Comment on If God had wanted us to have nearly unlimited clean energy, He would have placed a fusion reactor into the sky.

• chunes@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Right, but like… whatever you’re doing in space is going to be more cost effective to do on earth. Not to mention the insane amount of energy lost to the atmosphere

  source

  • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    musk wants datacenters in space. which makes sense, 24/7 sunlight and no transmission of power is grand; but I do wonder about the shielding and moving the data back and forth.

    source

    • mattyroses@lemmy.today ⁨47⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      It’s nonsense, for cooling reasons alone

      source
  • saturn57@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Energy loss for wireless energy transition is actually surprisingly low. Here is an example of 80% efficiency over 1 kilometer: ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1123672

    source

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Energy loss for wireless energy transition is actually surprisingly low.

      …

      source
  • vithigar@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Unless you really need to optimise for land use. An arbitrarily large solar array in space could transmit to a fairly small collector in the surface.

    As for losing power to atmospheric attenuation, high frequency microwaves will pass right through most everything that would scatter visible light. Clouds, dust, etc wouldn’t really impede it.

    I won’t say it’s not a silly idea, because it is. It’s fun to think about though.

    source

    • EvilHankVenture@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      You could also have a constellation of satellites with area greater than the surface of the earth. It’s not that silly of an idea.

      source
  • Zron@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Big solar panel

    source
  • HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    yeah but imagine you can put the plant and all the pollution on an asteroid or something.

    source