Slashdot Mirror


Simcity Microwave Power by 2050?

Politburo writes "The Drudge Report supplies this interesting Senate testimony. Dr. David Criswell, director of the University of Houston's Institute for Space Systems Operations, proposes that we develop robots to assist in the construction of a lunar solar array. The power from this array would be beamed to recievers on Earth, either directly or via relay satellites. Dr. Criswell predicts that with this project, "the average American income could increase from today's ~$35,000/y-person to more than $150,000/y-person." He also attempts to put to rest the idea that microwave power is unsafe, saying, "Each power beam can be safely received, for example, in an industrially zoned area." I wonder if he's ever played SimCity 2000" And coming soon, Godzilla from a drop-down menu.

9 of 740 comments (clear)

  1. eh $150,000? by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Details of that new income figure were a little light. Anybody got a more detailed explanation of what he meant by that, or should I chalk it up as "ooo people'll wanna make 150k, I'll get their vote!"

    Can't say I'm terribly worried about mishaps relating to this type of technology. We've been working with Microwaves for a very long time. I'm sure a reasonably safe system can be developed and launched cheaply. I'm more concerned with construction on the moon. Seems like it'd be a PITA to both construct and maintain. Do we really want to put our energy dependency in a very difficult to reach place? What if an angry country figures out a way to fire a missile up there?

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  2. Re:What about the 'whoops'? by TWX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Something that I've reasoned through, with my lack of engineering degree, is that the last satellite could be fixed so that in order to transmit, it must receive correct transmissions from strategically placed tight-beam ground signal transmitters. If it loses reception, it stops microwaving power. This way, if it drifts off course or is mis-aimed it won't send anything. Also, if someone were to attempt to take control of the satellite to aim it at a city or target, the satellite's repositioning would cause it to lose contact with it's ground-based failsafes and not function. It would also require a secure method of communicating from the ground, which would have to be kept secret so someone couldn't build their own ground based transmitters, but this would prevent the mis-alignment from being hazardous. If my idea works, which I have absolutely no idea if any of this is feasible.

    I think that it sounds cool though.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  3. What I haven't seen explained... by avdi · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...is how this is superior to putting a network of power generation satellites in earth orbit. What's the benefit of taking them all the way to the moon?

    --

    --
    CPAN rules. - Guido van Rossum
  4. Um.... the moon, like, moves... by HarveyBirdman · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Realtive to the Earth's surface, that is.

    I remember the early ideas for solar power sats way back when, and they almost always involved geosynchronous satellites so you don't have to aim at a moving target. Not as optimal as an LEO, but I believe for a focused beam most of your losses are in the atmosphere anyway, so another 20,000 miles or so of space is a good trade for the issues of aiming or relaying.

    Now in the past few years we keep seeing these wacky plans to put the arrays on the moon (very far away and down in another gravity well making servicing a really big issue, robots or not), and beam the energy around via realy satellites. It just seems so wastetful. The only advantage I can think of is that the lunar array could *maybe* be built so large that the transmission losses don't matter.

    It just seems like geosync is such a better solution, though. You could incorporate the next generation of communication satellites into the power arrays.

    --
    --- Ban humanity.
  5. Re:Inflation by in7ane · · Score: 5, Interesting

    150 = 35 * (1 + x) ^ 47
    x = 3.14%

    Yep, that's not an unreasonable average rate of inflation over the next half century. So implementing this project will result in wages only matching inflation, not growing along with GDP (about 5% - can't be bothered to lookup). As someone else pointed out - "a few billion apiece for the people who control the power".

    But please, don't give the machines a power source that is solar based...

  6. Issues of Weaponizing this System by Dukeofshadows · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This reminds me of the nuclear debates of the late 1940s. Do we use one of the most efficient energy transmitters conceiveable to power our planet or empower our government? Though it sounds like science fiction, the US army toyed with the idea of using focus solar energy as a weapons system early in the cold war (I've seen the films where they built a prototype complex and incinerated large I-beams of steel as if they were Dreamsicles next to a lighter). The US Army proved that microwave solar technology could be used to relay electricity from extraordinary altitudes in the mid 1960s. In Japan the University of Kyoto is already toying with development of a space-based satellite using an area of 1km^2 to generate solar power then beam it back to earth. The potential for near-limitless energy is especially appealing, though fossil fules would sitll be used in most of our transportation systems for some time to come (no one I know has a mass-market purely-electrical car with over a 150 mile range or better speed than 60 MPH, please send in any info on e-cars that are better).

    My concern is that any nation putting this sort of system into place risks misalignment of the beams and having a solar laser of incredible power strafing across the landscape. It would be extremely tempting for terrorists or rogue governments to either put these is orbit themselves, or more likely sabotage/take over those already in place. We would then be forced to either destroy the satellite or launch military strikes on the offending parties, mandating the development and refinement of rapid-deployment and anti-space missile technology. Granted, this is a dual use system whose benefits far outweigh the detractions, but the military application of such a solar energy system seems so obvious that it must be considered.

    --
    As long as there is a Second Amendment, there will always be a First Amendment.
  7. America's Moon by handy_vandal · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Dr. Criswell predicts that with this project, "the average American income could increase from today's ~$35,000/y-person to more than $150,000/y-person."

    As an American, I'm happy to imagine my income going from "most affluent nation on the planet" to "even more affluent".

    But as a human being I have to ask: what about the rest of humanity? Do they get a share?

    --
    -kgj
  8. Re:Refraction is neglible. by mrtroy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Lets say that the beam is 10 foot wide. Make the earth recieving station 100 feet wide.

    Then, have sensors detect if it ever varies more than 20 feet outside the center of the recieving station to send a signal to turn the microwave off.

    Build this station in the middle of deserts, or away from cities, the extra power consumed to transport it to cities is nothing in comparison to having a major accident in a residential area.

    Pretty simple suggestions, but why not try and make use of this?

    --
    [I can picture a world without war, without hate. I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it]
  9. We're doing it! by wildmage · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My research lab is working on a project to do just this. We're developing a system to assemble structures in space using an array of distributed self-reconfigurable robots. You can view the project at this website: SOLAR

    --
    ------
    wildmage
    Memoirs of a Mad Scientist