April 16, 2009

Will Space-Based Solar Power Finally See the Light of Day?

A satellite that reaps the sun's energy in space and beams it down to 
Earth for use as electricity may leave the realm of sci-fi and edge 
closer to reality this week following an energy deal in California

By Adam Hadhazy
Scientific American

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=will-space-based-solar-power-finally-see-the-light-of-day&print=true


Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PG&E) has long invested in renewable energy 
sources, including geothermal, wind and solar. Earlier this week, the 
utility company reached for the stars in announcing the first-ever deal 
of its kind: The California power utility, says spokesperson Jonathan 
Marshall, plans to purchase clean energy generated by a satellite 
beaming solar power from orbit.

The agreement between PG&E and Solaren Corp., an eight-year-old company 
based in Manhattan Beach, Calif., still hinges on state regulatory 
approval. If the deal gets the green light, Solaren must then privately 
raise billions of dollars to design, launch and operate a satellite as 
well as an energy-receiving ground station slated for the Fresno County 
area, says Cal Boerman, director of energy services for Solaren.

The challenges of building this satellite (due to be completed in 2016) 
and introducing so-called space-based solar power (SBSP) remain 
formidable. But driven by the urgency of climate change and the lowering 
costs of solar technology, a growing number of countries and companies 
believe an energy revolution could be in the offing.

Why bother harvesting solar energy directly from space? It is abundant, 
and "you can get [this] power 24/7," says Marty Hoffert, an emeritus 
professor of physics at New York University. Sunlight is some five to 10 
times stronger in space, and its shine would reach energy-gathering 
satellites placed into geostationary (fixed) orbits—the realm of many 
currently deployed communications spacecraft—more than 99 percent of the 
time.

SBSP could, according to energy experts, provide constant, 
pollution-free power—unlike intermittent wind and cloud cover–sensitive 
ground-based solar, and without the emissions of fossil fuels or 
radioactive waste from nuclear power. "[SBSP] is a disruptive technology 
[in that] it could change the whole energy equation," says Frederick 
Best, director of the Center for Space Power (CSP) at Texas A&M 
University in College Station, Tex.

The premise (and promise) of SBSP has been considered scientifically 
feasible since the late 1960s. The basic concept of beaming microwave 
frequencies to Earth from orbit has already been proved: A fleet of 
solar-powered communication satellites routinely beam various 
electromagnetic frequencies to ground receivers, linking cell phone 
calls or relaying TV signals to rooftop dishes, for example. Converting 
solar energy beamed from space into electricity in a power grid, 
however, has not yet been demonstrated.

Space Energy, a Switzerland-based SBSP start-up, aims to change that by 
deploying a prototype orbiter in the next several years, possibly before 
Solaren's pilot plant reaches orbit. "You can argue the physics [of 
SBSP] all day, but you'll only know with a prototype," says Peter Sage, 
a co-founder of Space Energy, started in 2008.

Last year, U.S. and Japanese researchers crossed an important SBSP 
threshold when they wirelessly transmitted microwave energy between two 
Hawaiian islands about 90 miles (145 kilometers) apart, representing the 
distance through Earth's atmosphere that a transmission from orbit would 
have to penetrate, says Frank Little, associate director of the CSP.

Many other technologies relevant to SBSP have made "enormous progress" 
in recent years, says John Mankins, who led the Hawaiian island test as 
chief operating officer and co-founder of Ashburn, Va.–based Managed 
Energy Technologies, LLC. A little over a decade ago, the best 
photovoltaic efficiency, or sunlight conversion into electricity, was 10 
percent, Mankins says; now it can reach 40 percent. And satellite 
technology has also improved: Autonomous computer systems as well as 
advanced, lightweight building materials have also made leaps and 
bounds, he says.

Despite such progress, and spending some $80 million, SBSP has not 
gotten past the U.S. government's drawing board so far. A key reason, 
Little says: NASA does not do energy, and the U.S. Department of Energy 
(DoE) does not do space.

The U.S. Department of Defense, however, has recently shown interest in 
SBSP. Air Force Colonel M. V. "Coyote" Smith cites high fuel costs, 
along with risks to personnel when supplying petroleum to U.S. combat 
theaters and bases. A 2007 Defense report (pdf) from the Pentagon's 
National Security Space Office (NSSO), viewed the commercial development 
of SBSP quite favorably, especially as traditional, fossil fuel energy 
sources get ever scarcer in the years ahead. "We've got to identify 
sources of safe, clean energy in order to help us prevent energy wars in 
the future," says Smith, one of the authors of the 2007 report.

The NSSO report said it would be in the fed's interest to encourage the 
commercial development of SBSP, but that the government should not 
design or operate the eventual orbiting power plants.

The previous government work, including a joint NASA and DoE report from 
the 1970s about SBSP, has left its mark on many current architectural 
schemes, though. This textbook approach calls for a massive, 
microwave-beaming satellite several miles wide that would sport multiple 
enormous solar arrays connected to a central hub [like the artist's 
conception on the first page of the article]. The craft would be perched 
in orbit about 22,400 miles (36,050 kilometers) above Earth, or a tenth 
the distance to the moon. There, the satellite would maintain a 
geostationary, or fixed, position relative to a point on Earth's surface 
while its solar panel arrays bask in the constant sunlight.

Captured solar energy then gets converted on board the satellite into 
electromagnetic carrier waves, specifically microwaves, ideally at a 
frequency of either 2.45 or 5.8 gigahertz (both fall on the spectrum 
between infrared and FM/AM radio signals) for subsequent beaming back to 
the ground. At that frequency, the waves pass easily through the 
atmosphere, although some energy—physicists do not know exactly how much 
yet—would be lost during the transfer, Smith says.

This invisible column of microwave energy, measuring perhaps a mile or 
two (two to three kilometers) across, would be beamed at an oval-shaped, 
ground-based rectifying antenna, or a "rectenna," of similar size, and 
from there the energy would flow into the traditional electrical grid.

Despite the clear analogy to a science fiction death ray, scientists 
believe the diffuse energy beam from above would not pose a health 
threat to people or wildlife, even at its most intense center.

"Microwave radiation is nonionizing, just like visible light or radio 
signals," says Jim Logan, former chief of medical operations at NASA's 
Johnson Space Center and an expert on aerospace medicine. That means it 
lacks sufficient energy, like x-rays and gamma rays, to remove an 
electron from an atom or a molecule to make a charged particle that can 
damage DNA and biomolecules, he says.

Birds passing through the heart of the carrier wave from space might 
feel some warmth, Logan wrote in a February white paper on SBSP safety 
for Space Energy, but not at elevated levels. And should the beam stray 
from its rectenna target, it would be designed to defocus, Logan says, 
and not "run amok all over the landscape." Sage of Space Energy says: 
"We won't be frying birds or turning clouds to steam."

Space Energy's first operational array, which adheres to the typical 
SBSP setup just described, would be designed to generate one gigawatt 
almost continuously, about the same output as a large nuclear plant. 
Pursuant to a successful prototype experiment in several years, Space 
Energy expects that investors would pony up the billions estimated to 
make a full-scale commercial plant a reality.

Building segments of the plant's solar arrays on Earth, along with 
supports and a central transmitter, would take two years or so, says 
Stephan Tennsel, CEO and co-founder of Space Energy. Some 40 to 60 
launches would boost all the components for the first SBSP satellite 
into a low Earth orbit (LEO) where a combination of automatic panel 
unfurling ("like an umbrella," Tennsel says) and robots would assemble 
and integrate them.

Dangers and engineering challenges abound, however: Space junk like that 
which recently threatened the International Space Station, for example, 
could collide with the skeletal space solar satellite during assembly. 
And keeping the satellite's huge beam and the distant rectenna reliably 
synced up also stands as an unsolved technical issue, says CSP's Little.

Overall, the how may be much easier to overcome than the how much. 
"Technically, we're a lot closer to space-based solar power than we are 
economically," Little says. The biggest obstacle, he says, continues to 
be launch costs. "Large structures in space are not showstoppers, but 
the cost of getting up into space is the real hang-up [for SBSP]," CSP's 
Best says. In Space Energy's business plan, for instance, half of the 
$250 million allotted for their communication satellite–size prototype 
goes toward just lofting the approximately 1,760-pound (800-kilogram) 
craft into orbit.

Though Solaren is tight-lipped about what its pilot power plant will 
look like, a 2005 patent retained by the company indicates that the firm 
intends to use mirrors—another oft-explored SBSP element—to gather and 
focus sunlight prior to converting it to microwaves. According to the 
patent, Solaren also looks to eliminate many of the structural 
connectors on its craft—that is, some or all of the satellite's 
components, including the mirrors, power module and microwave emitter 
could be "free-floating" in space, orbiting in tandem. "The big thing is 
to get the weight down so the weight costs don't kill you," says 
Solaren's Boerman.

Backers of SBSP hope that the rising commercialization of space—sparked 
by the allure of space tourism and the economics of cheaper access—will 
bring down the expense of rocketing into orbit. Some of the best-known 
entrepreneurial ventures include Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic and 
Elon Musk's SpaceX, but almost 20 companies are trying their hand at 
lowering launch overhead. "These organizations could potentially change 
the picture of launch costs," Best says.

Many other obstacles stand in the way of commercially viable SBSP. A 
crucial regulatory matter: getting clearance from the U.N.'s 
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) that allocates use of the 
electromagnetic spectrum. SBSP's ideal microwave frequencies are already 
used by wireless systems such as Bluetooth, according to Smith. "Even if 
we could narrow the beam [from space] down and ensure complete signal 
integrity in the broadcast wave area," the ITU may deem the possible 
interference from SBSP as too disruptive to some extant technologies, he 
says.

Some think that SBSP efforts should zero in on lasers rather than 
microwave transmission to avoid this and other confounding issues. "I 
think an approach using microwaves is doomed," N.Y.U.'s Hoffert says. 
Given the necessary size of microwave transmitters and their solar 
arrays, "it's a huge capital investment before you get one kilowatt of 
power," he adds.

A higher efficiency, laser-based approach would require far smaller 
satellites, perhaps requiring just one launch, Hoffert notes. One 
proposal involves capturing sunlight in space via photovoltaics, 
converting the energy into an infrared laser and then beaming this 
concentrated light onto existing solar panel arrays in the desert around 
the clock. Weather can disrupt laser transmissions, however, and Hoffert 
says other technical hurdles remain for both microwave and visible light 
laser approaches.

The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) is covering all bases as 
Scientific American magazine reported last year. JAXA hopes to have a 
one-gigawatt satellite in geostationary orbit around 2030 that may use 
either microwaves or lasers to send its energy back home.

Yet another school of thought involves placing solar-power generators 
and microwave transmitters on the surface of the moon, or even using a 
lunar base to construct the satellites before launching (with relative 
ease, due to moon's far weaker gravity) the power plants into a 
geostationary orbit.

If these and other far-flung, future missions ever come to pass, their 
creators may look back on PG&E's faith this week in Solaren as a key 
moment in the history of SBSP development, Logan predicts. "If [Solaren] 
is able to deliver this energy, you're talking about the first time 
space-based resources have ever been imported to Earth," he says. "It's 
a significant breakthrough in the awareness of the fact that we're not 
limited to just the resources on the planet."

Auspiciousness aside, Solaren has a long road ahead of it in terms of 
raising capital and constructing the first-of-its-kind SBSP operation. 
Soothing local fears of death rays from space will also take some 
finessing, Logan admits.

In the end, PG&E has not invested its customers' or shareholders' 
finances in the deal, says Marshall, the company spokesperson; rather, 
Solaren is on the hook to deliver the power first. Over 15 years, 
Solaren has agreed to provide 200 megawatts of electricity almost 
continuously, enough for a quarter million homes, starting in June 2016.

"Even though PG&E took pains to assure the public they were not 
investing and that it was only a supply contract, it is still a big 
step," says CSP's Little. "If another energy supply contract is signed 
in the near future, I expect interest in space solar will really 
accelerate."

-- 
================================
George Antunes, Political Science Dept
University of Houston; Houston, TX 77204 
Voice: 713-743-3923  Fax: 713-743-3927
Mail: antunes at uh dot edu

***********************************
* POST TO MEDIANEWS@ETSKYWARN.NET *
***********************************

Medianews mailing list
Medianews@etskywarn.net
http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews

Reply via email to