At 01:14 AM 9/5/2008, Kevin wrote:

>Keith,
>I think you have misplaced a comma or two. That is 1.357kW/m2 not 1357
>kW. 1,357Watt/m2  / 4.66 kg/m2 = 291 Watt/kilogram

Unless I don't understand what they are talking about, the article
notes "The 40.8 percent efficiency was measured under concentrated
light of 326 suns."

So the light hitting the cells would be 1.357 kW/m2 x 326 or 442
kW/m2.  Times efficiency that would put out 180 kW/m2.  180
kW/m2/4.66 kg/m2 is 38.7 kW/kg.

>Our thin film cells at 12.4% efficiency rate at 5,880 Watt/kilogram.
>At 2 microns thickness this increases to 16,800 Watts/kg = 16.8 kW/kg.

The trouble with lower efficiency is that the whole power sat is a
lot larger.  This costs you in structure and conductors.  I am not
convinced that photovoltaic cells are the best approach.  They might
be, but steam turbines are extremely well understood and are at least
40% efficient.  If we had a pipeline to lunar or asteroid dirt for
making heat transport fluid, steam would be even more attractive.

>Also there is not much heat sink mass.

True.  A concentration of 326 will require big heat sinks.  But mild
concentration, say 3 especially with some filtering of the parts of
the spectrum that the cells don't use well probably avoids heat sinks.

This is 1400 words of an 8000 word chapter in a novel I was working
on.  The chapter describes the space elevator and building a huge
power sat industry.

*************

The junkyard was attached to the space elevator through the so far
misnamed "driver hubs," a pair of pulleys only a few miles
apart.  Uplift intended to install big electric motors, but the cable
wasn't yet strong enough to lift motors that big in one piece
yet.  UpLift had attached the junkyard to the driver hubs with
breakaway connections in anticipation of the day natural or
artificial space junk cut the cable.  The four quadrants of the
junkyard were minute flower petals on an impossibly long stem.

North and south petals of the junkyard held the local photovoltaic
power sources.  They were small-scale versions of power-satellite
wings and rotated to stay pointed at the sun.  The openings in the
junkyard plane were much larger than the rotating
"wings."  Eventually UpLift would extend them to a GW when they
installed motors on the driver pulleys.

Until recently, when the elevator motors started pushing the power
limits of the Enterprise, there had been tension between building up
the elevator cable and extending the construction facilities.

In the three weeks since Marc had last been up, the fourth
beam-spinner had come on line in the East junkyard.  Ton spools of
perforated 5-mil Invar foil had been shipped up, and after passing
through the beam spinners came out as one meter by 1 km long channel
beams for the power satellites and the junkyard frame.

The same beams went into the frame for power-sat
construction--humorously known as "dry dock."  It had gantries on
both sides that hinged out of the way to launch the power sats to the
east.  The power sats slipped out of dry dock by electrical motors at
6 am local time when the transmitting antenna was in the same plane
as the wings.

The little 60-person inflatable habitat was on the west petal,
pointed north/south with a 45-degree sun-tracking mirror to light
it.  The space for the family habitat was just a large hole in the
junkyard plane further west of the inflatable temporary habitat.

Dry dock was on the east side, pointed north/south and rotating on
bearings to stay pointing 90 degrees from the sun except for a
non-rotating section in the middle for the transmission antenna.  The
antenna pointed down the elevator toward the earth, parallel to the
plane of the junkyard.  The dry dock's rotation kept at 90 degrees
from the sun was so the solar cells could be installed "off."  A
power sat lacked an "off" switch other than turning it away from the
sun.  Inflated white plastic balls on long skinny arms provided light
for the construction crews without generating lethal voltage on the
solar cell arrays.

Power sats were built in the dry dock.  The first, Stubby, was taking
shape as a 1/4 physical scale, 1/5th output power to drive the
elevator in the last stages of the cable buildup.  Stubby would
demonstrate the technology at almost full scale.  Stubby had two
wings like full-scale power sats, but the wings were only two km by
three km instead of five by five km, giving it an overall size of
five and a half km by three km with a one km round transmitting
antenna in the middle.

The bearings, mercury slip rings and transmitting antenna were
installed first, then the two inner end pieces.  The beams were
pulled out of the beam spinners from the outside in, stretched one at
a time, spot-welded to the inner end pieces, then spot welded to the
outer ends.  The beams were placed ten meters apart, a hundred beams
to the kilometer so there were three hundred two-km long main beams
in each wing.  The ton mass of a 1-km beam amused Marc.  In
skyscraper construction, a few meters of beam weighed more than a ton.

The construction process resulted in five flat-bottomed troughs in
each wing connected to a rotating transmitter disk in the middle that
always pointed toward the earth.  Each trough was 600 meters wide,
280 meters high, with 45-degree reflector sides and 200-meter-wide
pavements of solar cells in the middle.  The cells came in rolls, two
meters wide and 200 meters long.  The reflectors raised the light
exposure on the cells to three solars.  A square meter of solar cells
generated only ten volts, but 200 of these in series amounted to
2,000 volts across 200 meters, and five such strips in series
generated 10,000 volts at a scary 100,000 amps from each wing.

Twenty thousand 100-kW klystrons made up the one km antenna and each
of them used ten amps of current.  They came up in hexagonal bundles
of seven and snapped into place.  Two ironworkers could put in a
hundred a day.  There would be 19 to a bundle when UpLift upgraded
the elevator to 2,000 tons a day.
The plans had called for two km long, aluminized-Mylar reflecting
film to be unrolled on the reflectors.  The intent had been to test
the completed power sat in dry dock at full power, then cut it loose
with a number of ion engines to move it into place.

Vacuum degradation around the junkyard and a major flashover/meltdown
on the junkyard's north power wing had the engineers antsy about
powering up a power sat in the construction frame.  To improve the
hardness of the local vacuum, the engineers decided to ship up
uncoated Mylar film and coat the film as it was unrolled with
aluminum.  There is nothing like a fresh vaporized aluminum surface
to absorb stray gas molecules.

Dry dock's first long compression members had been a major pain to
bend.  The ironworkers pulled the beams between the elevator's
unpowered local drive wheels and stretched the beams a few
percent.  That made them straight, but it was hard to get the twist
out.  The ironworkers chopped up the first half dozen and used them
to extend the junkyard.

After some fast design work by UpLift's engineers, they put real-time
controls on the rollers in the beam spinners that bent the flat sheet
into channel beams and put a laser target on the end of the beam to
detect twisting.  The beam spinners then were able compensate for
twisting.  After post-stretching, all of the beams since then had
come out in spec for power sats and most of them were good enough to
carry the dry dock's compressive load where the power sat channel
beams were stretched in place.

Marc's main job this shift was to move the beam spinners along the
start end in the construction frame.  The frame was only three fifths
of its final width and half its length.  When completed and producing
full-sized power sats, the plans called for a thousand beam spinners.

The target construction rate was a power sat every five days, but
that depended on the elevator reaching full capacity, and that
depended on this first quarter scale sat to power it.  Full-scale
power sats would eventually weigh ten thousand tons; Stubby was only
a quarter that mass and bringing up its parts had occupied the
elevator for twenty days.  In addition, it took another twenty days
to bring up the parts for the quarter-sized dry dock needed to assemble it.

When the rolls of beam stock first started coming up, Marc had asked
Floyd why they were not using steel or aluminum instead of this
expensive nickel alloy.
"Eclipses."  Floyd told him.  "For a few weeks around the equinox, an
SPS gets eclipsed by the earth, for up to 70 minutes.  The darn
things cool by 200 hundred degrees; steel or aluminum would curl up
like a potato chip.  Then when the Sun comes back they flap like
wings.  The computer simulations were sad.  We could put hinges and
dampers into them, but using Invar we just ignore eclipses."

There were only 60 people at the construction yard, but they were
critical, taking on jobs such as building and unjamming the
automation.  The speed-of-light delay made it hard to do most jobs
from the ground.

It was amazing how much you could be done in zero-g riding around on
a magnified version of the ancient shuttle arm.  In spite of having
to move the beam spinners around, by the end of Marc's three weeks
they were a quarter done with framing Stubby, having pulled out half
the beams on the north wing.  Four more beam spinners had come up, so
the next quarter would take only half as long.

*******

Keith

>Kevin
>
>
>
>--- In solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com, hkhenson
><hkhenson@...> wrote:
> >
> > At 07:22 AM 8/30/2008, you wrote:
> > >Thy these numbers from SpectroLab as well (
> > >http://www.spectrolab.com/DataSheets/Panel/panels.pdf  ):
> > >370 W/m2, mass add-on coverslide needed on these cells for space
> > >launch front side = 1.76 kg/m2 (5.5 mil thick cell), back side 2.06
>kg/m2
> > >(5.5 mil thick cell ). The cells themselves, no mass add-ons are 840
> > >gram per m2.
> > >
> > >  Make these cell 100% efficient and run the numbers again,
> > > theoretical maximum value will be 54% efficient, but for the sake
> > > of argument say 100% efficient.
> > >
> > >0.840 + 1.76 + 2.06 = 4.66 kg/m2
> > >AMO Standard 1,357 m2
> > >
> > >Ouch!
> >
> > I'm sorry, I miss your point here.  What's important is kg/kW.  4.66
> > kg/m2/130kW is only 35 grams/kW.
> >
> > 77,000 m2 of them would only mass 359 tonnes.  That's 3.6% of a
> > 10,000 ton, 5 GWe (ground) power sat.  The reflectors, heat sinks and
> > transmitter are each going to mass way more than these cells.
> >
> > If you are going to this much concentration and big heat sinks I
> > think you might as well just use steam turbines that are already 40%
>efficient.
> >
> > Keith
> >
> >
> >
> > >----- Original Message ----
> > >From: hkhenson <hkhenson@...>
> > >To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
> > >Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 10:00:09 PM
> > >Subject: Re: [Solar Power Satellite Place] NREL Solar Cell Sets
> > >World  Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent
> > >
> > >
> > >At 05:49 PM 8/29/2008, you wrote:
> > > >FYI,
> > > >
> > > >"NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
> > > >National Renewable Energy Laboratory
> > > >http://www.nrel. gov/news/ press/2008/ 625.html
> > > >
> > > >: Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
> > > >: Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
> > > >: efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
> > > >: the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
> > > >: confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
> > > >
> > > >: The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
> > > >: fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
> > > >: efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
> > > >: sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
> > > >: sunny day.
> > >
> > >This is interesting.  Let's take a look at some numbers.
> > >
> > >Consider peak sunlight (on the ground) as a kW/m exp 2.  So the
> > >output of a sq meter would be around 130 kW.  I am not sure how to
> > >account for the reflected light from the cell surface.  Ignoring
> > >that, then 60% of 326 kW/m exp 2 will go into heating the
> > >cell.  That's about 195 kW/m exp 2.
> > >
> > >195,000/0.9 = 5.67 x 10 exp -8 T exp 4, T would be almost 1400 deg K
> > >or over 1100 deg C.  Solar cells don't operate that hot so it would
> > >have to be cooled.
> > >
> > >Installed in a power sat and kept well below 100 deg C, it would use
> > >almost as much radiator as a steam turbine system.
> > >
> > >Fewer moving parts though.
> > >
> > >10 GW would require about 77,000 square meters of cell and 23 million
> > >square meters of reflectors or a square close to 5 km on an edge.
> > >
> > >15 GW of waste heat at room temperature would need a radiator of
> > >about the same size, a 5 x 6 km radiator.
> > >
> > >Hmm
> > >
> > >Keith Henson
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >------------------------------------
> > >
> > >Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
>Messages in this topic (3)
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------

FWIW,

"Solar Energy Can Meet All the World's Energy Demands: Expert"
AFP
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080905/sc_afp/spainenvironmentenergyalte
rnativesolar_080905185732

: The world must speed up the deployment of solar power as it has the
: potential to meet all the world's energy needs, the chairman of an
: industry gathering which wrapped up Friday in Spain said.

: "The solar energy resource is enormous, and distributed all over
: the world, in all countries and also oceans," said Daniel Lincot,
: the chairman of the five-day European Photovoltaic Solar Energy
: conference held in Valencia.

: "There is thus an enormous resource available from photovoltaics,
: which can be used everywhere, and can in principle cover all the
: world energy demand from a renewable, safe and clean source," he
: added.

: Lincot, the research director of the Paris-based Institute for
: Research and Development of Photovoltaic Energy, said solar energy
: was growing rapidly but still made only a "negligible" contribution
: to total energy supply.

: Last year the world production of photovoltaic models represented a
: surface of 40 square kilometres (16 square miles) while meeting the
: electrical consumption of countries like France or Germany would
: require 5,000 square kilometres, he said.

: Under current scenarios, photovoltaic models will represent about
: 1,000 square kilometres by 2020 accounting for about only
: 3.0 percent of energy needs in the 27-member European Union, he
: added.

: Over 200 scientists and solar power experts have signed a
: declaration calling on the accelerated deployment of photovoltaic
: power which was launched at the conference.

: More than 3,500 experts and 715 sector firms took part in the
: gathering, billed as the largest conference ever organised in the
: field of photovoltaic conversion of solar energy.

: Germany and Spain are the world leaders in solar energy power.
: Germany has 4,000 megawatts of installed capacity while Spain has
: 600 megawatts.

Mark Reiff

Keith,
I think you have misplaced a comma or two. That is 1.357kW/m2 not 1357
kW. 1,357Watt/m2  / 4.66 kg/m2 = 291 Watt/kilogram

Our thin film cells at 12.4% efficiency rate at 5,880 Watt/kilogram.
At 2 microns thickness this increases to 16,800 Watts/kg = 16.8 kW/kg.

Also there is not much heat sink mass.

Kevin



--- In solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com, hkhenson
<hkhenson@...> wrote:
>
> At 07:22 AM 8/30/2008, you wrote:
> >Thy these numbers from SpectroLab as well (
> >http://www.spectrolab.com/DataSheets/Panel/panels.pdf  ):
> >370 W/m2, mass add-on coverslide needed on these cells for space
> >launch front side = 1.76 kg/m2 (5.5 mil thick cell), back side 2.06
kg/m2
> >(5.5 mil thick cell ). The cells themselves, no mass add-ons are 840
> >gram per m2.
> >
> >  Make these cell 100% efficient and run the numbers again,
> > theoretical maximum value will be 54% efficient, but for the sake
> > of argument say 100% efficient.
> >
> >0.840 + 1.76 + 2.06 = 4.66 kg/m2
> >AMO Standard 1,357 m2
> >
> >Ouch!
>
> I'm sorry, I miss your point here.  What's important is kg/kW.  4.66
> kg/m2/130kW is only 35 grams/kW.
>
> 77,000 m2 of them would only mass 359 tonnes.  That's 3.6% of a
> 10,000 ton, 5 GWe (ground) power sat.  The reflectors, heat sinks and
> transmitter are each going to mass way more than these cells.
>
> If you are going to this much concentration and big heat sinks I
> think you might as well just use steam turbines that are already 40%
efficient.
>
> Keith
>
>
>
> >----- Original Message ----
> >From: hkhenson <hkhenson@...>
> >To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
> >Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 10:00:09 PM
> >Subject: Re: [Solar Power Satellite Place] NREL Solar Cell Sets
> >World  Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent
> >
> >
> >At 05:49 PM 8/29/2008, you wrote:
> > >FYI,
> > >
> > >"NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
> > >National Renewable Energy Laboratory
> > >http://www.nrel. gov/news/ press/2008/ 625.html
> > >
> > >: Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
> > >: Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
> > >: efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
> > >: the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
> > >: confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
> > >
> > >: The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
> > >: fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
> > >: efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
> > >: sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
> > >: sunny day.
> >
> >This is interesting.  Let's take a look at some numbers.
> >
> >Consider peak sunlight (on the ground) as a kW/m exp 2.  So the
> >output of a sq meter would be around 130 kW.  I am not sure how to
> >account for the reflected light from the cell surface.  Ignoring
> >that, then 60% of 326 kW/m exp 2 will go into heating the
> >cell.  That's about 195 kW/m exp 2.
> >
> >195,000/0.9 = 5.67 x 10 exp -8 T exp 4, T would be almost 1400 deg K
> >or over 1100 deg C.  Solar cells don't operate that hot so it would
> >have to be cooled.
> >
> >Installed in a power sat and kept well below 100 deg C, it would use
> >almost as much radiator as a steam turbine system.
> >
> >Fewer moving parts though.
> >
> >10 GW would require about 77,000 square meters of cell and 23 million
> >square meters of reflectors or a square close to 5 km on an edge.
> >
> >15 GW of waste heat at room temperature would need a radiator of
> >about the same size, a 5 x 6 km radiator.
> >
> >Hmm
> >
> >Keith Henson
> >
> >
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

Now try with a real world comparison ... like 330 watt per m2 at 4.66 kg/m2
AND use real world configuration for rigid array panels. (see attached)





----- Original Message ----
From: "solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com"
<solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com>
To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, September 1, 2008 1:18:20 AM
Subject: [Solar Power Satellite Place] Digest Number 163

   Solar Power Satellite Place - Solar Power Satellite Forum
Solar Power Satellite Place - Solar Power Satellite Forum
Messages In This Digest      (1  Message)

1a.
Re: NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent From:  hkhenson
View All Topics | Create New Topic
Message
1a.
Re: NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent
Posted by:      "hkhenson" hkhenson@...    hkeithhenson
Sun Aug 31, 2008 11:13 pm        (PDT)
At 07:22 AM 8/30/2008, you wrote:
>Thy these numbers from SpectroLab as well (
>http://www.spectrol ab.com/DataSheet s/Panel/panels. pdf ):
>370 W/m2, mass add-on coverslide needed on these cells for space
>launch front side = 1.76 kg/m2 (5.5 mil thick cell), back side 2.06 kg/m2
>(5.5 mil thick cell ). The cells themselves, no mass add-ons are 840
>gram per m2.
>
>  Make these cell 100% efficient and run the numbers again,
> theoretical maximum value will be 54% efficient, but for the sake
> of argument say 100% efficient.
>
>0.840 + 1.76 + 2.06 = 4.66 kg/m2
>AMO Standard 1,357 m2
>
>Ouch!

I'm sorry, I miss your point here.  What's important is kg/kW.  4.66
kg/m2/130kW is only 35 grams/kW.

77,000 m2 of them would only mass 359 tonnes.  That's 3.6% of a
10,000 ton, 5 GWe (ground) power sat.  The reflectors, heat sinks and
transmitter are each going to mass way more than these cells.

If you are going to this much concentration and big heat sinks I
think you might as well just use steam turbines that are already 40% efficient.

Keith

>----- Original Message ----
>From: hkhenson <hkhenson@rogers. com>
>To: solarpowersatellite place@yahoogroup s.com
>Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 10:00:09 PM
>Subject: Re: [Solar Power Satellite Place] NREL Solar Cell Sets
>World  Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent
>
>
>At 05:49 PM 8/29/2008, you wrote:
> >FYI,
> >
> >"NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
> >National Renewable Energy Laboratory
> >http://www.nrel. gov/news/ press/2008/ 625.html
> >
> >: Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
> >: Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
> >: efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
> >: the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
> >: confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
> >
> >: The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
> >: fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
> >: efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
> >: sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
> >: sunny day.
>
>This is interesting.  Let's take a look at some numbers.
>
>Consider peak sunlight (on the ground) as a kW/m exp 2.  So the
>output of a sq meter would be around 130 kW.  I am not sure how to
>account for the reflected light from the cell surface.  Ignoring
>that, then 60% of 326 kW/m exp 2 will go into heating the
>cell.  That's about 195 kW/m exp 2.
>
>195,000/0.9 = 5.67 x 10 exp -8 T exp 4, T would be almost 1400 deg K
>or over 1100 deg C.  Solar cells don't operate that hot so it would
>have to be cooled.
>
>Installed in a power sat and kept well below 100 deg C, it would use
>almost as much radiator as a steam turbine system.
>
>Fewer moving parts though.
>
>10 GW would require about 77,000 square meters of cell and 23 million
>square meters of reflectors or a square close to 5 km on an edge.
>
>15 GW of waste heat at room temperature would need a radiator of
>about the same size, a 5 x 6 km radiator.
>
>Hmm
>
>Keith Henson
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>----------- --------- --------- -------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>


Back to top  Reply to sender  | Reply to group  | Reply via web post
Messages in this topic  (2)
Recent Activity
	 *  1
New MembersVisit Your Group
Yahoo! News
Get it all here
Breaking news to
entertainment news
Moderator Central
Yahoo! Groups
Join and receive
produce updates.
Health Groups
for people over 40
Join people who are
staying in shape.
Need to Reply?
Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily
Digest.
Create New Topic  | Visit Your Group on the Web
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar

Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Individual | Switch format to
Traditional
Visit Your Group  | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use  | Unsubscribe

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 07:22 AM 8/30/2008, you wrote:
>Thy these numbers from SpectroLab as well (
>http://www.spectrolab.com/DataSheets/Panel/panels.pdf  ):
>370 W/m2, mass add-on coverslide needed on these cells for space
>launch front side = 1.76 kg/m2 (5.5 mil thick cell), back side 2.06 kg/m2
>(5.5 mil thick cell ). The cells themselves, no mass add-ons are 840
>gram per m2.
>
>  Make these cell 100% efficient and run the numbers again,
> theoretical maximum value will be 54% efficient, but for the sake
> of argument say 100% efficient.
>
>0.840 + 1.76 + 2.06 = 4.66 kg/m2
>AMO Standard 1,357 m2
>
>Ouch!

I'm sorry, I miss your point here.  What's important is kg/kW.  4.66
kg/m2/130kW is only 35 grams/kW.

77,000 m2 of them would only mass 359 tonnes.  That's 3.6% of a
10,000 ton, 5 GWe (ground) power sat.  The reflectors, heat sinks and
transmitter are each going to mass way more than these cells.

If you are going to this much concentration and big heat sinks I
think you might as well just use steam turbines that are already 40% efficient.

Keith



>----- Original Message ----
>From: hkhenson <hkhenson@...>
>To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 10:00:09 PM
>Subject: Re: [Solar Power Satellite Place] NREL Solar Cell Sets
>World  Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent
>
>
>At 05:49 PM 8/29/2008, you wrote:
> >FYI,
> >
> >"NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
> >National Renewable Energy Laboratory
> >http://www.nrel. gov/news/ press/2008/ 625.html
> >
> >: Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
> >: Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
> >: efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
> >: the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
> >: confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
> >
> >: The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
> >: fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
> >: efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
> >: sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
> >: sunny day.
>
>This is interesting.  Let's take a look at some numbers.
>
>Consider peak sunlight (on the ground) as a kW/m exp 2.  So the
>output of a sq meter would be around 130 kW.  I am not sure how to
>account for the reflected light from the cell surface.  Ignoring
>that, then 60% of 326 kW/m exp 2 will go into heating the
>cell.  That's about 195 kW/m exp 2.
>
>195,000/0.9 = 5.67 x 10 exp -8 T exp 4, T would be almost 1400 deg K
>or over 1100 deg C.  Solar cells don't operate that hot so it would
>have to be cooled.
>
>Installed in a power sat and kept well below 100 deg C, it would use
>almost as much radiator as a steam turbine system.
>
>Fewer moving parts though.
>
>10 GW would require about 77,000 square meters of cell and 23 million
>square meters of reflectors or a square close to 5 km on an edge.
>
>15 GW of waste heat at room temperature would need a radiator of
>about the same size, a 5 x 6 km radiator.
>
>Hmm
>
>Keith Henson
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Thy these numbers from SpectroLab as well (
http://www.spectrolab.com/DataSheets/Panel/panels.pdf  ):
370 W/m2, mass add-on coverslide needed on these cells for space launch front
side = 1.76 kg/m2 (5.5 mil thick cell), back side 2.06 kg/m2
(5.5 mil thick cell ). The cells themselves, no mass add-ons are 840 gram per
m2.

  Make these cell 100% efficient and run the numbers again, theoretical maximum
value will be 54% efficient, but for the sake of argument say 100% efficient.

0.840 + 1.76 + 2.06 = 4.66 kg/m2
AMO Standard 1,357 m2

Ouch!



----- Original Message ----
From: hkhenson <hkhenson@...>
To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 10:00:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Solar Power Satellite Place] NREL Solar Cell Sets World 
Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent


At 05:49 PM 8/29/2008, you wrote:
>FYI,
>
>"NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
>National Renewable Energy Laboratory
>http://www.nrel. gov/news/ press/2008/ 625.html
>
>: Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
>: Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
>: efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
>: the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
>: confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
>
>: The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
>: fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
>: efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
>: sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
>: sunny day.

This is interesting.  Let's take a look at some numbers.

Consider peak sunlight (on the ground) as a kW/m exp 2.  So the
output of a sq meter would be around 130 kW.  I am not sure how to
account for the reflected light from the cell surface.  Ignoring
that, then 60% of 326 kW/m exp 2 will go into heating the
cell.  That's about 195 kW/m exp 2.

195,000/0.9 = 5.67 x 10 exp -8 T exp 4, T would be almost 1400 deg K
or over 1100 deg C.  Solar cells don't operate that hot so it would
have to be cooled.

Installed in a power sat and kept well below 100 deg C, it would use
almost as much radiator as a steam turbine system.

Fewer moving parts though.

10 GW would require about 77,000 square meters of cell and 23 million
square meters of reflectors or a square close to 5 km on an edge.

15 GW of waste heat at room temperature would need a radiator of
about the same size, a 5 x 6 km radiator.

Hmm

Keith Henson



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Solar Energy | Solar Systems North West Victoria Solar Power Plant
Feb.01, 2008 in Solar Energy
On 25 October, 2006, Australian company Solar Systems announced an ambitious
solar energy project that will add significant
benefits for both Victorian residents directly and the global
environment as a result.
A 154 MW photovoltaic solar energy power plant will be built in
north west Victoria in Australia. The solar power plant has been
designed and built by Solar Systems and will be the biggest and most
efficient photovoltaic power plant in the world.
The solar power plant will generate enough electricity to power
45,000 homes per year with zero greenhouse gas emissions. It will make
a big contribution to reducing carbon emissions with estimations
putting the actual reduction at approximately 400,000 tonnes per year.
The cost of the new solar power plant was originally estimated to
run to $420 million. The Australian Federal Government chipped in a $75
million grant under the Federal Government¢s Low Emissions Technology
Demonstration Fund (LETDF). The Victorian State Government also
supported the project by providing a grant of a further $50 million.
The solar power plant will use technology known as ¡Heliostat
Concentrator Photovoltaic¢ (HCPV). It will consist of fields of sun
tracking mirrors focusing sunlight on the receivers. The receivers
house photovoltaic (PV) modules, which consist of arrays of ultra
high-efficiency solar cells that convert sunlight directly into
electricity.
Most of this system is built out of ordinary materials like glass,
steel and concrete. This means the unique combination of high
technology and common materials enables a high performance solar power
station to be built at a relatively low cost.
The PV modules in the HCPV system run at 500 times sunlight
concentration. They are also three times more efficient than standard
solar panels. This means their output is 1500 times greater than the
same area of standard flat plate PV modules.
Full commissioning of the project is expected in 2013 with the first
stage to be complete in 2010. The 154 MW capacity means that the large
scale solar power plant generation capability will be 270,000 MWh per
annum
The original media release can be viewed at the Solar Systems Pty Ltd website.
You can read about other solar energy developments in construction by visitng
the solar energy page..


----- Original Message ----
From: ForDutyAndHumanity IAmSpacebearAICDA <astrobear@...>
To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 9:13:29 PM
Subject: RE: [Solar Power Satellite Place] NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency
Record at 40.8 Percent


One cool thing about these solar cells if they are receiving 326 times the light
from the sun by using a parabolic mirror or lenses,  you could more than likely
use the amount of heat being concentrated to heat hot water for a home or if hot
enough power a heat engine.










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

One cool thing about these solar cells if they are receiving 326 times the light
from the sun by using a parabolic mirror or lenses,  you could more than likely
use the amount of heat being concentrated to heat hot water for a home or if hot
enough power a heat engine.





















[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

At 05:49 PM 8/29/2008, you wrote:
>FYI,
>
>"NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
>National Renewable Energy Laboratory
>http://www.nrel.gov/news/press/2008/625.html
>
>: Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
>: Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
>: efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
>: the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
>: confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
>
>: The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
>: fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
>: efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
>: sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
>: sunny day.

This is interesting.  Let's take a look at some numbers.

Consider peak sunlight (on the ground) as a kW/m exp 2.  So the
output of a sq meter would be around 130 kW.  I am not sure how to
account for the reflected light from the cell surface.  Ignoring
that, then 60% of 326 kW/m exp 2 will go into heating the
cell.  That's about 195 kW/m exp 2.

195,000/0.9 = 5.67 x 10 exp -8 T exp 4, T would be almost 1400 deg K
or over 1100 deg C.  Solar cells don't operate that hot so it would
have to be cooled.

Installed in a power sat and kept well below 100 deg C, it would use
almost as much radiator as a steam turbine system.

Fewer moving parts though.

10 GW would require about 77,000 square meters of cell and 23 million
square meters of reflectors or a square close to 5 km on an edge.

15 GW of waste heat at room temperature would need a radiator of
about the same size, a 5 x 6 km radiator.

Hmm

Keith Henson

Good work for NREL. It seems ground solar cells move forward. With 4.6 kilograms
of glass cover slides and other mass add-ons for launch, the very efficient
cells have very low power density. Tits on a bull for SBSP.

markreiff wrote:
>             FYI,
> "NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
> National Renewable Energy Laboratory
>  http://www.nrel. gov/news/ press/2008/ 625.html
> : Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
> : Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
> : efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
> : the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
> : confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.
> : The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
> : fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
> : efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
> : sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
> : sunny day. The new cell is a natural candidate for the space
> : satellite market and for terrestrial concentrated photovoltaic
> : arrays, which use lenses or mirrors to focus sunlight onto the
> : solar cells.
> : The new solar cell differs significantly from the previous record
> : holder – also based on a NREL design. Instead of using a germanium
> : wafer as the bottom junction of the device, the new design uses
> : compositions of gallium indium phosphide and gallium indium
> : arsenide to split the solar spectrum into three equal parts that
> : are absorbed by each of the cell's three junctions for higher
> : potential efficiencies. This is accomplished by growing the solar
> : cell on a gallium arsenide wafer, flipping it over, then removing
> : the wafer. The resulting device is extremely thin and light and
> : represents a new class of solar cells with advantages in
> : performance, design, operation and cost.
> : NREL's Mark Wanlass invented the original inverted cell, which
> : recently won a R&D 100 award. His design was modified by a team led
> : by John Geisz that further optimized the junction energies by
> : making the middle junction metamorphic as well as the bottom
> : junction. Metamorphic junctions are lattice mismatched – their
> : atoms don't line up. The material properties of the mismatched
> : semiconductors allows for greater potential conversion of sunlight.
> : NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy's primary national laboratory
> : for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and
> : development. NREL is operated for DOE by Midwest Research Institute
> : and Battelle.
> Mark Reiff
>

FYI,

"NREL Solar Cell Sets World Efficiency Record at 40.8 Percent"
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
http://www.nrel.gov/news/press/2008/625.html

: Scientists at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable
: Energy Laboratory (NREL) have set a world record in solar cell
: efficiency with a photovoltaic device that converts 40.8 percent of
: the light that hits it into electricity. This is the highest
: confirmed efficiency of any photovoltaic device to date.

: The inverted metamorphic triple-junction solar cell was designed,
: fabricated and independently measured at NREL. The 40.8 percent
: efficiency was measured under concentrated light of 326 suns. One
: sun is about the amount of light that typically hits Earth on a
: sunny day. The new cell is a natural candidate for the space
: satellite market and for terrestrial concentrated photovoltaic
: arrays, which use lenses or mirrors to focus sunlight onto the
: solar cells.

: The new solar cell differs significantly from the previous record
: holder – also based on a NREL design. Instead of using a germanium
: wafer as the bottom junction of the device, the new design uses
: compositions of gallium indium phosphide and gallium indium
: arsenide to split the solar spectrum into three equal parts that
: are absorbed by each of the cell's three junctions for higher
: potential efficiencies. This is accomplished by growing the solar
: cell on a gallium arsenide wafer, flipping it over, then removing
: the wafer. The resulting device is extremely thin and light and
: represents a new class of solar cells with advantages in
: performance, design, operation and cost.

: NREL's Mark Wanlass invented the original inverted cell, which
: recently won a R&D 100 award. His design was modified by a team led
: by John Geisz that further optimized the junction energies by
: making the middle junction metamorphic as well as the bottom
: junction. Metamorphic junctions are lattice mismatched – their
: atoms don't line up. The material properties of the mismatched
: semiconductors allows for greater potential conversion of sunlight.

: NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy's primary national laboratory
: for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and
: development. NREL is operated for DOE by Midwest Research Institute
: and Battelle.

Mark Reiff

FYI,

Not necessarily new tech., but innovative uses of existing technology
will lower the cost of building solar power satellites.

"Thinking Outside the Square Finds Light in Oven"
Sydney Morning Herald
http://www.smh.com.au/news/energy-smart/thinking-outside-the-square-
finds-light-in-oven/2008/08/19/1218911717526.html

: For her 10th birthday, Nicole Kuepper received an inspirational
: present from her parents - her first solar-energy kit.

: It sparked a fascination with solar technology that last night led
: to Ms Kuepper, 23, winning two Australian Museum Eureka Prizes for
: her scientific research.

: She has developed a simple, cheap way of producing solar cells in a
: pizza oven that could eventually bring power and light to the
: 2 billion people in the world who lack electricity.

: Ms Kuepper is a PhD student and lecturer in the school of
: photovoltaic and renewable energy engineering at the University of
: NSW.

: "I love working with passionate people who want to help address
: climate change and poverty by thinking and experimenting outside
: the square," she said.

: Today's photovoltaic cells that convert sunlight to electricity are
: expensive and need sophisticated, "clean" manufacturing plants.

: Ms Kuepper realised a new approach would be needed if affordable
: cells were to be made on site in poorer countries: "What started
: off as a brainstorming session has resulted in the iJET cell
: concept that uses low-cost and low-temperature processes, such as
: ink-jet printing and pizza ovens, to manufacture solar cells."

: While it could take five years to commercialise the patented
: technology, providing renewable energy to homes in some of the
: least developed countries would enable people to "read at night,
: keep informed about the world through radio and television and
: refrigerate life-saving vaccines".

: Ms Kuepper said that the solar cells should be of high enough
: quality to be used anywhere in the world, including Australia.

: An advocate of green technology, she gives talks about solar energy
: to the public, has held miniature solar car races to teach
: indigenous children about renewable energy, and was a delegate at
: the 2020 Youth Summit in Canberra in April.

: Ms Kuepper was awarded the British Council Eureka Prize for Young
: Leaders in Environmental Issues and Climate Change and a $10,000
: study tour to Britain.

: She also won the People's Choice Award, in which almost 16,000
: members of the public voted for their favourite scientist out of
: six finalists. Twenty Eureka Prizes worth $200,000 were awarded
: last night at a ceremony at Royal Randwick Racecourse.

Mark Reiff

FYI,

Space Solar Power Video Presentation at LIFT Conference
LIFT Conference
http://www.liftconference.com/space-solar-power

: Capturing Solar Energy in orbit and beaming it down to Earth in a
: 24 hours a day controlled process, in combination with hydrogen
: technology, apppears as one of the global, clean and sustainable
: solutions to replace fossil fuels. The application is expected to be
: operational in 30 years from now, and technological development is
: already underway.

: Guy Pignolet
: Moderator:Bruno Giussani
: 7 Feb 2008

Mark Reiff

I think that Futures Channel SBSP TV Special may include about the commercially
funded WPT beaming of 80 miles at 2.35 GHz Neville Marzwell worked on. Neville
said they would have the 80 mile beaming on TV in the fall.



----- Original Message ----
From: budo biker <budobiker@...>
To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 6, 2008 8:29:52 PM
Subject: [Solar Power Satellite Place] Futures Channel Video


http://www.thefutur eschannel. com/dockets/ realworld/ space_based_ solar_power/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://www.thefutureschannel.com/dockets/realworld/space_based_solar_power/




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I think this one will not be able to even stand next to MW power DS4G Thrusters.
We can around 2 kW/kg propulsion now.
130 W/kg seems somewhat of an underachiever, not really solving the problem of
"power-starved" payloads.



----- Original Message ----
From: Keith Henson <hkhenson@...>
To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 4, 2008 9:20:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Solar Power Satellite Place] Fast Access Spacecraft Testbed (FAST)


I think this proposal is going to be dominated by the heat sink
problems.  I know of one way to solve such problems, but it can't be
tested on earth.  If anyone wants me to go into details, please ask.

Keith Henson

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Charles F. Radley
<charles@stratowave. com> wrote:
> Solicitation Number: BAA07-65 Notice Type:
> Award Notice Contract Award Date: July 23, 2008
> Contract Award Number: HR0011-08-C- 0086
> Contract Award Dollar Amount: $4,928,253
> Contractor Awarded Name: Boeing Satellite Systems, Inc.
> Contractor Awarded Address: 2260 Imperial Hwy
> El Segundo, California 90245-3501 United States
> Added: Jul 23, 2008 10:47 am
> FAST, Phase I
>
> DARPA is soliciting proposals for the development and demonstration
> of a High Power Generation Subsystem (HPGS) that, when combined with
> state-of-the- art electric propulsion systems, will form the
> technological basis for a light weight, high power, highly mobile
> spacecraft platform, generating as much as 50-80 kW for operational
> users, but at high specific power levels (130 W/kg or better). The
> FAST HPGS would also greatly enhance the performance of
> historically "power-starved" payloads, such as communications or
> radar.
> DARPA Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) No. 07-65, entitled Fast Access
> Spacecraft Testbed (FAST), is provided as an attachment to this
> solicitation notice and includes information on the specific areas of
> interest; submission process; abstract and proposal formats;
> evaluation and selection/funding processes; as well as all other
> pertinent administrative and contractual information. The BAA may be
> obtained from the FedBizOpps website: http://www.fedbizop ps.gov.
>
>
> ------------ --------- --------- ------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I think this proposal is going to be dominated by the heat sink
problems.  I know of one way to solve such problems, but it can't be
tested on earth.  If anyone wants me to go into details, please ask.

Keith Henson

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 9:26 AM, Charles F. Radley
<charles@...> wrote:
> Solicitation Number: BAA07-65 Notice Type:
> Award Notice Contract Award Date: July 23, 2008
> Contract Award Number: HR0011-08-C-0086
> Contract Award Dollar Amount: $4,928,253
> Contractor Awarded Name: Boeing Satellite Systems, Inc.
> Contractor Awarded Address: 2260 Imperial Hwy
> El Segundo, California 90245-3501 United States
> Added: Jul 23, 2008 10:47 am
> FAST, Phase I
>
> DARPA is soliciting proposals for the development and demonstration
> of a High Power Generation Subsystem (HPGS) that, when combined with
> state-of-the-art electric propulsion systems, will form the
> technological basis for a light weight, high power, highly mobile
> spacecraft platform, generating as much as 50-80 kW for operational
> users, but at high specific power levels (130 W/kg or better). The
> FAST HPGS would also greatly enhance the performance of
> historically "power-starved" payloads, such as communications or
> radar.
> DARPA Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) No. 07-65, entitled Fast Access
> Spacecraft Testbed (FAST), is provided as an attachment to this
> solicitation notice and includes information on the specific areas of
> interest; submission process; abstract and proposal formats;
> evaluation and selection/funding processes; as well as all other
> pertinent administrative and contractual information. The BAA may be
> obtained from the FedBizOpps website: http://www.fedbizopps.gov.
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Please digg this nice viral Video from a group of "renegades"....

http://digg.com/space/The_solution_for_energy_no_one_is_talking_about

It's a video on a different form of solar power--space solar power--as
our way out of the energy crisis.

The solution for energy no one is talking about. watch! youtube.com —
Space Based Solar Power gets twice the power per square inch as solar,
24 hours a day, all year round, can be transmitted anywhere with
minimal local infrastructure, requires no imaginary technology, and
above all else, is as awesome as you remember it in Sim City.

Video from ESA no less:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIXI_pl-Akk

Solicitation Number: BAA07-65 Notice Type:
Award Notice Contract Award Date: July 23, 2008
Contract Award Number: HR0011-08-C-0086
Contract Award Dollar Amount: $4,928,253
Contractor Awarded Name: Boeing Satellite Systems, Inc.
Contractor Awarded Address: 2260 Imperial Hwy
El Segundo, California 90245-3501 United States
Added: Jul 23, 2008 10:47 am
FAST, Phase I

DARPA is soliciting proposals for the development and demonstration
of a High Power Generation Subsystem (HPGS) that, when combined with
state-of-the-art electric propulsion systems, will form the
technological basis for a light weight, high power, highly mobile
spacecraft platform, generating as much as 50-80 kW for operational
users, but at high specific power levels (130 W/kg or better). The
FAST HPGS would also greatly enhance the performance of
historically "power-starved" payloads, such as communications or
radar.
DARPA Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) No. 07-65, entitled Fast Access
Spacecraft Testbed (FAST), is provided as an attachment to this
solicitation notice and includes information on the specific areas of
interest; submission process; abstract and proposal formats;
evaluation and selection/funding processes; as well as all other
pertinent administrative and contractual information. The BAA may be
obtained from the FedBizOpps website: http://www.fedbizopps.gov.

Mark,

I liked Werbos' response to the article as well.

You all know I forward this Thin Film Solar Cell manufacturing as key to SBSP
feasiblity. Manufacturing Thin Film Solar Cells at GW scale Dual Use Space and
Terrestrial Manufacturing in New Mexico can have immediate effect in reduced
consumer energy costs starting with Zero Electric Bill from Zero Consumer Cost
Rooftop Solar Modules.

California can instantly purchase forward solar electrical energy contracts from
New Mexico at 10 cents a Watt, from New Mexico consumer rooftop solar modules,
for as long as they would care to sign. Utah can sell it's lower cost energy by
the same transmission systems we sell the solar. 40 Trillion BTU in avoided cost
loss for electrical transmission systems energy losses (EIA figures)  for New
Mexico from the first day of GW production, 28 Trillion BTU (60% of 40 T BTU
less 40% transmission loss) of avoided cost energy for California, with addition
solar energy sales from 1.6TW of rooftop solar and 1.7TW of SBSP solar (100MW
start up SBSP)...  and onwards from there.

Likely any solar manufacturing will grow by at least 25% per year but, staying
at 1 GW production alone earns $92B profits in 10 years using Space and
Terrestrial Solar as 2 sides of the same Solar Energy Coin. If we treat Space
and Terrestrial solar cells as the same Solar Energy Coin we win on the ground
and close the business case for SBSP from the start.

While NASA spends $Billions on R&D and exploration, the Space Shuttle nor Ares
can be considered R&D in any form after such long use of these designs. It is
likely that a better use of these SS launchers is a a component of a Solar Power
Public Utility that is mandated to earn 12% profit as would any other public
utility Working in this way SBSP is actually earning additional R&D funding to
Congressional Space appropriations which will be dramatically depleted by the
retirement of Space Shuttle and economic impact associated with the loss of
these jobs..

Much like the outline for the SunSat Corporation, the  Space Solar Power Public
Utility with NASA as a partner can both stimulate the space markets and help
them to grow. SBSP will not cost 100 of  $Billions as stated in that article. It
will earn profits at each step of components development, R&D and manufacturing
infrastructure funding and development. It must earn these profits, in interest
or many, the consumers and true owners of these SBSP systems. 12% profits to
maintain systems and to add to these systems as needed in the future.

If you pay attention we are showing you how this is done. Keep up pushing for
Sun Sat Corporation. Welsom Consortium will encourage those interested in saving
space Shuttle Launcher jobs (sans Orbiter) to support it's use for the first
primary SBSP payload system.

By 2017 we will have begun work on a RLV  that can be deployed by 2024-2026 with
less than $20 per pound to LEO launch cost.
We will build this at a profits from contract sales of this article as the next
Generation Space Launcher and Commercial Air Transport.with lower operational
cost per passenger mile than todays jumbo jets.

You just can't beat physics, aerodynamics and the transportation market place
when it come to planning, implementing and maintaining such RLV design,
manufacture, sales and maintenance.  The most expedient benefits in Space
provide the most immediate benefit on the ground to the common man. That is what
innovation is all about. It is after we have several 2 GW of solar in space that
the Low Cost RLV and Civilian Commercial Transport becomes most useful as a cash
earning enter prize.

Energy cost decrease is on the primary agenda, 30,000 new jobs in New Mexico is
on the primary agenda, Zero Carbon Energy systems at cost parity are on the
primary agenda, decreasing cost for energy hungry zero emission recovery of
Canadian Sand and US Shale Oil bring gas back to $1 per gallon is on the primary
agenda.

The secondary agenda is development of WPT end user products that also save
massive mounts of fossil fuel energy with the fortunate $1Trillion per year
market for these end user devices and new jobs. WPT Hybrids that use no gas or
plug in recharge in metropolitan beam down areas. Home WPT units that beam to
our household appliances.

Make SunSat  Corporation a reality. We lead the conversion from Centralized
Fossil Fuel Economy to Distributed Solar Ecomomy for all of the right reasons
and in the interest of all mankind.

Keep up the very good work,

Kevin

Welsom Space Power "The Race is On!"









----- Original Message ----
From: markreiff <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
To: solarpowersatelliteplace@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 11:45:40 AM
Subject: [Solar Power Satellite Place] Harvest the Sun — From Space


FYI,

"Harvest the Sun — From Space"
New York Times
http://www.nytimes. com/2008/ 07/23/opinion/ 23smith.html?
ex=1374552000& en=94912ae69854b 48f&ei=5124& partner=permalin k&exprod= per
malink

: As we face $4.50 a gallon gas, we also know that alternative energy
: sources — coal, oil shale, ethanol, wind and ground-based solar
: — are either of limited potential, very expensive, require huge
: energy storage systems or harm the environment. There is, however,
: one potential future energy source that is environmentally
: friendly, has essentially unlimited potential and can be cost
: competitive with any renewable source: space solar power.

: Science fiction? Actually, no — the technology already exists. A
: space solar power system would involve building large solar energy
: collectors in orbit around the Earth. These panels would collect
: far more energy than land-based units, which are hampered by
: weather, low angles of the sun in northern climes and, of course,
: the darkness of night.

: Once collected, the solar energy would be safely beamed to Earth
: via wireless radio transmission, where it would be received by
: antennas near cities and other places where large amounts of power
: are used. The received energy would then be converted to electric
: power for distribution over the existing grid. Government
: scientists have projected that the cost of electric power
: generation from such a system could be as low as 8 to 10 cents per
: kilowatt-hour, which is within the range of what consumers pay
: now.

: In terms of cost effectiveness, the two stumbling blocks for space
: solar power have been the expense of launching the collectors and
: the efficiency of their solar cells. Fortunately, the recent
: development of thinner, lighter and much higher efficiency solar
: cells promises to make sending them into space less expensive and
: return of energy much greater.

: Much of the progress has come in the private sector. Companies like
: Space Exploration Technologies and Orbital Sciences, working in
: conjunction with NASA's public-private Commercial Orbital
: Transportation Services initiative, have been developing the
: capacity for very low cost launchings to the International Space
: Station. This same technology could be adapted to sending up a
: solar power satellite system.

: Still, because building the first operational space solar power
: system will be very costly, a practical first step would be to
: conduct a test using the International Space Station as a
: "construction shack" to house the astronauts and equipment. The
: station's existing solar panels could be used for the demonstration
: project, and its robotic manipulator arms could assemble the large
: transmitting antenna. While the station's location in orbit would
: permit only intermittent transmission of power back to Earth, a
: successful test would serve as what scientists call "proof of
: concept."

: Over the past 15 years, Americans have invested more than
: $100 billion, directly and indirectly, on the space station and
: supporting shuttle flights. With an energy crisis deepening, it's
: time to begin to develop a huge return on that investment. (And for
: those who worry that science would lose out to economics, there's
: no reason that work on space solar power couldn't go hand in hand
: with work toward a manned mission to Mars, advanced propulsion
: systems and other priorities of the space station.)

: In fact, in a time of some skepticism about the utility of our
: space program, NASA should realize that the American public would
: be inspired by our astronauts working in space to meet critical
: energy needs here on Earth.

Mark Reiff



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

FYI,

"Harvest the Sun — From Space"
New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/23/opinion/23smith.html?
ex=1374552000&en=94912ae69854b48f&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=per
malink

: As we face $4.50 a gallon gas, we also know that alternative energy
: sources — coal, oil shale, ethanol, wind and ground-based solar
: — are either of limited potential, very expensive, require huge
: energy storage systems or harm the environment. There is, however,
: one potential future energy source that is environmentally
: friendly, has essentially unlimited potential and can be cost
: competitive with any renewable source: space solar power.

: Science fiction? Actually, no — the technology already exists. A
: space solar power system would involve building large solar energy
: collectors in orbit around the Earth. These panels would collect
: far more energy than land-based units, which are hampered by
: weather, low angles of the sun in northern climes and, of course,
: the darkness of night.

: Once collected, the solar energy would be safely beamed to Earth
: via wireless radio transmission, where it would be received by
: antennas near cities and other places where large amounts of power
: are used. The received energy would then be converted to electric
: power for distribution over the existing grid. Government
: scientists have projected that the cost of electric power
: generation from such a system could be as low as 8 to 10 cents per
: kilowatt-hour, which is within the range of what consumers pay
: now.

: In terms of cost effectiveness, the two stumbling blocks for space
: solar power have been the expense of launching the collectors and
: the efficiency of their solar cells. Fortunately, the recent
: development of thinner, lighter and much higher efficiency solar
: cells promises to make sending them into space less expensive and
: return of energy much greater.

: Much of the progress has come in the private sector. Companies like
: Space Exploration Technologies and Orbital Sciences, working in
: conjunction with NASA's public-private Commercial Orbital
: Transportation Services initiative, have been developing the
: capacity for very low cost launchings to the International Space
: Station. This same technology could be adapted to sending up a
: solar power satellite system.

: Still, because building the first operational space solar power
: system will be very costly, a practical first step would be to
: conduct a test using the International Space Station as a
: "construction shack" to house the astronauts and equipment. The
: station's existing solar panels could be used for the demonstration
: project, and its robotic manipulator arms could assemble the large
: transmitting antenna. While the station's location in orbit would
: permit only intermittent transmission of power back to Earth, a
: successful test would serve as what scientists call "proof of
: concept."

: Over the past 15 years, Americans have invested more than
: $100 billion, directly and indirectly, on the space station and
: supporting shuttle flights. With an energy crisis deepening, it's
: time to begin to develop a huge return on that investment. (And for
: those who worry that science would lose out to economics, there's
: no reason that work on space solar power couldn't go hand in hand
: with work toward a manned mission to Mars, advanced propulsion
: systems and other priorities of the space station.)

: In fact, in a time of some skepticism about the utility of our
: space program, NASA should realize that the American public would
: be inspired by our astronauts working in space to meet critical
: energy needs here on Earth.

Mark Reiff

FYI,

"How Satellites Could Power the Future"
Live Science
http://www.livescience.com/environment/080618-pf-space-solar.html

: Placing solar panels in space above both night and clouds was first
: considered 40 years ago. But the estimated cost was, in a word,
: astronomical.

: The idea, however, has seen a resurgence, thanks to rising oil
: prices and advances in solar technology. A report from U.S. Defense
: Department found that space-based solar is technically feasible and
: economically viable.

: To help prove the point, the Air Force Academy recently announced
: plans for a small demonstration satellite that would beam down a
: meager, but still significant, 0.1 watts of solar power.

: "Our vision is to build the world's first-ever space-based solar
: power system to light a single bulb on Earth and in so doing light
: the path for business to follow," said Col. Michael "Coyote" Smith
: of the Air Force.

: The type of transmission beam is still not decided, but the project
: may benefit from separate research in Japan that has been studying
: the two most likely technologies: microwaves and lasers.

: In the full light of space

: The sun puts out more than 10 trillion times the energy currently
: being consumed by the whole world.

: "We would only need to tap into a small fraction of that to get all
: our energy now and in many years to come," said Mark Hopkins,
: senior vice president of the National Space Society, which recently
: formed an alliance with other non-profits to promote space-based
: solar.

: The advantage of going to space is that sunlight is constant up
: there and three to 13 times stronger than the average down here on
: Earth, Smith said.

: The first suggestion of a solar power satellite was in 1968, but
: early estimates put the price tag around $1 trillion, largely
: because astronauts would have had to construct the facility back
: then.

: Now robots can do the job, installing improved-efficiency solar
: cells in a modular fashion, for 100 times cheaper than before.

: "If you decide to go now with today's technology, you're talking
: about the same cost as ground-based solar," Hopkins said, which is
: around 30 cents per kilowatt-hour.

: That's still too high, according to Hopkins, but he thinks costs
: will continue to come down, especially if development dollars start
: coming in. The Pentagon-sponsored report offered a roadmap for how
: to build a 10-megawatt test satellite over the next 10 years for
: $10 billion.

: But where that money will come from is hard to say. According to
: Hopkins, NASA sees this as an energy application and the Department
: of Energy sees this as a space enterprise.

: "There are bureaucratic problems finding a home for this project,"
: he said.

: Japan plans ahead

: The Japanese space agency, JAXA, has been providing steady support
: over the past decade for their Space Solar Power System (SSPS). The
: goal is to launch a geostationary satellite by 2030 that could
: supply 500,000 homes on Earth with a gigawatt of power.

: Currently, JAXA researchers are looking at both microwaves and
: lasers as possible options for beaming the energy down.

: "The technology for microwave transmission is more advanced, since
: it is based on current communication satellites," said Susumu
: Sasaki, a manager at JAXA's Advanced Mission Research Group.

: But to transmit huge amounts of power in a focused beam, the
: transmitting antenna in space needs to be roughly 2 kilometers
: (1.2 miles) wide. A receiving antenna of similar size or bigger
: must be built on Earth.

: The alternative would be a laser. Japanese scientists have been
: working on metal alloy plates that can absorb sunlight and directly
: convert it into an infrared laser beam.

: The advantage is that the transmitting and receiving devices can be
: about 10 times smaller than for microwaves, Sasaki said. Lasers
: also do not carry the risk of interfering with communication
: networks that use microwaves.

: However, lasers cannot go through clouds like microwaves can, so
: about half of the beam energy is lost if lasers are used.

: 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.

: 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.

: "You would feel it as some extra warmth, like on a sunny day," he
: said.

: Sooner than later

: Smith said that both microwaves or lasers were being considered for
: the Air Force project, which was announced earlier this month at
: the International Space Development Conference.

: "Although our architecture is far from decided, we have adopted the
: mantra keep it cheap and simple and deliver it soon," he said.

: They plan to stay under $10 million with a 400-pound (181-kilogram)
: satellite in low Earth orbit. It may be able to piggyback on
: another mission and use inflatable solar arrays. Smith hopes it
: will launch in 2010.

: "We want to get this rolling," he said.

Mark Reiff

FYI,

"Farming Solar Energy in Space - Shrugging off massive costs, Japan
pursues space-based solar arrays"
Scientific American
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=farming-solar-energy-in-space

: In a recent spin-off of the classic Japanese animated series
: Mobile Suit Gundam, the depletion of fossil fuels has forced
: humanity to turn to space-based solar power generation as global
: conflicts rage over energy shortages. The sci-fi saga is set in the
: year 2307, but even now real Japanese scientists are working on the
: hardware needed to realize orbital generators as a form of clean,
: renewable energy, with plans to complete a prototype in about
: 20 years.

: The concept of solar panels beaming down energy from space has long
: been pondered—and long been dismissed as too costly and
: impractical. But in Japan the seemingly far-fetched scheme has
: received renewed attention amid the current global energy crisis
: and concerns about the environment. Last year researchers at the
: Institute for Laser Technology in Osaka produced up to 180 watts of
: laser power from sunlight. In February scientists in Hokkaido began
: ground tests of a power transmission system designed to send energy
: in microwave form to Earth.

Mark Reiff

Scientific American, July issue, pg 22
Roping the Sun

Japan plans to build a space array to beam 1 GW to a receiving array
off  the coast of Japan.  To be operational by 2030.

I have created a website called www.spacebasedsolarpower.org and I am
looking for volunteers to put info on this website.

The sole purpose of this website will be create awareness among people
that this is possible and pressure the US govt. to put money into the
research.

Please email me at ajiwani@... if you're interested in providing
content or designing website or helping in any other way..

Regarding the Moon Society power beaming project....we have requested
STA transmission permit from US Govt (FCC) and they have requested some
additional testing, which is causing some delay. Basically the device
is working, but we cannot operate it until we receive the official
permission. Best regards, Charles R.

I posted this to the files area of this forum:

  denial-08-may-08GetAtt.pdf

Letter from FCC denying license for one watt power beaming demo

URL:

http://tinyurl.com/5alnrz

Rob Mahan

http://www.mariettawoodworks.com/technology/sbsp/00_radio_interview.mp3

Posted by Rob Mahan on January 3, 2008
My first exposure to the media as a self-appointed advocate for space-
based solar power happened on December 28, 2007 on Dot Blum's Atlanta
radio show, Bright Spot. After many nights of preparation, the hour
went by quickly and a few more citizens have now heard about space-
based solar power and its potential to lead the way to energy
independence for America and our allies.

http://c-sbsp.org/2008/01/03/space-based-solar-power-interview-update/

Info Name: Space-Based Solar Power for Peace, Prosperity and Survival

Tagline: Space-Based Solar Power for Peace, Prosperity and Survival

Host: Space-Based Solar Power - SBSP
Type: Meetings - Club/Group Meeting
Time and Place Date: Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Time: 7:00pm - 8:30pm
Location: BIS Conference Room
Street: 27/29 South Lambeth Rd, SW8 1SZ
City/Town: London, United Kingdom

Contact Info Phone: +44-0207-735-3160
Email: mail@...

Description
Space-Based Solar Power for Peace, Prosperity and Survival - Non-
Member fee (£5.00)

Speaker(s): Col. Coyote Smith USAF
Venue: BIS Conference Room, 27/29 South Lambeth Rd, London, SW8 1SZ,
U.K.
Start Date: 7/May/2008
End Date: 7/May/2008
7.00 - 8.30 pm

Click here for details:

http://www.bis-spaceflight.com/sitesia.aspx/page/196/id/1687/l/en-us