2 hours ago, birdguy said:

Of course they want guaranteed profits.  They want a guaranteed return on their investments.  Aren't they entitled to that?

If you want a guaranteed return on an investment, put your money in Treasury bonds. Right now it's returning 0.06% for 6 months.

If you want more than that, you need to take on some risk. No one is "entitled" to a guaranteed profit.

On 11/21/2021 at 8:52 AM, Penzoil3 said:

It can be done. The Navy has had nuclear powered subs since the 1950s. They have never had an accident.

I don't think the families of the crew of the USS Thresher would agree...

6 hours ago, birdguy said:

Of course they want guaranteed profits.  They want a guaranteed return on their investments.  Aren't they entitled to that?  Just like if I go to work for somebody I want a guaranteed living wage otherwise I won't work for them.  Why should I?

If subsidies are needed to provide energy at an affordable cost to the consumer then that's fair.  The multinationals aren't charitable organizations.  But the profits they expect for shouldn't be exorbitant.

Just like the government providing tax breaks and assistance in buy solar panels for your home.

Noel

 

They would not do it in the UK windfarms, if the wind doesn't blow they get paid if the wind is too strong they switch them off in case they get damaged still get paid, one of the largest windfarms in the world offshore at Essex had a problem last year that caused power cuts in the southeast, this is also why farming land is being lost for solar panel farms, now more food is imported some thousands of miles and increasing the carbon footprint of food.

14 hours ago, dmwalker said:

Sounds pretty exciting but how many arrays would be required and, if they are all beaming down microwave radiation, would each beam require its own little no-fly zone?

 

Well it depends. Depends if it multiple arrays or a few massive ones.

Doesn't have to be microwaves, lasers can do the trick too. But in either case the intensity is low, so you wont get carbonised if you were to walk underneath. Does mean that fairly large areas for collection are required though with low intensity microwaves or lasers. 

I would imagine that aircraft would fly around, but to be honest with low intensity and thus wide collection area, flying through might not be an issue.

Being able to park your solar array in space, away from a diffusing atmosphere, thus boosting collection rates and period is a huge advantage. The disadvantage comers when you beam the energy down to Earth, in that half of it is lost due to conversion and absorption and reflection in the atmosphere.

Its being very actively pursued as we speak. JAXA the Japanese space agency actually have a road map and they have established it as a national goal. China, UK, Russia, US... are all studying the concept very seriously. 

So if Elon, Blue Origin and the other players in the private space industry can substantially reduce cost to orbit (SpaceX already have to a degree) it may well be a concept that's closer than many think. 

☀️🌞🚀

Nuclear fusion reactors on Earth are an awesome goal to aim for, but lets not forget that we have a mega awesome fusion reactor available already, its called the sun. 

In a single hour the the amount of power that strikes the Earth from the Sun is more than the entire world consumes in a year!

 

Edited November 23, 20214 yr by martin-w

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

In a single hour the the amount of power that strikes the Earth from the Sun is more than the entire world consumes in a year!

Outside of massive solar arrays how else would you harness it?

Noel

7 hours ago, G-RFRY said:

this is also why farming land is being lost for solar panel farms, now more food is imported some thousands of miles and increasing the carbon footprint of food.

It seems everything is a tradeoff.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul.  The solar array outside of our small city has cut out grazing land for cattle and sheep.  But then a lot of environmentalists want to turn us all into vegetarians anyway.  But the solar panels also occupy land that could be used for farming.

Everything is a tradeoff.

I wonder if all of this is what God had in mind when he placed man on such an otherwise beautiful planet?

Ah Wilderness!  Ever since I was a young teenager and my father introduced me to it I escaped into the wilderness every chance I got.  Even at 82 I was still backpacking into the Sacramento Mountains.  But I am just physically unable to do it anymore.  Of course my small campfire burning twigs and small branches to cook over and poke sticks into during the quiet evenings contributed to the CO2 problem too.

Noel

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

Depends if it multiple arrays or a few massive ones.

One could start by converting existing nuclear power plants, as each one is decommissioned, into receiving stations and use the existing distribution networks. That would require a few hundred arrays.

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

I would imagine that aircraft would fly around, but to be honest with low intensity and thus wide collection area, flying through might not be an issue.

I imagine some aircraft electronics might be vulnerable to microwave radiation. Is there any advantage between microwave and laser transmission?

14 hours ago, dave2013 said:

We definitely must find alternatives to fossil fuels.

We have to preserve the remaining reserves of fossil fuels for purposes other than as fuels. Think of all the chemicals derived from petroleum and how essential they are for our quality of life. One important example is medicines; most, if not all, are made using petrochemicals as starting points. I imagine if we run out of petroleum, these chemicals could be derived from coal.

We need to find an alternative to the Sun and Earth they are not going to last we do know that.

Global warming and Global cooling have been happening for millions of years, we know in the UK romans interduce grapes to Norfolk more than 2000 years ago when the area was much warmer.

Edited November 23, 20214 yr by G-RFRY

13 hours ago, w6kd said:

I don't think the families of the crew of the USS Thresher would agree...

Not a nuclear accident...from Wikipedia.

Cause

Deep-sea photography, recovered artifacts, and an evaluation of Thresher's design and operational history permitted a court of inquiry to conclude that the submarine had probably suffered the failure of a salt-water piping system joint that relied heavily on silver brazing instead of welding. Earlier tests using ultrasound equipment found potential problems with about 14% of the tested brazed joints,^[23][24] most of which were determined not to pose a risk significant enough to require repair. But on 30 November 1960, nearly three years prior to the accident, the Barbel suffered such a silver-braze joint failure near test depth while on an exercise, flooding the engine room with an estimated 18 tons of water in the 3 minutes it took to surface under power and with blown tanks.^[25] This incident was followed months later by more silver-braze failures in the Abraham Lincoln during trials.^[25] High-pressure water spraying from a broken pipe joint may have shorted out one of the many electrical panels, causing a shutdown ("scram") of the reactor, which in turn caused loss of propulsion.

The inability to blow the ballast tanks was later attributed to excessive moisture in the submarine's high-pressure air flasks, moisture that froze and plugged the flasks' flowpaths while passing through the valves. This was later simulated in dockside tests on Thresher's sister sub, Tinosa. During a test to simulate blowing ballast at or near test depth, ice formed on strainers installed in valves; the flow of air lasted only a few seconds.^[26] Air dryers were later retrofitted to the high-pressure air compressors, beginning with Tinosa, to permit the emergency blow system to operate properly.^{[citation needed]} Submarines typically rely on speed and deck angle (angle of attack) rather than deballasting to surface; they are propelled at an angle toward the surface. Ballast tanks were almost never blown at depth, as doing so could cause the submarine to rocket to the surface out of control. Normal procedure was to drive the submarine to periscope depth, raise the periscope to verify that the area was clear, and then blow the tanks and surface the submarine.^[24]

1 hour ago, G-RFRY said:

UK romans interduce grapes to Norfolk more than 2000 years ago when the area was much warmer

And now, with a shaky start:

https://lizthachmw.com/winetravelstories/wineries-in-scotland-yes-there-are-five-or-so/ 

With global warming they can only get better.

2 hours ago, birdguy said:

It seems everything is a tradeoff.  Robbing Peter to pay Paul.  The solar array outside of our small city has cut out grazing land for cattle and sheep.  But then a lot of environmentalists want to turn us all into vegetarians anyway.  But the solar panels also occupy land that could be used for farming.

Everything is a tradeoff.

I wonder if all of this is what God had in mind when he placed man on such an otherwise beautiful planet?

Yep, everything is a trade off. Which is why there are ideas such as mounting solar panels over parking lots and on top of buildings like malls and factories and, in climates where it makes sense to, on top of homes as well. There is also research going into solar windows that could be used on skyscrapers to generate electricity.

https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/what-are-solar-windows

Something to be more concerned about is how much paradise we are paving over putting up parking lots for yet another mall.

2 hours ago, G-RFRY said:

Global warming and Global cooling have been happening for millions of years, we know in the UK romans interduce grapes to Norfolk more than 2000 years ago when the area was much warmer.

 

That's nothing to do with man-made climate change.

We know the causal factors responsible for previous warming and none of them are present now. Our emmisions are present.

The rapidity of warming is also key.

Oh-oh Martin.  I would have liked to comment on that subject but that risks getting the thread shut down.  I agree with you though.

Noel

22 hours ago, w6kd said:

I don't think the families of the crew of the USS Thresher would agree...

The Navy has had accidents but I don't think you would include Thresher nor Scorpion as nuclear accidents.

 

scott s.

.