Well. They have a study. I hope they can get their SHIFT key fixed for the next project so it doesn’t spasm on them like it did for CASSiDi and CASSIOPeiA.*
Get back to me when they have hardware ready to fly.
*I recommend not drinking high fructose corn syrup beverages near keyboards.
This is exactly the sort of excessively self-congratulatory press release I would have reflexively round-filed in my days as a trade publication editor as something requiring a complete re-write to be suitable for publication even if the “product” seemed genuinely newsworthy.
The latter condition cannot be reasonably judged from the text. The same, unfortunately, is true of the company website. The powersat design isn’t the usual football-field-in-orbit thing, even allowing for the reflectors. But there is no explanation of the helical center section’s geometry. There are multiple references to this seemingly combined solar array/phased array RF power emitter construct as having 10s of thousands of “layers” – the definition of “layer” being anything but obvious in this context. The whole thing gave me epic Princess Bride flashbacks – “You keep using this word…”
As a skeptic of orbiting powersats for Earthly use, my strong inclination is to file this in the “British Reach Exceeds British Grasp” folder along with HOTOL and Skylon. That decision was reinforced upon encountering a reference to SABRE engine technology in the FAQ entry dealing with potential means of launch.
One solution to the “last mile” problem for space solar power would be to build a 150,000 foot tall tower to support the power receiver, which could then be either a microwave or laser photovoltaic receiver. Power density could be increased to an economical level without risk to living things flying through the beam. Can this be done with known structural materials? Yes, either pure silica or pure alumina has the compressive strength to build a structure far taller than this, and both are among the most abundant materials on Earth.
News flash 1985.
Wind power is now accelerating towards deployment, with plans to deliver a megawatt-scale commercial system within five years and expand to a full product range from 30 MW to GigaWatt-scale within twelve years. This roadmap positions wind as a cornerstone of the clean energy transition, offering a reliable, scalable, and cost-effective solution to meet the growing global energy demand while drastically reducing carbon emissions.
It promises to destabilize the grid to the point where there will be no electric power, just as it has done in Germany, Spain, and Texas.
Wind is the worst possible source of power.
I don’t understand. Can’t you put a big fan in front of the wind turbine on windless days? In other words point one wind turbine running backwards at another? Problem solved!
Well. They have a study. I hope they can get their SHIFT key fixed for the next project so it doesn’t spasm on them like it did for CASSiDi and CASSIOPeiA.*
Get back to me when they have hardware ready to fly.
*I recommend not drinking high fructose corn syrup beverages near keyboards.
This is exactly the sort of excessively self-congratulatory press release I would have reflexively round-filed in my days as a trade publication editor as something requiring a complete re-write to be suitable for publication even if the “product” seemed genuinely newsworthy.
The latter condition cannot be reasonably judged from the text. The same, unfortunately, is true of the company website. The powersat design isn’t the usual football-field-in-orbit thing, even allowing for the reflectors. But there is no explanation of the helical center section’s geometry. There are multiple references to this seemingly combined solar array/phased array RF power emitter construct as having 10s of thousands of “layers” – the definition of “layer” being anything but obvious in this context. The whole thing gave me epic Princess Bride flashbacks – “You keep using this word…”
As a skeptic of orbiting powersats for Earthly use, my strong inclination is to file this in the “British Reach Exceeds British Grasp” folder along with HOTOL and Skylon. That decision was reinforced upon encountering a reference to SABRE engine technology in the FAQ entry dealing with potential means of launch.
One solution to the “last mile” problem for space solar power would be to build a 150,000 foot tall tower to support the power receiver, which could then be either a microwave or laser photovoltaic receiver. Power density could be increased to an economical level without risk to living things flying through the beam. Can this be done with known structural materials? Yes, either pure silica or pure alumina has the compressive strength to build a structure far taller than this, and both are among the most abundant materials on Earth.
News flash 1985.
Wind power is now accelerating towards deployment, with plans to deliver a megawatt-scale commercial system within five years and expand to a full product range from 30 MW to GigaWatt-scale within twelve years. This roadmap positions wind as a cornerstone of the clean energy transition, offering a reliable, scalable, and cost-effective solution to meet the growing global energy demand while drastically reducing carbon emissions.
It promises to destabilize the grid to the point where there will be no electric power, just as it has done in Germany, Spain, and Texas.
Wind is the worst possible source of power.
I don’t understand. Can’t you put a big fan in front of the wind turbine on windless days? In other words point one wind turbine running backwards at another? Problem solved!