How could we transfer large amounts of energy sourced in space to Earth?Swarm: Is ESA launching another set of aerodynamically streamlined satellites into LEO without any self-destruct system onboard?Do atmospheric tides have any impact on orbiting satellites or rocket launches?Has the U.S. looked at the option of having a space station outside of LEO? If so, why or why not?How to get earth-centered, earth-fixed coordinates from Skyfield?MOM's NOT-so-sun-synchronous orbit about Mars - how large is it's J2?How could we make a fair comparison between space rockets regarding their payload mass in low Earth orbit and Earth escaping?Deorbit LEO debris with a higher orbit laser?How did the Roadster get high enough to take a whole-Earth picture?How large would be the seasonal variation of eclipse duration for a spacecraft in LEO?Would a Hohmann transfer within LEO be useful?
Job Market: should one hide their (young) age?
Why did Theresa May offer a vote on a second Brexit referendum?
Which European Languages are not Indo-European?
便利な工具 what does な means
How to let other coworkers know that I don't share my coworker's political views?
Why did Drogon spare this character?
Is superuser the same as root?
Is there a context where the expression `a.b::c` makes sense?
Where is Jon going?
The disk image is 497GB smaller than the target device
How do I superimpose two math symbols?
Time complexity of an algorithm: Is it important to state the base of the logarithm?
My players want to grind XP but we're using landmark advancement
Navigating a quick return to previous employer
Why do Russians almost not use verbs of possession akin to "have"?
Is it legal to meet with potential future employers in the UK, whilst visiting from the USA
Did 20% of US soldiers in Vietnam use heroin, 95% of whom quit afterwards?
How did NASA Langley end up with the first 737?
How to politely tell someone they did not hit "reply to all" in an email?
What does kpsewhich stand for?
Can I tell a prospective employee that everyone in the team is leaving?
Are runways booked by airlines to land their planes?
How do I disable login of user?
Do photons bend spacetime or not?
How could we transfer large amounts of energy sourced in space to Earth?
Swarm: Is ESA launching another set of aerodynamically streamlined satellites into LEO without any self-destruct system onboard?Do atmospheric tides have any impact on orbiting satellites or rocket launches?Has the U.S. looked at the option of having a space station outside of LEO? If so, why or why not?How to get earth-centered, earth-fixed coordinates from Skyfield?MOM's NOT-so-sun-synchronous orbit about Mars - how large is it's J2?How could we make a fair comparison between space rockets regarding their payload mass in low Earth orbit and Earth escaping?Deorbit LEO debris with a higher orbit laser?How did the Roadster get high enough to take a whole-Earth picture?How large would be the seasonal variation of eclipse duration for a spacecraft in LEO?Would a Hohmann transfer within LEO be useful?
$begingroup$
At the rate we are using energy, it is inevitable that we will need to source energy from outside of Earth, eg from space. I was wondering how one would transfer this energy from that energy collector (e.g. a solar array) to Earth to be used by us?
low-earth-orbit
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At the rate we are using energy, it is inevitable that we will need to source energy from outside of Earth, eg from space. I was wondering how one would transfer this energy from that energy collector (e.g. a solar array) to Earth to be used by us?
low-earth-orbit
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
Where do you think our energy comes from now, exactly? There's only four sources of energy available to us: nuclear, solar, lunar, and geothermal. Most of the ones we use today (petrolchemical, wind, water, etc) are just convoluted forms of solar.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
May 10 at 18:34
5
$begingroup$
"The United Nations Development Programme in its 2000 World Energy Assessment found that the annual potential of solar energy was 1,575–49,837 exajoules (EJ). This is several times larger than the total world energy consumption, which was 559.8 EJ in 2012.[3][4]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:45
2
$begingroup$
Can you clarify “at the rate we are using energy”? Is there a study showing power demand outracing supply?
$endgroup$
– JoeTaxpayer
May 11 at 0:56
add a comment |
$begingroup$
At the rate we are using energy, it is inevitable that we will need to source energy from outside of Earth, eg from space. I was wondering how one would transfer this energy from that energy collector (e.g. a solar array) to Earth to be used by us?
low-earth-orbit
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
$endgroup$
At the rate we are using energy, it is inevitable that we will need to source energy from outside of Earth, eg from space. I was wondering how one would transfer this energy from that energy collector (e.g. a solar array) to Earth to be used by us?
low-earth-orbit
low-earth-orbit
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
asked May 10 at 14:53
RogerRoger
1455
1455
4
$begingroup$
Where do you think our energy comes from now, exactly? There's only four sources of energy available to us: nuclear, solar, lunar, and geothermal. Most of the ones we use today (petrolchemical, wind, water, etc) are just convoluted forms of solar.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
May 10 at 18:34
5
$begingroup$
"The United Nations Development Programme in its 2000 World Energy Assessment found that the annual potential of solar energy was 1,575–49,837 exajoules (EJ). This is several times larger than the total world energy consumption, which was 559.8 EJ in 2012.[3][4]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:45
2
$begingroup$
Can you clarify “at the rate we are using energy”? Is there a study showing power demand outracing supply?
$endgroup$
– JoeTaxpayer
May 11 at 0:56
add a comment |
4
$begingroup$
Where do you think our energy comes from now, exactly? There's only four sources of energy available to us: nuclear, solar, lunar, and geothermal. Most of the ones we use today (petrolchemical, wind, water, etc) are just convoluted forms of solar.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
May 10 at 18:34
5
$begingroup$
"The United Nations Development Programme in its 2000 World Energy Assessment found that the annual potential of solar energy was 1,575–49,837 exajoules (EJ). This is several times larger than the total world energy consumption, which was 559.8 EJ in 2012.[3][4]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:45
2
$begingroup$
Can you clarify “at the rate we are using energy”? Is there a study showing power demand outracing supply?
$endgroup$
– JoeTaxpayer
May 11 at 0:56
4
4
$begingroup$
Where do you think our energy comes from now, exactly? There's only four sources of energy available to us: nuclear, solar, lunar, and geothermal. Most of the ones we use today (petrolchemical, wind, water, etc) are just convoluted forms of solar.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
May 10 at 18:34
$begingroup$
Where do you think our energy comes from now, exactly? There's only four sources of energy available to us: nuclear, solar, lunar, and geothermal. Most of the ones we use today (petrolchemical, wind, water, etc) are just convoluted forms of solar.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
May 10 at 18:34
5
5
$begingroup$
"The United Nations Development Programme in its 2000 World Energy Assessment found that the annual potential of solar energy was 1,575–49,837 exajoules (EJ). This is several times larger than the total world energy consumption, which was 559.8 EJ in 2012.[3][4]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:45
$begingroup$
"The United Nations Development Programme in its 2000 World Energy Assessment found that the annual potential of solar energy was 1,575–49,837 exajoules (EJ). This is several times larger than the total world energy consumption, which was 559.8 EJ in 2012.[3][4]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:45
2
2
$begingroup$
Can you clarify “at the rate we are using energy”? Is there a study showing power demand outracing supply?
$endgroup$
– JoeTaxpayer
May 11 at 0:56
$begingroup$
Can you clarify “at the rate we are using energy”? Is there a study showing power demand outracing supply?
$endgroup$
– JoeTaxpayer
May 11 at 0:56
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Various aspects of space-based solar power systems are described on
this wikipedia page To summarise briefly, the power is beamed down as electromagnetic radiation of some frequency to which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent. This is most likely to be optical or near IR or microwave. Microwave power can be converted efficiently at the Earth end, but the antennae needed are much bigger. Optical or IR solutions involve more loss, but can be done with smaller ground stations.
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
But there already is a space-based solar power system that is beaming down electromagnetic radiation of some frequencies to some of which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:00
5
$begingroup$
@Graipher, sure, but a civilization that burns 500 tons of fuel to get 10 tons of payload to LEO (which is not even remotely the place you'd want your Dyson swarm at) is probably not at the right point in their development to do such a thing.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:14
3
$begingroup$
@Graipher "But it is limited by the surface area of the Earth facing the sun, whereas e.g. a Dyson swarm is only limited by the amount of material available in the solar system/within reach of the civilization." I doubt that. Beaming a large amount of energy to the Earth would pose massive logistical problems. And all of this would be extra energy that's being added to the Earth. While solar panels are simply intercepting energy that would have gone to the Earth anyway, a Dyson swarm is adding net energy.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:52
1
$begingroup$
A GEO power satellite with a microwave beaming system to the ground (eg MASER) could be more efficient than ground based PV panels as the GEO sat would always have no night, no atmosphere, and no weather.
$endgroup$
– Dragongeek
May 10 at 23:41
3
$begingroup$
@user4574 All energy ends up as heat eventually. All the energy sent from the satellite to the Earth, may as well be heat, as far as Earth's temperature is concerned. Unless it's being sent again from Earth to somewhere else (in which case only a percentage becomes heat on Earth, and the rest becomes heat somewhere else)
$endgroup$
– immibis
May 11 at 2:49
|
show 3 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "508"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f36056%2fhow-could-we-transfer-large-amounts-of-energy-sourced-in-space-to-earth%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Various aspects of space-based solar power systems are described on
this wikipedia page To summarise briefly, the power is beamed down as electromagnetic radiation of some frequency to which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent. This is most likely to be optical or near IR or microwave. Microwave power can be converted efficiently at the Earth end, but the antennae needed are much bigger. Optical or IR solutions involve more loss, but can be done with smaller ground stations.
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
But there already is a space-based solar power system that is beaming down electromagnetic radiation of some frequencies to some of which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:00
5
$begingroup$
@Graipher, sure, but a civilization that burns 500 tons of fuel to get 10 tons of payload to LEO (which is not even remotely the place you'd want your Dyson swarm at) is probably not at the right point in their development to do such a thing.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:14
3
$begingroup$
@Graipher "But it is limited by the surface area of the Earth facing the sun, whereas e.g. a Dyson swarm is only limited by the amount of material available in the solar system/within reach of the civilization." I doubt that. Beaming a large amount of energy to the Earth would pose massive logistical problems. And all of this would be extra energy that's being added to the Earth. While solar panels are simply intercepting energy that would have gone to the Earth anyway, a Dyson swarm is adding net energy.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:52
1
$begingroup$
A GEO power satellite with a microwave beaming system to the ground (eg MASER) could be more efficient than ground based PV panels as the GEO sat would always have no night, no atmosphere, and no weather.
$endgroup$
– Dragongeek
May 10 at 23:41
3
$begingroup$
@user4574 All energy ends up as heat eventually. All the energy sent from the satellite to the Earth, may as well be heat, as far as Earth's temperature is concerned. Unless it's being sent again from Earth to somewhere else (in which case only a percentage becomes heat on Earth, and the rest becomes heat somewhere else)
$endgroup$
– immibis
May 11 at 2:49
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Various aspects of space-based solar power systems are described on
this wikipedia page To summarise briefly, the power is beamed down as electromagnetic radiation of some frequency to which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent. This is most likely to be optical or near IR or microwave. Microwave power can be converted efficiently at the Earth end, but the antennae needed are much bigger. Optical or IR solutions involve more loss, but can be done with smaller ground stations.
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
$endgroup$
4
$begingroup$
But there already is a space-based solar power system that is beaming down electromagnetic radiation of some frequencies to some of which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:00
5
$begingroup$
@Graipher, sure, but a civilization that burns 500 tons of fuel to get 10 tons of payload to LEO (which is not even remotely the place you'd want your Dyson swarm at) is probably not at the right point in their development to do such a thing.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:14
3
$begingroup$
@Graipher "But it is limited by the surface area of the Earth facing the sun, whereas e.g. a Dyson swarm is only limited by the amount of material available in the solar system/within reach of the civilization." I doubt that. Beaming a large amount of energy to the Earth would pose massive logistical problems. And all of this would be extra energy that's being added to the Earth. While solar panels are simply intercepting energy that would have gone to the Earth anyway, a Dyson swarm is adding net energy.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:52
1
$begingroup$
A GEO power satellite with a microwave beaming system to the ground (eg MASER) could be more efficient than ground based PV panels as the GEO sat would always have no night, no atmosphere, and no weather.
$endgroup$
– Dragongeek
May 10 at 23:41
3
$begingroup$
@user4574 All energy ends up as heat eventually. All the energy sent from the satellite to the Earth, may as well be heat, as far as Earth's temperature is concerned. Unless it's being sent again from Earth to somewhere else (in which case only a percentage becomes heat on Earth, and the rest becomes heat somewhere else)
$endgroup$
– immibis
May 11 at 2:49
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Various aspects of space-based solar power systems are described on
this wikipedia page To summarise briefly, the power is beamed down as electromagnetic radiation of some frequency to which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent. This is most likely to be optical or near IR or microwave. Microwave power can be converted efficiently at the Earth end, but the antennae needed are much bigger. Optical or IR solutions involve more loss, but can be done with smaller ground stations.
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
$endgroup$
Various aspects of space-based solar power systems are described on
this wikipedia page To summarise briefly, the power is beamed down as electromagnetic radiation of some frequency to which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent. This is most likely to be optical or near IR or microwave. Microwave power can be converted efficiently at the Earth end, but the antennae needed are much bigger. Optical or IR solutions involve more loss, but can be done with smaller ground stations.
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
answered May 10 at 15:15
Steve LintonSteve Linton
9,82212653
9,82212653
4
$begingroup$
But there already is a space-based solar power system that is beaming down electromagnetic radiation of some frequencies to some of which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:00
5
$begingroup$
@Graipher, sure, but a civilization that burns 500 tons of fuel to get 10 tons of payload to LEO (which is not even remotely the place you'd want your Dyson swarm at) is probably not at the right point in their development to do such a thing.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:14
3
$begingroup$
@Graipher "But it is limited by the surface area of the Earth facing the sun, whereas e.g. a Dyson swarm is only limited by the amount of material available in the solar system/within reach of the civilization." I doubt that. Beaming a large amount of energy to the Earth would pose massive logistical problems. And all of this would be extra energy that's being added to the Earth. While solar panels are simply intercepting energy that would have gone to the Earth anyway, a Dyson swarm is adding net energy.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:52
1
$begingroup$
A GEO power satellite with a microwave beaming system to the ground (eg MASER) could be more efficient than ground based PV panels as the GEO sat would always have no night, no atmosphere, and no weather.
$endgroup$
– Dragongeek
May 10 at 23:41
3
$begingroup$
@user4574 All energy ends up as heat eventually. All the energy sent from the satellite to the Earth, may as well be heat, as far as Earth's temperature is concerned. Unless it's being sent again from Earth to somewhere else (in which case only a percentage becomes heat on Earth, and the rest becomes heat somewhere else)
$endgroup$
– immibis
May 11 at 2:49
|
show 3 more comments
4
$begingroup$
But there already is a space-based solar power system that is beaming down electromagnetic radiation of some frequencies to some of which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:00
5
$begingroup$
@Graipher, sure, but a civilization that burns 500 tons of fuel to get 10 tons of payload to LEO (which is not even remotely the place you'd want your Dyson swarm at) is probably not at the right point in their development to do such a thing.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:14
3
$begingroup$
@Graipher "But it is limited by the surface area of the Earth facing the sun, whereas e.g. a Dyson swarm is only limited by the amount of material available in the solar system/within reach of the civilization." I doubt that. Beaming a large amount of energy to the Earth would pose massive logistical problems. And all of this would be extra energy that's being added to the Earth. While solar panels are simply intercepting energy that would have gone to the Earth anyway, a Dyson swarm is adding net energy.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:52
1
$begingroup$
A GEO power satellite with a microwave beaming system to the ground (eg MASER) could be more efficient than ground based PV panels as the GEO sat would always have no night, no atmosphere, and no weather.
$endgroup$
– Dragongeek
May 10 at 23:41
3
$begingroup$
@user4574 All energy ends up as heat eventually. All the energy sent from the satellite to the Earth, may as well be heat, as far as Earth's temperature is concerned. Unless it's being sent again from Earth to somewhere else (in which case only a percentage becomes heat on Earth, and the rest becomes heat somewhere else)
$endgroup$
– immibis
May 11 at 2:49
4
4
$begingroup$
But there already is a space-based solar power system that is beaming down electromagnetic radiation of some frequencies to some of which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:00
$begingroup$
But there already is a space-based solar power system that is beaming down electromagnetic radiation of some frequencies to some of which the atmosphere is reasonably transparent.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:00
5
5
$begingroup$
@Graipher, sure, but a civilization that burns 500 tons of fuel to get 10 tons of payload to LEO (which is not even remotely the place you'd want your Dyson swarm at) is probably not at the right point in their development to do such a thing.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:14
$begingroup$
@Graipher, sure, but a civilization that burns 500 tons of fuel to get 10 tons of payload to LEO (which is not even remotely the place you'd want your Dyson swarm at) is probably not at the right point in their development to do such a thing.
$endgroup$
– Ghanima
May 10 at 19:14
3
3
$begingroup$
@Graipher "But it is limited by the surface area of the Earth facing the sun, whereas e.g. a Dyson swarm is only limited by the amount of material available in the solar system/within reach of the civilization." I doubt that. Beaming a large amount of energy to the Earth would pose massive logistical problems. And all of this would be extra energy that's being added to the Earth. While solar panels are simply intercepting energy that would have gone to the Earth anyway, a Dyson swarm is adding net energy.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:52
$begingroup$
@Graipher "But it is limited by the surface area of the Earth facing the sun, whereas e.g. a Dyson swarm is only limited by the amount of material available in the solar system/within reach of the civilization." I doubt that. Beaming a large amount of energy to the Earth would pose massive logistical problems. And all of this would be extra energy that's being added to the Earth. While solar panels are simply intercepting energy that would have gone to the Earth anyway, a Dyson swarm is adding net energy.
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:52
1
1
$begingroup$
A GEO power satellite with a microwave beaming system to the ground (eg MASER) could be more efficient than ground based PV panels as the GEO sat would always have no night, no atmosphere, and no weather.
$endgroup$
– Dragongeek
May 10 at 23:41
$begingroup$
A GEO power satellite with a microwave beaming system to the ground (eg MASER) could be more efficient than ground based PV panels as the GEO sat would always have no night, no atmosphere, and no weather.
$endgroup$
– Dragongeek
May 10 at 23:41
3
3
$begingroup$
@user4574 All energy ends up as heat eventually. All the energy sent from the satellite to the Earth, may as well be heat, as far as Earth's temperature is concerned. Unless it's being sent again from Earth to somewhere else (in which case only a percentage becomes heat on Earth, and the rest becomes heat somewhere else)
$endgroup$
– immibis
May 11 at 2:49
$begingroup$
@user4574 All energy ends up as heat eventually. All the energy sent from the satellite to the Earth, may as well be heat, as far as Earth's temperature is concerned. Unless it's being sent again from Earth to somewhere else (in which case only a percentage becomes heat on Earth, and the rest becomes heat somewhere else)
$endgroup$
– immibis
May 11 at 2:49
|
show 3 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Space Exploration Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fspace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f36056%2fhow-could-we-transfer-large-amounts-of-energy-sourced-in-space-to-earth%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
4
$begingroup$
Where do you think our energy comes from now, exactly? There's only four sources of energy available to us: nuclear, solar, lunar, and geothermal. Most of the ones we use today (petrolchemical, wind, water, etc) are just convoluted forms of solar.
$endgroup$
– corsiKa
May 10 at 18:34
5
$begingroup$
"The United Nations Development Programme in its 2000 World Energy Assessment found that the annual potential of solar energy was 1,575–49,837 exajoules (EJ). This is several times larger than the total world energy consumption, which was 559.8 EJ in 2012.[3][4]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy
$endgroup$
– Acccumulation
May 10 at 20:45
2
$begingroup$
Can you clarify “at the rate we are using energy”? Is there a study showing power demand outracing supply?
$endgroup$
– JoeTaxpayer
May 11 at 0:56