The worry among some of the SCIENCE!skeptics, which includes me, is that solarfarming, although perhaps now viable, scales poorly for a modern society's energy needs.
I am not adverse to megaprojects, G-d knows, but solar is a space-hog compared with (say) a modestly-sized plutonium reactor. Same goes to wind, honestly, and we're already hearing resistance from the Sami about that. Back to solar, Morocco is embarking upon such a megaproject, basically carpeting the Sahara (which they claim will also green it). How are they reconciling all that with the Tuareg?
So: two articles as might save solar - defined as, bring it into competition with fission (and with just plain coal), if only for land-use concerns. Especially where we don't actually have nuclear fuel, and/or don't want to ship it: you guessed it, nearearth asteroids and Venus. Maybe even Mars.
One is to increase the incoming energy. No, not by boosting the Sun; the Sun can do that by itself. I mean concentrating rays in space and then beaming down the coherence - to Morocco, or to Death Valley or wherever. Also it seems other materials are more efficient than silicon, presumably much more so than the mercury method which George O Smith wanted.
No comments:
Post a Comment