4 ms·
The problem putting them in space solves is the approx 5X more solar energy without needing batteries for day and night cycles, along with some smaller wins due
by geertj 5mo ago
The problem putting them in space solves is the approx 5X more solar energy without needing batteries for day and night cycles, along with some smaller wins due to less structural support needed due to microgravity.
- xnx 5mo ago> The problem putting them in space solves is There are a lot of problems that can be solved by creating 20 other, much bigger, problems.
- geertj 5mo agoYou are creating 20 other engineering problems but not 20 other physics problems. You cannot put those in the same bucket. It remains to be seen how efficiently those engineering problems can be solved, but none of the commentators here have any real insight about that (myself included). My money is on the ingenuity of the engineers that are working these problems.
- Geof25 5mo agoAnd then it creates problem with radiation (energy dense particles travelling close to the speed of light ripping holes into 2nm chips) and heat (it turns out that coffee stays hot in a thermos for very long time)
- IshKebab 5mo ago100kW of solar and a massive battery is going to be easily cheaper than a 20kW satellite. Especially in somewhere like Texas.
- panick21_ 5mo agoStructural support. A few sheets of steel is what we are trying to safe money on? So the money we are saving is commodity solar, commodity steel and community battery (or any other form of power). And instead of those things we add, insane engineering complexity, insane complex heating, insanely complex maintenance or standing backup, insanely expensive transportation and insanely complex operations and insanely complex communications?
- Zardoz84 5mo agoGood luck with heat management.