How do you keep the energy being sent down highly efficient. If you used a laser, it would be no different to having solar panels on the ground since the atmosphere absorbs most of the energy and microwave, from a geosynch orbit is going to spread out a lot!
There are a few facts which are wrong. In a geosynchronous orbit, the satellite would get 22 hours of sunlight per day, and there is 8x more energy per square meter in orbit than on the ground. Also, there is a big difference between a communications satellite and a solar farm, the cost of launching something that size is going to bankrupt any nation. Although, I am fully convinced that space based solar, along with fusion will solve our energy needs past 2050 or later.
Wireless energy, clean renewable resources, the elite hoard our tehnology, our rulers our spiritually unenlightened pagan atheists... Followed by corporate tools, wake up
Woolerlland you're an idiot, research nikola tesla. Wireless energy, and the hazards of coal oil and nuclear, Jp Morgan chose our path for profit and to poison air and water so he can eventually sell us that too
bah this is all theory... nuclear plants are getting more efficent every decade and with the introduction of fussion power in the next 50 years or less, we''ll have a fairly unlimtied supply of fuel (water) which will also solved the ice caps flooding problem ;)
theres one thing collecting the energy from space but how are you going to transport it back to earth?? mass ammounts of wires... hmm....? by the time it gets to earth, alot of the energy would have been wasted by traveling so far...
@woollerland Unfortunately, it's obvious that you are not up on this technology at all. There is an excellent book on the topic called "Sun Power - The Global Solution to the Coming Energy Crisis". It was written by a Boeing engineer who was involved with the design process of this system back in the 70's, after the first oil embargo. It will answer a lot of questions for you. Wireless energy transmission is no theory, its a fact. This is the ONLY energy system that can save the U.S. economy.
Why not put them as close to the sun as possible? the effect that one objects gravity has on another is squared each time when the distance that separates them is cut in half. The same thing happens with the number of photons per square inch.
there's constant change in developement in the way of power consumption... a driving force in today's society is using less power (at least among the intelegent) and putting that aside... i'm sure feeding the population will become an issue before lighting their houses at night.. etc etc.... by 2100 we'll most likely have rules like china about how many kids you can have.. everything will be recycled and everything will be super energy effiecent... that's the dirrection i see us going
@Tsunne America's birthrate is at an all time low. So is Europes. The World Population is in decline. At the International Conference on Population in Cairo 1994, they called for stopping the world population around 8 billion and reducing it to what they call sustainable at 2 billion. That's a reduction of 6 billion! Its hard to fathom that the elites really want to cull that much of the population so it is easier to control.
@Tsunne From many different sources. You can google the birth rate for many different countries and find many different sources. It doesn't matter which source they are all relatively the same. The CIA U.S. birth rate statistic is 1.338% and a population must have a 2.1% birth rate to maintain the current population size. If you read the papers regarding the Cairo Conference, you can see the plans they set in motion to cull the population. Its eugenics and its perverse.
@SimplyThinkDreams i didn't find any statistic anywhere about 2.1 or 1.338 i did however find something saying that the global birthrate is approximately 20 but it's not measured per 100 its' per 1000 ... and yes there has been a gradual decline in birthrate since the 1950's stretched over the span of time in which sexual education has grown... birth control has grown... and yet the population has still been growing... so there's some conspiracy to reduce population?
@Tsunne From Wikipedia regarding Total fertility rate: " The replacement fertility rate is roughly 2.1 births per woman for most industrialized countries (2.075 in the UK for example), but ranges from 2.5 to 3.3 in developing countries because of higher mortality rates.[4] Taken globally, the total fertility rate at replacement is 2.33 children per woman. At this rate, global population growth would trend towards zero."
@SimplyThinkDreams so this confrence covered universal education... reducing infant and child mortality reducing maturnal mortality and access to services for family planning and sexual health.... there's no population control covered in that confrence
@Tsunne I beg to differ. Of course they sugar coat it and make it seem all inoccent but its really not. Population reduction has been a goal of the globalist elites for some time and their eugenics programs have been in effect and they are working. Much of it is through abortion, birth control pills, creating the mindset that children are hassles to be avoided, flouride in the water, poisons in many of our processed foods, etc. They even have pills today to reduce women's periods to a few/year
@SimplyThinkDreams i get it you're a conspiracy nut.... well think of it this way... are there any rules preventing you from having kids? has drinking city water made you starile? what? no??? birth control is for preventing unwanted pregnancy it's not manditory... it's an option for intelegent people that aren't ready for a child but want to have sex... and if you bled from between your legs every month... woudln't you wnat a pill that made that once a year instead?... you're thinking backwards
@Tsunne It would be impossible for anyone to prevent me from having children. Certainly no man has the authority to regulate another's reproduction. In fact, we are commanded by our Creator to "be fruitful, multiply, and subdue the earth" in Genesis 1:28. Of course sex is reserved for the sacred union of marriage.
And no if I was a woman I wouldn't want to pervert my natural cycle with drugs for convenience. Any thought otherwise is backwards.
@SimplyThinkDreams that was God commanding the first people on earth. the earth is subdued the bible teaches common sence and stripping the earth dry so that you can have as many kids as you damn well please is just stupid. and those drugs for women are for a great many women to regulate and calm symptoms. because many women go through agonizing pain and for you as a man to say a woman should suffer because you think anything less is a perversion? with that mind set you'll never have kids
@Tsunne Isn't it common sense not to mess with the natural cycle of the woman and her sacred ability to bring life into this world? By the way, PMS is a cultural bound syndrome. It is a sociocultural phenomenon of Western culture. Other women around the world do not experience symptoms of PMS.
The globalists want you to believe that the earth is being stripped dry so they can justify their depopulation agendas.
The United States missed the hugest opportunity. Boeing designed this system in the '70's, completely to the point that it was ready to build. The D.O.E. was even on board. Then it was swept under the carpet by the Carter and Reagan administrations. Had we moved ahead with this concept, the U.S. would now be the leader in steel and aluminum production, and we would be a net exporter of energy. Building and launching satellites for other countries and making trillions of dollars - literally.
To make this efficient we need a space elevator, a 33k km nanotube cable with an artificial counterweight at it's end (probably a space station). Nano tubes are good conductors and could be used to transmit electricity continuously from these panel fields. that with the capability of sending trains instead of small shuttles fucking up our atmosphere we could attain massive space capabilities.
@shorgoth Heavy lift rocket burning LOX and Hydrogen = no pollution. Think Saturn V without the kerosene. Heck- even with kerosene the 02 burns it pretty completely. That being said, if they can figure out the counter-weight on the space elevator, and the nano tube construction, it's a fantastic concept. We just cant wait that long to develop it. We have Saturn V motors laying around right now...This thing has to start NOW. Or we will be a third world nation...
Nice video and intriguing concept - although an article in SciAM *did* state that was possible for ground based solar power generate enough energy for the demand.
@nickanon A radio wave (think wireless) link is used. The energy collected in space by the panels is converted to a radio frequency and sent to a large receiving antenna on the ground where it is converted back to 120. It's a tried and trued method. There are a couple of great books by Ralph Nansen on this subject. He was one of the engineers at Boeing that developed a lot of the concepts for this system back in the late 70's. Google him.
@nickanon there is an excellent book by Ralph Nansen "Sun Power - The Global Solution for the Coming Energy Crisis" written in 1995. It should be a text book in every engineering and technology college in the U.S.A.
Nansen worked at Boeing, and after the oil embargo of 1973, Boeing designed this system and had it certified as a solution to our energy needs. Then it was swept under the carpet by the Carter and Reagan administrations. If we had done it then, things would be much better now!
@fiveos Radio wave. Check out the "NASA - JPL Goldstone demo of wireless transmission", in the video section to your right...That was done in 1975. It's a well established, proven method of transmission. And it's being updated and fine tuned all the time.
How do you get all that solar power down to earth? Do you "beam " it? If you could beam it down, Couldn't we beam it to our house now from power plants now like wi fi?
Just watched a video of solar power transfer over a distance of 1.5km with over 82% efficiency - That was back in 1972 - The technology is already here. This is the future,.
you may create more jobs but on the flip side you expend jobs to so that isn't a good point to make.
and does the predicted energy requirement for the future years consider the possible slow down in human population due to lack of room?
and how many satellites are required to fill that need?
and how can they transmit power 24/7? geostationary ones will follow your place into the dark of night and polar ones will be behind the earth half the time
@PumpkinMelonJuice There is no night 22,500 miles out. That object is in direct sunlight all the time. Also, if the U.S.A. did this on a large scale, we could build satellites for other countries and lease or sell them for billions of dollars. We'd be like the new OPEC. Also, the sort of aqua/agriculture that can take place under the rectenna would be a huge source of employment. With a super abundance of electrical energy, we could also create a hydrogen society - all new technology, more jobs.
This is the way of the future. As always, science and technology are the final salvation of mankind. If technology fail then it's the end of civilization. It's sad to know that the US spend so little money on these things. Example: Large Hadron Collider cost 9 billion. Iraq war? 991billions and counting.
Alternative energy has enough potential to power our needs, especially geothermal and solar power, they each have the potential to be more efficient then oil easily, unfortunately abundance of energy is not something your likely to see for a long time, even though its possible that 10 years from now we could have way more energy then we need, its about profit, so the only solution your likely to see is something they can control and market.
I agree, thats the point I made, It seems that its all a grab for money, there are some well intentioned people out their, but, all this hype is harming the true cause. Entropy laws says you cannot get out more than you put in, the best you could ever get is a 1 to 1 energy exchange, with that amount of power required, how big will it have to be, Dubai International Airport is the largest building made by man at 1.5km2 this would be a spec compared to what would have to be built in space.
@RegnevaDeksam You may be mixing up the 2nd law of thermodynamics with the impossibility of perpetual motion. This idea has nothing to do with either of them.
Well, no I am not getting them mixed up, I was making a point not giving a physics lecture, as you can tell from the absence of formulas. Read the point and don't get anal about the wording. now if you want to get into a discussion of entropy or thermodynamics then drop me a line, but the complexity's of the physics would not be beneficial to the discussion. In other words become a big picture person, so you dont miss what is happening around you
@n8style PS, my point is of the size that would be needed to be built, 100's of km, Now before you make a comment, do you understand of the enormity of scale they are talking about, did you ponder how my statement reflects on the postings and the statements made in this video, or did you just want to big note yourself, in a fools attempt to show that you know more than some else
@RegnevaDeksam I totally agree with you on the size it would have to be. I'm sorry if my tone earlier was patronizing, it just seemed like you were bringing up things that didn't have a bearing on it.
@RegnevaDeksam Well, space construction would be taken to a new level, for sure. But this is not a manned space station, so the construction is simple and modular. In space, there is no wind or gravity or geological forces, so construction can be ultra-lightweight., even flimsy. The new thin film solar cells could be rolled out like tin foil over large skeletal structures - like giant kites. The heavy duty stuff would be reserved for the transmitter, which is more complex. Fun engineering stuff!
So wrong... if we went to the max with all alternative energy sources we would easily produce more than enough energy to power the whole world 100 times over.
Lets Not live in the fantasy that science will on queue have a solution to this problem.
LHC, The god Partial, Zero Point Energy, and Quantum Vortexes, Maybe we can wait for the spacemen to come and show us LOL. Sorry having a laugh with a very serious subject. We dont know where the colluder will lead us (breakdowns and repairs I guess), I believe its only real purpose is pure science. Knowing how God started the whole bigbang off is not really going to help us solve a global power problem.
the god partial? colluder? dude you don't even know how to spell, why should we listen to you. do you have any idea the technology that comes from such experiments not to mention the vast new understandings about the universe? this is why people don't listen to you.
Well yes, I am dyslexic and yes English is not my first language (how many do you speak) Dude sounds like you are highly educated, it never entered into you mind to look at the concepts and not the text. Now as quantum mechanics is my field of interest, I do understand the relevance of the experiment, and am happy to put my mathematical knowledge against someone who thinks that 666 and 13 are cool.
@insane66613 Well yes, I am dyslexic and yes English is not my first language (how many do you speak) Dude sounds like you are highly educated, it never entered into you mind to look at the concepts and not the text. Now as quantum mechanics is my field of interest, I do understand the relevance of the experiment, and am happy to put my mathematical knowledge against someone who thinks that 666 and 13 are cool.
@insane66613 As for people listening to me, well I did not ask anyone to listen to me, I am assuming that are not dyslexic and are capable of reading, if not understanding, I posed some question, I did not ask anyone to list to me.
@TheBlingblingbros the Higgs boson will in no way provide free unlimited energy. The main taget of the LHC is research, practical proof of theoretical physics. It has nothing to do with free energy. (Unless, as a spin-off, it would provide a possibility to control micro-black holes. But I believe that will take longer than nuclear fusion research :)
PS: I could not confirm this figure (but its the only one I have got)
The some total production of cells come to 10 square kilometres, by todays standards that is .0045% of what is required to power the US, forget the world, forget the massive ramp up of power requirement in the next 90 years. It is time to start the mammoth project of fixing it, before we regress to the Stone Age.
@RegnevaDeksam place them in the desert around the world, you have losses from the atmosphere but huge benefits in terms of servicing and maintenance. Europe is actually planning to build a grid that uses solar from north Africa (together with wind from the North Sea and biomass in central west Europe)
@RegnevaDeksam Boeing's design of the SPS from the late 70's projected that each large satellite would produce the equivalent power of 5 nuke plants. The life expectancy of a satellite - with some maintenance - well over 100 years. The payoff time? 20 years. It's like Grand Coulee dam in the sky. A giant revenue stream...We just need the vision and the investment mentality to do it.
Heres a question, how many cells are required for 1130 quadrillion BTUs, Im guessing a lot more than a lot. In all the years since the first high efficiency cell was made, about 50 yrs, how many where produced? I doubt we will ever produce that type of power from cells. But they are on the right path. Building things in space is the solution, we should take a pointer from the sun, its basically a huge nuclear reaction. No one wants to live next door to a reactor, no problem in space.
the tech sound good boosting the required equipment into a stable orbit will take time and vast resources I dought there is enough launch vehicals to do this at the moment on anothere note there are aproximitly 900 operational satilites in orbit at the moment this is not counting debrie and natural objects the risk of colition with one of these orbital objects is huge.
they have the technology, they have the resources, but they are afraid that they will fail. things you think is sci fi is actually just science. we have technology to send energy from one location to another
Japan announces plans to orbit solar power satellites that will transmit energy back to earth via laser beams. They hope to have the first one orbiting by 2030.
I thought one of the reasons we went after saddam was because he was building a super gun that could easily and cheaply just shoot material and weapons into orbit.and I,ve seen recent advances in wireless transmission of energy that are finaly recognizing Teslas 100 year old tech.or are the naysayers claiming that guns and electricity are a vast green conspiracy?
All the recources that we need to build all of the solar power cells. That is going to take years of research, then years of political discussion, then years of building them( and what kind of energy do we need to build them?). By the time it is finished it is past 2100. this way takes to long. But the Idea is ok. It just doesn't work with the world we know now
@QEV8C : The research is already complete! Satellites such as the ones proposed here do not need any new technology to work. And Japan, Switzerland and the U.S.s Pacific Gas & Electric are all exploring little pilot projects right now.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Im all for finding better way's to extract energy, but when I see shit like I saw in your video I realize I have to look elswhere, I know propaganda when I see. Please stop your hurting the cuase, stop your lies.
@bagtaggar \I think you can make comments like that when you can answer question about the project. So, how big will it be, how are we going to manufacture 10 million times more photoelectric cells than we have ever made, what are the atmospheric affects of transferring so much power to earth. PS I dont know ORVX, its just your ignorance Im commenting on.
@bagtaggar Vibrate with the vision of solutions. Perhaps Bagtagger, is rewarded for tagging bags. This is both false and true. I do agree that get all bend out of shape over conspiracy is further away from hope. Or- lets say - running water in bagtaggers home, and heat or food in his presense. Vibrate with the hope of solutions.. and look for evidence of them. Even if you are tagging bags.
@ORVX I agree, thats the point I made, It seems that its all a grab for money, there are some well intentioned people out their, but, all this hype is harming the true cause. Entropy laws says you cannot get out more than you put in, the best you could ever get is a 1 to 1 energy exchange, with that amount of power required, how big will it have to be, Dubai International Airport is the largest building made by man at 1.5km2 this would be a spec compared to what would have to be built in space.
Well it's either this or fusion. Both have some missing parts. None of our fusions reactors are net energy producers except the ones that last phempto seconds. But for space solar power all you need is cheap access to space. One day one of those will be developed. But with the broken institutions of the West, the more likely outcome will be us using the same power in 2100 that we used in the 1920's. We are not a forward looking society anymore.
Disagree, I think we are more forward looking at this point in history than we have ever been in decades, indeed centuries past. People in the 1800s weren't concerned about climate predictions spanning 100 years, science fiction wasn't part of their daily digest.
That said, technology is improving exponentially. And cheap access to space is literally around the corner, thanks to the COTS program, and Elon Musk's SpaceX.
Well I wish that were true. We still pay $5000/lb to LEO . Let's say Musk cuts that in half to $2500/lb. If SSP requires $100/lb to LEO and we get a new Musk every 20 years we need 4 more halvings to get LEO costs down to the $100/lb mark. At 20 years per halving, that's 80 years. Given 'progress' since Apollo which was 40 years ago, 80 years does not sound outrageous at this rate. What you want is an enterprise whos job it is to develop cheap ISP 300 and cheap ISP 400 rocket engines.
@bagtaggar Cheaper access to space is important. You're not going to boost these things into GEO and operate them. They'll be build out of NEO materials and move themselves to Earth. We still lack the automated remote manufacturing needed to make use of SSP scale asteroidal resource usage. You will have lots of warning it's on the way. Massive global unemployment as the manufacturing sector uses this technology to maximize profit.
@bagtaggar The " gang of 12 ( 12 of the original engineers from the Saturn program) including Ralph Nansen, who worked at Boeing during the design phase of Solar Power Satellites in the 70's have the heavy lift solution as well. Nansen's book from 1995 "Sun Power - a Global Solution to the Coming Energy Crisis" is the text book on the Boeing design concept, with some tech updates. His latest book, while a little rough around the edges is yet another update. "Energy Crisis" Solution from Space.
@TalksWithDirt wow did we forget about fission? The US navy has a fleet of these reactors floating in saltwater bobing all over the planet all the time. If these 20 to 24 year old kids can do that then surely sorry ars civilians can manage a stationary fission plant on solid ground ah?
@masluxx Well for one there's not enough recoverable fission fuel on the planet to become a viable global power system. It could have worked in the West (It does work in France.), provided it stayed in the West. I think the USSR shows what happens when societies decay and have large nuclear power plants. But the simple fact is we don't have enough uranium 235 to take everyone to breeders. Even if you bridge with fission you'll be under pressure to go fusion or SSP in pretty fast order.
@TalksWithDirt you clearly are using bad, no data, or misinterpreting the data when you say "Well for one there's not enough recoverable fission fuel on the planet". Here on the internet you might run across some one that might know something about any field. Like for instance a geologist that was in the navy nuclear program in his youth. Again fission then converted into hydrogen via electrolysis is the answer for near future generations
The technology for a "leo tether" is just not there yet,even building from top down,a space elebator would have to be able to withstand roughly 60-100 gigapascals(gpa) of tension.Steel snaps at about 2 gpa,even carbon nanotubes aren't there yet.Pure nanotubes fibers in labs are only 15mm long,1 atom misaligned would knock it's strenght down by 30%.NASA has prize $,figure it out,win the $10 mil,all else is just talk,take me on a cruise when you win the prize
You know what, I aint no motherfuckin rocket science but, we dont use nuclear energy because its dangerous right, How come we dont just gather nuclear energy from the moon generator or something like that. You know what i mean that way it wont be so distructive if something happends to go wrong right?
the resources needed to construct a vast space infastructure are only expensive if you do it using todays inefficient timid approach to space. a new type of rocket (nothing revolutionary) just a bigger version of the many others mass produced is needed, we can make use of most of the mass in the shuttles by simply using the fuel tanks instead of jettisoning them wastefully. a space station could be built using these tanks... you can even fit them out before they are filled with fuel
if done right we need to spend hundreds of billions. new ways of getting huge amounts of mass into geo like a rotating leo tether and new ways of shunting mass across vast distances in space like mass drivers. using in situ resources from moon/asteroids and using the unique space environment to manufacture the main bulk of the sps in orbiting space stations. it would require a massive infastructure. but the electricity market is worth trillions and spin offs alone would be immense.
To the people with all the negative comments. Thinking like yours is what has caused the US to fall behind in technology. Thankfully there are new companies in the US that aren't affraid of pushing the limits of technology. I know you guys hate change but its coming.
@marcz28 ????FALL BEHIND?????America dominates tech,from 90% of cpu production,95% of operating systems,the list goes on..........................80% of the global tech companies are American...
Yeah., and if America doesn't get space-based solar or fusion, just wait to see the lead drop away. And given that the EU are doing far more on fusion than anybody else, and any sensible project would join to them instead of going solo, America simply has to crack space-based solar.
Yes, America is currently dominant, I'm saying that too. But in 50-100 years time, energy will be supplied via fusion and/or space solar. If America doesn't control one of those methods, it has to rely on another world power for its energy needs and will inevitably get overtaken.
Also, to one of your articles on population growth: a shrinking population is actually more desirable than a growing one, and is used as a measure of development.
These are great facts that lead to a great solution, however, directing it to the next president or any president of the US for that matter, is plain useless because the president does not make the decisions. He only gets about a 12% say in all of the country's decisions. President is just someone the country can either thank for positive and productive doings, or point the finger and blame for any doings for which the citizens of the country disagree with.
good idea, and once we begin to colonize space we will use it for certain. i applaud the video, and am curious about how one may transmit the energy from outer space through the atmosphere into storage facilities on Earth?
The leading idea for power transmission from Space to Earth is concentrated microwaves - a solution which presents as many problems as it solves. Given the military resources and coal reserves of the United States, don't expect us to give this a go until the 2050s or so. Japan, on the other hand may try as early as the 2030s.
thats the best part power beaming technology, its been around for ages and was actually originally developed as an alternative to the national grid. thats how old and safe this technology is. you build an antenna on the sattelite and a rectenna on the ground. its a concentrated beam of energy yet its not radioactive, nor does it damage living things... a bird or a plane could fly through it and not be affected at all.
I don't know what the purpose is of this vid, but its everything but objective and true. Harvesting solar from space is (literally) far-sought. One can't imagine the problems of getting the panels up there, protecting them against micro-meteorites (for one), there is no space elevator (yet, let's hope there will be one in 25 years), do maintenance,
China and India will soon have higher energy demands than Europe and US together, are they in the plan?
you dont have to protect the panels from micro metiorites, why the fuck would you bother when at most they will only reduce the output by a fraction of a percent? do you know what a solar panel is?
a cheap heavy lift launch vehicle would need to be used to get the stuff up there because the space elevator is pie in the sky. it would be cheaper and more profitable in the long run to launch a smaller space mining mission to gather bennificate and cast the struts from resources in situ
What the fuck do you know about it all (to use your own words) ? There are no cheap heavy weight launchers, A launch of 1kg costs about 20000€ today. There is no industry in space, and no resources for mining closer than the moon. And I DO know about solar technology, the solar cells are positioned in series so if you break one you lose the production of a whole chain of cells.
There's a lot of space in deserts, like Northern Africa, use that space first for solar.
there are solutions for all the problems you have mentioned... you just need ambition and imagination, two things totally missing in national space programmes today. there is no way we can transmit electricity intercontinental through wires, already only 10-20% of electricity generated reches point of consumption long range transmision would increase this inefficiency by a factor of 10. the only credible alternative is to reduce our electricity consumption which will cost far more than sps
that's friggin brilliant! we can launch these solar modules into the sun orbits as close as possible..don't even need to go collect energy, since a network of them can transmit energy back wirelessly or w/e efficient method. (i hope) then living in deep space colonies and fighting with gundams is that much closer!!
Fusion is probably the better alternative. But In the nearer term, in 1-3 decades from now, I can see Space based solar power as a viable method to increase space commercialization.
yeah sure, fusion the biggest fuck up in modern science. do you know how many billions of dollars have been poured into that bottomless pit already? and what have we got to show for it? a handful of working reactors that take up more energy than they give out. the idea of generating power is that power stations must contribute to the national grid - not suck it dry
Isn't a space-elevator design being currently designed? Once its been built and tested, implementation of the SSP would be monetarily viable for large scale use.
PLEASE EVERYONE LOOK UP NIKOLA TESLA! there is no need for people to suffer because they dont have energy. tesla made wireless power which would have allowed anyone energy at any point on earth, i even demonstrate his wireless energy system! please watch and spread! tesla is our longterm answer.
If Solaren, PowerSat, or other private groups can get 100% of their stuff up from the ground and show a return, I'm all for it. Great proof-of-concept for a National SBSP program using lunar materials. 99% of sunsat mass can come from the moon with 97% cost savings. It solves the permanent energy requirement and the climate problem. It defends the earth from NEOs by processing them. It is the industrial reason for permanent settlement of space. Obama can roll a space and energy program into one.
at 4KW to 17KW per KG it's really not that expensive to produce them here and launch them.... A 100 MW's in space and a more advanced lifter could be powered with a maser(microwave laser).
A MHD scramjet with a 100 MW magnetoplasma fusion torch ripping apart CO2 H2O in the compressed air into ionized plasma, super heating it. That will get megatons of cargo into space.
Not even America could afford to do this. Your talking about powering the whole world with a couple of hundred solar panels in space. Thats going to be a bit difficult.
Imagine country's fighting over the sun's power Trust me it will happen its a good idea but if we lead the charge at are current state it will only have horrible results..
available earth based solar is something like 5,000,000% of our current usage... that knocks down by best current extraction % and would require tapping every square meter... but the energy is there..
This would raise MJ/m2 and lower cost per mega watt. It could make solar cheaper then coal, but the start up cost is high, very high.
10 years will be before the fossil fuels run out. Then we get massive amounts of energy from there. More than all the fossil fuels that has existed. I wonder what better ideas tycotyrann has.
There is a lot of false information in this video. Even though harvesting solar energy in space is interesting we will be there technically in 10 years from an extremely optimistic viewpoint, to make a difference producing energy it would take another 20 years, (extremely optimistic). Invests needs to be much larger than the American defense budget over years. Interesting to see the possibilities though.
PG&E is looking to buy 200MW of baseload space solar power from Solaren Corp. in Manhattan Beach, CA starting in 2016. The rectenna will be in Fresno. Solaren will put their powersat in geo orbit using an existing lift vehicle. Leave it to California to lead on this! Obama, are you paying attention?
i watched ths vid a couple months ago and im starting 2 make it very much aware in my school ppl call me crazy but i dont want 2 jst sitt here and see my future go 2 waste, when theres somthin we could all do and i know itll take a couple thousand yrs 4 the earths natrual sourses 2 b used up, but hows about we elongate that..
um..... yeah solar power pales in comparison to tether power, solar power from space would actually be very easy just have to fly up a massive space blanket thing and anchor it to the space station, but based on previous tether power experiments in space it still pales in comparison to ease of harnessing and building infa structure for tether power...only prob is they dont have a cable that can withstand the electro forces put on the tether when it gathers energy.
Considering how long it took to get the international Space station as far as it has gotten, the idea of these massive arrays seems like too much , How much energy would it take to manufacture this stuff AND get it into space AND set up an incredibly complex "gathering instrument. Why is it that we can never just use the technology we have right now ?
This is the future. While I do not agree w/ the vid's blatantly partisan assertion that the Iraqi Theater of the U.S.-Islamist War (aka GWOT) was about oil (to refute this, just look at the price shocks we endured in oil & where the US gets most of its oil from), the US Department of Defense has already developed this tech & is perfecting it until the order is given to mass-produce. The energy will be collected in space & then beamed down to receivers on Earth via Microwave transmission.
In a world which last year consumed a total (from all sources of energy) just over 480 Quadrillion British Thermal Units, concepts such as this one in this video are of little practical use.
However, if a total solution to fossil fuel reliance somehow did present itself, how responsible would mankind be with it?
I'm not quite sure how you conclude that an SSP platform, one of which provides as much power as 12 nuclear fission plants, is a concept of little use.
The most pressing issue is finding a clean and reliable source of power. Changing human nature will take more time than we have.
What I'm referring to is the aspect of portability.
In order to be practical, a solution that replaces fossil fuels must be delivered in a such a way that can be used by heavy trucks, trains, ships and very importantly, aircraft.
And be non polluting.
Establishing a solution that does not challenge the realities as espoused by the Laws of Thermodynamics has always been the big problem.
But let's say that such a solution is already imminent
If the electricity is cheap enough, you can use it to take water vapor and CO2 out of the air and make clean-burning synthetic hydrocarbons. When burned in a car, truck, plane, ship, etc. this will produce water vapor and CO2, but since those came from the atmosphere to begin with, the whole cycle is carbon-neutral.
It can be done now, but with the current high cost of electricity and low cost of petroleum, it isn't cost-effective. But let electricity drop and petroleum rise, and it will be.
How is beamed power not portable? We already have power grids and batteries. Portability is the main reason that the military is looking into SBSP. It would allow them to beam power to wherever the battlefield is or use it to help during national disasters e.g. Katrina.
I agree. Nuclear fusion is a very powerful way to get reliable, cheap energy. Solar in space is probably easier to launch (pardon the pun) than our current state of Nuclear efficiencies (far too much energy and mass are wasted). Our best hope is the Chinese "Little Sun" Nuclear Fusion Reactor series. We have far more potential in nuclear fusion, but I fear we will need the solar sustenance to keep our society moving until we make that Nuclear breakthrough.
It will be worth whatever it costs to put up. There is no other energy source that will be able to deliver this much power without serious pollution. And there is enough resources in space to pay for all of this. Mining one metallic asteroid and selling the rare earth metals should pretty much cover it.
How do you keep the energy being sent down highly efficient. If you used a laser, it would be no different to having solar panels on the ground since the atmosphere absorbs most of the energy and microwave, from a geosynch orbit is going to spread out a lot!
eacao 3 weeks ago
There are a few facts which are wrong. In a geosynchronous orbit, the satellite would get 22 hours of sunlight per day, and there is 8x more energy per square meter in orbit than on the ground. Also, there is a big difference between a communications satellite and a solar farm, the cost of launching something that size is going to bankrupt any nation. Although, I am fully convinced that space based solar, along with fusion will solve our energy needs past 2050 or later.
eacao 3 weeks ago
This is my aff for this years debate topic. Pretty good aff
1019079 2 months ago
if we will get an energetic surplus, it will change our priorities :-)
i think, it can be good :-)
and specially for cosmic travelling :-))
ivanjesik 5 months ago
Wireless energy, clean renewable resources, the elite hoard our tehnology, our rulers our spiritually unenlightened pagan atheists... Followed by corporate tools, wake up
AdamNoAnts 5 months ago
Woolerlland you're an idiot, research nikola tesla. Wireless energy, and the hazards of coal oil and nuclear, Jp Morgan chose our path for profit and to poison air and water so he can eventually sell us that too
AdamNoAnts 5 months ago
Wow. I had seen this video many times before, but I didn't know it was you who made it o_O
Awesome.
LordSapiens 5 months ago
bah this is all theory... nuclear plants are getting more efficent every decade and with the introduction of fussion power in the next 50 years or less, we''ll have a fairly unlimtied supply of fuel (water) which will also solved the ice caps flooding problem ;)
theres one thing collecting the energy from space but how are you going to transport it back to earth?? mass ammounts of wires... hmm....? by the time it gets to earth, alot of the energy would have been wasted by traveling so far...
woollerland 7 months ago
@woollerland The energy is sent to Earth via microwaves.
LordSapiens 5 months ago
@woollerland Unfortunately, it's obvious that you are not up on this technology at all. There is an excellent book on the topic called "Sun Power - The Global Solution to the Coming Energy Crisis". It was written by a Boeing engineer who was involved with the design process of this system back in the 70's, after the first oil embargo. It will answer a lot of questions for you. Wireless energy transmission is no theory, its a fact. This is the ONLY energy system that can save the U.S. economy.
Prestostark 3 weeks ago in playlist Favorite videos
Nice video, very well put together; tastefully informative. Thanks.
sajabz2007 9 months ago
Why not put them as close to the sun as possible? the effect that one objects gravity has on another is squared each time when the distance that separates them is cut in half. The same thing happens with the number of photons per square inch.
MacabreManifesto 10 months ago
Hi,
would you mind telling me what video editing software was used to create this video?
Nx772 10 months ago
And Obama just shut down space program,American astronauts will have to take the Russian taxi.The worst President ever.
LePageChannel 10 months ago
there's constant change in developement in the way of power consumption... a driving force in today's society is using less power (at least among the intelegent) and putting that aside... i'm sure feeding the population will become an issue before lighting their houses at night.. etc etc.... by 2100 we'll most likely have rules like china about how many kids you can have.. everything will be recycled and everything will be super energy effiecent... that's the dirrection i see us going
Tsunne 10 months ago
@Tsunne America's birthrate is at an all time low. So is Europes. The World Population is in decline. At the International Conference on Population in Cairo 1994, they called for stopping the world population around 8 billion and reducing it to what they call sustainable at 2 billion. That's a reduction of 6 billion! Its hard to fathom that the elites really want to cull that much of the population so it is easier to control.
SimplyThinkDreams 10 months ago
@SimplyThinkDreams where do you get your birthrate statistics?
Tsunne 10 months ago
@Tsunne From many different sources. You can google the birth rate for many different countries and find many different sources. It doesn't matter which source they are all relatively the same. The CIA U.S. birth rate statistic is 1.338% and a population must have a 2.1% birth rate to maintain the current population size. If you read the papers regarding the Cairo Conference, you can see the plans they set in motion to cull the population. Its eugenics and its perverse.
SimplyThinkDreams 10 months ago
@SimplyThinkDreams i didn't find any statistic anywhere about 2.1 or 1.338 i did however find something saying that the global birthrate is approximately 20 but it's not measured per 100 its' per 1000 ... and yes there has been a gradual decline in birthrate since the 1950's stretched over the span of time in which sexual education has grown... birth control has grown... and yet the population has still been growing... so there's some conspiracy to reduce population?
Tsunne 10 months ago
@Tsunne From Wikipedia regarding Total fertility rate: " The replacement fertility rate is roughly 2.1 births per woman for most industrialized countries (2.075 in the UK for example), but ranges from 2.5 to 3.3 in developing countries because of higher mortality rates.[4] Taken globally, the total fertility rate at replacement is 2.33 children per woman. At this rate, global population growth would trend towards zero."
SimplyThinkDreams 10 months ago
@Tsunne im writing a paper about this. what are the sources for all these stats. I need reliable sources. please help urgent???
cino14 10 months ago
@SimplyThinkDreams so this confrence covered universal education... reducing infant and child mortality reducing maturnal mortality and access to services for family planning and sexual health.... there's no population control covered in that confrence
Tsunne 10 months ago
@Tsunne I beg to differ. Of course they sugar coat it and make it seem all inoccent but its really not. Population reduction has been a goal of the globalist elites for some time and their eugenics programs have been in effect and they are working. Much of it is through abortion, birth control pills, creating the mindset that children are hassles to be avoided, flouride in the water, poisons in many of our processed foods, etc. They even have pills today to reduce women's periods to a few/year
SimplyThinkDreams 10 months ago
@SimplyThinkDreams i get it you're a conspiracy nut.... well think of it this way... are there any rules preventing you from having kids? has drinking city water made you starile? what? no??? birth control is for preventing unwanted pregnancy it's not manditory... it's an option for intelegent people that aren't ready for a child but want to have sex... and if you bled from between your legs every month... woudln't you wnat a pill that made that once a year instead?... you're thinking backwards
Tsunne 10 months ago
@Tsunne It would be impossible for anyone to prevent me from having children. Certainly no man has the authority to regulate another's reproduction. In fact, we are commanded by our Creator to "be fruitful, multiply, and subdue the earth" in Genesis 1:28. Of course sex is reserved for the sacred union of marriage.
And no if I was a woman I wouldn't want to pervert my natural cycle with drugs for convenience. Any thought otherwise is backwards.
SimplyThinkDreams 10 months ago
@SimplyThinkDreams that was God commanding the first people on earth. the earth is subdued the bible teaches common sence and stripping the earth dry so that you can have as many kids as you damn well please is just stupid. and those drugs for women are for a great many women to regulate and calm symptoms. because many women go through agonizing pain and for you as a man to say a woman should suffer because you think anything less is a perversion? with that mind set you'll never have kids
Tsunne 10 months ago
@Tsunne Isn't it common sense not to mess with the natural cycle of the woman and her sacred ability to bring life into this world? By the way, PMS is a cultural bound syndrome. It is a sociocultural phenomenon of Western culture. Other women around the world do not experience symptoms of PMS.
The globalists want you to believe that the earth is being stripped dry so they can justify their depopulation agendas.
SimplyThinkDreams 10 months ago
one word NAZZI
xSlavic 11 months ago
The United States missed the hugest opportunity. Boeing designed this system in the '70's, completely to the point that it was ready to build. The D.O.E. was even on board. Then it was swept under the carpet by the Carter and Reagan administrations. Had we moved ahead with this concept, the U.S. would now be the leader in steel and aluminum production, and we would be a net exporter of energy. Building and launching satellites for other countries and making trillions of dollars - literally.
Prestostark 1 year ago
To make this efficient we need a space elevator, a 33k km nanotube cable with an artificial counterweight at it's end (probably a space station). Nano tubes are good conductors and could be used to transmit electricity continuously from these panel fields. that with the capability of sending trains instead of small shuttles fucking up our atmosphere we could attain massive space capabilities.
shorgoth 1 year ago
@shorgoth Heavy lift rocket burning LOX and Hydrogen = no pollution. Think Saturn V without the kerosene. Heck- even with kerosene the 02 burns it pretty completely. That being said, if they can figure out the counter-weight on the space elevator, and the nano tube construction, it's a fantastic concept. We just cant wait that long to develop it. We have Saturn V motors laying around right now...This thing has to start NOW. Or we will be a third world nation...
Prestostark 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Oil companies are trying their best to stop free energy ideas from spreading to common ppl.
We need to put an end to this corruption ,start generating your own electricity now.
Visit LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM and get the blueprints . Join the Revolution!!
polysemousncrk 1 year ago
Comment removed
813Galileo 1 year ago
Comment removed
813Galileo 1 year ago
Nice video and intriguing concept - although an article in SciAM *did* state that was possible for ground based solar power generate enough energy for the demand.
But Space-based solar is really cool! :-)
P.S. what is the soundtrack? It is very nice.
testrichter 1 year ago
FANTASTIC! How about transmission?
nickanon 1 year ago
@nickanon A radio wave (think wireless) link is used. The energy collected in space by the panels is converted to a radio frequency and sent to a large receiving antenna on the ground where it is converted back to 120. It's a tried and trued method. There are a couple of great books by Ralph Nansen on this subject. He was one of the engineers at Boeing that developed a lot of the concepts for this system back in the late 70's. Google him.
Prestostark 1 year ago
@nickanon there is an excellent book by Ralph Nansen "Sun Power - The Global Solution for the Coming Energy Crisis" written in 1995. It should be a text book in every engineering and technology college in the U.S.A.
Nansen worked at Boeing, and after the oil embargo of 1973, Boeing designed this system and had it certified as a solution to our energy needs. Then it was swept under the carpet by the Carter and Reagan administrations. If we had done it then, things would be much better now!
Prestostark 1 year ago
how do we transport the energy from these solar panels to earth?
fiveos 1 year ago
@fiveos rechargeable batteries.
tsipise 1 year ago
@fiveos Radio wave. Check out the "NASA - JPL Goldstone demo of wireless transmission", in the video section to your right...That was done in 1975. It's a well established, proven method of transmission. And it's being updated and fine tuned all the time.
Prestostark 11 months ago
How do you get all that solar power down to earth? Do you "beam " it? If you could beam it down, Couldn't we beam it to our house now from power plants now like wi fi?
McDonoughSean 1 year ago
Just watched a video of solar power transfer over a distance of 1.5km with over 82% efficiency - That was back in 1972 - The technology is already here. This is the future,.
cjstemplar 1 year ago
seems like a nice way but i have a few problems.
you may create more jobs but on the flip side you expend jobs to so that isn't a good point to make.
and does the predicted energy requirement for the future years consider the possible slow down in human population due to lack of room?
and how many satellites are required to fill that need?
and how can they transmit power 24/7? geostationary ones will follow your place into the dark of night and polar ones will be behind the earth half the time
PumpkinMelonJuice 1 year ago
@PumpkinMelonJuice There is no night 22,500 miles out. That object is in direct sunlight all the time. Also, if the U.S.A. did this on a large scale, we could build satellites for other countries and lease or sell them for billions of dollars. We'd be like the new OPEC. Also, the sort of aqua/agriculture that can take place under the rectenna would be a huge source of employment. With a super abundance of electrical energy, we could also create a hydrogen society - all new technology, more jobs.
Prestostark 11 months ago
THIS IS THE REAL SOLUTION FOR ALL OUR PROBLEMS.
WE MUST MAKE AN INTERNATIONAL REVOLUTION NOT ONLY WITH THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA, BUT WITH UNO MEMBERS
biasefrancisco 1 year ago
A big problem is all the high speed debris in space waiting to punch holes in those solar panels.
n8style 1 year ago
fuck u man, this is such bullshit it's not even funny... There's enough solar power alone to power the planet 1000 time at least...
flashdomm 1 year ago
This is the way of the future. As always, science and technology are the final salvation of mankind. If technology fail then it's the end of civilization. It's sad to know that the US spend so little money on these things. Example: Large Hadron Collider cost 9 billion. Iraq war? 991billions and counting.
tk100 1 year ago 9
Alternative energy has enough potential to power our needs, especially geothermal and solar power, they each have the potential to be more efficient then oil easily, unfortunately abundance of energy is not something your likely to see for a long time, even though its possible that 10 years from now we could have way more energy then we need, its about profit, so the only solution your likely to see is something they can control and market.
Matty14388 1 year ago
why all the downer comments on this video. this concept can save the world in so many ways.
moonus111 1 year ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
I agree, thats the point I made, It seems that its all a grab for money, there are some well intentioned people out their, but, all this hype is harming the true cause. Entropy laws says you cannot get out more than you put in, the best you could ever get is a 1 to 1 energy exchange, with that amount of power required, how big will it have to be, Dubai International Airport is the largest building made by man at 1.5km2 this would be a spec compared to what would have to be built in space.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@RegnevaDeksam You may be mixing up the 2nd law of thermodynamics with the impossibility of perpetual motion. This idea has nothing to do with either of them.
n8style 1 year ago
Well, no I am not getting them mixed up, I was making a point not giving a physics lecture, as you can tell from the absence of formulas. Read the point and don't get anal about the wording. now if you want to get into a discussion of entropy or thermodynamics then drop me a line, but the complexity's of the physics would not be beneficial to the discussion. In other words become a big picture person, so you dont miss what is happening around you
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@n8style PS, my point is of the size that would be needed to be built, 100's of km, Now before you make a comment, do you understand of the enormity of scale they are talking about, did you ponder how my statement reflects on the postings and the statements made in this video, or did you just want to big note yourself, in a fools attempt to show that you know more than some else
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@RegnevaDeksam I totally agree with you on the size it would have to be. I'm sorry if my tone earlier was patronizing, it just seemed like you were bringing up things that didn't have a bearing on it.
n8style 1 year ago
@RegnevaDeksam Well, space construction would be taken to a new level, for sure. But this is not a manned space station, so the construction is simple and modular. In space, there is no wind or gravity or geological forces, so construction can be ultra-lightweight., even flimsy. The new thin film solar cells could be rolled out like tin foil over large skeletal structures - like giant kites. The heavy duty stuff would be reserved for the transmitter, which is more complex. Fun engineering stuff!
Prestostark 11 months ago
The greatest inspiration to science is sci-fi
The greatest hindrance is that people believe the sci-fi.
Sci-fi = (science fiction, movies, shows, books)
It seems to me that all these big companies with big ideas all after big money.
Why is it that I can email the top 12 companies for more info, and none bother to email back????
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
Science on cue has the answer to this problem.
ProgRok 1 year ago
So wrong... if we went to the max with all alternative energy sources we would easily produce more than enough energy to power the whole world 100 times over.
rottenpancakes 1 year ago
Lets Not live in the fantasy that science will on queue have a solution to this problem.
LHC, The god Partial, Zero Point Energy, and Quantum Vortexes, Maybe we can wait for the spacemen to come and show us LOL. Sorry having a laugh with a very serious subject. We dont know where the colluder will lead us (breakdowns and repairs I guess), I believe its only real purpose is pure science. Knowing how God started the whole bigbang off is not really going to help us solve a global power problem.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
the god partial? colluder? dude you don't even know how to spell, why should we listen to you. do you have any idea the technology that comes from such experiments not to mention the vast new understandings about the universe? this is why people don't listen to you.
insane66613 1 year ago
Well yes, I am dyslexic and yes English is not my first language (how many do you speak) Dude sounds like you are highly educated, it never entered into you mind to look at the concepts and not the text. Now as quantum mechanics is my field of interest, I do understand the relevance of the experiment, and am happy to put my mathematical knowledge against someone who thinks that 666 and 13 are cool.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@insane66613 Well yes, I am dyslexic and yes English is not my first language (how many do you speak) Dude sounds like you are highly educated, it never entered into you mind to look at the concepts and not the text. Now as quantum mechanics is my field of interest, I do understand the relevance of the experiment, and am happy to put my mathematical knowledge against someone who thinks that 666 and 13 are cool.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@insane66613 As for people listening to me, well I did not ask anyone to listen to me, I am assuming that are not dyslexic and are capable of reading, if not understanding, I posed some question, I did not ask anyone to list to me.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@RegnevaDeksam lol you could have just said you were dyslexic and esl
insane66613 1 year ago
What about the possibility of the LHC and possible discovery of the 'god particle' which will provide us unlimited energy?
TheBlingblingbros 1 year ago
@TheBlingblingbros the Higgs boson will in no way provide free unlimited energy. The main taget of the LHC is research, practical proof of theoretical physics. It has nothing to do with free energy. (Unless, as a spin-off, it would provide a possibility to control micro-black holes. But I believe that will take longer than nuclear fusion research :)
tsipise 1 year ago
PS: I could not confirm this figure (but its the only one I have got)
The some total production of cells come to 10 square kilometres, by todays standards that is .0045% of what is required to power the US, forget the world, forget the massive ramp up of power requirement in the next 90 years. It is time to start the mammoth project of fixing it, before we regress to the Stone Age.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@RegnevaDeksam place them in the desert around the world, you have losses from the atmosphere but huge benefits in terms of servicing and maintenance. Europe is actually planning to build a grid that uses solar from north Africa (together with wind from the North Sea and biomass in central west Europe)
tsipise 1 year ago
@RegnevaDeksam Boeing's design of the SPS from the late 70's projected that each large satellite would produce the equivalent power of 5 nuke plants. The life expectancy of a satellite - with some maintenance - well over 100 years. The payoff time? 20 years. It's like Grand Coulee dam in the sky. A giant revenue stream...We just need the vision and the investment mentality to do it.
Prestostark 11 months ago
Heres a question, how many cells are required for 1130 quadrillion BTUs, Im guessing a lot more than a lot. In all the years since the first high efficiency cell was made, about 50 yrs, how many where produced? I doubt we will ever produce that type of power from cells. But they are on the right path. Building things in space is the solution, we should take a pointer from the sun, its basically a huge nuclear reaction. No one wants to live next door to a reactor, no problem in space.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
the tech sound good boosting the required equipment into a stable orbit will take time and vast resources I dought there is enough launch vehicals to do this at the moment on anothere note there are aproximitly 900 operational satilites in orbit at the moment this is not counting debrie and natural objects the risk of colition with one of these orbital objects is huge.
4664524 1 year ago
they have the technology, they have the resources, but they are afraid that they will fail. things you think is sci fi is actually just science. we have technology to send energy from one location to another
fireboot1 1 year ago
Japan announces plans to orbit solar power satellites that will transmit energy back to earth via laser beams. They hope to have the first one orbiting by 2030.
TheNagatoyuki 1 year ago
I thought one of the reasons we went after saddam was because he was building a super gun that could easily and cheaply just shoot material and weapons into orbit.and I,ve seen recent advances in wireless transmission of energy that are finaly recognizing Teslas 100 year old tech.or are the naysayers claiming that guns and electricity are a vast green conspiracy?
robert66michel 1 year ago
All the recources that we need to build all of the solar power cells. That is going to take years of research, then years of political discussion, then years of building them( and what kind of energy do we need to build them?). By the time it is finished it is past 2100. this way takes to long. But the Idea is ok. It just doesn't work with the world we know now
QEV8C 2 years ago
@QEV8C : The research is already complete! Satellites such as the ones proposed here do not need any new technology to work. And Japan, Switzerland and the U.S.s Pacific Gas & Electric are all exploring little pilot projects right now.
magelpie 2 years ago
I didn't knew that. but that sounds very positive
QEV8C 2 years ago
So is this like Microwave Power that I heard of or are we using some sorta of long electric arc to get that power down to earth.
Darkwizzrobe 2 years ago
space solar power, if that's not clean energy then I don't know what is
RaynorX 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Im all for finding better way's to extract energy, but when I see shit like I saw in your video I realize I have to look elswhere, I know propaganda when I see. Please stop your hurting the cuase, stop your lies.
ORVX 2 years ago
I just watched some of your videos...
All I have to say is - conspiracy theories are intellectual sophistication for the ignorant.
And you have a wealth of that.
bagtaggar 2 years ago 15
lol, I don't have any video's.
ORVX 2 years ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
Comment removed
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bagtaggar \I think you can make comments like that when you can answer question about the project. So, how big will it be, how are we going to manufacture 10 million times more photoelectric cells than we have ever made, what are the atmospheric affects of transferring so much power to earth. PS I dont know ORVX, its just your ignorance Im commenting on.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
@bagtaggar Vibrate with the vision of solutions. Perhaps Bagtagger, is rewarded for tagging bags. This is both false and true. I do agree that get all bend out of shape over conspiracy is further away from hope. Or- lets say - running water in bagtaggers home, and heat or food in his presense. Vibrate with the hope of solutions.. and look for evidence of them. Even if you are tagging bags.
MC2233z 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ORVX I agree, thats the point I made, It seems that its all a grab for money, there are some well intentioned people out their, but, all this hype is harming the true cause. Entropy laws says you cannot get out more than you put in, the best you could ever get is a 1 to 1 energy exchange, with that amount of power required, how big will it have to be, Dubai International Airport is the largest building made by man at 1.5km2 this would be a spec compared to what would have to be built in space.
RegnevaDeksam 1 year ago
srry to be a total blonde and ask this but...... whats the song called...??? ..plus...ive already made my opinionated comment 1yr ago....
inuyashaghydj 2 years ago
Well it's either this or fusion. Both have some missing parts. None of our fusions reactors are net energy producers except the ones that last phempto seconds. But for space solar power all you need is cheap access to space. One day one of those will be developed. But with the broken institutions of the West, the more likely outcome will be us using the same power in 2100 that we used in the 1920's. We are not a forward looking society anymore.
TalksWithDirt 2 years ago
Disagree, I think we are more forward looking at this point in history than we have ever been in decades, indeed centuries past. People in the 1800s weren't concerned about climate predictions spanning 100 years, science fiction wasn't part of their daily digest.
That said, technology is improving exponentially. And cheap access to space is literally around the corner, thanks to the COTS program, and Elon Musk's SpaceX.
bagtaggar 2 years ago 5
Well I wish that were true. We still pay $5000/lb to LEO . Let's say Musk cuts that in half to $2500/lb. If SSP requires $100/lb to LEO and we get a new Musk every 20 years we need 4 more halvings to get LEO costs down to the $100/lb mark. At 20 years per halving, that's 80 years. Given 'progress' since Apollo which was 40 years ago, 80 years does not sound outrageous at this rate. What you want is an enterprise whos job it is to develop cheap ISP 300 and cheap ISP 400 rocket engines.
TalksWithDirt 2 years ago
@bagtaggar Cheaper access to space is important. You're not going to boost these things into GEO and operate them. They'll be build out of NEO materials and move themselves to Earth. We still lack the automated remote manufacturing needed to make use of SSP scale asteroidal resource usage. You will have lots of warning it's on the way. Massive global unemployment as the manufacturing sector uses this technology to maximize profit.
TalksWithDirt 1 year ago
@bagtaggar The " gang of 12 ( 12 of the original engineers from the Saturn program) including Ralph Nansen, who worked at Boeing during the design phase of Solar Power Satellites in the 70's have the heavy lift solution as well. Nansen's book from 1995 "Sun Power - a Global Solution to the Coming Energy Crisis" is the text book on the Boeing design concept, with some tech updates. His latest book, while a little rough around the edges is yet another update. "Energy Crisis" Solution from Space.
Prestostark 11 months ago
@TalksWithDirt wow did we forget about fission? The US navy has a fleet of these reactors floating in saltwater bobing all over the planet all the time. If these 20 to 24 year old kids can do that then surely sorry ars civilians can manage a stationary fission plant on solid ground ah?
masluxx 1 year ago
@masluxx Well for one there's not enough recoverable fission fuel on the planet to become a viable global power system. It could have worked in the West (It does work in France.), provided it stayed in the West. I think the USSR shows what happens when societies decay and have large nuclear power plants. But the simple fact is we don't have enough uranium 235 to take everyone to breeders. Even if you bridge with fission you'll be under pressure to go fusion or SSP in pretty fast order.
TalksWithDirt 1 year ago
@TalksWithDirt you clearly are using bad, no data, or misinterpreting the data when you say "Well for one there's not enough recoverable fission fuel on the planet". Here on the internet you might run across some one that might know something about any field. Like for instance a geologist that was in the navy nuclear program in his youth. Again fission then converted into hydrogen via electrolysis is the answer for near future generations
masluxx 1 year ago
The technology for a "leo tether" is just not there yet,even building from top down,a space elebator would have to be able to withstand roughly 60-100 gigapascals(gpa) of tension.Steel snaps at about 2 gpa,even carbon nanotubes aren't there yet.Pure nanotubes fibers in labs are only 15mm long,1 atom misaligned would knock it's strenght down by 30%.NASA has prize $,figure it out,win the $10 mil,all else is just talk,take me on a cruise when you win the prize
OakIslandBandit 2 years ago
You know what, I aint no motherfuckin rocket science but, we dont use nuclear energy because its dangerous right, How come we dont just gather nuclear energy from the moon generator or something like that. You know what i mean that way it wont be so distructive if something happends to go wrong right?
ahmloc 2 years ago
man you're a fucking retard
hukt0nf0nikz 2 years ago
the resources needed to construct a vast space infastructure are only expensive if you do it using todays inefficient timid approach to space. a new type of rocket (nothing revolutionary) just a bigger version of the many others mass produced is needed, we can make use of most of the mass in the shuttles by simply using the fuel tanks instead of jettisoning them wastefully. a space station could be built using these tanks... you can even fit them out before they are filled with fuel
lucasleivia 2 years ago
if done right we need to spend hundreds of billions. new ways of getting huge amounts of mass into geo like a rotating leo tether and new ways of shunting mass across vast distances in space like mass drivers. using in situ resources from moon/asteroids and using the unique space environment to manufacture the main bulk of the sps in orbiting space stations. it would require a massive infastructure. but the electricity market is worth trillions and spin offs alone would be immense.
lucasleivia 2 years ago
@lucasleivia Interesting idea, the tanks are purpose built tho and it's not going to be very easy to make them into something else as well.
n8style 1 year ago
Very Interesting!
Nature2Energydotcom 2 years ago
To the people with all the negative comments. Thinking like yours is what has caused the US to fall behind in technology. Thankfully there are new companies in the US that aren't affraid of pushing the limits of technology. I know you guys hate change but its coming.
marcz28 2 years ago 11
@marcz28 ????FALL BEHIND?????America dominates tech,from 90% of cpu production,95% of operating systems,the list goes on..........................80% of the global tech companies are American...
TheChristianRight09 10 months ago
@TheChristianRight09
Yeah., and if America doesn't get space-based solar or fusion, just wait to see the lead drop away. And given that the EU are doing far more on fusion than anybody else, and any sensible project would join to them instead of going solo, America simply has to crack space-based solar.
jimmyboyG485 10 months ago
@jimmyboyG485 I WILL SEND YOU SOME FUN FACTS...
;)
TheChristianRight09 10 months ago
@TheChristianRight09
Yes, America is currently dominant, I'm saying that too. But in 50-100 years time, energy will be supplied via fusion and/or space solar. If America doesn't control one of those methods, it has to rely on another world power for its energy needs and will inevitably get overtaken.
Also, to one of your articles on population growth: a shrinking population is actually more desirable than a growing one, and is used as a measure of development.
jimmyboyG485 10 months ago
These are great facts that lead to a great solution, however, directing it to the next president or any president of the US for that matter, is plain useless because the president does not make the decisions. He only gets about a 12% say in all of the country's decisions. President is just someone the country can either thank for positive and productive doings, or point the finger and blame for any doings for which the citizens of the country disagree with.
seskie 2 years ago
good idea, and once we begin to colonize space we will use it for certain. i applaud the video, and am curious about how one may transmit the energy from outer space through the atmosphere into storage facilities on Earth?
recyclingismylife 2 years ago
The leading idea for power transmission from Space to Earth is concentrated microwaves - a solution which presents as many problems as it solves. Given the military resources and coal reserves of the United States, don't expect us to give this a go until the 2050s or so. Japan, on the other hand may try as early as the 2030s.
permutationsofpaul 2 years ago
thats the best part power beaming technology, its been around for ages and was actually originally developed as an alternative to the national grid. thats how old and safe this technology is. you build an antenna on the sattelite and a rectenna on the ground. its a concentrated beam of energy yet its not radioactive, nor does it damage living things... a bird or a plane could fly through it and not be affected at all.
lucasleivia 2 years ago
I don't know what the purpose is of this vid, but its everything but objective and true. Harvesting solar from space is (literally) far-sought. One can't imagine the problems of getting the panels up there, protecting them against micro-meteorites (for one), there is no space elevator (yet, let's hope there will be one in 25 years), do maintenance,
China and India will soon have higher energy demands than Europe and US together, are they in the plan?
In this case, the truth is down here.
tsipise 2 years ago
you dont have to protect the panels from micro metiorites, why the fuck would you bother when at most they will only reduce the output by a fraction of a percent? do you know what a solar panel is?
a cheap heavy lift launch vehicle would need to be used to get the stuff up there because the space elevator is pie in the sky. it would be cheaper and more profitable in the long run to launch a smaller space mining mission to gather bennificate and cast the struts from resources in situ
lucasleivia 2 years ago
What the fuck do you know about it all (to use your own words) ? There are no cheap heavy weight launchers, A launch of 1kg costs about 20000€ today. There is no industry in space, and no resources for mining closer than the moon. And I DO know about solar technology, the solar cells are positioned in series so if you break one you lose the production of a whole chain of cells.
There's a lot of space in deserts, like Northern Africa, use that space first for solar.
tsipise 2 years ago
there are solutions for all the problems you have mentioned... you just need ambition and imagination, two things totally missing in national space programmes today. there is no way we can transmit electricity intercontinental through wires, already only 10-20% of electricity generated reches point of consumption long range transmision would increase this inefficiency by a factor of 10. the only credible alternative is to reduce our electricity consumption which will cost far more than sps
lucasleivia 2 years ago
Unless this guy is promoting Microwave tech which is Science Fiction.
Darkwizzrobe 2 years ago
No a space elevator is a elevator in the sky.
Darkwizzrobe 2 years ago
that's friggin brilliant! we can launch these solar modules into the sun orbits as close as possible..don't even need to go collect energy, since a network of them can transmit energy back wirelessly or w/e efficient method. (i hope) then living in deep space colonies and fighting with gundams is that much closer!!
tdotc 2 years ago
i think you should be the one to pilot them into the suns orbit since its your idea.
lucasleivia 2 years ago
who made this vid?
i would like to use it in a project and i would like to know who to credit it to
Spareshot93 2 years ago
Fusion is probably the better alternative. But In the nearer term, in 1-3 decades from now, I can see Space based solar power as a viable method to increase space commercialization.
JoJ0tAhm 2 years ago
yeah sure, fusion the biggest fuck up in modern science. do you know how many billions of dollars have been poured into that bottomless pit already? and what have we got to show for it? a handful of working reactors that take up more energy than they give out. the idea of generating power is that power stations must contribute to the national grid - not suck it dry
lucasleivia 2 years ago
Well that's because the technology is still in the R&D phase.
Darkwizzrobe 2 years ago
i expected more flaming from all of you.
im disappointed
LooseLeaves728 2 years ago
"FACT: There aren't enough resources on this planet to sustain continued human growth and increasing quality of life."
LMAO. That is NOT a fact.
patio87 2 years ago
Isn't a space-elevator design being currently designed? Once its been built and tested, implementation of the SSP would be monetarily viable for large scale use.
TriStarGOD 2 years ago
PLEASE EVERYONE LOOK UP NIKOLA TESLA! there is no need for people to suffer because they dont have energy. tesla made wireless power which would have allowed anyone energy at any point on earth, i even demonstrate his wireless energy system! please watch and spread! tesla is our longterm answer.
boxa888 2 years ago
If Solaren, PowerSat, or other private groups can get 100% of their stuff up from the ground and show a return, I'm all for it. Great proof-of-concept for a National SBSP program using lunar materials. 99% of sunsat mass can come from the moon with 97% cost savings. It solves the permanent energy requirement and the climate problem. It defends the earth from NEOs by processing them. It is the industrial reason for permanent settlement of space. Obama can roll a space and energy program into one.
ProgRok 2 years ago
at 4KW to 17KW per KG it's really not that expensive to produce them here and launch them.... A 100 MW's in space and a more advanced lifter could be powered with a maser(microwave laser).
A MHD scramjet with a 100 MW magnetoplasma fusion torch ripping apart CO2 H2O in the compressed air into ionized plasma, super heating it. That will get megatons of cargo into space.
abram730 2 years ago
America could afford to do this! Go to my facebook page@ vijayanc where i posted my solution to a ONE or TWO launch satellite solar power solution.
vancouverbluz 2 years ago
Not even America could afford to do this. Your talking about powering the whole world with a couple of hundred solar panels in space. Thats going to be a bit difficult.
honestrunescaper 2 years ago
Wow
PrisonersofWoW 2 years ago
This needs to get high prior people, send this to as many people you know.
Cause if we forget about this, we as humanity will never develop, and we will stay stuck on this planet forever.
Internet was our first upgrade, now we need an power upgrade.
Just imagine... what will be next...
Mistahjey 2 years ago
A war...
Imagine country's fighting over the sun's power Trust me it will happen its a good idea but if we lead the charge at are current state it will only have horrible results..
Sommthing1 2 years ago
the war will be harder when we don't have fossile fuels anymore...
it will be the survival of the fittest.
Mistahjey 2 years ago
@Sommthing1 That's unlikely, the volume of space to put these things in is immense, everyone could a personal one and it wouldn't matter
n8style 1 year ago
Building a space elevator would have to come first.
jessegr 2 years ago
Sooo, if we went to 'the max' of every alternative power source, it would provide only 1/3 of energy demand by 2100.
Then, you go on to state that using every existing energy technology, we would still only generate 1/3 of global energy demand? Doesnt make sense.
I agree, this proposal sounds good, but the problem has always been with the transmission; microwaves tend to scare people.
Lets hope that fusion becomes viable before 2100, or 2050 the way things are going!
dimzi101 2 years ago
and fusion wouldn't scare people?
reinux 2 years ago
available earth based solar is something like 5,000,000% of our current usage... that knocks down by best current extraction % and would require tapping every square meter... but the energy is there..
This would raise MJ/m2 and lower cost per mega watt. It could make solar cheaper then coal, but the start up cost is high, very high.
abram730 2 years ago
interesting.....
greenboy215 2 years ago
10 years will be before the fossil fuels run out. Then we get massive amounts of energy from there. More than all the fossil fuels that has existed. I wonder what better ideas tycotyrann has.
MrGinger1230 2 years ago
There is a lot of false information in this video. Even though harvesting solar energy in space is interesting we will be there technically in 10 years from an extremely optimistic viewpoint, to make a difference producing energy it would take another 20 years, (extremely optimistic). Invests needs to be much larger than the American defense budget over years. Interesting to see the possibilities though.
tycotyrann 2 years ago
Disagree, obviously, with this assessment. Launch costs are dropping steadily, and spacex is leading the way.
Economies of scale would also drastically reduce the cost of such a project, as the demand for rockets would increase.
bagtaggar 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That's truly amazing! I slashed my electric bill in half! look here: solar.xfollow.me (Copy to your browser's address bar)
iknowyoux 2 years ago
PG&E is looking to buy 200MW of baseload space solar power from Solaren Corp. in Manhattan Beach, CA starting in 2016. The rectenna will be in Fresno. Solaren will put their powersat in geo orbit using an existing lift vehicle. Leave it to California to lead on this! Obama, are you paying attention?
ProgRok 2 years ago 4
i watched ths vid a couple months ago and im starting 2 make it very much aware in my school ppl call me crazy but i dont want 2 jst sitt here and see my future go 2 waste, when theres somthin we could all do and i know itll take a couple thousand yrs 4 the earths natrual sourses 2 b used up, but hows about we elongate that..
inuyashaghydj 2 years ago
um..... yeah solar power pales in comparison to tether power, solar power from space would actually be very easy just have to fly up a massive space blanket thing and anchor it to the space station, but based on previous tether power experiments in space it still pales in comparison to ease of harnessing and building infa structure for tether power...only prob is they dont have a cable that can withstand the electro forces put on the tether when it gathers energy.
Fulcanellius 2 years ago
Considering how long it took to get the international Space station as far as it has gotten, the idea of these massive arrays seems like too much , How much energy would it take to manufacture this stuff AND get it into space AND set up an incredibly complex "gathering instrument. Why is it that we can never just use the technology we have right now ?
Librarian62 2 years ago
This is the future. While I do not agree w/ the vid's blatantly partisan assertion that the Iraqi Theater of the U.S.-Islamist War (aka GWOT) was about oil (to refute this, just look at the price shocks we endured in oil & where the US gets most of its oil from), the US Department of Defense has already developed this tech & is perfecting it until the order is given to mass-produce. The energy will be collected in space & then beamed down to receivers on Earth via Microwave transmission.
AllTerroristsMustDie 2 years ago
In a world which last year consumed a total (from all sources of energy) just over 480 Quadrillion British Thermal Units, concepts such as this one in this video are of little practical use.
However, if a total solution to fossil fuel reliance somehow did present itself, how responsible would mankind be with it?
That is the more important issue.
OMGEnterprise 2 years ago
I'm not quite sure how you conclude that an SSP platform, one of which provides as much power as 12 nuclear fission plants, is a concept of little use.
The most pressing issue is finding a clean and reliable source of power. Changing human nature will take more time than we have.
bagtaggar 2 years ago
What I'm referring to is the aspect of portability.
In order to be practical, a solution that replaces fossil fuels must be delivered in a such a way that can be used by heavy trucks, trains, ships and very importantly, aircraft.
And be non polluting.
Establishing a solution that does not challenge the realities as espoused by the Laws of Thermodynamics has always been the big problem.
But let's say that such a solution is already imminent
Again, how responsible would mankind be with it?
OMGEnterprise 2 years ago
If the electricity is cheap enough, you can use it to take water vapor and CO2 out of the air and make clean-burning synthetic hydrocarbons. When burned in a car, truck, plane, ship, etc. this will produce water vapor and CO2, but since those came from the atmosphere to begin with, the whole cycle is carbon-neutral.
It can be done now, but with the current high cost of electricity and low cost of petroleum, it isn't cost-effective. But let electricity drop and petroleum rise, and it will be.
SailorBarsoom 2 years ago
How is beamed power not portable? We already have power grids and batteries. Portability is the main reason that the military is looking into SBSP. It would allow them to beam power to wherever the battlefield is or use it to help during national disasters e.g. Katrina.
RealitysSuccessor 2 years ago
How will the energy get from space to earth???
NeoAltPower 2 years ago
it would be beamed.
fatjohn1408 2 years ago
I think nuclear fusion will be very effective once its perfected.
nerox2006x 2 years ago 3
I agree. Nuclear fusion is a very powerful way to get reliable, cheap energy. Solar in space is probably easier to launch (pardon the pun) than our current state of Nuclear efficiencies (far too much energy and mass are wasted). Our best hope is the Chinese "Little Sun" Nuclear Fusion Reactor series. We have far more potential in nuclear fusion, but I fear we will need the solar sustenance to keep our society moving until we make that Nuclear breakthrough.
pyrocyon 2 years ago
Is it safe to transfer such huge amounts of energy from space to earth?
malekith77 2 years ago
18,000 gigawatts of nuclear power, at $1-3 billion per gigawatt, would only cost $18-$54 trillion.
hitssquad 2 years ago
18,000 gigawatts of space-based solar power would cost $4.32 quadrillion, according to this SBSP advocacy paper:
sspi. gatech. edu/aiaa-2009-0462_ssp_alternatives_potter. pdf
hitssquad 2 years ago
It will be worth whatever it costs to put up. There is no other energy source that will be able to deliver this much power without serious pollution. And there is enough resources in space to pay for all of this. Mining one metallic asteroid and selling the rare earth metals should pretty much cover it.
guruofreason 2 years ago