Transterrestrial Musings  


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Space
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Spacearium
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)
Journoblogs
The Ombudsgod
Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett)
Joanne Jacobs


Site designed by


Powered by
Movable Type
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Did Al Gore Pass Through Wyoming? | Main | Hungry for Ethanol »

Space Solar Support?

Taylor Dinerman calls for space solar power in this week's The Space Review. He trots out hydrogen as an alternative energy source. No--it's an alternative energy delivery method. Last time I checked, to get hydrogen, we had to use another fuel source and lose energy to crack the hydrogen. To make space solar power viable, we need an advance that will advantage space solar power to terrestrial solar power. Does this meet the objective:

One technology that might radically reduce the weight requirements for these systems is the technique pioneered at the University of Notre Dame where single-walled carbon nanotubes are added to a film made of titanium-dioxide nanoparticles, doubling the efficiency of converting ultraviolet light into electrons. Any solar cell technology that could reach conversion factors of over 50% or even higher would reduce the size and weight of an SPS and thus make it easier and cheaper to build and launch.

It also makes terrestrial solar power potentially reach conversion factors of over 50% too. To make space solar better than terrestrial solar, we need launch costs to be no more than 3x manufacturing costs per kg if space solar is 4x as efficient. With manufacturing costs $350/kg, we need launch costs $1000/kg to make space solar viable.

Posted by Sam Dinkin at June 08, 2007 11:13 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.transterrestrial.com/mt-diagnostics.cgi/7652

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference this post from Transterrestrial Musings.
Comments

Even ignoring manufacturing costs and assuming $250/kg to GEO launch costs, you couldn't make SPS economic against mass produced nuclear power.

In a high radiation environment the panels and electronics would barely last 20 years before requiring replacement, structure might be lucky to last twice as long.

Posted by Adrasteia at June 9, 2007 08:31 AM

Or of course arrange that the materials don't have to be launched out of Earth's gravity well at all. Moon materials can be delivered at very low cost; energy isn't the problem, reaction mass for manouvering is, and that can be supplied from the slag created while you're refining the ore.

Do it right, and the whole thing can be done by robots with very little human intervention.

Hell, Gerard O'Niell said all this in the early 70s!

Posted by Fletcher Christian at June 9, 2007 04:17 PM

SPS is virtually inevitable if New Space succeeds, so the real question is when.

Posted by Brian Swiderski at June 9, 2007 07:50 PM

The "When?" question is very interesting to potential investors. If it's 100 years from now, they will pass.

Using mass drivers from the Moon would add more than a decade to development time and make the business case less likely to pass the laugh test.

We as a country and a world may have a strong preference for space solar over nuclear power. But that still leaves carbon, wind, water and terrestrial solar to outperform/outprefer.

Posted by Sam Dinkin at June 12, 2007 08:24 AM


Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments: