[AR] Re: Way off topic (was Nitrating C60)
- From: Bill Claybaugh <wclaybaugh2@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 07:29:01 -0600
Solar rooftop installations already meet coal--with a subsidy--and are
projected to be lower cost on an absolute basis w/i five years.
I want to spend a bajillion dollars on this BS why?
Bill
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 14, 2015, at 2:56 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> As some of you know, I have been working off and on for forty years on
> getting the cost to GEO down to where power satellites can undercut
> coal.
>
> Currently working on a thermal power satellite design that looks to
> come in at 32,500 tons and puts out 5 GWe at the rectenna bus bars.
>
> To undercut coal, the total cost can't exceed $2.4 B/GW. For 6.5
> kg/kW, the cost to get the parts to GEO can't exceed $200/kg. Between
> Skylon at more than 10,000 flights per year and an old proposal by
> William Brown, it looks like that can be done.
>
> It's here http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=7046244
> for those who can get through the pay wall. If not, there is a copy
> here:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5iotdmmTJQsc2htUG5yVTczT2xBME1GOGhzWlBaWkg5R29v/view?usp=sharing
>
> Off topic, but some of you may find it amusing.
>
> Keith
>
Other related posts: