this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
84 points (95.7% liked)
solarpunk memes
5199 readers
2 users here now
For when you need a laugh!
The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!
But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.
Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.
Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines
Have fun!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The issue is power transmission. Wireless transmission has repeatedly been shown to be highly energy intensive and prone to severe loss the further you're sending it, plus you still have to have a way to pick it up and convert it to electricity at a useful rate on the ground.
The basic practicality of a microwave-based system was demonstrated in 2023, and it does work. However, they are suspiciously mum about efficiency.
https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/in-a-first-caltechs-space-solar-power-demonstrator-wirelessly-transmits-power-in-space
Solar irradiance above the atmosphere (i.e., in orbit) is 1360 W/m^2. At ground level, it's 1120, so a loss of ~18% due to the atmosphere.
If transmission losses plus the massive costs of launch, keeping the panels cool (no conduction/convection in space), and maintenance add up to greater than 18%, it's more efficient on the ground.
It's a lot more than that.
First, the best place for them is GEO. In that orbit, they're only in the earth's shadow for small chunks of time throughout the whole year. The extra delta-v to go from LEO to GEO is generally worth it.
Second, never have to worry about cloud cover.
Third, 1120 W/m^2 is an average that changes substantially depending on where and when you're talking about. The 1360 W/m^2 in GEO is constant.