Power From Above, Free and Carbon Free?

Some years ago (increasingly, everything is "some years ago"), I helped install a microwave relay dish on top the building where I worked. Since it was on a tile roof with about a 45 degree slope, we were all tied off and not free to move. The supervisor who was out there adjusting the thing for maybe two hours had a nice sunburn when he came back down. And this was just a low level TV signal.

And, when I was in school, we had one of these old (probably illegal) microwave therapy machines they used to use in the (maybe) 40s. The darn thing would burn you pretty badly if you weren't careful.

So, would I take a chance on high power? No days!

Could also be a way for the government or hackers to selectively lobotomize us. Or it might cause us to emit a rainbow out the side of our heads... just kidding. In a previous thread my question was how many such devices would it take to effect the earth's trajectory about the sun.

Why would it affect the orbit of any object in our solar system?

Orbit is dependent on mass and speed and distance, heat levels don't come into it in normal physics, or do they?

In the spirit of your signature, you cannot throw a hot spark plug any further than a cold one, sooner the other way around I thought.

You are right. I was thinking of microwave propulsion which is still mostly theory.

Feasible as a source of energy for civilian use? Maybe. But let me ask you, say you are the government in control of a megawatt space maser and you just happen to want to smoke someone...come on now, really.

"Every tool is a weapon, if you hold it right." Ani Difranco

That is right and we are worried about that too. Same counts for the solar collector towers. If aimed slightly differently you can fry almost anything.

This argument will not stop them building the thing though so it needs to be managed somehow.

Agreed. Trying to stop such things only causes them to be done in secret. Not knowing is generally worse, for the not knowie.

Raytheon started pushing this in '71 when military radar orders went down and they needed a market for their klystrons. It is a way to centralize the production of an inherently decentralized energy source.

Another problem, aside from the beam, is gathering the energy. These will be large platforms generating power at low voltage. Adding more area to the platform has a negative economy of scale as the power generated by the more distant areas gets increasingly consumed by the conductors. The cure for that is superconductors, requiring a compressor plant. Nobody ever explained how the compressors would be maintained.

Hi Blitz,

I would not think that the superconductors in space would require refrigeration as it is darned cold up there already! If you wanted to use traditional superconductors, like metals then yes, but presumably some of the more recent liquid nitrogen and above temperature superconductors could be used (shielded from the sun, of course!)

I wait for correction from those in the know.......

It may be cold already but not cold enough to approximate superconductor levels. This why they have liquid nitrogen on some of the satellites up there to cool them further. Once this has run out it is time for either a top up or scrap the damn thing.

Hi Case 491

I knew somebody would be able to expand my knowledge, thanks!

Why not take a close look at whats going on here, it s really appropriate to this topic, if you really understand the topic:

http://www.asdevents.com/event.asp?ID=119

milo

Shame they only advertise the conference/workshop and would like your fee of over £1000 before they tell you more

The prospect of huge amounts of energy being beamed down is daunting. We have to realize, though, we need huge amounts of energy. Try hand cranking a generator to light one 60W bulb. Conservation will improve with time, but is there any conservation measure that will reduce overall usage, or just slow the rate of growth? We need lots of energy and now the question is where is it coming from?

Solar collectors in orbit are an attractive possibility. The collectors would be relatively inexpensive. Getting them into orbit would be relatively expensive. Transmitting the power to earth would involve some challenges. Certainly they would require some exclusion zones, possibly invisible and silent. There are already exclusion zones related to energy production; Chernobyl - marked by some signs that may not last thousands of years.

There are a lot of unknowns, but considering the problems we already have with energy production, I think orbital solar collectors may solve more problems than they create.

A good post, case 491. Our exposure to radiation is already beyond the levels accepted a decade ago with cell phones and medical imaging as the dominant sources.

Additional sources of radiation are being brought to the consumer every day with electromagnetically linked devices and RF networked interfaces. There is little legislation to limit the effective radiated power and no (or very limited) government monitoring of compliance to ERP regulations of such devices.

Currently the rate of glial carcinomas (a certain type of brain and meninges cell cancer) has escalated beyond statistical predictions. The jury is still out regarding causative factors but the cell phone industry has already plans for mounting a campaign stressing safety and compliance with federal regulations.

At best, Federal regulations regarding "safe exposure" to RF are a SWAG with limited animal and no human testing beyond some rudimantary exposure level evaluations.

The thought of increased microwave radiation blanketing heavily populated areas from the aforementioned sources and now the threat of additional radiation from space is problematic with long term health issues at the forefront.

Yes I am worried about risks that have not been properly tested and checked yet so what do you do, I use the mobile and I let my 14 year old daughter also use it.

There are also other sources not quantified yet and what can you do about them, nothing as you don't know where they come from.

It seems we need proper medical trials about these things but with so much opposition from lobbyists no government is going to stick out their neck. Dollar for dollar we are worthless to them, just cannon fodder and consumers.

I rather like the response below about the unused resources already available but not utilised yet. Many good points.

The "blanketing" remark is somewhat twisted as it would not be indiscriminate blasting of microwave radiation but very focused narrow beam. Expensive stuff microwave radiation so you don't want to waste much if any. The effect of "scattering" may be a bigger concern.

With regards to escalating levels of glial cancers you must not forget that all cancers are on the rise and biggest alleged causes are western lifestyle and better detection rates.

Ah, that is different and you are absolutely right. We have had some protests here in the UK about these over-land power cables and their RF and/or EMF. It was not very much discussed but it put it temporarily on the map. As far as I know it has died a death again and nobody seems to be bothered but I cannot help thinking that it must have an effect.

It wish it would be feasible to conduct a proper medical survey about this, taking into account peoples way of life and where they have lived all or most of their lives. That would shine some light on certain things no doubt.

It must have been alarming to drive around and see the evidence. Ignorance is no longer an option after that and neither is bliss.

It seems that as soon as we put an alternative on the table such as sustainable energy sources, some group or another is objecting. I wonder if they would object against this "risk" from microwave collection without knowing for sure if it is harmful or not. Not in my back yard seems to be their argument.

"Electromagnetic pollution may be the most significant form of pollution human activity has produced since 1900, all the more dangerous because it is invisible and insensible." Andrew Weil, MD

If anything, we need less radiation as new studies confirm such as this one published in December:

Israeli study says regular mobile use increases tumour risk

Regular use of mobile telephones increases the risk of developing tumours, a new scientific study by Israeli researchers and published in the American Journal of Epidemiology revealed in December.
An extract of the report seen by Israel's Yedoit Aharonot newspaper put the risk of developing a parotid gland tumour nearly 50 percent higher for frequent mobile phone users -- more than 22 hours a month.

The risk was still higher if users clamped the phone to the same ear, did not use hands-free devices or were in rural areas.

"Analysis restricted to regular users or to conditions that may yield higher levels of exposure (eg heavy use in rural areas) showed consistently elevated risks," said an abstract of the report in the US journal made available to AFP.

The study included 402 benign and 58 malignant incident cases of parotid gland tumour diagnosed in Israel at age 18 years or more, in 2001-2003.

The research was led by Dr Siegal Sadetzki, a cancer and radiation expert at the Chaim Sheba Medical Centre in Israel and as part of a World Health Organisation project.

Very good snippet of information and quite alarming as well.

The only problem with research like that is that it is not strictly according the testable and repeatable lines we scientists like to comply with in "real" science. What I mean is that there are too many uncontrollable dependent factors which are all changeable parameters and in turn these cause your findings to be merely an indication, linked to geography and/or lifestyle, rather than concrete proof for your hypothesis.

Having said that I just made myself sick, realising I sounded exactly like those dimwitted lobbyists that sabotage progress with the same arguments. We need to start somewhere to get anywhere.

Good points. Of course starting in the wrong place is not a good thing either and can lead to wasting resources and not attending to the actual issues, which of course is one of the reasons we prefer good science.

I almost commented on it myself. I mean how hard is it to conjecture that possibly those who spend more time on their cell phones also lead a more stressful life.

I know the less I talk on the phone the less is going on and the more calm I am!

Hello???

Isn't anyone paying attention?

We don't need any more power to be let loose on our atmosphere, we are already experiencing Global Warming.

With so many areas of land not very well suitable for habitation or agriculture, there is plenty of space to build solar and wind based solutions. With new techniques like the company Nanosolar is ramping up, the cost will dip towards $ 1.00/watt.

If you haven't seen the various wind farms with three (3) 95 foot long blades, take a drive west from Sonora, Texas on Interstate 10 or other such areas of West Texas and the Texas Panhandle.

Some States and Cities are offering cash incentives for individuals and businesses who invest in more efficient technologies.

The main problem is the lobby money flowing into Congress, not a lack of energy to tap.

If I remember correctly, approximately 1,000 watts fall on every sq. yard on sunny days. Harvesting it and finding a storage solution makes much more sense than the testosterone driven super-techno proposals like beaming energy from outer space!

I like what the previous poster eluded too regarding GW. I have always argued that upper atmosphere flight as well as continuously punching holes in the atmosphere as we burn out into space can offer no good for the ozone layer. But now - a blanket of microwave energy. that could be interesting.

In the states more and more autos have electronic tracking either through the manufacturer or secondary programs like electronic 'toll tags' for the transit system. Pair this with cellular technology and the majority of U.S. citizens are easily trackable. I am not sure that the technology poses no threat of a big brother scenario that would be in line with the needs of our new global government.

cr3