Slashdot Mirror
Japan Eyes Solar Station In Space
An anonymous reader writes "By 2030 [Japan] wants to collect solar power in space and zap it down to Earth, using laser beams or microwaves. The government has just picked a group of companies and a team of researchers tasked with turning the ambitious, multi-billion-dollar dream of unlimited clean energy into reality in coming decades."
Great , now we not only have to worry about stray godzilla attacks, now japan gets pew pew lasers
Godzilla is made, all that microwave radiation frying the Lizard DNA...
Don't tell Japan they had it coming to them!
History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Japan's just preparing for the near future.
My work here is dung.
...ever since I played SimCity 2000... But I don't want the beam pointing toward my head when I am not wearing my tinfoil hat!
make sushi?
Yours In Baikonur,
Kilgore Trout
maybe if they converted the solar to hydrogen first
How might they do this?
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
From: "[ExI] Thoughts on Space based solar power" :-)
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2008-November/046620.html
"""
I spent a long time around 2003 and 2004 on the SSI email list (now on yahoo
groups if you want to look at the archives) explaining why space-based solar
power will not in any likely time frame be of any value on Earth.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/ssi_list/
And I want to make it clear I was a SSI Senior Associate (five year pledge
of money) back in the 1980s, and even took a (intro Physics) course from
Gerry O'Neill. So this in not just a casual disagreement. I am very sad that
the Space Studies Institute even now pushes an outdated agenda (well, now
they are moving to scaring people with asteroids, to the extent they are
still operating). I feel if Gerry O'Neill was around now he might agree with
this analysis of the current prospects for space-based power in the next few
decades, since he always was an adaptable and innovative guy, even if,
unfortunately, ultimately an unsuccessful businessperson with GeoStar and
LAWN with which he hoped to fund space habitation. I think by coupling the
two -- a desire to build space habitations coupled with economic arguments
for space solar power (or even other space activities) -- that one may miss
out on sooner realizing the dream of space habitation done for its own sake
(as a hobby).
The core points of the argument I advanced there:
* About a third to one half the cost of residential electric service is
maintaining transmission lines. So, at best, space solar even if *free* at
the ground station will be at best one-third the cost of utility power is
now at the home meter. As the costs of home power generation fall from
advanced manufacturing, the cost of home solar power (or wind, or
cogeneration) will drop below that cost at some point for self-contained
homes producing all or most of their own power, making space solar power
obsolete for home use. Since space solar power will initially be expensive,
it is non-viable right now. And since the cost of solar panels (like
Nanosolar's) is dropping way faster than the cost of space operations, and
since solar space satellites have a twenty to thirty year time horizon for
significant production, they are a non-starter and too risky investment
comparatively. Things might have been different in the 1970s, but it is
thirty years later. Also, one can make an argument for limited solar power
for large commercial facilities producing aluminum or liquid fuels or doing
laser launching, but that is only likely to be worth doing once we already
have a space presence since then only the incremental costs will need to be
paid, rather than expect solar power to pay to develop a space
infrastructure as O'Neill and others proposed (and people still propose).
I'm sure one can look hard at situations where transmission costs are
minimized, but this cost of transmission argument is a very deep one and
I've never seen it rigorously discussed. We know how to do solar on the
ground, there are ways to store the energy at night (molten salts, ever
improving batteries, pumping water up hill, compressed air, production of
synthetic liquid fuels, production of hydrogen, a superconducting world wide
grid backbone, etc.), and there are complementary technologies like wind
power and cogeneration by burning biomass that together with solar produce
fairly reliable power (as well as a lot of local hands-on jobs in the short
term). And there are organizations promoting R&D to make this all even better:
http://www.google.com/corporate/green/energy/
* A rebuttal to this is
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
. . . meanwhile, some space experts have questioned Japan's plans for a shark crew.
A NASA spokesman commented, "I'm just not exactly sure, but something seems not quite right with a laser satellite to be crewed by sharks."
A Japan space agency spokesman countered, "Sharks don't sleep, so we will be sure that they are always paying attention to the sensitive instruments, 24/7. And they don't get cancer, because of some mysterious substance in their cartilage. Sharks have survived for millions of years in the oceans of the Earth. Outer space is the next logical challenge for them."
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Do not look at solar station with remaining eye!
Version A)
The microwaves are going to ionize the atmosphere.
Breaking down earth's magnetic shielding from the solar wind.
And then igniting the entire atmosphere.
Unless you give me... ONE...MILLION...DOLLARS!!! MUHAHAHAHAAAAA...
Version B)
Our power needs will go up so far, that we will fill the whole area around the sun with solar panels, and live on top of them.
Thereby making us invisible for any aliens.
So we grow, and become more and more evil and power-hungry.
Until we set out, to harvest other suns.
And the aliens on other planets see sun after sun... vanish from the sky.
"Prepare for an epic billion-year long battle!
In a 40-hour movie, that will burst even LOTR's time frame!
Now in cinemas!"
P.S.: On a more serious note: What effect does this have on the atmosphere? I'd guess somewhat the same as in a microwave: Ionization and heating. The heating won't change much, I guess, when compared to the global warming of fossil fuel power plants. But the ionization certainly has a effect. What are the long-term results of those effects? :P)
And how big of a focus point on the surface are we talking about? I don't want to be at the spot where it hits when it's mis-calibrated...
If those questions are answered, it's a pretty good plan in my eyes. I always wondered why we erect power plants, when nature already gave us the biggest fuckin' fusion reactor one can think of! ^^
(Yes there are bigger stars. But try imagining them!
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Bankers.
The rest of our money.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.