Posted on 03/01/2005 7:56:56 AM PST by grundle
Sign me up for the extension cord contract.
Microwaves are our friends.
Looks like these things cost ~$360/kW panel and only last ~2yrs.($0.05/kW*Hr)
Ping.
Two of these in direct sunlight could handle the load of most houses.
I was thinking more low-volume storage. Small house-level energy storage methods. Hadn't thought about compressed gas: it would be a bit lossy, but what isn't. . .
The idea I see for photvoltaics of this sort is to get individual homes off the grid. . .
Isn't solid state physics fun!
Photovoltaics along with in-home natural gas fuel cells. I worked for the electric utility for eight years and nothing would do my soul more good than to see them lose some customers.
"120 watts per square inch at 110V" LOL on what planet
I'm not aware of any technology that can move large amounts of power through large distances using microwaves. Pity the airplane that flies through them>
Solar power will be relevant when Home Depot or Lowes has a do-it-yourself solar power roof tiles so you can power your whole house.
This is good news.
(s)Of course the environwackos will then pass a law outlawing night and taxing sunlight usage.(/s)
Then you're not familiar with the technology. An SPS would have a receiving antenna in a roughly 8 x 10 km oval (measurements would vary by latitute), and the land underneath could still be used for raising crops or cattle.
Yes, there will be losses. But even at the center, with peak beam density, it's nowhere near harmful levels, it's calculated that if a bird flew through the longest axis of the rectenna, directly through the peak area of the beam, the net effect would be a rise of about .1 degrees C, or a tad over a fifth of a degree temperature rise Fahrenheit. . .
hmm.....a 140 sq ft module produces 120 watts/in*2:
140 ft*2 x 144 in*2/ft*2 x 120 watt/in*2 = 2.4192 mega watts.
Absolutely f***ing amazing!!.
Sounds like a theoretical dream to me. A microwave has short wavelengths (that's why they call them microwaves). Since an efficient antenna has to be 1/4 wavelength to capture the power, the grid spacing would have to be very tight. Supporting a 100 square Km antenna grid at 1/4 wavelength spacing and still passing light and cows would be quite a feat, in my view. The power requirements at the transmitter would also be unique. To be comparable with a single land based powerplant would require hundreds of megawatts of power. How would this be serviced at geo-synchronous orbits since the shuttle won't go up that high? It's hard to imagine a hundred megawatt powerplant that needs no service.
I suggest that you talk to Raytheon and the Japanese. They have been developing and testing such technology for decades.
Pity the airplane that flies through them.
Simply don't fly through the no fly zone. The aluminum skin would protect the passengers and crew (as they would pass through the beam quickly), but the skin might heat up significantly and if there was any minor fuel leak, it might be an engine fire hazard.
Clearly you wouldn't want to sunbathe in the rectenna zone for extended periods, but the Japanese are doing tests on plants and animals living under a typical rectenna continuously bathed in microwaves at the power it would see from a space-based solar power satellite.
Don't fear what you don't understand. Understand what you fear.
I don't think so.
My first thought, too. Solar flux is more like one Watt/square inch. However, it is possible to focus sunlight using mirrors. But at anything approaching 120 Watts per square inch, you'd have one helluva cooling problem.
I suggest you inform yourself using a primer.
No, the shuttle can't go to Geosynch. But the vehicles proposed for the President's Space Exploration Initiative CAN. . .
Please see post 35
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.