Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Japan will try to beam solar power from space by 2025

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 98 posts

Re: Japan will try to beam solar power from space by 2025

#31

Post by jvanderbot »

35mm wrote: post #15

I’m no rocket scientist but surely it’s cheaper to build more panels and batteries on Earth? Launching stuff into orbit is expensive in cash and emissions.

You're not a rocket scientist but you're absolutely right.

It's cheaper to tear down the microwave receiver and put up solar panels and batteries than it is to send solar panels to space to beam power back to the microwave receiver. You'd have to beam 1000x the power that solar panels receive to justify the cost of sending things to space, but at that point you're lifting 100x more panels to space to get the 10x bonus, and lifing / installing them in space at 10,000x the cost or worse... Plus they have to be magical perfect installations that never fail and work perfectly.

Again cheaper to put that money into more batteries and panels..

Re: Japan will try to beam solar power from space by 2025

#33

Post by runeks »

> However, even if Japan successfully deploys a set of orbital solar arrays, the tech would still be closer to science fiction than fact. That’s because producing an array that can generate 1 gigawatt of power – or about the output of one nuclear reactor – would cost about $7 billion with currently available technologies.

Re: Japan will try to beam solar power from space by 2025

#34

Post by boringg »

vitro wrote: post #29

Curious question, why not use this approach for example with wind farms or solar farms? You'd avoid the need to build high capacity cables which are sometimes a reason why renewables do not spread that much. I can imagine that coming into contact with this beam is not something anyone would wish for. You could beam energy up to a station in the orbit which would then redirect it to the place where energy is needed. Y…

What you are describing is increasingly more cost prohibitive and another level of conplexity then the problem statement

Re: Japan will try to beam solar power from space by 2025

#35

Post by datameta »

vitro wrote: post #29

Curious question, why not use this approach for example with wind farms or solar farms? You'd avoid the need to build high capacity cables which are sometimes a reason why renewables do not spread that much. I can imagine that coming into contact with this beam is not something anyone would wish for. You could beam energy up to a station in the orbit which would then redirect it to the place where energy is needed. Y…

What would that satellite look like to enable meaningful power transmission? A bank of capacitors and batteries? Would have multiple smaller sats scale better and/or increase coverage?

Re: Japan will try to beam solar power from space by 2025

#36

Post by JoeAltmaier »

jvanderbot wrote: post #31
35mm wrote: post #15

I’m no rocket scientist but surely it’s cheaper to build more panels and batteries on Earth? Launching stuff into orbit is expensive in cash and emissions.

You're not a rocket scientist but you're absolutely right. It's cheaper to tear down the microwave receiver and put up solar panels and batteries than it is to send solar panels to space to beam power back to the microwave receiver. You'd have to beam 1000x the power that solar panels receive to justify the cost of sending things to space, but at that point you're lifting 100x more panels to space to get the 10x bonu…

That's probably an exaggeration by this time. Lift costs are decreasing geometrically. Solar efficiency is going up constantly. Land and eminent domain groundside continue to go up.

All the variables are moving in the direction to benefit orbital solar, and will continue to go that way. It's not so much a matter of whether it's cheaper in space, than when it is cheaper in space. And it won't be long now.

Re: Japan will try to beam solar power from space by 2025

#39

Post by IsTom »

drowsspa wrote: post #19
bryanlarsen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaded gasoline and asbestos weren't studied before introduction. This has been.

Don't know about asbestos, but everyone knew lead was bad. Profits just spoke louder.

Romans knew that slaves in asbestos mines didn't live long.
Post reply on HN