Pages: 1 2 3

 

2008-06-19 12:38:08
too_money2007
Member
+145|6730|Keller, Tx
That's right, the Sun. Here's a new article about using solar panels in space and capturing the sun's rays, 13 times more powerful than the rays that hit us each day on the face of the planet. It states how the Sun generates 10 tillion times the energy our entire planet uses, so all we'd need to retreive would be microscopic to power everything. Of course, its in political limbo, as nobody wants to pay for it. I mean, what the fuck?! The costs of the ENTIRE project could be made within a few years of full deployment and then they could give us free energy forever. Really though, how is it ethical to profit off of something that you do not have to produce. Maybe pay a small fee for maintenance and to pay the workers salary at the plants, but the actual company shouldn't charge anything over $.01/kw. Just my opinion.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/ … solar.html
2008-06-19 12:41:37
kylef
Gone
+1,352|6915|N. Ireland
I think it's not so much that political parties don't want to do it, more the fact that the electrical companies it charge a lot and the Government gets quite a bit of tax from it. It's really the opportunity cost that affects whether it happens or not. That is, at least, in my opinion.
2008-06-19 12:46:47
too_money2007
Member
+145|6730|Keller, Tx
Well, possibly. If it was a government entity that was the owner of said infrastructure, they could charge the low low price of a few cents per kw, and take in all the profits. Of course, people would say it wouldn't work, but, why not?
2008-06-19 12:54:24
chittydog
less busy
+586|7257|Kubra, Damn it!

I don't know. Money not spent on power will be spent, and taxed, elsewhere. Personally, I'd have an extra $150 - $300 per month if I didn't have to pay for electricity.

heggs posted an interview with Ray Kurzweil where he mentioned that solar cells are becoming so efficient, within 6 years we'll have the technology to power the entire US by putting solar farms on "one small fraction of a percent of the deserts that are now unused in the United States".
2008-06-19 12:56:47
imortal
Member
+240|7087|Austin, TX
And who wants a huge microwave beam projector over their head?  Who controls it?  It would make an awesome (and I use it in the correct sense; it would be an item to inspire awe) weapon in the wrong hands.  And what goverment NOT in control of it would trust the ones who were?

It is pretty good on theory; would love to see the practice.  But there are still TONS of issues with developing it.

Getting the various goverments to agree to it.
Getting the various goverments to agree to control.
Getting goverments to front the money for it.
Getting the public of those nations to agree to invest a WHOLE lot of money that they will see no value in for decades to come.
Dealing with the economic depression that will occur as a pretty substantial amount of money drops down a black hole with no visible end.
Getting the design approved.
Getting the people trained.
Expanding the current space programs the world over.
Getting the parts built... honestly.  Just the fight to develop the parts could take a decade.
Getting the parts and other materials into orbit. 
Getting all the infrastructure on Earth developed.
Building it.
Testing it.

Who would be against it?  Energy companies.  Enviromental groups (an accident in targeting could burn down entire forests).  Various militaries (a non-accident in targeting could destroy cities).

If it actually go t built, would it be great? Cheap, abundant energy?  You bet!  But you also have to think of the cost of beaming that much energy into the world.  As people use elecrical power, it is developed into heat energy.  Think conservation of energy time.  If you want to send terrawatts of additional energy beaming into the earth, you will be increasing the amount of heat around the world by a significant factor.  Right now, we use and convert energy that is basically in or striking the world already; we are not yet importing it.
2008-06-19 12:59:25
kylef
Gone
+1,352|6915|N. Ireland
I think the building wouldn't be an issue as such. The Space Station seems to be coming along quite nicely ... albeit slowly for obvious reasons. The Government money front would be the hard bit!
2008-06-19 12:59:32
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7194|PNW

imortal wrote:

And who wants a huge microwave beam projector over their head?
GDI!

2008-06-19 13:00:39
chittydog
less busy
+586|7257|Kubra, Damn it!

imortal wrote:

And who wants a huge microwave beam projector over their head?  Who controls it?  It would make an awesome (and I use it in the correct sense; it would be an item to inspire awe) weapon in the wrong hands.  And what goverment NOT in control of it would trust the ones who were?

It is pretty good on theory; would love to see the practice.  But there are still TONS of issues with developing it.

Getting the various goverments to agree to it.
Getting the various goverments to agree to control.
Getting goverments to front the money for it.
Getting the public of those nations to agree to invest a WHOLE lot of money that they will see no value in for decades to come.
Dealing with the economic depression that will occur as a pretty substantial amount of money drops down a black hole with no visible end.
Getting the design approved.
Getting the people trained.
Expanding the current space programs the world over.
Getting the parts built... honestly.  Just the fight to develop the parts could take a decade.
Getting the parts and other materials into orbit. 
Getting all the infrastructure on Earth developed.
Building it.
Testing it.

Who would be against it?  Energy companies.  Enviromental groups (an accident in targeting could burn down entire forests).  Various militaries (a non-accident in targeting could destroy cities).

If it actually go t built, would it be great? Cheap, abundant energy?  You bet!  But you also have to think of the cost of beaming that much energy into the world.  As people use elecrical power, it is developed into heat energy.  Think conservation of energy time.  If you want to send terrawatts of additional energy beaming into the earth, you will be increasing the amount of heat around the world by a significant factor.  Right now, we use and convert energy that is basically in or striking the world already; we are not yet importing it.
Or, we just build a few small, efficient ones on the ground and forget about it.
2008-06-19 13:05:40
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7158|Salt Lake City

imortal wrote:

And who wants a huge microwave beam projector over their head?  Who controls it?  It would make an awesome (and I use it in the correct sense; it would be an item to inspire awe) weapon in the wrong hands.  And what goverment NOT in control of it would trust the ones who were?

It is pretty good on theory; would love to see the practice.  But there are still TONS of issues with developing it.

Getting the various goverments to agree to it.
Getting the various goverments to agree to control.
Getting goverments to front the money for it.
Getting the public of those nations to agree to invest a WHOLE lot of money that they will see no value in for decades to come.
Dealing with the economic depression that will occur as a pretty substantial amount of money drops down a black hole with no visible end.
Getting the design approved.
Getting the people trained.
Expanding the current space programs the world over.
Getting the parts built... honestly.  Just the fight to develop the parts could take a decade.
Getting the parts and other materials into orbit. 
Getting all the infrastructure on Earth developed.
Building it.
Testing it.

Who would be against it?  Energy companies.  Enviromental groups (an accident in targeting could burn down entire forests).  Various militaries (a non-accident in targeting could destroy cities).

If it actually go t built, would it be great? Cheap, abundant energy?  You bet!  But you also have to think of the cost of beaming that much energy into the world.  As people use elecrical power, it is developed into heat energy.  Think conservation of energy time.  If you want to send terrawatts of additional energy beaming into the earth, you will be increasing the amount of heat around the world by a significant factor.  Right now, we use and convert energy that is basically in or striking the world already; we are not yet importing it.
The politics of where the money comes from is definitely an issue.  As a weapon I don't think it's an issue.  We already have weapons that can destroy entire cities, and a careless cigarette can burn down an entire forest.

Another problem is that a laser-beaming satellite sounds like a weapon, even though Hopkins thinks there would be ways to ensure that it never gets used in such a way.
And

In contrast, microwave transmission is too low of intensity to be considered dangerous. A person could safely walk across where the targeted beam hits the Earth, according to Hopkins.
2008-06-19 13:06:26
SEREVENT
MASSIVE G STAR
+605|6529|Birmingham, UK
After this oil price rise, we've seen bacteria that excrete crude oil AND eat rubbish, enough oil to supply the USA for 40 years, and now this. Is it just me or is it all too good to be true?
2008-06-19 13:16:04
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6746|New Haven, CT
I remember this concept from Sim City 3000 8 years ago.
2008-06-19 13:16:51
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7158|Salt Lake City

SEREVENT wrote:

After this oil price rise, we've seen bacteria that excrete crude oil AND eat rubbish, enough oil to supply the USA for 40 years, and now this. Is it just me or is it all too good to be true?
I would dare say much of this technology has been around and viable for some time.  The problem is $$$$$$$, both for those who are going to have to put it out to bring new technology to market, as well as the money being made by those that are invested in current technology and will lose money from said new technology.  The problem is that because of money changing the way things are only seems to happen once things start to hit critical mass.
2008-06-19 13:21:33
SEREVENT
MASSIVE G STAR
+605|6529|Birmingham, UK

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

SEREVENT wrote:

After this oil price rise, we've seen bacteria that excrete crude oil AND eat rubbish, enough oil to supply the USA for 40 years, and now this. Is it just me or is it all too good to be true?
I would dare say much of this technology has been around and viable for some time.  The problem is $$$$$$$, both for those who are going to have to put it out to bring new technology to market, as well as the money being made by those that are invested in current technology and will lose money from said new technology.  The problem is that because of money changing the way things are only seems to happen once things start to hit critical mass.
Hmmmm. I can't honestly think of ANY country that would pay for this.

We can rule out the ME, as all they care about is making money for themselves now, live and die rich and then wreck up our lives.

And, as for Europe, the EU would never do this. Not sure about the Americas though.
2008-06-19 13:23:12
chittydog
less busy
+586|7257|Kubra, Damn it!

I wouldn't pay for it. I'd rather put the money into solar energy that doesn't create smog, soot or nuclear waste.
2008-06-19 13:26:53
SEREVENT
MASSIVE G STAR
+605|6529|Birmingham, UK

chittydog wrote:

I wouldn't pay for it. I'd rather put the money into solar energy that doesn't create smog, soot or nuclear waste.
This will create smog, soot and nuclear waste?
2008-06-19 13:30:10
imortal
Member
+240|7087|Austin, TX

chittydog wrote:

I don't know. Money not spent on power will be spent, and taxed, elsewhere. Personally, I'd have an extra $150 - $300 per month if I didn't have to pay for electricity.
To give you some idea of the burden you would have to bear to finance a program this large.  Imagine yourself now; your current income, your current bills.  Now, take half of your money you have after taxes, and send it to the goverment for this "new construction" they tell you will be ready in 10 years.  Do this every month for 15 years.  You still have the same income, you still have the same bills.

There is no payoff until 2 decades from now.   Think you could live like that?  Okay, maybe you could live; would you enjoy it?
2008-06-19 13:48:46
Lotta_Drool
Spit
+350|6605|Ireland
We've all been pwn'd like noobs.

There are easy solutions to the energy crisis that doesn't exist.
2008-06-19 13:57:56
chittydog
less busy
+586|7257|Kubra, Damn it!

imortal wrote:

chittydog wrote:

I don't know. Money not spent on power will be spent, and taxed, elsewhere. Personally, I'd have an extra $150 - $300 per month if I didn't have to pay for electricity.
To give you some idea of the burden you would have to bear to finance a program this large.  Imagine yourself now; your current income, your current bills.  Now, take half of your money you have after taxes, and send it to the goverment for this "new construction" they tell you will be ready in 10 years.  Do this every month for 15 years.  You still have the same income, you still have the same bills.

There is no payoff until 2 decades from now.   Think you could live like that?  Okay, maybe you could live; would you enjoy it?
I'm not talking about your space microwave thing. That will never happen and is outlandish. I'm talking about efficient, land-based solar farms that can be a reality within a few years. Nobody wants to read that Ray Kurzweil article for some reason. This guy is working on this technology now and says it's almost ready.
2008-06-19 14:00:15
chittydog
less busy
+586|7257|Kubra, Damn it!

SEREVENT wrote:

chittydog wrote:

I wouldn't pay for it. I'd rather put the money into solar energy that doesn't create smog, soot or nuclear waste.
This will create smog, soot and nuclear waste?
Your microbes won't. But they'll create oil for us, which we'll continue to burn as uncleanly as we do now and create more smog. The soot and nuclear waste was in reference to coal and nuclear energy and really didn't belong in that post.
2008-06-19 14:02:27
HurricaИe
Banned
+877|6383|Washington DC

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

imortal wrote:

And who wants a huge microwave beam projector over their head?
GDI!

The more militant/neocon side of me has always wanted an ion cannon in space. Historically, who controls the high ground in battle controls the battle. Can't get much higher ground than a huge laser in space
2008-06-19 14:07:31
hacefrio
Member
+4|6666
I once read that if we covered half of Iowa with solar panels we could power the entire Earth.  These are all nice thoughts but quite frankly unrealistic.  There is no easy solution, people are far to stubborn to realize how much of a crisis we are really in.  In my eyes the only thing to do is abandon the suburbs and urbanize everything.  We will have to eliminate many forms of transport, utilize your legs people!  If the human race wants to survive they must walk to the store.
2008-06-19 14:07:59
bf2gammer
Member
+14|6642

imortal wrote:

And who wants a huge microwave beam projector over their head?  Who controls it?  It would make an awesome (and I use it in the correct sense; it would be an item to inspire awe) weapon in the wrong hands.  And what goverment NOT in control of it would trust the ones who were?

It is pretty good on theory; would love to see the practice.  But there are still TONS of issues with developing it.

Getting the various goverments to agree to it.
Getting the various goverments to agree to control.
Getting goverments to front the money for it.
Getting the public of those nations to agree to invest a WHOLE lot of money that they will see no value in for decades to come.
Dealing with the economic depression that will occur as a pretty substantial amount of money drops down a black hole with no visible end.
Getting the design approved.
Getting the people trained.
Expanding the current space programs the world over.
Getting the parts built... honestly.  Just the fight to develop the parts could take a decade.
Getting the parts and other materials into orbit. 
Getting all the infrastructure on Earth developed.
Building it.
Testing it.

Who would be against it?  Energy companies.  Enviromental groups (an accident in targeting could burn down entire forests).  Various militaries (a non-accident in targeting could destroy cities).

If it actually go t built, would it be great? Cheap, abundant energy?  You bet!  But you also have to think of the cost of beaming that much energy into the world.  As people use elecrical power, it is developed into heat energy.  Think conservation of energy time.  If you want to send terrawatts of additional energy beaming into the earth, you will be increasing the amount of heat around the world by a significant factor.  Right now, we use and convert energy that is basically in or striking the world already; we are not yet importing it.
I agree. also, if something happens and the satelite has to shut down for even 10 seconds. The world would be without power. This means that ALL defense networks, communications etc would be down unless they have a backup energy source "even though most do"
2008-06-19 14:31:56
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|7188|UK
"10-megawatt test satellite over the next 10 years for $10 billion"

lol... I think ill stick with good old Nuclear.
2008-06-19 14:46:26
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6922|so randum
Nuclear tbh.

And to be blunt, fuck all this NIMBY bollocks - the world needs cleaner energy, and if that means you live 20 miles away from a Nuclear Plant - So be it.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
2008-06-19 14:47:35
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7158|Salt Lake City

imortal wrote:

chittydog wrote:

I don't know. Money not spent on power will be spent, and taxed, elsewhere. Personally, I'd have an extra $150 - $300 per month if I didn't have to pay for electricity.
To give you some idea of the burden you would have to bear to finance a program this large.  Imagine yourself now; your current income, your current bills.  Now, take half of your money you have after taxes, and send it to the goverment for this "new construction" they tell you will be ready in 10 years.  Do this every month for 15 years.  You still have the same income, you still have the same bills.

There is no payoff until 2 decades from now.   Think you could live like that?  Okay, maybe you could live; would you enjoy it?
As opposed to how much we've spent fighting in the ME?

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard