griffithsuk Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 2-3 mile high posts could be built with long cables just like holding up a tent post. these cables are also electrical cables. Aa masive magnifying glass and miror network ontop out in outer space with solar cells. That is what we should be aiming for. Easyier than eternity growing biofuel.
lemur Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 How much more energy do you think you can get from sunlight in space than on Earth? Is the energy gained per unit altitude worth the energy it takes to move the equipment to that altitude?
griffithsuk Posted May 12, 2011 Author Posted May 12, 2011 (edited) How much more energy do you think you can get from sunlight in space than on Earth? Is the energy gained per unit altitude worth the energy it takes to move the equipment to that altitude? I don't know ,the sky is pretty blue so say 20-50 times more?no way you can look at the sun in space without a visor.Burn your face off mate, something like 2000 deg Edited May 12, 2011 by griffithsuk
lemur Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 I don't know ,the sky is pretty blue so say 20-50 times more?no way you can look at the sun in space without a visor. The blueness of the sky is all the sunlight getting scattered in your direction. The solar panel on your roof collects the blue-sky light as well as the direct sunlight, I believe. 1
Schrödinger's hat Posted May 12, 2011 Posted May 12, 2011 Firstly, the flux density in orbit above earth is not much greater than at the surface (less than double iirc), the main difference is the distribution of frequencies. The harmful ionising (UV) frequencies are absorbed more than visible light and infrared. The main advantage of high altitude or orbital solar panels is that you aren't sitting in the shade of the earth for half of the day. Mile high posts and cables are at the edge of or beyond our ability to make, and even if we could they would be very expensive in energy and money. For the gain you get from doing this it is much cheaper to just make extra solar panels with the money and energy. There is no shortage of sunlight, with efficient solar panels a small fraction Australia's deserts alone could power the world (the money for such a project would be prohibitive though). Another project that has been seriously considered is putting solar collectors in orbit and beaming the energy down with microwaves. Although one or two countries could do this with very little effect, the ecological/weather impact of doing this on a global scale would have to be considered.
CaptainPanic Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 2-3 mile high posts could be built with long cables just like holding up a tent post. these cables are also electrical cables. Aa masive magnifying glass and miror network ontop out in outer space with solar cells. That is what we should be aiming for. Easyier than eternity growing biofuel. LOL!!! A huge space magnifying glass, space mirrors and some other contraption on 2-3 mile high posts is easier than growing plants? Could you please explain why it would be so "easy", and include the expected maintenance problems you'll face sooner or later?
griffithsuk Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 All I know is i would rather have something working for me than me doing all the work, else we would not of invented tractors.
CaptainPanic Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 All I know is i would rather have something working for me than me doing all the work, else we would not of invented tractors. Yes, so you actually admit that for biofuels, machines (tractors) do all the work. So, you cannot use that as an argument to build a giant space magnifying glass, because that too (just like biofuels) will be mechanized. If you want to compare "how much work" something is, and you want to compare biofuels to a giant space magnifiying glass including something on 2-3 mile high posts, then you need to be a little more detailed. The giant space magnifying glass isn't gonna build itself, and it won't go up into space by itself.
griffithsuk Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 Yes, so you actually admit that for biofuels, machines (tractors) do all the work. So, you cannot use that as an argument to build a giant space magnifying glass, because that too (just like biofuels) will be mechanized. If you want to compare "how much work" something is, and you want to compare biofuels to a giant space magnifiying glass including something on 2-3 mile high posts, then you need to be a little more detailed. The giant space magnifying glass isn't gonna build itself, and it won't go up into space by itself. The main purpose of this thread is to put AN idea across, you never know, might of given someone ideas.
CaptainPanic Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 The main purpose of this thread is to put AN idea across, you never know, might of given someone ideas. All I try to do is to get you engaged in the discussion. Until now, you posted the idea as a "fire-and-forget" idea... it would be nice if you defend it, and try to find some arguments why it's a good idea.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now