The use of Solar Powered Satellites will provide developing nations a stable and effective energy source upon which to build their economy. It will provide safe, clean, renewable energy which can additionally be sold of for profit.


Understandably, money is the backbone of development and without it a society will be hard pressed to further its advancement. Yet money in itself cannot foster growth but only serves as an enabler for development and serves as a means to an end, the end being tangible goods and services. Ergo, the elimination of money as an influencing factor in development begs the question of what tangible and physical requirements are needed to stimulate development in any nation. As develop progresses, societies will begin to build up industries, schools, and businesses, and basic public services such as lights, water pumping stations and societies power needs will steadily increase. Yet all these services require power and without a steady supply of it, a nation can only develop so far before it is hindered by an inability to power the industries and machinery that development requires. Power then, is essentially, the lifeblood of any growing nation. It can power something as simple as the town water pump to something as crucial as the wireless infrastructure used in mobile banking. Furthermore, hospitals, schools, and libraries all require power in order to function and provide cutting edge services education to the next generation of entrepreneurs, engineers, doctors, and teachers. The introduction of Solar Powered Satellites promises to hold the key to a steady and sustainable energy source which will guarantee that there will be enough power, thereby eliminating any impediment to growth, to sustain the needs of a rapidly developing nation.
The Solar Powered Satellite program has been in development for some time and only recently, with the proliferation of affordable solar panels and the maturity of microwave technology as a means of energy transfer, has the project become realistic in terms of cost, feasibility, and advantages over current methods of energy production. The SPS system works by using an orbiting solar collector made up of many solar cells. Each of these cells are multidirectional and independent thereby allowing them to always point at the sun regardless of the orientation or speed of the satellite. The energy is collected and then by means of a microwave antenna on the satellite, the energy is sent to receivers on the earth’s surface for power. These base stations covert the microwave energy to usable energy either in the form of Solar Dynamic or Photovoltaic. The SD uses a heat engine to drive a piston or a turbine which connects to a generator or dynamo whereas the PV converts the energy into an electrical current. Both of these would be useful in a developing nation where there has been a general acceptance and willingness of the developing cultures to adopt technologies that would promote the growth of the culture and improve the quality of life.

The current methods of energy collection in developing nations have been limited to hand power which has proven effective in for the time being. Yet as stated earlier, and seen in the previous diagram in order for a nation to continue on this path of development, more stable and greater amounts of energy will be needed. The chart at the end shows a comparison of the different proposed methods of energy production, the benefits, costs and other factors of consideration. As evidenced, the SPS system is extremely expensive and the benefits, not evident at first glance. The costs seem to far outweigh the benefits in terms of cost and implementation yet, in the long run, SPS promises to deliver on all the needs of those developing nations.

Perhaps one of the greatest downfalls of the SPS system would be cost. In the range of 80 billion dollars, the costs of this system far exceed any of the other systems of production. Even the fact that the technology offers benefits far into the future would seem unreasonable in terms of cost. In comparing SPS to the two systems that generate most of the world’s power, nuclear and coal, the cost of SPS drastically outweighs. Take nuclear power for example. A typical reactor costs approximately 5 billion to build, a mere 20th of a SPS without taking into account, the base stations. Fossil fuels account for 65% of the world’s energy production and are even cheaper due to its availability and flexibility with regards to use. It would seem then, that currently established means of energy production are capable enough of handling the power needs of any developing nations. Yet with any growing society, energy demands are expected to rise and without stable energy sources, demand will exceed supply and costs will begin to rise. It is then that in terms of cost and sustainability, the true benefit of the SPS system begins to outweigh those monetary costs in the long run.

Fossil fuels currently are highly available and consequently, the cost of this fuel is dramatically cheaper than that of any other power source. The Energy Information Administration has calculated the average price – factoring in fuel, construction and operating costs – of various electricity sources over 20 years starting in 2010. It estimates that coal would cost $53.42 compared with $61.32 for nuclear power. It can easily be used without the complicated systems and machinery of solar panels or nuclear reactors reducing further reducing the usage costs of the product. However, as demand for fossil fuels increases and supply is used, prices are expected to rise as the resource becomes increasingly scarce.

Merely looking at the costs of implementation would also be looking only at one side of the picture. Though the SPS system itself costs much more than nuclear or fossil fuel system, in the long run, the SPS system begins to pay for itself. The energy, harvested from the sun, is free and can be converted directly into electrical energy at the base station at no additional monetary costs. Once the satellite is in orbit and the base station, built, there are no further costs to account for other than maintenance. Both the nuclear power plants and fossil fuel systems would require considerable additional investment. The nuclear powerplant would require money to finance security, facilities to dispose of nuclear waste, as well as a means of transportation to move the nuclear fuel. The same applies for the fossil fuel burning plants where an extensive transportation system would be needed to effectly move the coal to the plant. The SBS system accounts for all this ans requires no transportation costs or security.

We can already see that within the last 5 years, prices of oil has doubled and as third world nations become more developed, prices are expected to continue to rise as supply diminishes and the easily accessible oil reserves are tapped. Current projections by the U.S. Energy Administration shows that by about 2010, supply will no longer be able to keep up with demand. Furthermore, fossil fuel burning power plant emitsof CO2, Carbon Monoxide, Sulfur Oxides, and Nitrogen Oxides, all of which have a negative impact on the environment. Already, these power plants account for a 25% increase in the amount of pollution in the atmosphere, and increasing their usage in developing nations would only further pollute the environment. In addition to the rising costs and pollution, there is the issue of dependence upon foreign nations for power. The price fluctuations and dependencies would add a level of uncertainty and intangible costs to any developing nation and put at risk its development. Nuclear power eliminates both the pollution and sustainability issues while providing higher power output. Yet with these benefits come with both additional and intangible costs not associated with the actual energy production itself. The expensive facilities needed to contain the nuclear material and the costs associated with the safe disposal and security of the nuclear waste would add several million dollars to the base costs of the energy. The Solar Panel Satellites system promises to resolve all the issues associated with sustainability and environmental cleanliness without the worries of increasing costs or pollution and can easily overcome these problems through its infinite and clean renewable energy source. The energy provided through the sun is free and once the system is constructed, there are no other environmental costs to the developing nations. Furthermore, there is no involvement of danger materials, threat of attack associated with the nuclear power plants. It is in these redeeming values that the SPS system can prove to be a better solution to increasing energy demands.
It has been pitched that terrestrial solar power would have similar advantages to the SPS but at a fraction of the cost.

Though true in regards to the cost, the SPS system would be far more efficient than any land based solar power system. Firstly, in order for the those systems to generate the same levels of energy as a solar based ones, it would require a very large solar array to be built in an area that received a large amount of sunlight. Areas in developing nations may not have the ability or the space to accommodate for these large installations. The SPS land system however, could be placed underground thus allowing developing to continue above those installations. These installations would also require a smaller space because of their higher efficiency, 230 watts per square meter as opposed to 19-56 watts per square meter. The last and perhaps on of the most important advantages would be the fact that SPS system would allow power generation at all times regardless of the weather. Land based solar panels become ineffective at night or during cloudy days thereby reducing efficiency and can result in power failure during crucial times. The mobility of the Solar Powered Satellite system would add another advantage by allowing power to be easily given to areas that most needed it. Because the system is essentially an orbiting satellite with base stations constructed around the nation, power can be “beamed down” to wherever needed it most. The satellite system need only be repositioned and because power is available essentially whenever it is needed due to the mobility of the system, power can be available to whatever location needs it.
There is a general decline in the cost of solar panels which in turn would result in a decrease in price of the SPS system itself. Innovations by companies such as Nanosolar (nanosolar.com) andSolar Integrated (solarintegrated.com) offer new horizons and potentials in the production of solar panels. By developing a method utilizing nanoparticle ink, Solar Integrated directly prints the semiconductor of the solar cells, eliminating the silicon waver cells thus allowing it to deliver a current 5-10 times that of any other thin film solar panels. This, coupled with its ease in production makes it a feasible energy source. The technology that Solar Integrated brings forth furthers the innovation of Nanosolar by offering the cheapest known means of producing solar cells. Currently, solar panel installations cost around 7.00 to 8.00 dollars per watt but the technology that Solar Integrated provides brings that cost down to less than 1.00 dollar a watt. It achieves this low cost through two methods. Firstly, it uses amorphous silicon solar panels which are capable of collecting power even in any condition, increasing the number of hours that the panel can generate electricity and thus reducing inactivity. Secondly, it uses a new method called Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) which drastically reduced the cost of installation. If this general trend of improved solar panels at a reduced cost, the technologies offered by Nanosolar and Solar Integrated can be adapted for the SPS system and offer new potentials for greater stable energy generation at a reduced cost.

Further advantages of the system that would promote development would be the ability for a nation to sell its excess power. It would be unlikely that a nation would require the 4 gigawatts of annual energy initially and thus, it could sell the energy off and use the money for development. For every one gigawatt of energy, the SPS can generate 8.75 terawatt hours of electricity. With market prices of 22 cents per kilowatt, the revenue that the SPS would generate would equate to 1.93 billion dollars annually. This money would be of considerable advantage to the developing nation who could use this to develop roads and technology, foster business development and encourage entrepreneurship. It would also be more than enough money to build an education system and healthcare, thereby preparing the next generation to further intellectual development as well as ensure the health and betterment of the existing generations.

Solar power satellites would have a great impact on the third-world market. Third world countries are growing at an alarming rate, and there is a need for increase power daily; however, these countries are also the least able to fund and develop newer innovative technologies such as solar power satellites. By the year 2020, there are a predicted 26 mega-cities. Mega-cities are those with a population greater than 10 million. Most of these cities will be in third-world countries. In order to sustain such huge cities, countries will have to rely on sources other than the standard ones of today. For example, in Brazil, the city of Sao Paolo consumes over ten billion watts of power. Having solar power satellites would allow the creation of a renewable energy source. Realistically, however, the creation of solar power satellites is more feasible in countries such as the United States. While the benefits would be reaped more in third world countries, it is very impractical to assume that countries such as Brazil can pursue high technology power sources when sustaining adequate electrical power to its citizens in a more pressing issue at the moment. If more economically sound countries such as the United States did the initial research into developing solar power satellites, more countries globally could benefit from installing solar power receivers and having a renewable energy source.

In regards to economic sustainability, the design of solar power satellites is very expensive. However, once the initial start-up costs are realized, the satellites are self-sufficient. The countries would have to do touchups every once in awhile, but this job could be outsourced to other nations. The hardest part about realizing this venture would be acquiring the initial capital. Solar power satellites are a renewable energy source, so no extra money would be spent to generate extra energy. Also, the cost of solar panels is decreasing, another reason why solar power satellites are economically sustainable. In terms of design, the launching of satellites is one of the most expensive aspects. In order to launch something into space, countries spend between $3,000 and $5,000 per pound of material. This design is very expensive and would not be lucrative for developing countries till much later. In order to fully be accessible to developing nations, the cost of launching satellites must decrease drastically. It is estimated that as more and more satellites are launched into space, the initial cost of sending objects into space will decrease. In order for the design of solar power satellites to be economically realized, a lot of things must occur. First, low launch costs must exist. Second, a manufacturing industry must develop in space which can fix these satellites up in space. Only after these steps happen, will the design of the solar power satellite be economically feasible.
Culturally, the design of solar power satellites may be a new innovation. People are not used to seeing solar power panels in their everyday life. Once these satellites are realized, people will begin to see the benefits of a renewable energy source, and how having solar power can be a reason for never ending energy. The receiving stations may prove to be a hindrance initially. People will not be used to having large metropolitan areas dedicated to energy receivers. However, this phenomenon must be realized so that energy can be directly transmitted without too much delay to where it is most needed. Another viable option is to move the receiving stations to remote areas. However, in order to transmit the solar energy from remote locations, the metropolitan areas will have to lay down wires in order to get the energy. These lines could be expensive and interfere with everyday life during its construction. Developing countries are just starting to use coal and other fossil fuels. However, if we were to introduce a renewable energy source, such as the solar power satellites, third world countries could skip the stage of development where countries massacre the environment, and become more culturally and environmentally friendly. Environmentally, the design of solar power satellites is sustainable. They do not cause a disturbance in nature, and the receivers can be inputted into places humans have already created. For example, within each major city, we could have these receiver panels so that they can distribute the energy throughout the city. One potential problem with having solar power satellites is what happens when the satellites become debunked. Is littering in space the same as littering on earth? Morally and ethically, many questions are raised which we must first address before we are able to successfully launch the design of solar power satellites into space. Also, another environmental issue is whose space the universe belongs to. Are there country rights up in space like there are on the earth? The design of solar power satellites is good for the environment. Solar power satellite’s are a renewable energy source, have zero emissions, and generates no waste.

In terms of technology, solar power satellites are on the forefront of development. As countries use up more and more of our natural resources, we must seek outside methods of maintaining resources. A solar power satellite is a clear method of developing a renewable energy source. As of yet, the only drawback to this technology is its high initial startup cost. Design-wise, we must find way to lower the cost of the parts of building a solar power satellite. As more and more satellites are launched into space, the cost of launching will decrease. However, this cost decrease will be for null unless we can find a way to produce these units for a much more cost effective price. This technology has changed society in a positive manner because we are lowering the emissions rate of energy sources. With a renewable energy source, we will no longer have to burn fossil fuels and take away from the limited, precious fuels. As more and more countries are developing, renewable energy sources became needed. With the design of the solar power satellites, we are able to have energy that is reusable. In terms of future design, we need to find a way to produce the parts at a cheaper price. Also quintessential is finding a way to launch the satellites into space at a much more cost effective price. We very much look forward to development from this sector of energy. As fossil fuels are being used up, we are in constant need of a renewable energy source. With its simplistic design, and if we realize lower startup costs, solar power satellites are really the renewable energy source of the future.

	Power Generation	Costs	Cost/Watt	Pros	Cons
Nuclear Power	State of the art facilities can generate up to 366 Gigawatts	3-5 billion for the facility	$61.32	Extensive scientific data is available Technology has been established and used for decades in the other developed nations No greenhouse effects	Nuclear proliferation Larger capital costs because of emergency, containment, radioactive and storage systems Security and risks of containment breaches
Fossil Fuels	Dependent upon usage.	Currently oil is at $100 a barrel and expected to rise	$53.42	Inexpensive and established Currently Abundant and highly Versatile	Pollution and contributions to acid rain and global warming Extensive transportation systems to bring them to nations Subject to political and economic instability Limited Supply will resulting increasing costs
Solar Power	19-56 watts per square meter. Max power generation limited only by size	at a rate of <$1.00, dependent upon the size of the station	<$1.00 (employing new technologies)	Free as long as sunlight is available	Requirement of special materials Current technology requires large amounts of land for small amounts of energy generation
Solar Powered Satellites	230 watts per square meter up to 8.75 terawatts	70-80 billion including launch costs	<$1.00 (employing new technologies)	Can produce electricity 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Satellite can be moved to transmit power to different areas globally	Extremely expensive

Research Links:

http://www.ecoworld.com/blog/2008/02/11/solar-integrated-bipvs/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power

http://energy.cr.usgs.gov/energy/stats_ctry/Stat1.html

http://www.eia.doe.gov/

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/science/20041014-1354-wst-greenenergy.html

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/fossil_fuels/the-hidden-cost-of-fossil-fuels.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_satellites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil

http://www.przoom.com/news/29544/

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/solar_power_sats_011017-1.html