Big Sky Debate Page


THE PROBLEM OF LAUNCH COST CAN BE SOLVED WITH UPFRONT INVESTEMENT-Nansen ‘10



Download 1.79 Mb.
Page27/32
Date18.10.2016
Size1.79 Mb.
#2940
1   ...   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32

THE PROBLEM OF LAUNCH COST CAN BE SOLVED WITH UPFRONT INVESTEMENT-Nansen ‘10

[Ralph; 31 year space engineer @ Boeing; Low Cost Access to Space is Key to Solar Power Satellite Deployment; Online Journal of Space Communication; Winter 2010 ;http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/nansen.html; retrieved 24 Jun 2011]


The barrier to their development is still the lack of a low-cost space transportation system for launching the satellite hardware. Without a reusable launch system there is little hope to deploying a significant capability to generate competitive cost electric energy from space. The problem is not technology; it is the up-front investment money and understanding of what is required. In the 21st century, NASA's goals and approaches are no longer compatible with those of a commercial development program such as Solar Power Satellites.
ECONOMIES OF SCALE WILL MAKE THE LAUNCH COSTS AN INSIGNIFICANT BURDEN-Champman ‘10

[Phillip; geophysicist and astronautical engineer, Ph. D from MIT; Deploying Sunsats; Online Journal of Space Communication; Winter 2010; http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/chapman.html; retrieved 24 Jun 2011]


The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that the economies of scale in any significant space-based solar power (SBSP) program will permit launch at acceptable cost, even without major advances in launch technology. To be definite, a fairly modest sunsat deployment program is assumed, with the first launch taking place in 2015, leading to an installed sunsat capacity of 800 GWe in 2050. This goal will represent somewhere between 6% and 9% of the total global capacity that we will need by then.

The analysis uses simple standard models to approximate the performance and cost of LVs, with subsystem characteristics comparable to those of existing engines and vehicles. The only major technical innovation considered is the introduction of reusable LV stages, and the only major change in spaceflight practice is launch from an equatorial site. There is no attempt to optimize the launch architecture. Improved designs and advanced technologies will offer significantly lower costs than the rough estimates obtained here.


LAUNCH COST IS NOT A REASON TO DELAY SBSP. THE TIME TO DEVELOP THE PROGRAM IS NOW-Champman ‘10

[Phillip; geophysicist and astronautical engineer, Ph. D from MIT; Deploying Sunsats; Online Journal of Space Communication; Winter 2010; http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/chapman.html; retrieved 24 Jun 2011]


It is clear from Figure 3 that the principal problems in closing the business case for a launch services provider that supports SBSP are related to financing the venture rather than to the cost of operations or the eventual profitability. For example, a launch price of $450/kg leads to a maximum deficit of $60 billion in the 12th year of the deployment schedule, and the cumulative cashflow does not become positive until the 22nd year – but the end result in 2050 is a profit of $180 billion. The delay in profitability exceeds the planning horizon of most venture capitalists, so the project probably requires both a strong government commitment to completing the deployment as well as some form of financial guarantee. Creative financing could help: for example, the launch price could be set at $600/kg in the early years, with a contractual obligation to refund some of the money once the cashflow went positive.

The particular systems assumed in this analysis (LOX/LH2 in both stages, winged recovery, etc.) should not be taken as recommendations for design of RLVs for this application. The purpose is only to show by example that the cost of launch to LEO is not a reason to delay implementation of SBSP as a major contributor to energy supply in the United States and around the world. The need is urgent and the best time to begin a serious development program is right now.

A/T: FOSSIL FUELS ARE CHEAPER
SBSP DOES NOT HAVE TO COMPETE WITH TRADITIONAL FOSSIL FUELS TO BECOME VIABLE-Atkinson ‘09

[Nancy; staff writer; New Company Looks to Produce Space Power Within a Decade; Universe Today; 18 Feb 2009; http://www.universetoday.com/25754/new-company-looks-to-produce-space-based-solar-power-within-a-decade/#more-25754; retrieved 17 June 2011]


He says this is an important point. “We’re not setting ourselves up to compete with coal, or nuclear, or ground based solar or wind. I don’t want to pick a fight with any of those industries saying that we’re trying to take a piece of their pie. What we’re saying is that right now, from a responsible perspective in terms of being a good steward for the environment, we need to look at every single source of energy that we can get our hands on, primarily green, and develop it regardless, because we’re going to need it. SBSP is one of the few forms of energy that has the ability to be base-load, i.e., 24-7, and it’s the only form of energy that can be broadcast on demand.”
GIVEN THE INCREASED COST OF OIL, THERE IS MORE INTEREST IN SBSP-Foust ‘07

[Jeff; editor; A Renaissance for Space Solar Power; The Space Review; 13 aug 2007;



http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]
It’s easy to see why people are willing to give space solar power another look. High oil prices, worries about the political stability of places like the Middle East that are key sources of energy, and heightened concerns about climate change have created a mad scramble in the last several years for alternative energy, from wind and terrestrial solar to biofuels like E85 ethanol. John Mankins, who managed the last major NASA space solar power study, the “Fresh Look” study in the late 1990s, said during a Marshall Institute forum on space solar power in Washington last week that there was little interest at the time because oil was $15 a barrel; now it’s about five times as expensive.
PEAK OIL LIKELY TO SEE DRAMATIC INCREASES OF FOSSIL FUELS--Jensen '07

[Brennen; “No More Oil? A Charity Gives New Life to 50-Year-Old Prediction of Falling Supply;” The Chronicle of Philanthropy; 4 October 2007; Wilson Databases]


It is widely acknowledged that for the past 20 years, people have used more oil each year than has been discovered. Indeed, last year two barrels of oil were used up for every new barrel discovered underground.

"You can assume that gas prices will go through the roof," Mr. Andrews says of what to expect as the world slides down the backside of Hubbert's Peak. "People will feel badly ambushed by this when it happens."

A/T: FUSION AND RENEWABLES
WE COULD DELIVER A WORKING SATELLITE FOR LESS THAN HALF THE COST OF ONE ITER REACTOR-Foust ‘07

[Jeff; editor; A Renaissance for Space Solar Power; The Space Review; 13 aug 2007;



http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]
Marty Hoffert, a New York University professor who has been a long-time advocate of space solar power, contrasted the current plight with that of fusion, the one other energy source Hoffert believes could provide energy security to the world. While space solar power goes virtually unrecognized by the US and other governments, an international consortium is spending up to $20 billion on a test fusion reactor, ITER, in France. “For half that money I think we could deliver a working solar power satellite, whereas ITER is just going to show the proof of feasibility” of controlled nuclear fusion without generating any power, he said.

“Certain ideas just fall through the cracks because there isn’t a champion in the agency,” in either the DOE or NASA, Hoffert said.


GROUND SOLAR WILL CREATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND REDUCE ARABLE LAND; CANNOT SOLVE-Rouge, et al ‘07

[Joseph; Acting Director, National Security Space Office; Space‐Based Solar Power



As an Opportunity for Strategic Security; 10 2007; retrieved 24 Jun 2011; http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf]
Unlike terrestrial solar facilities, microwave receiving rectennas allow greater than 90% of ambient light to pass through, but absorb almost all of the beamed energy, generating less waste heat than terrestrial solar systems because of greater coupling efficiency. This means that the area underneath the rectenna can continue to be used for agricultural or pastoral purposes. To deliver any reasonably significant amount of base‐load power, ground solar would need to cover huge regions of land with solar cells, which are major sources of waste heat. As a result, these ground solar farms would produce significant environmental impacts to their regions. The simultaneous major increases to the regional temperature, plus the blockage of sunlight from the ground, will likely kill off local plants, animals and insects that might inhabit the ground below or around these ground solar farms. This means that that a SBSP rectenna has

less impact on the albedo or reflectivity of the Earth than a terrestrial solar plant of equivalent generating capacity. Moreover, the energy provided could facilitate water purification and irrigation, prevent frosts, extend growing seasons (if a little of the energy were used locally) etc. In the plains of the U.S. (e.g., South Dakota, etc), in sub‐Saharan Africa, etc. etc. there are vast areas of arable land that could be both productive farm land and sites for SBSP rectennas.



SBPS SOLVES THE LIMITATIONS OF GROUND-BASED SOLAR-Binns ‘11

[Corey; Space-based solar power: satellites could gather energy from the sun and beam it down to Earth, Popular Science; July 2011; pg. 64]


On the ground, solar power has its limitations. Solar cells are not especially efficient. It rains. The sun disappears at night. A space-based solar panel can generate five times the energy of a similar panel on Earth by circumventing both weather and hours lost to darkness. A 2007 study by the National Space Society estimates that a half-mile-wide band of photovoltaics in geosynchronous orbit with Earth could generate the energy equivalent of all the oil remaining on the planet over the course of one year. Though costly, launching working solar satellites is possible today. It's transmitting the captured energy to Earth that presents a challenge--one that scientists are just starting to work on.

If beaming power from space sounds disconcerting, the concept is remarkably safe and simple. Satellites outfitted with solar panels would gather the sun's energy 24 hours a day and then convert that energy into an infrared laser beam. The high-efficiency laser would transmit 80 percent of the captured energy to ground-based receivers; one design calls for 60-foot-wide laser beams and 9,700-square-foot ground-based receiving stations. If clouds hinder the beam from traveling though Earth's atmosphere, the satellite could redirect the energy to other satellites or receivers in the network.


NONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES TO SBSP OFFER THE HUGE SPACE, ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS-Rouge, et al ‘07

[Joseph; Acting Director, National Security Space Office; Space‐Based Solar Power



As an Opportunity for Strategic Security; 10 2007; retrieved 24 Jun 2011; http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf]
The SBSP Study Group found that while the United States requires a suite of energy options, and while many potential options exist, none offers the unique range of ancillary benefits and transformational capabilities as SBSP.

It is possible that the world’s energy problems may be solved without resort to SBSP by revolutionary breakthroughs in other areas, but none of the alternative options will also simultaneously create transformational national security capabilities, open up the space frontier for commerce, greatly enable space transportation, enhance high‐paying, high‐tech jobs, and turn America into an exporter of energy and hope for the coming centuries.


SBSP SOLVES ALL OF THE RELIABILITY AND EFFICIENCY PROBLEMS OF SOLAR AND WIND POWER-Mardon and Balogun ‘11

[Austin, member of the International Academy of Astronautics and Pauline; Solar Satellites Key to Green Energy; Edmonton Journal; 12 Jun 2011; http://www.edmontonjournal.com/story_print.html?id=4933251&sponsor=; retrieved 23 Jun 2011]


The major criticisms against solarpower facilities, such as wind farms, are unreliability and inefficiency. Solar power depends on environmental factors beyond human control and that makes investors anxious. These facilities also require areas with high amounts of sunlight, usually hundreds if not thousands of acres of valuable farmland and all for relatively little power production.

This is why, in the 1960s, scientists proposed solar-powered satellites (SPSs). SPSs have about the most favourable conditions imaginable for solar energy production, short of a platform on the sun.

Earth's orbit sees 144 per cent of the maximum solar energy found on the planet's surface and takes up next to no space in comparison to land-based facilities.

Satellites would be able to gather energy 24 hours a day, rather than the tenuous 12-hour maximum that land-based plants have, and direct the transmitted energy to different locations, depending on where power was needed most.

A/T: TECHNOLOGY ISN’T THERE YET
THE 70S MODELS ARE NOT THE SBSP OF TODAY-Foust ‘07

[Jeff; editor; A Renaissance for Space Solar Power; The Space Review; 13 aug 2007;



http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]
One obstacle facing space solar power is that most people have not heard of it, and many of those who have associate it with the huge, expensive concepts studied back in the 1970s. Those proposals featured arrays many kilometers long with massive trusses that required dozens or hundreds of astronauts to assemble and maintain: Mankins joked that a giant Borg cube from Star Trek would have easily fit into one corner of one of the solar power satellite designs. “You ended up with a capital investment—launchers, in-space infrastructure, all of those things—on the order of $300 billion to $1 trillion in today’s dollars before you could build the first solar power satellite and get any power out of it,” he said.
THERE ARE NO TECHNOLOGICAL OR THEORETICAL OBSTACLES PREVENTING A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT-Hsu ‘10

[Feng; Sr. Vice President Systems Engineering & Risk Management, Space Energy Group; Harnessing the Sun: Embarking on Humanity's Next Giant Leap; Online Journal of Space Communication; Winter 2010; http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/hsu.html;retrieved 23 Jun 2011]


Is SPS a viable option? Yes, in my opinion, it can and should be a major source of base-load electricity generation powering the needs of our future. SPS satisfies each of the key criteria except for cost based on current space launch and propulsion technology. We all know that the expense of lifting and maneuvering material into space orbit is a major issue for future energy production in space. The development of autonomous robotic technology for on-orbit assembly of large solar PV (or solar thermal) structures along with the needed system safety and reliability assurance for excessively large and complex orbital structures are also challenges. Nevertheless, no breakthrough technologies or any theoretical obstacles need to be overcome for a solar power satellite demonstration project to be carried out.
THE ENTIRE SBSP SYSTEM IS TECHNOLOGICALLY FEASIBLE TODAY-Lemonick ‘09

[Michael; senior writer at Climate Central; Solar Power from Space:Moving Beyond Science Fiction; Environment 360; 31 Aug 2009; http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2184; retrieved 23 Jun 2011]


Doubts abound that space-based solar power will come to pass anytime soon, and for good reason: The technology involves launching a series of large satellites into space, using robotic technology to assemble the solar arrays, transmitting the energy 22,000 miles to earth using microwave technology, and then converting that energy to electricity on the ground.

The fact is, however, that all of that is now feasible — if pricey — thanks to technological advances in recent years. These include cheaper and more reliable launch technology, lighter and stronger materials for solar stations, significant improvements in the robotic technology needed to assemble the solar arrays, far more efficient solar cells, more precise digital devices to direct that energy accurately to earth, and significantly smaller and more powerful microwave transmitters and receivers.


THERE HAVE BEEN FEW STUDIES ABOUT SBSP SINCE THE 70S-Foust ‘07

[Jeff; editor; A Renaissance for Space Solar Power; The Space Review; 13 aug 2007;



http://www.thespacereview.com/article/931/1; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]
Not everyone is sold, however, on the viability or cost-effectiveness of space solar power, leading to long-running debates on the topic. Those disputes have remained largely academic, though, since there has been little support for research in the field: after the original studies by NASA and the Department of Energy (DOE) ended in the late 1970s, the only concerted effort, other than some isolated studies in Europe and Japan, was NASA’s “Fresh Look” studies in the late 1990s in cooperation with the National Science Foundation (NSF). Space solar power has withered on the vine since then, but a confluence of events has provided proponents with a new opportunity to reinvigorate the subject.
MORE TIME WILL MAKE SOLAR CELLS BETTER AND CHEAPER, BUT NO TECH BREAKTHROUGH IS NEEDED-Betancourt ‘10

[Kiantar; JD student, University of Maryland; Legal Challenges Facing Solar Power Satellites; Online Journal of Space Communication; Winter 2010; http://spacejournal.ohio.edu/issue16/betancourt.html; retrieved 24 Jun 2011]


Also, since 1977, the efficiency of solar cells has increased from around 10% to over 40%. The efficiency of solid-state amplifiers has increased from 20% to 80%. Solar power satellites using these new technologies should weigh around 25 tons, much smaller than the 250 ton satellites originally contemplated by Dr. Peter E. Glaser, the scientist who introduced the SBSP concept.[14] Dr. Glaser’s 1960’s proposal required hundreds of astronauts in space to build solar power satellites.[15] This is no longer the case as advances in computing and robotics will now allow satellites to be self-assembling made up of many small parts. More time and research will help to lower the initial cost and improve efficiency to the scale needed for SBSP implementation, but no new breakthrough discovery or invention is thought to be necessary.
THE TECHNOLOGICAL HURDLES ARE COMING DOWN-Edwards ‘10

[Lin; European space company wants solar power plant in space; Physorg.com; 21 Jan 2010;



http://www.physorg.com/news183278937.html; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]
The concept of harvesting solar power in space has been discussed for at least the last three decades, but the problems of power loss during transmission and the expense and difficulty of assembling large arrays of solar collectors in space have seemed almost insurmountable. However, Astrium is not the only company close to bringing the idea to fruition. Last September Japan announced it is planning to put a small demonstration solar collecting satellite in orbit by 2015. This system will transmit the power to Earth using microwaves.

EADS Astrium is seeking investors and partners such as the EU, national governments, space agencies, or power companies, to fund and contribute in other ways to the development of its operational orbital solar collection and transmission system.


AS ENERGY COSTS INCREASE AND TECHNOLOGY IMPROVES, SBSP IS BECOMING MORE VIABLE-Billings ‘09

[Lee; Getting Solar Off the Ground; SEED Magazine; 28 Jul 2009; http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/getting_solar_off_the_ground/; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]


During the heyday of the Space Age in the late 60s, researchers conceived of solutions to this problem that relied on placing solar arrays, or “powersats,” in orbit. The powersats would beam the collected power down to Earth as microwaves, which can easily penetrate the atmosphere with scarcely any energy lost. Space-based solar power (SBSP) seemed feasible, except for one thing: Launching the necessary infrastructure into high orbit would be prohibitively expensive, especially when cheaper fossil fuels were readily available.

Today, as with many other alternative energy proposals, interest in SBSP has been rejuvenated by the rising direct and indirect costs of fossil fuels, and several SBSP companies have formed. Earlier this year, Pacific Gas & Electric, a major California utility company, signed an agreement to purchase hundreds of megawatts of power from Solaren, an SBSP company, beginning in 2016. Last month, another SBSP company, PowerSat Corporation, filed two patents for technologies that the company claims can shave billions of dollars off the launch costs for an SBSP system. Seed’s Lee Billings spoke with PowerSat’s CEO, William Maness, about the company’s technology and the revival of SBSP.


SBSP IS NO MORE SCIENCE FICTION THAN SATELLITE TELEVISION-Billings ‘09

[Lee; Getting Solar Off the Ground; SEED Magazine; 28 Jul 2009; http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/getting_solar_off_the_ground/; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]


Seed: What’s the toughest part of talking with people about SBSP?

WM: I’ve spent the last eight years of my life fighting the “giggle factor.” When politicians or investors hear about SBSP, they get a little smile on their face, probably thinking about when they saw it in SimCity 2000. It drives me nuts because this isn’t science fiction. Powersats are no more science fiction than satellite television. What this is about is enabling the continued, controlled growth of our society and our standard of living in a way that doesn’t destroy the planet. I don’t want anyone to have to think about where their electricity comes from. But in order to get there, people like me have to think a lot about what happens behind the scenes when the lights get switched on.


TECHNOLOGIES EXIST FOR ALL PHASES OF SOLAR POWERED SATELLITE SYSTEMS-Mankins ‘97

[John C.; A Fresh Look at Space Solar Power: New Architectures, Concepts and Technologies; Space Future; 1997; http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/a_fresh_look_at_space_solar_power_new_architectures_concepts_and_technologies.shtml; retrieved 8 August 2011]


A number of innovative and advanced technologies were investigated by the "fresh look" study for each major aspect of an SSP system, including: the space segment, the ground segment, space infrastructure, and transportation.

Space Segment Conventional structures as were very innovative approaches, such as large gossamer structures. In addition to implementation of the space segment as a single, unitary system, constituting the systems or arrays from a number of independent sub-units were considered. Alternative configurations were examined, including conventional solar array/transmitter layouts with three-axis stabilization, and innovative configurations that exploit a gravity gradient approach.

A/T: MICROWAVE SAFETY
THE MICROWAVE ENERGY WILL POST POSE A HEALTH RISK TO HUMANS-Logan ‘09

[Dr. James; PhD and 18 year career at NASA; Safety of Space-Based Solar Power; Feb 2009; http://www.spaceenergy.com/i/pdf/safety_paper.pdf; retrieved 17 Jun 2011]


The biological effects and health implications of microwave radiation have been an intense subject of study for many years. We know that non‐ionizing radiation is not mutagenic. It does not increase the frequency of mutations in DNA, for example, above the natural background level. Instead of creating charged ions when passing through matter, non‐ionizing electromagnetic radiation has energy sufficient only for ‘excitation.’ Rather than removing an electron, the energy can only move an electron to a higher energy state; this results in local heating which is, to date, the only demonstrated biological effect of microwave exposure. Cumulative data from multiple scientific and medical studies have allowed the establishment of detailed microwave exposure limits for humans under a wide variety of exposure conditions.

Download 1.79 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
solar system
russian academy
major cities
gospel according
devastating impact
only alternative
solar wind
material included
most user-friendly