China's Solar Array in Space Project

[JeffKeryk]

China is working on a solar array in space that will generate more energy in a year than all the earth's oil
Unlike my earth tied solar panels, generation will not be affected by night, clouds, etc. Power will be delivered to earth via microwaves.

A truly incredible, ambitious project; some are calling it an energy Manhatten Project.
This stuff scares me because I wonder if America has the taste to compete? Are we too short-term orientated?

 

[JavierH19]

Had me fooled until I read the first word of the title and thread. It's not gonna happen, china lies about advanced tech and projects all the time.

 

[ctechbob]

What happens when it wanders off course and they start cooking people under the ray?

Real Engineering had a breakdown of the technology about a month ago:

 

[CleanSump]

James Bond knows how to take care of it...
It's not a new idea, but it seams like a good idea if the tech is here to do it.

 

[JustN89]

Well, if we break this down, we can get this very rough approximation. Sources here and here.

The world produces 869.8 TWh of electricity from oil. We'll round up to 870 TWh. Based on the current level of efficiency and using 350 watt solar panels, we would need roughly 2,850 solar panels to produce 1 megawatts. We need 870,000,000 megawatts to reach 870 terawatts, which means we would need approximately 2,479,500,000,000 individual solar panels to match the energy generation produced by oil. An average commercial solar panel is approximately 6.5' X 3', so 19.5 sqft. That is about 127,153,846,153.9 sqft of solar panels, or 2.92 million acres of solar panels. In comparison, according to the Department of Agriculture, the United States is roughly 2.26 million square acres, meaning the solar panel array would be 22% larger than the land mass of the United States.

Just asking the obvious here, but even if it wasn't just one array (which is seemingly impossible) one would have to question how you 1) build 2.92 million acres worth of solar panels in orbit, 2) how you repair such a massive array, 3) how you cool everything, and 4) how you justify the cost of this project from an environmental and economic perspective when other alternatives, such as nuclear power, provide an actually plausible path forward while being far more reliable.

All told, I'll have beachfront property in Nebraska before this comes even close to a drawing board.

 

[JHZR2]

Well, if we break this down, we can get this very rough approximation. Sources here and here.

The world produces 869.8 TWh of electricity from oil. We'll round up to 870 TWh. Based on the current level of efficiency and using 350 watt solar panels, we would need roughly 2,850 solar panels to produce 1 megawatts. We need 870,000,000 megawatts to reach 870 terawatts, which means we would need approximately 2,479,500,000,000 individual solar panels to match the energy generation produced by oil. An average commercial solar panel is approximately 6.5' X 3', so 19.5 sqft. That is about 127,153,846,153.9 sqft of solar panels, or 2.92 million acres of solar panels. In comparison, according to the Department of Agriculture, the United States is roughly 2.26 million square acres, meaning the solar panel array would be 22% larger than the land mass of the United States.

Just asking the obvious here, but even if it wasn't just one array (which is seemingly impossible) one would have to question how you 1) build 2.92 million acres worth of solar panels in orbit, 2) how you repair such a massive array, 3) how you cool everything, and 4) how you justify the cost of this project from an environmental and economic perspective when other alternatives, such as nuclear power, provide an actually plausible path forward while being far more reliable.

All told, I'll have beachfront property in Nebraska before this comes even close to a drawing board.

Believe you’re conflating power and energy. You’re saying Watt -hours, but then saying watts.

Let’s use your panel example. And sssume somehow it’s in constant orientation with the sun. Your 350 W panel would create 350Wh in one hour, 8400Wh in a day, and about 3000000 Wh (3MWh) in a year. From one panel running 24/7.

So you’d ONLY need around 290 million panels to do it… LOL!!!

Of course the beaming is probably only 30-40% efficient at best, so I guess you need 3x the panels I calculated….

Maybe a 350W panel is actually rated a good deal higher in space where there is no atmospheric loss?

 

[ctechbob]

Maybe a 350W panel is actually rated a good deal higher in space where there is no atmospheric loss?

30% for new space based panels.

And solar irradiance outside the atmosphere is something like 1300 watts per meter.

 

[Skippy722]

Believe you’re conflating power and energy. You’re saying Watt -hours, but then saying watts.

Let’s use your panel example. And sssume somehow it’s in constant orientation with the sun. Your 350 W panel would create 350Wh in one hour, 8400Wh in a day, and about 3000000 Wh (3MWh) in a year. From one panel running 24/7.

So you’d ONLY need around 290 million panels to do it… LOL!!!

Of course the beaming is probably only 30-40% efficient at best, so I guess you need 3x the panels I calculated….

Maybe a 350W panel is actually rated a good deal higher in space where there is no atmospheric loss?

I read that Juno's solar panels, totaling 1,620sq ft, would produce 12-14kW of power if it was around Earth. At Jupiter they will produce 486W when new.

 

[oldcodger]

If I remember right this was brought up sometime in the 60s. I think someone pointed out that downloading by microwave presented some real dangers.

 

[andyd]

Kinda sorta the same thing, only different. Chinese using nukes to heat CO2 to high temps/pressure instead of steam to power turbines to generate electricity. Waste heat from steel mills could be used as well. Supposedly a commercial project being built. US has proven technology with a small test plant that is scalable but.. Not smart enough to do a feasibility test, so I leave it up to the engineers

 

[Vercingetorix]

Meteor shower and buh bye panels.

 

[Snagglefoot]

30% for new space based panels.

And solar irradiance outside the atmosphere is something like 1300 watts per meter.

How about if we give everything the high end of imaginable performance and go to 90% efficiency.

 

[ctechbob]

How about if we give everthing high end of imaginable performance and go to 90% efficiency.

Then you'd get 1170 watts per square meter?

 

[Snagglefoot]

Then you'd get 1170 watts per square meter?

Yup. There is a theoretical maximum but scientist around the world are working full time on the issue.

 

[demarpaint]

Delivered via "microwaves" I wonder if there will be a spike in cancer.......... Food for thought, and concern.

 

[4wd]

We have both solar and wind farms - and the most noticeable difference is land use/footprint. With wind - the farmers and ranchers can continue their craft with some bonus income …
With solar - that land is dedicated to panels …

 

[JHZR2]

We have both solar and wind farms - and the most noticeable difference is land use/footprint. With wind - the farmers and ranchers can continue their craft with some bonus income …
With solar - that land is dedicated to panels …

Plus, solar after a hurricane…

 

[4wd]

Plus, solar after a hurricane…

View attachment 322273

Yes, about an hour from me in two directions - many were ripped by a twister - and many broken by hail at another site …
I’m seeing the panels set on stronger angles now - perhaps the difference in damage -vs- glancing off - slight loss in efficiency?

 

[demarpaint]

Plus, solar after a hurricane…

View attachment 322273

An expensive mess! Not very well thought out either.

 

[john_pifer]

Yeah, well, I heard China is going to build a Dyson sphere.