NASA Expert Quits, joins Space Solar Power Bandwagon

Space solart power sounds wonderful BUT, what are the hazards of
microwave or laser energy pointed back at our planet?

gut feeling its hazardous, and nearly no one will welcome one in their
neighborhood?

bob haller safety advocate writes:
Space solart power sounds wonderful BUT, what are the hazards of
microwave or laser energy pointed back at our planet?

gut feeling its hazardous, and nearly no one will welcome one in their
neighborhood?

Well people (read tort lawyers) have for a decade now been trying to
prove cell phones give you brain cancer. And for two decades prior to
that they were trying to do the same for people living next to high
tension power lines.

Gut feeling is a poor substitute for good science Bob, but when it comes
to people's prejudices, you are probably right on...

However it isn't health risks that will sink SPS, when its cost will
suffice quite nicely.

I will give William Mook credit here. He seems to be the only one posting
pro SPS articles who is attempting to address the real issue with SPS and
that is the cost of getting material to orbit cheaply enough to make it pay.
We can argue the practicality of his ideas, but he is taking on directly
the correct issue.

Dave

"David Spain" wrote in message
...
bob haller safety advocate writes:
Space solart power sounds wonderful BUT, what are the hazards of
microwave or laser energy pointed back at our planet?

gut feeling its hazardous, and nearly no one will welcome one in their
neighborhood?

Well people (read tort lawyers) have for a decade now been trying to
prove cell phones give you brain cancer. And for two decades prior to
that they were trying to do the same for people living next to high
tension power lines.

Gut feeling is a poor substitute for good science Bob, but when it comes
to people's prejudices, you are probably right on...

However it isn't health risks that will sink SPS, when its cost will
suffice quite nicely.

I will give William Mook credit here. He seems to be the only one posting
pro SPS articles who is attempting to address the real issue with SPS and
that is the cost of getting material to orbit cheaply enough to make it
pay.
We can argue the practicality of his ideas, but he is taking on directly
the correct issue.


Listen to this business presentation on Space Solar Power.
This very serious company believes it's economically feasible
right now with the current launch costs.

TedX Conference
http://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation

And if you think they don't know what they're doing, look
at their consultants.

Technical Advisors
http://www.spaceenergy.com/s/TechnicalAdvisors.htm

Space Energy Inc
http://www.spaceenergy.com/s/Default.htm


s













Dave

On Mar 24, 6:01*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"David Spain" wrote in message

...



bob haller safety advocate writes:
Space solart power sounds wonderful BUT, what are the hazards of
microwave or laser energy pointed back at our planet?

gut feeling its hazardous, and nearly no one will welcome one in their
neighborhood?

Well people (read tort lawyers) have for a decade now been trying to
prove cell phones give you brain cancer. And for two decades prior to
that they were trying to do the same for people living next to high
tension power lines.

Gut feeling is a poor substitute for good science Bob, but when it comes
to people's prejudices, you are probably right on...

However it isn't health risks that will sink SPS, when its cost will
suffice quite nicely.

I will give William Mook credit here. He seems to be the only one posting
pro SPS articles who is attempting to address the real issue with SPS and
that is the cost of getting material to orbit cheaply enough to make it
pay.
We can argue the practicality of his ideas, but he is taking on directly
the correct issue.

Listen to this business presentation on Space Solar Power.
This very serious company believes it's economically feasible
right now with the current launch costs.

TedX Conferencehttp://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation

And if you think they don't know what they're doing, look
at their consultants.

Technical Advisorshttp://www.spaceenergy.com/s/TechnicalAdvisors.htm

Space Energy Inchttp://www.spaceenergy.com/s/Default.htm

s


Dave

If they could only agree with William Mook, we'd be set for life with
clean and seriously cheap energy. Problem is, Mook would probably
have to be in charge of most everything.

~ BG

On Mar 18, 5:49*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"Damien Valentine" wrote in message

...

Did Dr. Hsu quit, or was he laid off, or was he fired? *All your
article says is that he left NASA...it doesn't say why.

His bio says only that *"He has most recently left NASA and is taking
on greater challenges as Sr. VP of the Space Energy Group."

Why isn't William Mook in charge of SSP/SEG?

~ BG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
...
On Mar 18, 5:49 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"Damien Valentine" wrote in message

...

Did Dr. Hsu quit, or was he laid off, or was he fired? All your
article says is that he left NASA...it doesn't say why.
His bio says only that "He has most recently left NASA and is taking
on greater challenges as Sr. VP of the Space Energy Group."

Why isn't William Mook in charge of SSP/SEG?


Why? Who is William Mook?

~ BG

"bob haller safety advocate" wrote in message
...
Space solart power sounds wonderful BUT, what are the hazards of
microwave or laser energy pointed back at our planet?


The tyrpical proposed microwave beam is less intense than sunlight.
You can grow crops within the rectenna.


gut feeling its hazardous, and nearly no one will welcome one in their
neighborhood?

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
...


If they could only agree with William Mook, we'd be set for life with
clean and seriously cheap energy. Problem is, Mook would probably
have to be in charge of most everything.


I haven't read many of his posts, what is there to agree about|?

And did you listen to the business presentation for SSP?
Not too shabby imo.


Tedx Conference
http://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation


~ BG

On Mar 25, 9:30�pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"bob haller safety advocate" wrote in ...

Space solart power sounds wonderful BUT, what are the hazards of
microwave or laser energy pointed back at our planet?

The tyrpical proposed microwave beam is less intense than sunlight.
You can grow crops within the rectenna.





gut feeling its hazardous, and nearly no one will welcome one in their
neighborhood?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

would that have the current capacity needed?

On Mar 25, 5:35*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"Brad Guth" wrote in message

...

If they could only agree with William Mook, we'd be set for life with
clean and seriously cheap energy. *Problem is, Mook would probably
have to be in charge of most everything.

I haven't read many of his posts, what is there to agree about|?

And did you listen to the business presentation for SSP?
Not too shabby imo.

Tedx Conferencehttp://www.spaceenergy.com/i/flash/ted_presentation

*~ BG

SSP is something our William Mook is very big on. In fact, my LSE-CM/
ISS with its tether dipole element reaching to within 2r of Earth, as
such was to be configured with hosting a good dozen 100 GW laser
cannons, or perhaps nowadays the same energy density in electron beam/
lasers would be better yet.

Question: how many SSP satellites per TW are necessary?

If it's a net 1 GW/SSP, it's going to require a thousand SSP units
transmitting 1.5 GW each, and it there's unit down-time it'll mean
perhaps 2 GW each.

~ BG