Pentagon Urges Space-Based Solar Power

eldavojohn writes "The Pentagon issued a report indicating that space-based solar power 'has the potential to help the United States stave off climate change and avoid future conflicts over oil by harnessing the Sun's power to provide an essentially inexhaustible supply of clean energy.' The report, from the Pentagon's National Security Space Office, calls for funding the development of space-based solar power culminating in 'a platform in geosynchronous orbit bigger than the international space station and capable of beaming 5-10 megawatts of power to a receiving station on the ground.' The Pentagon's interest in such an effort stems from the need to acquire energy on the battlefield, which today often comes at a painful premium."

Comments

Life imitates art

[Daishiman]

Do you remember SimCity 2000 when you could build an orbital solar power station that could potentially misalign and burn down half the city? Fun times.
In practice, it'd be a piece of cake to implement a safeguard against that.

Re:Could be a tremendously capable tool, but....

[MBraynard]

this mean that the Pentagon could *bogart* all of the power when needed

They can do this now (with the civilian president's executive authority), it's just terribly inefficient to do so.

And it's doubtful that they ever would turn off everyone's power - particularly since they haven't so far.

Re:Kumbayah, indeed.

[earlymon]

In the circle concerned with DoD and DOE funding debates, the Air Force guys used to have a saying:

If you gave the fusion project to us, four guys would be in prison for fraud, the taxpayers would have been bilked out out of several hundred million dollars, the project would be two years late - with mods on top of that - and we'd all be driving Mr. Fusions by now!

That was in the late 80s - twenty years ago.

Lot of truth to that way of thinking.....

---
Over thirty means near-recent history.

American Agri-business Versus DOD

[reporter]

One organization that rivals the influence of the military industrial complex (of which the Department of Defense is a piece) is the farm lobby (also known as the agri-business lobby). If the farm lobby -- or, more specifically, the pro-ethanol corn lobby in the midwest -- opposes the solar-power idea in favor of ethanol, will the government still build an orbiting solar-power transmitter?

My hunch is that the answer is "no". Even though Brazilian sugar-cane-based ethanol is much cheaper than American corn-based ethanol, Washington levies such a huge tariff on the former that it is more expensive than the latter. The whole point is to placate the angry American farmer.

An effort that favors any alternative fuel source besides corn is sure to run afoul of the farm lobby. Isn't Iowa one of the earliest primary states?

Oh yeah. Coca-Cola, long ago, dumped sugar in favor of corn syrup in the soft drinks. A tariff here and there sure can change the economics of life.

Re:American Agri-business Versus DOD

[GooberToo]

However, ethanol will leave the system highly vulnerable to climate change, a risk the US govt with its denial-stance will probably ignore.

It is far worse than that. Corn for ethanol is actually using up one of the largest underground water aquifers in the world which resides under the Midwest. The Ogallala Aquifer is a significant source of water for cattle and crops a like. Additional pressures forced by ethanol means in as little as one to two hundred years basic items such as FOOD may not come from our own country because there is no water to grow it.

So in a nut shell we pay farmers subsidies to crow a crop we don't need, which is thought to create health problems, so we can pay a premium on said crop at the market so we can pay another subsidy on ethanol, so we can pay a premium at the fuel pump, all the while using up our fresh water supplies.

If you feel sorry for the small American farmer, don't! They are killing us now and setting us up for famine later. If the small American Farmer insists on being so irresponsible, they deserve to become extinct. Remember, they could actually lobby for alternatives, but they don't even try.

Add in the fact that much study is currently underway to prove HSCS is the cause of the rapid increase of cancers, obesity, and diabetes in Americans only makes things grimmer; all of which seem to follow the same curve as our shift from cane sugars to HSCS. Long story short, the American Farmer is a greater threat to the US population than is any terrorist plot.

To add insult to injury, alternatives are available for ethanol production, including hemp. Contrary to popular myth, hemp is NOT pot; though pot can be used at hemp. Hemp can actually yield three to four times the same ethanol per acre than corn. Hemp is naturally insect and drought resistant, requiring a fraction of water consumed by corn. Hemp can be grown is almost every state in the US. Hemp is editable. The ONLY problem with hemp is that it has a very long list of political enemies including; corn and sugar beet growers, chemical and petroleum companies, paper growers, and cotton farmers. As most people are completely ignorant of hemp and believe hemp is pot, hemp doesn't have much chance to succeed; thanks in large by the misinformation provided by chemical and petroleum companies following the concussion of WWII, which is the last time it was grown in the US.

Re:Right...

[jstomel]

I'm not an expert in power transmission, but if I recall correctly any transmission method capable of punching through our atmosphere would have to be relatively inert with respect to actual human beings. Probably radio or low frequency microwaves. You could probably fry a city's electronics with it, but actually harming people would be difficult.