4 ms·

Another crazy idea would be to put nuclear reactors themselves in orbit, and then beam the energy down to the surface. Space is already pretty thoroughly radio

Another crazy idea would be to put nuclear reactors themselves in orbit, and then beam the energy down to the surface. Space is already pretty thoroughly radioactive, so a meltdown goes from "ZOMG WE'RE GONNA GROW EXTRA ARMS AND DIE OF CANCER" to "meh, just another Tuesday".

cpeterso 6y ago
But then you have nuclear-powered space lasers, which will scare people.
- yellowapple 6y ago
  Yeah, but if people don't like it, what are they gonna do? Complain? That'll just draw the attention of the nuclear-powered space lasers :)
ed25519FUUU 6y ago
How does one efficiency “beam down” gigawatts of energy? Or at all?
- cthalupa 6y ago
  Light. Focusing mirrors or lasers. But as others have pointed out, why would you bother with building space based nuclear plants and then converting that energy to light when you could just use the sun?
- DennisP 6y ago
  Microwaves. Ground station has to be several square kilometers, but it's cheap and birds can fly through the beam without harm. For economic reasons you pretty much have to use phased array transmitters, with a reference signal from the ground to make it coherent, so if the beam gets repointed it gets a lot more diffuse than that.
  - zdragnar 6y ago
    I've seen how this plays out in SimCity. No thank you!
DennisP 6y ago
I support nuclear but if you're beaming power from space, it might as well be from solar panels. In geostationary orbit you have power 24/7, with 5X more sunlight per day than panels on the ground. The only time your satellite goes into shadow is for a few minutes per day around the equinoxes, half an hour max. Capacity factor is still over 99%.
- 8note 6y ago
  With geostationary? Don't they track a location on the earth? Is the satellite not in the earth's shadow at night?
  - mikepurvis 6y ago
    Geostationary is super far out— you're effectively in constant sun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit Except, as the parent noted, very briefly during the equinoxes.
    - yellowapple 6y ago
      And even that seems "easy" to circumvent by having redundant satellites, such that during the equinoxes (equinoxen?) only a fraction of said satellites are shadowed out at once. Alternately, a massive battery or capacitor bank could give the receiver enough buffer to hold out through an equinox-induced shadowing.
- bserge 6y ago
  Basically Gundam 00 haha. I was young when it aired, but it left a long lasting impression of what the future of space exploration might be like. Space elevators and massive solar arrays around the planet.
  - snuxoll 6y ago
    It’s not the worst idea, but we kind of need to get the whole orbital elevator but done first before the massive planet-spanning solar array. Truth though: I think Gundam 00 showed a shockingly plausible future (sans mechas, most likely) for our planet if we do not get over our reliance on fossil fuels. Global conflict on a scale that makes WW2 look like child’s play is an inevitability if we cannot mitigate the environmental impact and eventual depletion of fossil fuels, and that includes support to help less developed nations move away from them.
Keyframe 6y ago
We already have that nuclear reactor beaming energy down for us to collect.
- DennisP 6y ago
  It's just too bad the planet keeps getting in the way.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    And sometimes the moon.
bserge 6y ago
Interesting idea, but my next thought was "how are you going to cool that thing?!" :D
- kelnos 6y ago
  Not sure in which direction you're joking, but heat dissipation can actually be a difficult problem in space, at least as close to the sun as Earth is, while outside Earth's atmosphere. For example: https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast21mar_1/ https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/a...
  - bserge 6y ago
    That's exactly what I meant. Running a nuclear fission reactor (along with the high power beams to Earth) in vacuum might prove... problematic.
panzagl 6y ago
Or it could blow away the Van Allen belts and fry everything else in orbit, then drop plutonium somewhere.

cpeterso 6y ago

But then you have nuclear-powered space lasers, which will scare people.

yellowapple 6y ago
Yeah, but if people don't like it, what are they gonna do? Complain? That'll just draw the attention of the nuclear-powered space lasers :)

ed25519FUUU 6y ago

How does one efficiency “beam down” gigawatts of energy? Or at all?

cthalupa 6y ago
Light. Focusing mirrors or lasers. But as others have pointed out, why would you bother with building space based nuclear plants and then converting that energy to light when you could just use the sun?
DennisP 6y ago
Microwaves. Ground station has to be several square kilometers, but it's cheap and birds can fly through the beam without harm. For economic reasons you pretty much have to use phased array transmitters, with a reference signal from the ground to make it coherent, so if the beam gets repointed it gets a lot more diffuse than that.
- zdragnar 6y ago
  I've seen how this plays out in SimCity. No thank you!

DennisP 6y ago

I support nuclear but if you're beaming power from space, it might as well be from solar panels. In geostationary orbit you have power 24/7, with 5X more sunlight per day than panels on the ground. The only time your satellite goes into shadow is for a few minutes per day around the equinoxes, half an hour max. Capacity factor is still over 99%.

8note 6y ago
With geostationary? Don't they track a location on the earth? Is the satellite not in the earth's shadow at night?
- mikepurvis 6y ago
  Geostationary is super far out— you're effectively in constant sun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary_orbit Except, as the parent noted, very briefly during the equinoxes.
  - yellowapple 6y ago
    And even that seems "easy" to circumvent by having redundant satellites, such that during the equinoxes (equinoxen?) only a fraction of said satellites are shadowed out at once. Alternately, a massive battery or capacitor bank could give the receiver enough buffer to hold out through an equinox-induced shadowing.
bserge 6y ago
Basically Gundam 00 haha. I was young when it aired, but it left a long lasting impression of what the future of space exploration might be like. Space elevators and massive solar arrays around the planet.
- snuxoll 6y ago
  It’s not the worst idea, but we kind of need to get the whole orbital elevator but done first before the massive planet-spanning solar array. Truth though: I think Gundam 00 showed a shockingly plausible future (sans mechas, most likely) for our planet if we do not get over our reliance on fossil fuels. Global conflict on a scale that makes WW2 look like child’s play is an inevitability if we cannot mitigate the environmental impact and eventual depletion of fossil fuels, and that includes support to help less developed nations move away from them.

Keyframe 6y ago

We already have that nuclear reactor beaming energy down for us to collect.

DennisP 6y ago
It's just too bad the planet keeps getting in the way.
- yellowapple 6y ago
  And sometimes the moon.

bserge 6y ago

Interesting idea, but my next thought was "how are you going to cool that thing?!" :D

kelnos 6y ago
Not sure in which direction you're joking, but heat dissipation can actually be a difficult problem in space, at least as close to the sun as Earth is, while outside Earth's atmosphere. For example: https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast21mar_1/ https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/a...
- bserge 6y ago
  That's exactly what I meant. Running a nuclear fission reactor (along with the high power beams to Earth) in vacuum might prove... problematic.

panzagl 6y ago

Or it could blow away the Van Allen belts and fry everything else in orbit, then drop plutonium somewhere.