> [ ... ] The second reveals that beaming power to the lunar base region with microwaves from Earth is by far the cheapest, most flexible option – for operation

> [ ... ] The second reveals that beaming power to the lunar base region with microwaves from Earth is by far the cheapest, most flexible option – for operations on the Earth facing side of the Moon. Sorry, this fails several tests of common sense. Compare the alternatives: * A suitably large solar array near the Moon's north or south pole, with DC transmission lines to the point of use, able to provide continuous power during all lunar phases. * A solar array on Earth, then a microwave converter, then a phased-array beam of microwaves to the moon, then an equal-sized phased-array microwave receiver on the moon, then a converter from microwaves to DC, finally a lunar transmission line of some length to (a) avoid the area immediately beneath the microwave high-flux area and (b) convey the power to the point of use. The second option is a non-starter on multiple grounds, starting with the antenna sizes that would be required -- on both ends -- to avoid spilling the majority of the microwave energy outside the beam path. Then there's the issue of multiple conversion losses: Earth solar collector -> DC to microwave loss -> losses while being beamed to the moon -> microwave to DC loss -> to point of use. Let me re-emphasize this one line: "... beaming power to the lunar base region with microwaves from Earth is by far the cheapest, most flexible option ..." Well, no. Not really. Not remotely. Even geostationary microwave power stations have multiple-conversion and beam-width power loss issues, and that's a small fraction of the Earth - Moon distance.