A few weeks ago, the Space Frontier Foundation (and another group that wishes to remain nameless) submitted a white paper on Space-Based Solar Power to the Obama transition team. Over the weekend this white paper was posted to the “Change.Gov” website by the Obama transition team to acquire public feedback on the idea that Space Solar Power (as it is called in the white paper) should be part of a balanced federal portfolio of energy research and development.

The Space Frontier Foundation’s white paper was among the first 10 white papers posted by the Obama transition team, and it is the only white paper on space (so far).

We clearly have the attention and interest of senior Obama policy officials.

In just a few days, there are over 200 comments from the public so far on the concept of new national initiative to invest in Space Solar Power. Quite a few of the comments are critical, and recommend that we continue to invest nothing in Space Solar Power.

If ever there was a time to participate in a discussion about nation’s future in space, it is now.

Your voice needs to be heard now.

If you want to make a difference in our nation’s future, then go to https://change.gov/open_government/entry/space_solar_power_ssp_a_solution_for_energy_independence_climate_change/. This will take you to the Change.Gov website where you can engage in this critical debate on whether America should invest in Space Solar Power.

Cheers!

Coyote (credit for authorship goes to Charles “Chazmanian Devil” Miller.)

Its time to let actions speak louder than words. We’re going to build the first ever space-based solar power satellites!

I made this announcement at the International Space Development Conference and again at the New$pace (properly spelled with a dollar sign) conference in Washington D.C. this summer. Now it’s time to let you in on what has been discussed. We are still at the beginning of this project. That’s why I want to start by going public. I believe in providing transparency into this project because developing another source of safe, clean energy is just too important to the US, our Allies, and the World.

In addition, I want to hear from you. You probably have lots of ideas that can help us out. Now, let’s look into our project a bit closer.

Background:

Earlier this summer Ambassador Roger Harrison, the Director of the Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studies at the United States Air Force Academy, had the idea of building a small SBSP demonstration satellite at the Academy and in concert with a handful of other highly technical and competent universities inside the US. He invited me to serve as the “Visiting Associate Director for Special Space Solar Power Projects” at the Eisenhower Center. Yes, that ominous sounding title is a mouthful that makes me chuckle every time he says it. For some reason it makes me want to wear a bigger hat with my uniform.

Our Vision, Mission, and Mandate:

Our vision is to light a single bulb from space and in-so-doing light the path for business to follow.

Our mission is to give academy and university students a one-of-a-kind educational experience solving real world energy problems on the path to commercial development of space-based solar power. At the same time, this will help build the work force for industry to capitalize on.

Our mandate is to Keep It Cheap And Simple and deliver it Soon (KICASS). Be careful who you pronounce the acronym in front of…and please use a hard ‘c’ sound, because a soft ‘c’ is unacceptable!

Project Overview:

The project involves the building of two satellite systems concurrently, one “heavy” and one “light.” This dual approach using radically different methods gives us greater assurance that we will succeed in the event that technical, legal, financial, or other challenges bog down one effort. Both satellite missions will be launched into space, if possible. The desired launch dates are in 2010.

Each satellite must weigh 400 pounds or less and be prepared to ride into orbit for free on an ESPA ring. In order to keep the weight of the satellite down, we must use lasers for power beaming because the microwave systems are way too large. There is a benefit in this. Neither the Federal Communications Commission nor the International Telegraphic Union need to be consulted for laser energy beaming as there are no associated frequencies that must be deconflicted. Such consultation would be required if we were using microwave.

The “heavy” satellite mission represents a more complicated set of tasks and greater expense than its counterpart. It will place on orbit a satellite that will collect power and broadcast it to Earth via laser (1.0 or 0.86 microns). In order to keep the size of the solar array light and manageable, we will accept several orbits to allow the satellite to store energy and build up a sufficient charge for broadcast to the ground receiving station where the lightbulb will be illuminated. The use of a positive control laser at the ground receiving station will be used to allow the satellite to aim its laser precisely at the receiver and to authorize its discharge.

The “light” satellite mission turns the experiment on its head. It will place on orbit a satellite that merely contains a receiver and the lightbulb that will be illuminated by a ground-based laser (1.0 or 0.86 microns). Visual observation of the light on the satellite being illuminated during the laser broadcast will indicate success.

To keep the project as cheap as possible, the use of existing ground equipment is desired. Using simple satellite designs and employing proven hardware is also desired.

The satellites need not have a long on-orbit life and our goal is to allow them to safely deorbit at any time after successfully completing the experiment, which will likely include the requirement for replication by independent observers.

Limitations:

International Traffic in Ams Regulations (ITAR), which I hate with a passion, prevents us from working with non-US universities and non-US citizens.  (I personally cheer on all attempts to improve ITAR (WIHWAP) so we can collaborate more broadly with our traditional and especially our non-traditional international partners.)

Money is a factor. We have to do this on the cheap. Ambassador Harrison is exploring ways that organizations and individuals can make tax deductible contributions to educational institutions which can be used to fund this project. In addition, I am sure he’ll accept funding from government organizations that would like to advance this concept.

Some will accuse us of trying to field a weapon. This is simply not the case, but we are taking measures to alleviate such concerns. Theresa Hitchens from the Center for Defense Information sits on this project’s advisory board. She has complete access to everything we will be doing. We share her belief that providing transparency into this project is the principle method of preventing baseless accusations.

Conclusion:

There you go. Now, once again, you know as much about this project as I do…and I’m leading it!

Please provide comments and lets get the discussion going.

Cheers!

Coyote

WASHINGTON, Sept. 11 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following event announcement was released by the National Space Society:

What: Space solar power could be a clean, renewable solution to America’s long-term energy needs. John C. Mankins, former manager of NASA’s Exploration Systems Research and Technology Program, and one of the foremost experts on space solar power, will announce on Friday a milestone demonstration of the critical technology enabling SSP: long-distance, solar-powered wireless power transmission.

The project demonstrated wireless power transmission between two Hawaiian islands 148 kilometers apart, more than the distance from the surface of Earth to the boundary of space.

It will be featured in an hour-long special that evening on Discovery Channel as part of DISCOVERY PROJECT EARTH, an eight-part series on the most ambitious geo-engineering ideas to tackle global climate change and the need for new and sustainable energy sources.

Space-based solar power, in which large satellites would collect plentiful solar energy in orbit and beam it safely down to Earth, could one day reduce our carbon emissions to virtually zero. It is the only energy technology that is clean, renewable, constant and capable of providing power to virtually any location on Earth.

Mankins will describe the demonstration project and show a realistic plan forward to develop this promising technology.

When:
Friday, September 12, 2008 at 9:30am

Where:
National Press Club, Lisagor Room
529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor
Washington, DC 20045
202-662-7500

Who:
John C. Mankins, COO of Managed Energy Technologies LLC
Mark Hopkins, Senior Vice President, National Space Society

Hosted by:
National Space Society

About National Space Society

The National Space Society (NSS) is an independent, grassroots organization dedicated to the creation of a spacefaring civilization. Founded in 1974, NSS is widely acknowledged as the preeminent citizen’s voice on space. NSS counts thousands of members and more than 50 chapters in the United States and around the world. The society also publishes Ad Astra magazine, an award-winning periodical chronicling the most important developments in space. For more information about NSS, visit https://www.nss.org.

Please RSVP to:
Katherine Brick
katherine.brick@nss.org
429-1600
Call-In #: 1-888-387-8686
ID #: 6863339#
First Call Analyst:
FCMN Contact:

Source: National Space Society

CONTACT: Katherine Brick of the National Space Society, +1-202-429-1600,
katherine.brick@nss.org

Web Site: https://www.nss.org/

The Discovery Channel (which my kids LOVE and we LOVE them watching it!) will show a documentary on Space-Based Solar Power at 10pm on 12 September, 2008. We filmed it in Washington DC at the Space Frontier Foundation’s New$pace 2008 conference (you are a member, aren’t you?). It was so totally cool working with the pros from the Futures Channel who did the filming (they must work closely with the Discovery Channel). It was amazing watching them do their thing.  They turned a small conference room at the hotel into a studio, wired us up, created mood lighting, and all that Hollywood stuff. These guys were entirely professional and WOW, it was entirely motivational being around professional media people who want to tell a story so kids get excited!

So, here is the preview from our most excellent friends at the Futures Channel:

Space-Based Solar Power on the Futures Channel

Make sure you tune-in to the Discovery Channel when it airs. Record it, and share it with all your friends, consistent with the laws in your viewing area*!

Cheers!

Coyote

* We’ve got to be careful with copyright laws…I once got into a kerfuffel because I described a baseball game to a friend of mine without the expressed written permission of the commissioner of major league baseball!

1. How would a company obtain a geostationary parking slot for a SBSP satellite?
2. How would a company obtain a license to broadcast power from space over radio frequencies?

Excellent questions. Here are the answers that I slapped together from the Internet. (Special thanks to Maldivian Digital, and Wikipedia for having some well researched info posted on their sites!) Please check my work and let me know if I’ve embarrassed myself in public (again):

1. How does a company obtain a geostationary parking slot for a SBSP satellite?
   • Parking slots are allotted internationally, by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU).
   • However, the ITU only allocates orbital slots to countries, and not to private sector companies.
   • Companies must negotiate with countries who hold the rights to orbital slots of interest. They must establish an agreement whereby space-based solar power satellites can thereafter occupy the countries’ allocated orbital slot(s).
   • This is a common and standard practice by companies operating communications satellites in the geostationary belt. Space-based solar power companies will follow these routine and well established procedures to acquire orbital parking slots.
   • When satellites are located close to each other, their up-link and downlink frequencies and polarisations are to be coordinated, so that there is no interference. Sometimes this requires that existing frequencies or polarisations be altered by existing satellites, to accommodate a new entrant.
   • The ITU which allocates the orbital slots (to countries who in turn may grant use of their slots to commercial ventures) requires that all players coordinate their frequencies so that there is no disruption of service. The new entrant is obliged to ensure that their transmissions will not disrupt existing services.
   • Frequency coordination is a technical matter, and not easily resolved, particularly in regions over India, where practically every orbital slot is occupied by one or more satellites.
2. How would a company obtain a license to broadcast power from space over radio frequencies?
   • Space-based solar power companies most likely will broadcast power from space to Earth using radio frequencies in the industrial, scientific, and medical (ISM) radio bands originally reserved internationally for the use of RF electromagnetic fields for industrial, scientific, and medical purposes other than communications. In general, communications equipment must accept any interference generated by ISM equipment.
   • ISM bands are defined by the ITU-R in 5.138, 5.150, and 5.280 of the Radio Regulations. Individual countries’ use of the bands designated in these sections may differ due to variations in national radio regulations. Because communication devices using the ISM bands must tolerate any interference from ISM equipment, these bands are typically given over to uses intended for unlicensed operation, since unlicensed operation typically needs to be tolerant of interference from other devices anyway. In the United States of America, ISM uses of the ISM bands are governed by Part 18 of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules, while Part 15 Subpart B contains the rules for unlicensed communication devices, even those that use the ISM frequencies. Thus, designers of equipment for use in the United States in the ISM bands should be familiar with the relevant portions of both Part 18 and Part 15 Subpart B of the FCC Rules.
   • Specifically, space-based solar power companies will broadcast energy from space to Earth at 2.45 GHz, or 5.8 GHz
   • In recent years these bands have also been shared with license-free error-tolerant communications applications such as wireless LANs and cordless phones in the 0.915 GHz, 2.45 GHz, and 5.8 GHz bands. Because licensed devices already are required to be tolerant of ISM emissions in these bands, unlicensed low power uses are generally able to operate in these bands without causing problems for licensed uses.
   • SBSP companies must engage with the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) to secure general approval for the use of these frequencies.
   • SBSP companies must also engage with customer countries’ agencies responsible for national radio regulations (eg, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the US) to obtain approval to use either 2.45 GHz or 5.8 GHz for power broadcasts in their country.
   • If these radio frequencies are unavailable, SBSP companies might pursue power beaming using lasers at 1.0 micron or 0.86 micron wavelengths. This removes the need for any frequency approval, as lasers are not regulated as radio frequencies.
   • SBSP companies must also engage with national aviation agencies (eg, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the US) to establish no-fly zones around radio or laser energy corridors between the satellite and its ground-based receivers, as may be required by national or local laws.

There’s a lot that goes into building space-based solar power systems. Let’s get it out on the table so we can take a look at all that goes into it and think together about how to grease the tracks of progress.

Cheers!

Coyote

Our friend, starbase202, sent me this interesting article that describes the problem. It comes from the New York Times online: (please disregard shots taken at political figures in the article–that’s not our aim here)

“Wind Energy Bumps Into Power Grid’s Limits”
by Matthew L. Wald
published 26 August, 2008

This is something we clearly need to keep in mind as we pursue space-based solar power.

Does this make space-based solar power measurably more difficult?

Cheers!

Coyote

Intel recently brought the concept closer to reality with a live demo illuminating a 60 watt bulb on stage at an annual meeting in San Francisco of the company’s developers. Their goal is simple, free computers and other devices from power cords.

The event was reported by staff writers on Spacemart.com in an article titled, “Intel Cuts Electric Cords With Wireless Power System.”

I think if people used wireless power broadcast systems in their own homes, the concept of power beaming from space wouldn’t seem so strange or even dangerous. Perhaps we need to give a push to this idea?

Cheers!

Coyote

It is important for us to understand how ITAR (WIHWAP) can affect our space industry, because space-based solar power is such a huge undertaking that international partnerships will be required not only for construction, but also for ownership and development of an international customer base.

The Economist published an article yesterday criticizing ITAR (WIHWAP). The AIAA Daily Launch (an email news service for members of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics–you are a member, aren’t you?) described the article this way:

Economist: U.S. export rules handicap space industry.

The Economist (8/21) editorialized that “the zealous application of the export rules is the American space industry’s biggest handicap,” noting critics who say the system “fails to distinguish between militarily sensitive hardware that should be controlled and widely available commercial technologies.” The Economist cited several examples of “American components and satellites…suffering” on the international market “because of the cost and delays in doing business with the firms that make them,” and added that in the past “the State Department ignored such complaints.” However, “there are signs of change,” including “small adjustments” to the administration of ITAR regulations and “a promise that licensing decisions would be taken within 60 days of an application.” Additionally, “work is also afoot to update the munitions list, which contains the set of military technologies that must be protected.” The Economist concluded, “Such change is overdue.”

Here is the link to the Economist article, which is titled: “Gravity is not the main obstacle for America’s space business. Government is.” Please give it a good read.

What are your thoughts on the issues raised in the article? How can we ensure that the export control environment is conducive to the types of partnerships space-based solar power requires?

Cheers!

Coyote

“Your concern about weaponization of the system and environmental risks are proper and deserve solid answers. For the answers (and a whole bunch of other great information) let me point you to a special edition of Ad Astra magazine produced by the National Space Society.

If you look on page 29 you’ll see the answers as to why space-based solar power satellites cannot be weaponized. Let me add to that list the following items:

• The DoD will not own or operate SBSP satellites. Energy production and distribution is outside of its Title X authority. In my opinion the DoD merely wants to be a customer of safe, clean energy and is most comfortable purchasing its energy from commercial vendors, just as it does today. The interest shown by the National Security Space Office (NSSO) in hosting the work done by the Space-Based Solar Power Study Group was largely because NASA does not do energy and the DoE does not do space. In other words, it was a ball being dropped along organizational lines.
  
• The security-related interest of the NSSO as it stepped in to host the study was three fold:
  • Provide more energy sources to hopefully alleviate energy competition as a trigger for war between the major powers in the 21st Century
  • Achieve American energy independence from foreign oil suppliers who attract US vital interests in areas and with peoples with whom we really would prefer to interact with in ways other than a dependent customer-supplier relationship.
    
  • Provide a source of clean energy that provides America with broader options regarding carbon contamination and clean-up, as well as improved ability to make progress on treaties such as Kyoto.
    
• Simple inspections of the waveguides for either laser or microwave transmitters on the satellites can easily verify that the beam cannot be focused narrowly to create a weapons effect. Such inspections can and likely will be conducted at time of insurance inspection, licensing, and registration before launch. International inspectors would be welcome and encouraged.
• The goal is to have international corporations own and operate these satellites and provide power to international customers–that’s the key to defense of these huge birds–deterrence by mutual defense through broad international ownership and international customership–an attack on a satellite is an attack against all.
  

As for environmental safety, especially when transmitting power into disaster areas and feeding power to forward bases, I envision spreading the several kilometer in diameter rectifying antenna on air bases or other relatively secure areas in the theater of operations and using ground broadcasting from there to the forward forces, first responders, or relief workers. That way we keep the beam from space very broad and desaturated. No way do we want ANY accusation of this being a weapon.

Keep in mind that there are two forms of power broadcasting that can be done from satellites. The first form is by microwave at 2.45 GHz and 5.8 GHz. These are the same frequencies that are used by internet wifi, cordless phones, and blue tooth. Since the beam is fairly well focused on the rectifying antenna we will prevent interference with those systems. In addition, the intensity of a cellular telephone placed next to the head delivers more radiation to the user than space-based solar power possibly can. The second form of power transmission from space is by laser at 1.0 microns (silicon) or 0.86 microns (Galium Arsinide). Laser transmissions are obviously more focused than microwave, but still must be spread to prevent overheating of the system, which also removes the risk of weaponization.

As for multinational approaches, when it comes to space, government-led multinational ventures are risky for a very strange and almost counterintuitive reason. The International Space Station (ISS) is a case in point. We assembled it with our very best allies and partners, but everybody got their feelings hurt in the process. In my opinion, it is far less likely that we will cooperate on such projects government-to-government in the near future because of the miserable experience of the ISS. Everybody was waiting for various governments to cut their red tape and stood around tensely waiting for last-minute funding and various approvals for go-aheads. Budgets changed frequently which drove some dramatic redesigns that impacted several other players. As a result, the project had all the joy of loaning money to relatives with gambling problems.

I personally believe that in order to make space-based solar power a reality that business must lead the way. However, government does have a role. Governments should conduct some R&D to improve efficiencies inherent to the system, remove bureaucratic barriers, and fund experiments to incrementally buy down some of the risk that business must take on. Examples include increasing the efficiencies of solar cells, lowering the cost and increasing the turnaround rate for launch vehicles, advancing the development of an international space traffic control system, securing the orbital parking slots and frequency allowances for these satellites, and conducting concept demonstrators.

It is also my opinion that it is best if commercial companies take government research and lead the development effort for space-based solar power, and then own and operate such systems. In the first instance, they partner more broadly and far easier than governments do. Take a Boeing aircraft for example. Nearly 40% of the components on the latest Boeing aircraft are made by Airbus. Conversely, nearly 40% of the components on the latest Airbus aircraft are made by Boeing. That did not take massive government negotiations. Business is international by its very nature. Take a look at the products in your home. They are likely a hodgepodge of gadgets with parts made all over the world and assembled somewhere else. It’s nothing personal, it’s just business. The problem with government leadership is that it often gets personal.

Best of all, when business is enabled to get the job done, they do so on their own dime, not the taxpayer’s. I like it when the taxpayers get a break. I want space-based solar power in the worst way, but not on the backs of the taxpayer, and only when the business case is sufficiently made that industry can profitably sustain the effort over the long run. We must avoid the fits and starts in industry that did such great damage to the overall space industry in the 1990s when wild enthusiasm collided with reality on several projects. In the end, I want the commercial sector to do it, and I want my government to clear the obstacles, such as ITAR (which I hate with a passion), out of the way so Americans can work with their international business partners to start bending the steel to make it happen!

Space-Based Solar Power is a huge undertaking. I need fleets of reusable rockets and spaceplanes to get ‘er done. Since these birds MUST be launched into a prograde orbit, I need lots and lots of lift coming out of Florida and hopefully other domestic launch sites to make it happen. That said, current sites cannot accommodate the full compliment of launches that I will need without massive expansion. I will need launches from international partners as well. If led by American industry, this will make America the hub of commercial space launch once again–with the busiest launch industry in the world. Think jobs, jobs, jobs. The shuttle is peanuts compared to this project.

I want to hit on the fact that space-based solar power transcends other projects because it crosses the lines of 6 major policy areas; Energy, Environment, Commerce, Space, Education, and Defense. Every dollar spent on SBSP addresses six sets of policies. Where else can government and the business sector collaborate to get a 6-to-1 return on investment for our future? As you see, there is no bureaucratic home for SBSP inside any single government organization. Perhaps this is another argument why this is best done in the business sector.

Space-based solar power is part of an energy diet that should be rich with a variety of safe, clean energy sources for America, its Allies, and the World. It is NOT the answer to ALL problems, but it IS part of solution.”

Your thoughts on my reply?

On 23 July 2008, he published an op-ed piece titled “Harvest the Sun – From Space” in the New York times.

Then on 29 July 2008, he was interviewed on NPR (National Public Radio) in a piece titled, “Can We Run the World Off the Sun?”

He an I have enjoyed a couple of very interesting discussions about various opportunities to use the International Space Station for some bits and pieces of the research. I think thats a great idea; every little bit helps.

To provide a sort of balance to the discussion, on 25 July 2008, Paul Rako, the Technical Editor for EDN (Electronics, Design, Strategy, News) wrote a piece titled “Solar Power in Space, A Really Stupid Idea” in response to Glenn’s NY Times article. It is the most scathing review of the concept of space-based solar power I’ve ever seen. In a nutshell, he thinks it’s a veiled attempt to build some sort of weapon. Fair enough. He’s just now learning about the concept and spent only a few hours browsing before writing his article.

Don’t miss the opportunity to read the comments from the bloggers that appear below the article. Some are precious. By the way, keep in mind that a simple inspection of the transmitting antenna can quickly verify that the energy beam cannot be narrowed into a weaponizable configuration.

Let’s be clear on this point; we are pushing for the production of all forms of safe, clean energy in order to prevent energy wars in the future. We’re a bunch of space savvy citizens from many different sectors, but we’re trying to do our part to solve the energy and environmental problems we face while trying to give direction to our space policy and provide real goals to our educational programs. Space-based solar power is one of the things we can do that addresses all of that. We also want these systems to be owned and operated by companies, not governments. That way space becomes an even larger part of our normal, everyday economic environment.

What are your thoughts about these two authors and their opinions? (keep it clean and impersonal)

Cheers!

Coyote