Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Military Power Space

Is the US Space Force Researching Space-Based Solar Power? (cleantechnica.com) 38

Posted by EditorDavid from the eye-on-the-sky dept.
The "technology building blocks" for space solar are already available, reports Clean Technica. "It's just a matter of scaling, systems integration, and adjustments for space-hardiness."

And several groups are looking at it — including the U.S. Space Force To help push costs down, the California Institute of Technology has proposed a sandwich-type solar module that integrates solar harvesting along with conversion to a radio frequency into one compact package, accompanied by a built-in antenna. Last month researchers at the school wrapped up a months-long, in-space test of different types of solar cells. Another approach is illustrated by the Michigan startup Virtus Solis, an industry partner of the University of Bristol. Last June the company and the school received £3.3 million in funding from the UK Net Zero Innovation program, for developing an open-source model for testing the performance of large, centralized antennas in space. "The concept depends upon the use of gigascale antenna arrays capable of delivering over 2GW of power from space onto similar gigascale antenna arrays either at sea or on the ground," the school explained.

As for how such a thing would be launched into space, that's where the U.S. Space Force comes in. Last August, the Space Force awarded a small business contract to the U.S. startup Orbital Composites. The company is tasked with the mission of developing its patented "quantum antenna" and in-space fabrication tools for secure communications in space applications, including space-to-space as well as space-to-Earth and vice versa. The basic idea is to let 3D printing doing much of the work in space. According to Orbital, in-space fabrication would save more than 100 times the cost of applying conventional fabrication methods to large-scale orbiting antennas. "By harnessing the potential of In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM), the company eyes the prospect of creating significantly larger space antennas," Orbital Composites explains. "By fabricating antennas in space, larger and more complex designs are possible that eliminate the constraints of launch and rocket fairings...."

If you're guessing that a hookup between Virtus and Orbital is in the works, that's a good guess. On February 1, at the SpaceCOM conference in Orlando, Florida, Virtus Solis let slip that it is working with Orbital Composites on a space solar pilot project. If all goes according to plan, the project will be up and running in 2027, deploying Virtus's robot-enabled fabrication system with Orbital's 3D printing. As of this writing the two companies have not posted details, but Space News picked up the thread. "The 2027 mission is designed to showcase critical power-generation technologies including in-space assembly of solar panels and transmission of more than one kilowatt to Earth," Space News explained. "The news release calls the 2027 mission "a precursor to large-scale commercial megawatt-class solar installations in space by 2030...."

To be clear, Orbital's press release about its new Space Force quantum antenna contract does not mention anything in particular about space solar. However, the pieces of the puzzle fit. Along with the Virtus and Grumman connections, in October of 2022 Orbital won a small business contract through SpaceWERX, the Space Force's innovative technologies funding arm, to explore the capabilities of ISAM systems.
"SpaceWERX comes under the umbrella of the U.S. Air Force's AFWERX innovation branch, which has developed a program called SSPIDR, short for Space Solar Power Incremental Demonstrations and Research Project," the article points out. (While Virtus believes most space-based solar power systems could deliver megawatt hours of electricity at prices comparable to today's market.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is the US Space Force Researching Space-Based Solar Power? More

Is the US Space Force Researching Space-Based Solar Power?

Comments Filter:

  • Yes they are (Score:5, Interesting)

    by burtosis ( 1124179 ) on Monday February 05, 2024 @07:48AM (#64215028)
    The reason they are researching space based power isn’t because beaming power back from space at far below 1% efficiency after spending tens of millions on just the launch is cost effective or even effective at all, it’s because an incredibly powerful microwave transmitter with a phased array antenna can lock on and overwhelm or even fry the electronics of other satellites at long range. It’s a far more useful and effective space weapon than it will ever be for power and that’s a great cover story for its use.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by necro81 ( 917438 )

      The reason they are researching space based power isn’t because beaming power back from space at far below 1% efficiency after spending tens of millions on just the launch is cost effective or even effective at all, it’s because an incredibly powerful microwave transmitter with a phased array antenna can lock on and overwhelm or even fry the electronics of other satellites at long range. It’s a far more useful and effective space weapon than it will ever be for power and that’s a gre

      • Just use a solar panel. Microwave receive antennas from a geostationary orbit or even low earth requires a phased array of something like half a square kilometer, not just some PCB antenna you can hide inside the tank or UAV. The coupling won’t even work properly in rain or fog or even overcast conditions.
      • For the pole research stations use an RTG.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by HiThere ( 15173 )

        I don't think this is for use on Earth. But power for space missions is always one of the critical features, and we're low on the proper Plutonium isotopes.

        Whether, and where, this will be practical is another matter.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by whitroth ( 9367 )

      Less than 1% efficiency? Really? Links, please, to the evidence of this.

      • While the creation and reception of a microwave link can reach 40-50% efficiency, sending the signal 22,000 miles means a transmission loss of far greater than 99%, even with a square kilometer receive station. Just look for yourself [pasternack.com]. Gain of an incredibly highly directed half kilometer array is something on the order of 50db, same with receive. You are talking one part in a billion best case, it’s just not possible to send higher frequencies as they get attenuated too much by any little defect in

    • Recently re-watched Real Genius [wikipedia.org] did ya? :-)

  • No, they are not. (Score:3)

    by MacMann ( 7518492 ) on Monday February 05, 2024 @08:16AM (#64215082)

    The US Space Force is not researching space based solar power. The math has been gone over many times before and we are a long way from having the technology to make it work, certainly not to make it cheaper than some alternative. This would be double for the military, people that aren't afraid of using a nuclear power plant, and would not be held to the same regulations that drive up costs on civil nuclear power.

    I can think up a lot of things they could be working on while using space based solar power as cover. It could be directed energy weapons. Maybe not something that can make things "go boom" but could melt the propellers on UAVs, disrupt radar/sensors/communications/etc., blow out tires, or cause other damage that isn't a strict "kill" but leave them unable to put up much of a fight. Think of this like a 25 mike-mike on a Bradley FV up against a battle tank. The Bradley isn't likely to penetrate the armor but it could bust up the view ports and knock off a track. That tank is now blind and hobbled, this leaves the tank unable to give chase to a fleeing Bradley and/or leave it immobile to buy time for a kill once reinforcements arrive.

    Maybe the USSF is working on power systems for satellites, space stations, and or craft to deep space. A kind of demonstration they can build a bigger solar array than anything before.

    Maybe this is some kind of beam-powered propulsion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    With a big antenna in space pointed at Earth this could be for receiving than transmitting. This could be for picking up weaker signals on the ground. Maybe it does transmit but with a narrower beam than attempted before. Maybe for communications to the moon, Mars, or beyond.

    All kinds of things could be going on. What is not going on is beaming solar power down to Earth, I'm quite certain about that.

    • The US military spends a massive chunk of its budget transporting kerosene from one place to another. Often that kerosene is burned to produce electricity.

      Space based solar power is cheaper than flying kerosene to a generator. So yes, it could be useful to the US military.

      • >> Space based solar power is cheaper than flying kerosene to a generator.
        HAHAHA. Nope.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by necro81 ( 917438 )

        Space based solar power is cheaper than flying kerosene to a generator.

        I don't disagree that it could be cheaper. Or that it could result in fewer casualities. But until it's actually been demonstrated and deployed, I would steer clear from such definitive assertions.

        Or, put differently, [citation needed].

      • The US Military does not give one flying fuck about being "cheaper" or "green". See exemptions for proof.

        Any space-based solar power savings will be shot out of a machine gun barrel in some "just" war, because rare earth minerals.

        Stop deluding yourself and others with the government sales pitch.

      • "Space based solar power is cheaper than flying kerosene to a generator. So yes, it could be useful to the US military."

        Especially since you don't even need soldiers on the ground, you can just cook the enemy.

    • Then again, if such a system was already cost-justified as a weapon, then using it opportunistically to download power whenever it's not needed for frying things would be almost a freebie.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by XXongo ( 3986865 )
        Unfortunately (or possibly fortunately) the characteristics of a weapon beam are very different from a power beam. It would be like trying to send power with a stream of rifle bullets; yes, they carry energy, but they aren't really optimized for that.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by XXongo ( 3986865 )

      The US Space Force is not researching space based solar power.

      In fact, though, they are.

      Do keep in mind, however, that researching space-based solar power is not the same as implementing space based solar power

  • Have two Bond movies been insufficient to show the obvious danger of such a deployment?

  • Actually, power beamed from space would be incredibly useful to the U.S. military. They have spent truly enormous sums of money flying in fuel to power generators for field camps. And, that's when they have mostly uncontested airspace. IIRC, in Afghanistan they needed a lot of power for A/C to keep the troops cool enough to be combat effective. That said, you need literally acres of space for the power receiving antennas and I don't know how many theaters that would be feasible in.

  • Space based solar power collection, converted to microwaves and beamed to a terrestrial rectenna farm is possible but difficult and currently with questionable economics. ...saying you will save money by 3D printing the solar array in orbit just sets off the bullshit alarms. The base mass you need to lift is the same, plus the manufacturing hardware, plus the technology doesn't exist yet.

    • Think about all the whining and complaining about shredded birds and windfarms. Think about the complaints over fried birds at heliostat sites. Can you guess the reaction to microwaves frying things on the ground? IMHO, this idea is infeasible. Local pebble bed reactors or thorium reactors are a better solution. Both have issues, but I believe both are more easily solved and cheaper to implement.

      • The energy density over the receiving rectenna farm wouldn't be enough to fry anything.

        Nobody designing and promoting this system as an energy source has forgotten to do the math to ensure they aren't creating death rays from space. I'm a little surprised at how many people think the people smart and educated enough to come up with the concept would somehow overlook that.

        "Hey, let's beam massive amounts of energy down from space and not look at the beam properties or for potential deleterious effects" is n

  • The idea of beaming space-based solar back to earth has popped up in SciFi more than once. It works in novels. They gave it to the air force to mess with because the idea _isn't_ feasible. They don't want to tie up the high-energy labs that _do_ have a shot at actually producing cheaper power.

    • >> the idea of beaming space-based solar back to earth has popped up in SciFi more than once.
      Nope. It works well in fact.
      My personnal space power reception array gets a few picowatts of power, and feeds that power signal right into the LNA of my LCD-based gizmo which displays a picture as a result.
      Space power works !!!

  • Because why spend money on solving problems on Earth like homelessness when you can build pipedreams in the sky?

Slashdot Top Deals

Dennis Ritchie is twice as bright as Steve Jobs, and only half wrong. -- Jim Gettys

Close