PDA

View Full Version : Orbiting Solar Panels to Shoot Energy to Earth in the Form of Laser Beams



SkinsHokieFan
June-5th-2008, 12:00 PM
http://gizmodo.com/353985/orbiting-solar-panels-to-shoot-energy-to-earth-in-the-form-of-laser-beams



(http://gizmodo.com/353985/orbiting-solar-panels-to-shoot-energy-to-earth-in-the-form-of-laser-beams)Orbiting Solar Panels to Shoot Energy to Earth in the Form of Laser Beams (http://gizmodo.com/353985/orbiting-solar-panels-to-shoot-energy-to-earth-in-the-form-of-laser-beams)

Solar energy is great in theory, but the problem is that panels need to face the sun, which is frequently behind clouds or shining down at some less-than-optimal angle. The solution? Put solar panels in space, of course! Duh!
That's just what the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has begun working on, actually. They are currently working on the hardware, and plan to have a Space (http://gizmodo.com/353985/orbiting-solar-panels-to-shoot-energy-to-earth-in-the-form-of-laser-beams)Solar Power (http://gizmodo.com/tag/solar-power/) System (SSPS) up and running by 2030.

The setup would consist of a satellite-type object in orbit about 22,400 miles above the surface of the Earth. Terrifyingly, the satellite would convert the sun's rays into laser beams and shoot them down to base stations on Earth. Yes, lasers would fire down from space. But friendly lasers, so, you know, it's cool.

On February 20th, JAXA is going to begin testing these crazy laser beam transmitters designed to send the precious energy down from orbit. It's a long ways away from this actually being put into use, but researchers claim that when all is said and done, one of these things in orbit can provide basically free power to a whopping 500,000 homes, so we say take all the time you need. Sounds great to us.

(http://gizmodo.com/353985/orbiting-solar-panels-to-shoot-energy-to-earth-in-the-form-of-laser-beams)

Larry
June-5th-2008, 12:17 PM
Don't believe the "laser" part. For lots of reasons. Like, optical-frequency lasers would have the same problem that sunlight has: it doesn't penetrate clouds. (And, I don't think anybody's figured out how to make a laser anywhere near that powerfull.)

I've seen proposals (which have been tested) that use [i]microwaves[/u], though.

mjah
June-5th-2008, 12:29 PM
As long as the plan doesn't involve permanently manned stations, I'm all for it.

The foreseeable future of long-term space exposure lies with machines.

DGreenistheBest
June-5th-2008, 12:30 PM
Can we attach the lasers to the heads of sharks?

JohnLockesGhost
June-5th-2008, 12:43 PM
Can we attach the lasers to the heads of sharks?

No, sorry.

You'll have to settle for some ill-tempered seabass.

mjah
June-5th-2008, 12:44 PM
Can we attach the lasers to the heads of sharks?
I imagine that we and/or the old Soviet regime already have.

Didn't some killer porpoises escape their confines during Hurricane Katrina? Did they have lasers?

Tulane Skins Fan
June-5th-2008, 12:48 PM
The title sounds a lot scarier than the post.

Corcaigh
June-5th-2008, 12:49 PM
Can we attach the lasers to the heads of sharks?

How would the sharks survive in orbit? Think things through before posting. :doh: :silly:

Corcaigh
June-5th-2008, 12:55 PM
Microwaves are a lot more likely than optical lasers.

Actually, the Active Denial weapon that Bang posted about uses microwave power.

IbleedBnG83
June-5th-2008, 12:56 PM
At least they are looking for reknewable and more cost effective energy. I would hate to see rolling blackouts hit the MD/DC/VA area

IbleedBnG83
June-5th-2008, 01:10 PM
I don't really see anything too crazy on there. Maybe only that Smoot is faster than Rogers.

IbleedBnG83
June-5th-2008, 01:11 PM
Oh yeah, Campbell's throwing power is only a 91?

IbleedBnG83
June-5th-2008, 01:15 PM
oops, wrong thread!

Larry
June-5th-2008, 02:27 PM
Apparantly, this looks like another job for Larry's Space Colonization promotion thread (http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?p=298924&post298924).

This isn't a new idea, folks. In fact, it's older than a lot of you youngin's.

(And yes, it's a manned effort. Only way it can possibly be cost effective. OTOH, to us Trekkies, the fact that it involves setting up permanent manned facilities, with thousands of people, in space, isn't exactly a drawback.)

jb4348
June-5th-2008, 02:39 PM
How would the sharks survive in orbit? Think things through before posting. :doh: :silly:

I guess you have never seen Austin Powers???:doh: If you don't get the joke don't hate on the post.

Corcaigh
June-5th-2008, 02:43 PM
I guess you have never seen Austin Powers???:doh: If you don't get the joke don't hate on the post.

I guess you're not very bright.

If you don't get it don't hate on the post.

:cheers:

jb4348
June-5th-2008, 02:45 PM
I guess you're not very bright.

If you don't get it don't hate on the post.

:cheers:

Whoops lol didn't see the smiley face in your original post. Uggh I need a beer. No hard feelings :cheers:

kuraitengai
June-5th-2008, 03:01 PM
isnt that the same type of thing arthur c clarke used in 2061? some 2 man station in another system that harnessed power and beamed it back to pickup stations to deliver to earth.

Larry
June-5th-2008, 03:03 PM
I certainly don't recall it being mentioned there. But the idea was first proposed in the 70s. (As my link (hint, hint) mentions).