Bashny.Net
The myth of the space solar power plant
Bashny.Net
I present to the public some reflections on space solar power plants (CSP).
Theory can be found in Википедии and more here .
Where will post CSE? Likely to GSO. On the other orbits necessary or receivers all over the planet to put, or a bunch of batteries with a carry.
We will not fantasize, and we shall understand the available opportunities
PH "Angara" from the cosmodrome "Plesetsk" will carry up to 4.3 tons of GSO. What can they stick? Very squares approximately 100 solar panels. With the constant direction of the sun and the efficiency of 20 percent can be squeezed out of 300 watts a square. Assume they will degrade at 5% per year (hopefully no surprise that solar panels in space spoil from radiation, micrometeorites etc.).
Let's consider: (100 * 300 * 24 * 365 * 20) / 2 = 2,628,000,000 Wh.
To realize the full extent of the problem, let these Megawatts lossless get to Earth. Power inspires, but what if we're not flying. In the presence of 300 tons of kerosene. Almost kerosene gasoline. Makes one more assumption and take the normal gasoline generator (200kW per 50 liters per hour).
200000 * 300000/50 = 1 200 000 000 Wh
What happens: merge gasoline with rockets and already getting half the power.
More polrakety holds liquid oxygen. Wanted to calculate cooling and liquefaction by the heat capacity, but then just got on the Internet price 8200 rubles per ton of liquid oxygen. Since the cost of almost one get electricity (kilowatt let it be 2 rubles):
300 * 8200 * 1000/2 = 1,230,000,000 Wh
Oops, the second half. Already efficiency is 0%. This we are still not considered a rocket.
But we invent a zakidyvatel payloads into orbit
That is somehow inform panels kinetic energy in the form of 10 km / s:
3000 * 10000 2 sup> / = 2 150 000 000 000 J = 41700000 Wh
It seems that there is a 5000% efficiency, but there are some problems:
- High enough to throw the object is unlikely to succeed, so part of the mass and energy should be spent on overcoming the atmosphere;
- All that is emitted from the Earth to the laws of ballistics and return to Earth, that is still part of the mass takes to climb the perigee.
Let ton went to the thermal protection. Calculate the change in orbit:
ΔV = root ((3, 986 ּ 10 14 sup> / 42000000) (1 + 2 * 6000000 / (6000000 + 42000000))) = 3441 m / s
Top engines give impetus to 4500. Take Tsiolkovsky rocket equation:
M end sub> = 2000 / exp (4500/3500) = 572 kg
And let's take electrorocket engines, the pulse is 10 times more and panels we have. I> Yes, but the available power panels, the thrust will milliNewtons, and the transition will take years. And we have before landing just a couple of hours.
The result: minus engine, tanks, over - well, if we get the same amount.
Let's raise the bar on the elevator
The whole idea is not bad. If you just lift the load to a height, we consider the change of potential energy:
3000 * 9.81 * 36000000/3600 = 294 300 000 Wh
As they report in Georgia? Electricity transmission options:
- According to the elevator. It is not difficult to imagine the loss and weight of the conductor length of 36,000 km. He would build an elevator.
- Lasers - minus the essential part of the mass in the conversion.
- For a number of panels to deliver the traditional way and then the other free pick on a string. Per megawatt of power must be 3 km 2 sup> panels. At the same time to lift the load will need two weeks. Ie the same megawatt we raise for the year.
Other complexity
Available terms kilometers panels and effective methods of solar energy in space, but rare authors tell how they are going to focus on the sun panel. GEO stationary only relative to the Earth. Accordingly, need mechanisms fuel.
More needs converters, curators, receivers on Earth. Are there many consumers at the equator? High-voltage lines through half of the ball. If it's not multiplied by 100% chance of a task, ask who it is generally afford?
Conclusions:
- Using existing technology to build solar power plants unprofitable space.
- Even if you raise all in the space elevator, at the time of completion of the question will arise as to dispose go down panel.
- You can adjust to the Earth asteroid and panels crap out of him. Something tells me that by the time we can, there will be no need to transmit energy to the Earth.
However, because of smoke without fire. And a seemingly peaceful intentions can hide very different.
For example, the construction of a space station on combat orders easier and much more effective:
- Orbit can and should choose lower;
- 100% hit in the receiver optional;
- A very short time by clicking on the Start button to hitting the target;
- The lack of contamination of the area.
These are the conclusions. Perhaps calculation errors. Traditionally invite readers to correct them.
Source: geektimes.ru/post/245560/
Theory can be found in Википедии and more here .
Where will post CSE? Likely to GSO. On the other orbits necessary or receivers all over the planet to put, or a bunch of batteries with a carry.
We will not fantasize, and we shall understand the available opportunities
PH "Angara" from the cosmodrome "Plesetsk" will carry up to 4.3 tons of GSO. What can they stick? Very squares approximately 100 solar panels. With the constant direction of the sun and the efficiency of 20 percent can be squeezed out of 300 watts a square. Assume they will degrade at 5% per year (hopefully no surprise that solar panels in space spoil from radiation, micrometeorites etc.).
Let's consider: (100 * 300 * 24 * 365 * 20) / 2 = 2,628,000,000 Wh.
To realize the full extent of the problem, let these Megawatts lossless get to Earth. Power inspires, but what if we're not flying. In the presence of 300 tons of kerosene. Almost kerosene gasoline. Makes one more assumption and take the normal gasoline generator (200kW per 50 liters per hour).
200000 * 300000/50 = 1 200 000 000 Wh
What happens: merge gasoline with rockets and already getting half the power.
More polrakety holds liquid oxygen. Wanted to calculate cooling and liquefaction by the heat capacity, but then just got on the Internet price 8200 rubles per ton of liquid oxygen. Since the cost of almost one get electricity (kilowatt let it be 2 rubles):
300 * 8200 * 1000/2 = 1,230,000,000 Wh
Oops, the second half. Already efficiency is 0%. This we are still not considered a rocket.
But we invent a zakidyvatel payloads into orbit
That is somehow inform panels kinetic energy in the form of 10 km / s:
3000 * 10000 2 sup> / = 2 150 000 000 000 J = 41700000 Wh
It seems that there is a 5000% efficiency, but there are some problems:
- High enough to throw the object is unlikely to succeed, so part of the mass and energy should be spent on overcoming the atmosphere;
- All that is emitted from the Earth to the laws of ballistics and return to Earth, that is still part of the mass takes to climb the perigee.
Let ton went to the thermal protection. Calculate the change in orbit:
ΔV = root ((3, 986 ּ 10 14 sup> / 42000000) (1 + 2 * 6000000 / (6000000 + 42000000))) = 3441 m / s
Top engines give impetus to 4500. Take Tsiolkovsky rocket equation:
M end sub> = 2000 / exp (4500/3500) = 572 kg
And let's take electrorocket engines, the pulse is 10 times more and panels we have. I> Yes, but the available power panels, the thrust will milliNewtons, and the transition will take years. And we have before landing just a couple of hours.
The result: minus engine, tanks, over - well, if we get the same amount.
Let's raise the bar on the elevator
The whole idea is not bad. If you just lift the load to a height, we consider the change of potential energy:
3000 * 9.81 * 36000000/3600 = 294 300 000 Wh
As they report in Georgia? Electricity transmission options:
- According to the elevator. It is not difficult to imagine the loss and weight of the conductor length of 36,000 km. He would build an elevator.
- Lasers - minus the essential part of the mass in the conversion.
- For a number of panels to deliver the traditional way and then the other free pick on a string. Per megawatt of power must be 3 km 2 sup> panels. At the same time to lift the load will need two weeks. Ie the same megawatt we raise for the year.
Other complexity
Available terms kilometers panels and effective methods of solar energy in space, but rare authors tell how they are going to focus on the sun panel. GEO stationary only relative to the Earth. Accordingly, need mechanisms fuel.
More needs converters, curators, receivers on Earth. Are there many consumers at the equator? High-voltage lines through half of the ball. If it's not multiplied by 100% chance of a task, ask who it is generally afford?
Conclusions:
- Using existing technology to build solar power plants unprofitable space.
- Even if you raise all in the space elevator, at the time of completion of the question will arise as to dispose go down panel.
- You can adjust to the Earth asteroid and panels crap out of him. Something tells me that by the time we can, there will be no need to transmit energy to the Earth.
However, because of smoke without fire. And a seemingly peaceful intentions can hide very different.
For example, the construction of a space station on combat orders easier and much more effective:
- Orbit can and should choose lower;
- 100% hit in the receiver optional;
- A very short time by clicking on the Start button to hitting the target;
- The lack of contamination of the area.
These are the conclusions. Perhaps calculation errors. Traditionally invite readers to correct them.
Source: geektimes.ru/post/245560/
Tags
See also
Life is within reach: the search in the solar system
The solar system is an anomaly in space
A solar sail of graphene: reality or fiction?
Will we have to say goodbye to the dream of space elevators?
10 unsolved mysteries of the Solar system
The space of the home, part 4: how will we live on Venus
5 myths about solar energy
Myths about NASA
It turns out that the Solar system is not the same as we used to think
