Comments
ItsmyDZNA t1_ixd05so wrote
What about all of the flying debris out there? Wouldn't that hit the panels?
Glad_Ideal_8514 t1_ixdsulb wrote
You’ve been fooled by mainstream media about this. The chances of that happening are astronomically small and all debris is mapped. You’ve significantly more chance of hitting a whale while sailing a sailboat
[deleted] t1_ixcto8o wrote
[removed]
FuturologyBot t1_ixcw9dv wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/chrisdh79:
From the article: The European Space Agency (ESA) is set to approve a three-year study to determine whether sending huge solar farms into space could effectively meet the world's energy demands, a report from the BBC reveals.
A space-based solar power plant would be launched into a geostationary orbit, meaning it would orbit in a fixed location over the Earth that would be hit by the Sun 24/7.
So, if all goes to plan, the technology could one day harvest massive amounts of energy from space — enough to power millions of homes.
The ESA's space-based solar power initiative is called Solaris, and it is one of several similar projects worldwide, including ongoing research by China's Xidian University, which has built a 75-meter-tall (246-feet-tall) steel tower to test the technology for a ground receiving station, and Caltech's Space Solar Power Project.
Research ministers at the ESA's triennial council are expected to meet today, Tuesday, November 22, to discuss the ESA'S idea. They will also consider several other proposals before deciding the budget for the next phase of the space agency's space technology development plans.
In an interview with the BBC, ESA director general Josef Aschbacher said, "we do need to convert into carbon neutral economies and therefore change the way we produce energy and especially reduce the fossil fuel part of our energy production. If you can do it from space, and I'm saying if we could, because we are not there yet, this would be absolutely fantastic because it would solve a lot of problems."
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/z1u8ac/the_esa_aims_to_make_247_spacebased_solar_energy/ixcsfc3/
Beachdaddybravo t1_ixd9u1c wrote
Lots of flying debris to hit panels out there and everyone keeps dancing around the reality that nuclear is our best option for clean power. If we bothered to recycle spent fuel so we’re not just using 7% or so and casting the rest aside, all the better. Then again, we’re the same bunch of idiots that think Chernobyl is a real risk in the west and shut down Yucca mountain.
UniversalMomentum t1_ixg5kus wrote
Nuclear has a lot of negatives, meltdown and high insurance liability is one, but also it's hard to export, complex and it's highly proprietary so most nations will never use it. It has water use issues and you still have to source uranium which means somebody has mine and ship uranium. It also one of the more expensive ways to generation power.
Looking down the road 10-20 years the projected cost of solar/wind and energy storage will create a lower Levelized Cost of Energy than what nuclear investments would yield AND you will be investing in technology that can meet economics of scale requirements and be mass produced in factories and exported everywhere.
Fusion seems to be the only chance nuclear has and even then most nations don't want to rely a the 1-5 nations that can build and maintain something like that to have that much leverage over them. The simpler solution that does the job is really what we are looking for.
Beachdaddybravo t1_ixh8ylm wrote
Nuclear is the only solution that can provide a constant and steady level of energy at what we need 24/7 to hit meet our demand.
ItsAConspiracy t1_ixm2t6x wrote
I totally support nuclear but solar power satellites would also do that. They'd be in geostationary orbit, putting them in sunlight 99.5% of the time.
Beachdaddybravo t1_ixn6eut wrote
There are much more problems when it comes to solar satellites. Ease of repair being just the first one that comes to mind. People are averse to nuclear mostly because of ignorance.
Gripegut t1_ixddbq4 wrote
"Rising energy concerns"? You mean the lack of available energy due to humanity's idiotic war against fossil fuels, and nuclear energy, and hydro energy? You mean the neo-marxist war against cheap and reliable energy in order to destroy capitalism and democracy cleverly disguised as "saving thr planet" just so they can satiate their unholy lust for power and their nihilistic desire for destruction and revenge? That energy concern? You mean man's war against "global warming" when every climatologist knows for a fact that we are due to be plunged into the next ice age? The problem isn't energy, the problem is the people who are destroying cheap reliable energy.
chrisdh79 OP t1_ixcsfc3 wrote
From the article: The European Space Agency (ESA) is set to approve a three-year study to determine whether sending huge solar farms into space could effectively meet the world's energy demands, a report from the BBC reveals.
A space-based solar power plant would be launched into a geostationary orbit, meaning it would orbit in a fixed location over the Earth that would be hit by the Sun 24/7.
So, if all goes to plan, the technology could one day harvest massive amounts of energy from space — enough to power millions of homes.
The ESA's space-based solar power initiative is called Solaris, and it is one of several similar projects worldwide, including ongoing research by China's Xidian University, which has built a 75-meter-tall (246-feet-tall) steel tower to test the technology for a ground receiving station, and Caltech's Space Solar Power Project.
Research ministers at the ESA's triennial council are expected to meet today, Tuesday, November 22, to discuss the ESA'S idea. They will also consider several other proposals before deciding the budget for the next phase of the space agency's space technology development plans.
In an interview with the BBC, ESA director general Josef Aschbacher said, "we do need to convert into carbon neutral economies and therefore change the way we produce energy and especially reduce the fossil fuel part of our energy production. If you can do it from space, and I'm saying if we could, because we are not there yet, this would be absolutely fantastic because it would solve a lot of problems."