A path to really cheap energy
You might be amused by this: I have identified a positive economic feedback loop between beamed energy propulsion and power satellites. Given an understanding of the physics of lasers for beamed energy and hydrogen for reaction mass, there is a very strong feedback loop between the existence of power satellites and low cost transportation to build them. The physics and feedback indicates that future energy costs will be very low. This seems to be inevitable if you build power satellites at all and take the beamed energy route to power lifting the parts. The energy cost looks to be so low that solar energy from space will displace fossil fuels by simply underpricing them. (Half or less.) Very low cost space transport is a side benefit. Further, with only a ten percent feedback, that is dedicating ten percent of new power sats to propulsion, the construction rate triples every year, offering the possibility of ending the fossil fuel era in a decade. The minimum investment to reach the self sustaining scale is not precisely known, but seems likely to exceed $10 B and to be less than $100 B. A lot of money but not considering the profit to be made solving a really big problem. I can go deeply into the technical and math details if you want to see them. ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Really cheap energy
On 9/8/2010 4:32 PM, Wayne Eddy wrote: Sounds interesting, but I wonder how it would cope with a big storm? On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Keith Henson mailto:hkeithhen...@gmail.com>> wrote: http://www.slideshare.net/chris8649/stratosolar-overview http://www.zinzzu.com/stratosolar.html If this works as advertised, there will be no economic reason to build SBSP. Wayne-- I'm more worried about normal high-altitude winds. While 20 km high is pretty much above the jet streams, I'm sure there's still a fair amount of wind. As pictured, the mirror apparatus would be torn to bits. But maybe one could have smaller mirrors, built into some sort of parafoil kite? I see bigger problems with losses in the light pipe. The plan seems to be to have a flexible tube lined with reflective material to guide the solar radiation down to steam turbines or whatever on the ground. Most of the light would have to reflect off the sides many times, losing at least a few percent of its intensity at each reflection. So nothing makes it to the ground, and the light pipe melts. There may be solutions to this too, but they're going to be tricky. ---David ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Re: Really cheap energy
Sounds interesting, but I wonder how it would cope with a big storm? On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > http://www.slideshare.net/chris8649/stratosolar-overview > http://www.zinzzu.com/stratosolar.html > > If this works as advertised, there will be no economic reason to build > SBSP. > > Keith > > ___ > http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com > > ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
Really cheap energy
http://www.slideshare.net/chris8649/stratosolar-overview http://www.zinzzu.com/stratosolar.html If this works as advertised, there will be no economic reason to build SBSP. Keith ___ http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
