A radical alternative to nuclear reactors
March 15, 2011 by Amara D. Angelica
With deterioration of the nuclear reactor situation in Japan and radiation heading for Tokyo — in one extreme Pentagon scenario, catastrophic meltdowns and megadeaths in Japan, according to a source — many scientists are ramping up the search for alternates to earthquake-vulnerable nuclear power.
“The Japanese Government has dissembled regarding the gravity of the failure of their power plants and the potential for meltdown of their containment vessels, leading to a catastrophic release of radioactivity were this to happen,” said L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., and Director, Physicians for Social Responsibility – Los Angeles.
“This tragic event proves that complex systems behave unpredictably when subjected to a natural disaster outside the design parameters of the engineers who build them. Thus, this probably marks the end of the nuclear power industry in the US — and likely in other countries in the world — for the next century. These reactors are simply too dangerous to make their risk of failure palatable.”
The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has in fact already been developing one possible solution: space solar power (SSP) — beaming energy to Earth from a satellite in orbit. With its Space Solar Power Systems project, JAXA researchers “have started preparation for the world’s first demonstration of 1kW-class wireless power transmission technology, and are aiming for practical use in the 2030s,” says JAXA spokesman Yasuyuki Fukumuro.
A space solar power concept. Credit: (c) 2007, Mafic Studios Inc.
India is also planning a partnership with the U.S to develop a space solar power solution for that country.
A Manhattan project for space solar power?
Mankins
John Mankins, former manager of Advanced Concepts Studies at NASA for ten years, where he was the lead for critical studies of space solar power, just returned from Japan, where he has been collaborating with JAXA. He told me the current situation in Japan could provide further support for Japan’s SSP project.
“I personally believe that an SSP program leading to an initial pilot plant is very realistic, and would cost no more than a ‘James Webb Space Telescope,’ and much less than an ‘International Space Station.’ An International Academy of Astronautics study on SSP will (I hope) be released in 6 weeks or so; it will provide a useful context for the SSP business case.”
“I believe that we need a focused SSP project,” says Mankins. “However, space solar power will not require the handful of technical breakthroughs that were needed to accomplish the Manhattan District project — most of the basic technologies needed are already in the laboratory. Such a project should be a government-industry partnership, to assure rapid commercialization of advances that are achieved.
“Such an effort would initially cost less than $1 billion. However, to ultimately achieve a significant SSP pilot plant (e.g., delivering 5-10 megawatts or more) will most likely require $5B to $10B, and some 10-15 years to accomplish (depending on the details and technical progress).
More info on space solar power here. (Full disclosure: I’m on the board of directors of the National Space Society. – AA)
1975 NASA JPL Goldstone Demo of Wireless Power Transmission
Comments (8)
by buzzards
Costs are coming down for SSP significantly. If you look at the launch costs for Falcon Heavy launch costs are falling dramatically If you look at the various techniques planned for SSP they all have high infrastructure costs. What is really needed is to utilize thin film techniques with printer technology in space. One might launch a cargo of liquid methane, convert into a gas and using gas deposition create graphene solar cells or a graphene subtrate to cover with a thin film solar cell of another substance in long, continuous sheets. Once the infrastructure is in place, flying refills will bring the costs down significantly. To test this, an xprize could be offered for the first team to create a minature printer using scalable componentry that produces long thin film solar cells at sufficient power ratios. Flying preassembled cells and deploying in space is too labor intensive and heavy.
by LibertyPrime
The public misperception fear mongering that nuclear power is inherently unsafe is naive and false. The Fukushima reactors withstood the quakes well; it was the tsunami that damaged the diesel powered generators that cool the reactor. Despite ignoring the mass deaths from the actual disaster, nations that pursue nuclear power will benefit from modern safety designs and self-contained nuclear batteries. The tech tree for SSP must mature before it can become cost effective in a free market, such as reduced launch cost technologies and efficient solar collection and transmission. For SSP to become a reality, it must be profitable, because relying on government funding anytime soon is delusional.
by maxresonance
Re forecasts: for a future fantasy novel written some 30+ years ago that envisioned active SSP use as well as extreme weather conditions (new glacial period) try “Zero Weather,” available used from $2.70 and up on Amazon. Okay, so it’s a weird hippie novel, but that could be a plus for some…
http://www.amazon.com/Zero-Weather-Ramon-Sender-Morningstar/dp/0937770000/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1300474278&sr=1-1
by smurillo100
This is so exciting, I had never even heard about SSP. This reminded me about the “space elevator” idea, using nano-tubes. Would it be possible to combine the two ideas and have wired SSP with a much higher efficiency?
by Zoan Caine
An earthly nuclear plant is far more reachable (thus vulnerable) to a military attack than a SSP plant, even without using rocket tech…
In my opinion, SSP is the only way to go.
by GamerFromJump
One method = one failure point. A good energy policy, like a good investment strategy, is a varied basket. Use them both.
by Imperator03
Simple fix. Let oil go up to 100+. Heck it looks like it’s going there anyway. This will spur massive research into next gen technology as people try to find ways to push energy generating costs down. The last thing any government should do is get involved. Can you imagine what the first cars would have been, had they been designed by a government committee? Oh wait, we have one of those, the Volt. Chevy hasn’t been pushing that one much, have they? Nor doe the executives at Chevy think the Volt will become commercially viable. Contrast that with Henry Ford and the Model T.
by Spud100
Political Futurist, George Friedman, of Strafor, in his book; The Next 100 Years, has forecast the use of solar power sats, to power, and re-invigorate the US. For myself, I respectfully disagree, not because I hate SPS, but because I see two issues preventing it. One is cost of making the SPS, and the second is military vulnerability-easy to shoot out of orbit with 1960′s rocket tech.