More on Extraterrestrials...

The search for aliens should start on Earth, not in space, says Paul Davies

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/7068765/The-search-for-aliens-should-start-on-Earth-not-outer-space-says-scientist.html

and

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jan/25/aliens-space-earth-humans

Aliens visiting Earth will be just like humans, scientist claims

Extra-terrestrials likely to possess human foibles such as greed, violence and a tendency to exploit others' resources, conference to be told

• Ian Sample, science correspondent
• The Guardian, Monday 25 January 2010
• Article history
• Governments should prepare for the worst if aliens visit Earth because beings from outer space are likely to be just like humans, a leading scientist is claiming.
  
  Extra-terrestrials might not only resemble us but have our foibles, such as greed, violence and a tendency to exploit others' resources, saysSimon Conway Morris, professor of evolutionary paleobiology at Cambridge University.
  
  And while aliens could come in peace they are quite as likely to be searching for somewhere to live, and to help themselves to water, minerals and fuel, Conway Morris will tell a conference at the Royal Society in London tomorrow.
  
  His lecture is part of a two-day conference at which experts will discuss how we might detect life on distant planets and what that could mean for society. "Extra-terrestrials … won't be splodges of glue … they could be disturbingly like us, and that might not be a good thing – we don't have a great record."
  
  The US space agency's search for alien life is based upon the mantra "follow the water", a strategy reflecting the fact that, on Earth, where there's water there's life. Recent missions have revealed ice on the moon and Mars.
  
  Astronomers have detected more than 400 planets outside our solar system, some of which sit in the "Goldilocks zone" where the temperature is neither too hot nor too cold for liquid water to form.
  
  Conway Morris will argue that alien life is most likely to occur on a planet similar to our own, with organisms made from the same biochemicals. The process of evolution will even shape alien life in a similar way, he added.
  
  "My view is that Darwinian evolution is really quite predictable, and when you have a biosphere and evolution takes over, then common themes emerge and the same is true for intelligence.
  
  "If you have a planet much smaller than ours, the gravity is so weak it loses its atmosphere. If the planet is much bigger, its gravity is so strong that everything crawls around on the ground, because you don't have to fall far to break everything. It's fantastically dull."
  
  The meeting is the first in a series that marks the Royal Society's 350th anniversary. Future conferences will tackle the science of ageing, vaccines, stem cells and geoengineering: the use of technology to protect the planet from the adverse effects of climate change.
  
  Albert Harrison, a professor of psychology at the University of California, Davis, who is speaking at the meeting tomorrow, will raise concerns about the radio signals humans are sending out to any eavesdropping aliens.
  
  Scientists have used telescopes to listen for alien broadcasts for more than 20 years, but we have also beamed our own signals into space. Harrison wonders if we might be sending the wrong kind of messages.
  
  "Some of them are serious, but there's a lot of hoopla, like love letters and commercials. What would we make of an alien civilisation if the first thing we translated from them was a commercial for a snack food?" he said.
  
  In the spring, scientists will debate whether Earth should be more proactive in trying to make contact with aliens by broadcasting signals to solar systems that might harbour life.
  
  Some enthusiasts believe any alien civilisation capable of reaching us can only have survived long enough to develop the necessary technology by solving major social problems, such as war, poverty and discrimination. Harrison disagrees.
  
  "I do think there's a risk in active searches for extra-terrestrials. The attitude seems to be they're friendly, they're a long way away, and they can't get here. But if you wake up one morning and an armada of extra-terrestrial spaceships are circling Earth, that prediction won't necessarily hold," Harrison said.
  
  If life has evolved elsewhere in our cosmic neighbourhood, we should find out by detecting their waste gases in the atmosphere of their planet or by discovering remnants of extra-terrestrial microbes in meteorites or alien soil samples, he said.
  
  Harrison dismisses fears of public panic if alien life is discovered, of the kind which reportedly followed Orson Welles' infamous radio broadcast of War of the Worlds in 1938.
  
  "The public reaction was overstated. Most people who thought the broadcast was real took sensible actions to protect themselves," Harrison said. "Surveys suggest most people think they will be fine, but they worry about others freaking out."
  
  Ted Peters, professor of systematic theology at the Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary in California, has surveyed religious groups to understand whether confirmation of extra-terrestrials could trigger the collapse of religion on Earth.
  
  His research suggests not, but he believes Christians should clarify whether God's creation covers the whole of space or just Earth.
  

Full NRC Report! Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies: Final Report

Above are the links for both the Interim and the Just-Released Final Report.  Here are the Findings and Recommendations of the Final Report:

• Finding: Congress has mandated that NASA discover 90 percent of all near-Earth objects 140 meters in diameter or greater by 2020. The administration has not requested and Congress has not appropriated new funds to meet this objective. Only limited facilities are currently involved in this survey/discovery effort, funded by NASA’s existing budget.
• Finding: The current near-Earth object surveys cannot meet the goals of the 2005 George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act directing NASA to discover 90 percent of all near-Earth objects 140 meters in diameter or greater by 2020.
• Finding: The selected approach to completing the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey will depend on nonscientific factors:
• If completion of the survey as close to the original 2020 deadline as possible is considered most important, a space mission conducted in concert with observations using a suitable ground-based telescope and selected by peer-reviewed competition is the best approach.
• This combination could complete the survey well before 2030, perhaps as early as 2022 if funding were appropriated quickly.
• If cost conservation is deemed most important, the use of a large ground-based telescope is the best approach. Under this option, the survey could not be completed by the original 2020 deadline, but could be completed before 2030. To achieve the intended cost effectiveness, the funding to construct the telescope must come largely on the basis of non-NEO programs.
• Recommendation: Because recent studies of meteor airbursts have suggested that near-Earth objects as small as 30 to 50 meters in diameter could be highly destructive, surveys should attempt to detect as many 30- to 50-meter objects as possible. This search for smaller-diameter objects should not be allowed to interfere with the survey for objects 140-meters in diameter or greater.
• Finding: The Arecibo and Goldstone radar systems play a unique role in the characterization of NEOs, providing unmatched accuracy in orbit determination, and insight into size, shape, surface structure, and other properties for objects within their latitude coverage and detection range.
• Recommendation: Immediate action is required to ensure the continued operation of the Arecibo Observatory at a level sufficient to maintain and staff the radar facility. Additionally, NASA and NSF should support a vigorous program of radar observations of NEOs at Arecibo and NASA should support such a program at Goldstone for orbit determination and characterization of physical properties.
• Recommendation: The United States should initiate a peer-reviewed, targeted research program in the area of impact hazard and mitigation of NEOs. Because this is a policy driven, applied program, it should not be in competition with basic scientific research programs or funded from them. This research program should encompass three principal task areas: surveys, characterization, and mitigation. The scope should include analysis, simulation, and laboratory experiments. This research program does not include mitigation space experiments or tests which are treated elsewhere in this report.
• Recommendation: The United States should take the lead in organizing and empowering a suitable international entity to participate in developing a detailed plan for dealing with the NEO hazard.
• Recommendation: Data from NEO airburst events observed by the U.S. Department of Defense satellites should be made available to the scientific community to allow it to improve understanding of the NEO hazards to Earth.
• -----------------
• Finding: The mandated survey to locate 90 percent of near-Earth objects 140-meters in diameter or greater has not yet been funded by the federal government. Because the survey requires several years to budget and build new equipment, and then to conduct the search, completion by 2020 is not realistic.
• Finding: The selected approach to completing the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey will depend on nonscientific factors:
• • If completion of the survey as close to the original 2020 deadline as possible is considered most important, a space mission conducted in concert with observations using a suitable ground-based telescope and selected by peer-reviewed competition is the best approach. This combination could complete the survey well before 2030, perhaps as early as 2022 if funding were appropriated quickly.
• • If cost conservation is deemed most important, the use of a large ground-based telescope is the best approach. Under this option, the survey could not be completed by the original 2020 deadline, but could be completed before 2030. To achieve the intended cost-effectiveness, the funding to construct the telescope must come largely on the basis of non-NEO programs.
• Finding: It is highly probable that the next destructive NEO event will be an airburst from a <50- meter object, not a crater-forming impact.
• Recommendation: Because recent studies of meteor airbursts have suggested that near-Earth objects as small as 30 to 50 meters in diameter could be highly destructive, surveys should attempt to detect as many 30- to 50-meter objects as possible. This search for smaller-diameter objects should not be allowed to interfere with the survey for objects 140-meters in diameter or greater.
• Finding: The best opportunities for physical characterization of most NEOs occur during close Earth approaches when these objects are optically bright. Existing programs of ground-based optical observations for characterization of NEOs are few in number, and are not coordinated among different observing teams. Many observable NEOs are not characterized.
• Finding: The capabilities of Arecibo and Goldstone are complementary and many observing campaigns have utilized their synergy. One of the primary advantages of having two radar facilities is that one can serve as a backup for the other.
• Finding: The number of NEOs observed by radar per year could be increased about fivefold by obtaining sufficient observing time.
• Finding: Radar cannot be used to discover NEOs, but is a powerful tool for rapidly improving our knowledge of the orbit of a newly found object, and thus characterizing its potential hazard to Earth.
• Finding: The Arecibo and Goldstone radar systems play a unique role in the characterization of NEOs, providing unmatched accuracy in orbit determination, and insight into size, shape, surface structure, and other properties for objects within their latitude coverage and detection range.
• Finding: Congress has directed NASA to ensure that Arecibo is available for radar observations, but has not appropriated funds for this work.
• Recommendation: Immediate action is required to ensure the continued operation of the Arecibo Observatory at a level sufficient to maintain and staff the radar facility. Additionally, NASA and NSF should support a vigorous program of radar observations of NEOs at Arecibo and NASA should support such a program at Goldstone for orbit determination and characterization of physical properties.
• Finding: U.S. Department of Defense satellites have detected and continue to detect high-altitude airburst events from NEOs entering Earth’s atmosphere. Such data are valuable to the NEO community for assessing NEO hazards.
• Recommendation: Data from NEO airburst events observed by the U.S. Department of Defense satellites should be made available to the scientific community to allow it to improve understanding of the NEO hazards to Earth.
• Finding: Preliminary theoretical studies on low-altitude atmospheric Tunguska-like airbursts from asteroids as small as 30 meters in diameter suggest significant risk exists from these NEOs.
• Finding: Current models for generation of tsunamis by impacts into, or airbursts above, the ocean are not yet sufficiently reliable to establish threat levels to coastal communities.
• Recommendation: Additional observations and modeling should be performed to establish the risk associated with airbursts and with potential tsunami generation.
• Finding: Dedicated flyby spacecraft missions to NEOs provide only limited information relevant for hazard mitigation issues.
• Finding: Rendezvous spacecraft missions can provide detailed characterization of NEOs that could aid in the design and development of hazard-mitigation techniques. Such in situ characterization also allows calibration of ground- and space-based remote sensing data and may permit increased confidence in the use of remote classification of NEOs to inform future mitigation decisions.
• Recommendation: If NASA conducts human missions to NEOs, these missions should maximize the data obtained for NEO characterization.
• Finding: No single approach to mitigation is appropriate and adequate to fully prevent the effects of the full range of potential impactors, although civil defense is an appropriate component of mitigation in all cases. With adequate warning, a suite of four types of mitigation is adequate to mitigate the threat from nearly all NEOs except the most energetic ones.
• Finding: Civil defense (evacuation, sheltering in place, providing emergency infrastructure) is a cost-effective mitigation measure for saving lives from the smallest NEO impact events and is a necessary part of mitigation for larger events. If an NEO is predicted to impact on a specific, inhabited location, there is likely to be strong pressure for more than the most cost-effective method for saving lives.
• Finding: Slow-push-pull techniques are the most accurately controllable and are adequate for changing the orbits of small NEOs (tens of meters to roughly 100 m in diameter) with decades of advance warning and for somewhat larger NEOs (hundreds of meters) in those few cases where it would pass through a keyhole that would put the NEO onto an impact trajectory. Of the slow push/pull techniques, the gravity tractor appears to be the most independent of variations in the properties of the NEO and by far the closest to technological readiness.
• Finding: Kinetic impactors are adequate to prevent impacts on Earth by moderately sized NEOs (many hundreds of meters to 1 kilometer) with decades of advance warning. The concept has been demonstrated in space, but the result is sensitive to the properties of the NEO and requires further study.
• Finding: Unless a large flotilla (100 or more) of massive spacecraft was sent as impactors, nuclear explosions are the only current, practical means for changing the orbit of large NEOs (diameters greater than about 1 km). They also remain as a backup strategy for somewhat smaller objects if other methods have failed. They may be the only method for dealing with smaller objects when warning time is short, but additional research is necessary for these cases.
• Finding: For a wide range of impact scenarios, launch capability exists to deliver an appropriate payload to mitigate an NEO. For some scenarios, particularly short warning scenarios, the capability is inadequate. Development of foreseen heavy-lift launch vehicles, such as the Ares cargo vehicle, should enable the use of a variety of methods for NEOs up to 2 times larger than is possible with current launch vehicles
• Finding: Mitigation of the threat from NEOs benefits dramatically from in-situ characterization of the NEO prior to mitigation, if there is time to do so.
• Finding: Changing the orbit of an NEO with our current understanding is sufficiently uncertain that, in most cases, it requires an accompanying verification. This is easy to implement with many slow-push techniques but requires considerable additional effort for other techniques.
• Recommendation: If Congress chooses to fund mitigation research at an appropriately high level, the first priority for a space mission in the mitigation area is an experimental test of a kinetic impactor along with a characterization, monitoring and verification system, such as the Don Quijote mission that was previously considered, but not funded, by ESA. This mission would produce the most significant advances in understanding and provide an ideal chance for international collaboration in a realistic mitigation scenario.
• Recommendation: The United States should initiate a peer-reviewed, targeted research program in the area of impact hazard and mitigation of NEOs. Because this is a policy driven, applied program, it should not be in competition with basic scientific research programs or funded from them. This research program should encompass three principal task areas: surveys, characterization, and mitigation. The scope should include analysis, simulation, and laboratory experiments. This research program does not include mitigation space experiments or tests which are treated elsewhere in this report.
• Recommendation: The United States should establish a standing committee with membership from each of the relevant agencies and departments, to develop a detailed plan for treating all aspects of the threat posed to Earth by NEOs, and apportioning among these agencies and departments authority and responsibility for carrying out this plan, in coordination and collaboration with other nations. The committee would be further charged with overseeing on a continuing basis the carrying out of each agency’s and department’s activities under this plan. The Administration should designate one agency or department as the lead; the chair of the committee should be the representative from this agency or department.
• Recommendation: The United States should take the lead in organizing and empowering a suitable international entity to participate in developing a detailed plan for dealing with the NEO hazard.
• Finding: A $10 million annual level of funding would be sufficient to continue existing surveys, maintain the radar capability at the Arecibo and Goldstone observatories, and support a modest level of research on the hazards posed by NEOs. This level would not allow achievement of the goals established in the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act on any timescale. A $50 million annual level of funding for several years would likely be sufficient to achieve the goals of the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act. A $250 million annual level of funding if continued for somewhat under a decade, would be sufficient to accomplish the survey and research objectives, plus provide survey redundancy and support for a space mission to test in situ characterization and mitigation.

NRC Report is out!: Bigger, Better Telescopes Needed to Find Near-Earth Asteroids

From: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/01/bigger-better-telescopes-needed-to-find-near-earth-asteroids/

If we’re going to protect the Earth from an asteroid, we need to find the dangerous ones whizzing about in the emptiness of space.

Unfortunately, the United States will not complete the survey of large near-Earth objects by 2020 as mandated, but not funded, by Congress in 2005. That’s the conclusion of a new National Research Council Report,Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies, released Friday.

The current budget and astronomical tools are just not sufficient to find all near-Earth objects larger than 140 meters (460 feet) across. Better telescopes than we currently have will be needed. While this has been known within the NEO science community, the final report could bring the realization to the policymakers and politicians who control the purse strings.

“There’s no longer time to meet the goal by 2020,” said Michael A’Hearn, a University of Maryland astronomer and co-author of the report. “There’s no way to do the survey in that length of time because the equipment isn’t even built yet. We say it is not unreasonable to set a new deadline of 2030 and start funding now. We probably can do the job by then.”

Despite the large number of NEO discoveries over the past several years, our current detection instruments like the Catalina Sky Survey, are not up to the task of completing the Congressional mandate, known as the George E. Brown Survey.

“The current instruments, no matter how you operate them are not capable of doing the George Brown survey,” A’Hearn noted.

And that’s to say nothing of the smaller asteroids, those in the 30- and 50-meter (90 to 165 foot) range, which hit Earth far more often than larger objects. Finding and tracking those little guys will require new telescopes like the Large Synoptic Sky Survey and Panstarrs, neither of which currently has the funding to complete construction.

Scientists have increasingly come to understand that the risk of asteroids and comets hitting Earth is real, but quantifying the risk that humans face from such events is much trickier.

“Our estimates of the risk could easily be wrong by a factor of two or three,” A’Hearn said. “I don’t think they are wrong by a factor of 10, but the boundaries, again, haven’t been explored.”

Even the Tunguska asteroid, which exploded over Siberia in 1908, remains something of a mystery. It’s unclear even how large the object was, A’Hearn said, which makes it difficult to know how common such an impact is. The rareness of the event makes it very tough to compare the risk from an asteroid strike with that from automobile collisions or other prosaic problems.

Right now, National Research Council scientists estimate the risk of being killed by an NEO impact is comparable to the risk of being one of the 50 or so people who die on an amusement park ride each year. The difference is that a major asteroid would kill many people all at once.

Another area of high uncertainty is the physics of asteroid impacts. Near-Earth objects of different types may require different mitigation strategies.

“The first thing we need to do is understand what the hazard is,” A’Hearn said. “That’s partly finding them and partly understanding what their effect is. We have to understand in more detail how we’d mitigate against them.”

Former astronaut Rusty Schweickart, a tireless campaigner for asteroid risk awareness, said the latest report was the best of its kind, surpassing an earlier NASA report to Congress on near-Earth object risk.

“I can certainly say that Irwin Shapiro, who I know very well personally, did a terrific job in putting this review together,” Schweickart said.

Lindley Johnson, program executive at NASA’s Near Earth Object Program, which wrote the NASA report agreed.

“It looks to be a very good report,” Johnson said. “It had a very strong team of top scientists in the area on the committee. They had the right people and it looks like they looked at all the right things.”

Differences begin to emerge between people who study near-Earth objects when mitigation options come up. The new report looks at two main ways of deflecting asteroids, following previous reports. First, the asteroid could be hit with some kind of impactor, either conventional or nuclear. Second, a longer-term, more precise technique like a gravity tractor could be employed.

Schweickart argued, however, that a gravity tractor, which would slowly push an asteroid off a collision path with Earth, should be considered a necessary but not independent part of any Earth defense.

“It’s the icing on the cake of stronger deflection needs,” Schweickart said. “It’s not comparable to and should never be considered the primary means of deflection.”

Update 1/25: Typos corrected to include the correct names for the George E. Brown Survey and the National Research Council report.

Image: U.S. Geological Survey/Composite: Tim Warchocki

Lasers to beam energy to Earth from space

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/solarpower/7060015/Lasers-to-beam-energy-to-Earth-from-space.html

Solar energy collected in space and beamed back to Earth by laser could soon be used to power homes and electric vehicles under a project by European space engineers.

By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent
Published: 8:30PM GMT 23 Jan 2010
It sounds more like a scheme dreamed up by a James Bond villain attempting to destroy the Earth than a technology that could help provide a solution to the planet's dwindling energy supplies.
Engineers plan to put satellites into orbit around the planet that can gather energy from the sun, concentrate it into powerful laser beams and transmit the energy back to the Earth where it can be used to generate electricity.
While harvesting solar energy in space has been discussed by scientists for more than 30 years, engineers at EADS Astrium, Europe's largest space company, now believe the technology is available to allow them to start building a working prototype.
They hope to have a small demonstrator of a full sized space-based power station, capable of beaming back 10-20kW of power, ready for launch in the next five years.
Using a network of these solar power stations it would be possible to provide energy on demand 24 hours a day – something that is not possible with solar power on the planet's surface which can only produce energy during the hours of sunlight.
"There is a global need for increased energy generation that does not have an environmental impact," explained Matthew Perren, head of innovation at Astrium's headquarters in Paris.
"The real advantage of space solar power is that it can provide power on demand as we can essentially point the laser beam where ever we like on the earth below the orbit.
"Looking to the future we envisage large power stations in space that are capable of transmitting energy to any point in the planet on demand."
Space-based solar power, although more expensive than using solar panels on Earth, is attractive because of its capability to provide a clean, inexhaustible power supply around the clock.
Much of the power of the sun is filtered out by the Earth's atmosphere while clouds and the inability to produce power at night have all limited the use of solar power as an energy source.
In space, however, the sun's rays are far more powerful and even with a relatively inefficient conversion process, could still produce large amounts of power. Most importantly, satellites can be positioned so they are exposed to sunlight for far longer than sites on Earth.
The space power stations would be launched into a geostationary orbit, which means they remain above the same point above the planet, around 22,300 miles above the surface.
With solar panels more than 50 metres across, they would be able to gather large amounts of energy from the sun which would then be converted into a infrared laser beam to be transmitted back to Earth.
One of the key uses of the technology could be to power a new generation of large electric vehicles such as cargo ships and tankers. The satellites could be made to move the laser beam to track the ships as they move across the ocean, providing a constant energy supply.
Scientists at Astrium have already begun work on developing the technology needed to turn a laser beam into movable source of electricity. They have managed to use lasers in the laboratory to power toy cars.
Astrium hopes to work with international space agencies, governments and power companies to develop a network of space based power stations that will eventually be capable of supplying enough energy to power hundreds of thousands of homes.
But it is not the only firm working in the field. In September Japan announced a $21 billion plan to send solar panel equipped satellite into space that could beam enough power back to Earth to supply 300,000 homes.
California has also made a deal with a company called Solaren to design satellites that would beam power back down from solar powered satellites.
But Astrium claims that its approach of using infrared lasers will make the system safer than other proposals which have suggested using microwaves to transmit the energy. If misdirected, microwaves could cause widespread damage, effectively cooking anything in their path.
Such schemes are reminiscent of far fetched plots in James Bond movies such as Die Another Day, where villain Gustav Graves builds a space based laser that he can control as a weapon, and Diamonds are Forever, where Ernst Stavro Blofeld attempts to hold the world to ransom with a laser in space.
Astrium, however, insist that the infrared laser, which is typically used in laser guidance systems for the military, will be safe. As it is beyond the visible spectrum of the human eye, it would also not be harmful to eyesight should anyone look into the beam.
Mr Perren said: "We are concentrating on developing something that is safe. While the laser beam will have some heat in it, we intend for it to be safe for people to walk through unaffected.
"Much of the technology we need has already been tried and tested in existing satellites and spacecraft, but there are technical difficulties that still need to be overcome such as improving the efficiency of converting the energy and increasing the power of the laser we can build.
"It is important to remember that we are not looking to take the place of power stations on Earth, but to provide another piece of the puzzle in finding alternative energy sources."

Russia and Space Solar Power

From: Science & Technology Overview Russia Dec '09
Science&Technology Unit, Embassy of Switzerland in Moscow


Time To Build Space Solar Power Plants
The Russian science news agency Informnauka claims that more and more attention is drawn by scientists in Russia to the use of solar energy including the creation of space solar power plants. The researchers at the Lavochkin Scientific Production Association Federal State Unitary Enterprise suggest a new principle for building such power plants.  The researchers propose to give up the idea of building extremely large constructions and to place the solar accumulators and transmitting antennas on a system of autonomous satellites controlled via a piloting signal from the Earth.  They suppose to use the short-wave range of microwave frequency up to millimetric radio waves for the antenna, which will provide an opportunity to form narrow beams in the outer space with the minimal size of generators and amplifiers. Small generators will allow to reduce the size of receiving antennas by a factor of ten.  Interestingly, the researchers plan to place them on captive balloons at a height of 4.000 km. Such location will ensure that the molecular oxygen will not absorb the millimetric radio waves.  Moreover, a captive balloon can be put anywhere in any region.  The beams of individual satellite antennas should converge at the spot of the receiving antenna location. Each autonomous satellite will present a single element of a large antenna field comprised of a fleet of such spacecrafts. To deploy this project, a rather large photoemitting panel which transforms solar radiation directly into microwave energy is required. Capabilities of modern space-rocket hardware make it possible to build spacecrafts equipped with the panels up to 500 м2 in size in the nearest term. Today, the photoconverter efficiency reaches 60 per cent. Perhaps, by the time the experimental design works to build space solar power plants commence such converters will be produced industrially.  It will take quite a lot of effort. The researchers will have to create a semiconductor structure capable not only of transforming solar energy but also radiating it in the microwave range at the same time. A control system to operate the automatic spacecrafts should be developed as it will allow to form an integrated antenna field of single satellites. The experts believe that in order to address the issues of a future energy crisis and to keep up with the developed countries, Russia must begin the research today.
Sources:
RUSSIAN SCIENCE NEWS, PARK-MEDIA, 29.12.2009, www.informnauka.ru, article on the basis of a publication in
Russia Electronic Scientific Magazine by V. K. Sysoev, G. M. Polishchuk, K. M. Pichkhadze “The Solar Space Power
Plant: The Choice Of Solution.” , http://zhurnal.ape.relarn.ru/articles/2009/050.pdf
Contact for further information: Valentin Sysoev, Doctor of Technics, assistant director of the Federal State
Unitary Enterprise of Lavochkin Scientific Production Association, Khimki; sysoev@laspace.ru

Atlantis Research Announces International Collegiate Solar Power Satellite Design Competition!

Atlantis Research, sponsor of the Space Settlement Design competition is excited to announce it will host and sponsor the International collegiate Solar Power Satellite Design Competition.  The Contest would be open to all Undergraduate and Graduate students from across the globe. The preliminary round or the qualifying round would be announced in the first week of February. Registrations would begin with the announcements. The RFP shall be made available to the participants from February 10, 2010, with the finals (live competition) round being held August 6, 2010 to August 8, 2010.  The competition structure will be:

• Max. 8 member teams
• The registration fees for the competition would be USD 120 per international team, and Rs. 5500 per team for Indian teams.
• Prize money for the winning team would be USD 2000.
• 8 teams in all would be invited from the world over for the final round. We might be able increase this number depending upon how much support we are able to gather.
• Atlantis expects some 200 teams to register world-wide.

Atlantis is currently seeking volunteer 20 volunteer judges to review the student proposals and serve as competition judges.

Interested judges or sponsors may contact Atlantis Education at:

Abhishek Agarwal

Email: rickeverest@gmail.com

Ph (India): +91 97170 01231

Ph (US): +1 713 397 0781

Director

Atlantis Frontiers Edutainment Pvt. Ltd.

Ground Floor, K 4/5

DLF Phase II, Gurgaon - 122002

Off: +91 124 4009 936 / 37 / 38 / 39 / 40

Fax: +91 124 4009 935

Website: http://www.atlantisfrontiers.com

Planetary Defense: Interesting Discussion

For those readers interested in Mega engineering ideas and planetary defense, the following weblog entry by James M. Essig might be of interest.  The author discusses everything from deflection of large asteroids, to galaxy-sized thermonuclear devices to deliberately make a local section of the universe more friendly to life by seeding it with more heavy elements.  Includes a healthy dose of both Science (math formulas, but thankfully not obtuse), and theological speculation. 
http://jamesmessig.wordpress.com/2010/01/22/a-post-modern-era-physicists-reflection-on-the-continued-existence-and-development-of-nuclear-weapons-technology-how-i-learned-to-both-love-and-hate-the-bomb-and-a-warning-for-future-generations-re/


Just a few of the interesting tidbits:

The point to be made here is that, literally speaking, there is no upper limit to the mass of a thermonuclear device. Why would mankind choose to produce the extreme sized devices described above is anyone’s guess. However, it may be useful to point out that the cosmos over long time frames is a metaphorical shooting gallery. One has to merely recall the event that supposedly wiped out the dinosaurs and realize that over a long enough time period, most probably, even larger threats will present themselves. If we are going to plan for the survival of mankind for the next thousand years, why not plan for our survival essentially for eternity.

A much more practical 1,000 megatons to safety destroy a 1/4 mile wide or even a 1/3 mile wide asteroid might be doable providing at least one third of the bombs energy can be deposited within the asteroid’s material composition. 1,000 megatons of TNT releases the energy required to completely vaporize 2 cubic kilometers of water ice and because of the relatively lower specific heat and heat of vaporization of many solid minerals and metals,  roughly, an equal volume of rock and metal may be vaporized depending on the minerals and metals in question. Note that even though it is relatively easy to bring water from freezing to boiling, the heat of vaporization of water is about 1.85 megajoules/kilogram as opposed to the 0.420 megajoules/kilogram necessary to heat liquid water just above freezing to boiling temperature. The specific heat of water and its heat of vaporization is about as high as they come for ordinary materials.

Our first use of space based nuclear bombs might be our first self-saving act of deflecting a large rouge asteroid with our name on it. Afterward, Project Orion star ships that use low yield atomic bombs, perhaps even low yield pure fusion bombs, can probably get us to the stars within this century if a concerted global effort were to be undertaken to develop the flight hard ware, mission plans, and operational protocol.


I strongly feel that we definitely have the explosive means for dealing with large rouge asteroids given enough lead time and human ingenuity.

OPEN LETTER TO ARPA-E on Space Solar Power

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Marty Hoffert
To: Arunava Majumdar ; Arun Majumdar
Cc: Steve Chu ; David.Danielson; eric; john_holdren
Sent: Wed, January 20, 2010 3:45:55 AM
Subject: Presentation at ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit

Dear Prof. Majumdar:

I write to propose a high-level briefing, perhaps at the ARPA-E Energy Innovation Pre-Conference Workshop on March 1 at the Gaylord Convention Center in DC, on space-based solar power (SBSP); and, as a possible specific example, a near-term ARPA-E funded project to test it by laser beaming of solar energy collected in orbit from the International Space Station to collectors on Earth (see attached).

Longer term, but soon, a laser SBSP demonstrator in geostationary orbit could be deployed. If successful, there are many plausible business plans for commercialization, at least as much as for terrestrial solar, with which space-based solar would logically can co-evolve.  Even now, a California company, Solaren, has signed a proprietary agreement with Pacific Gas and Electric to deliver 200 megawatts of electricity from space to their grid by 2016. And whereas, for technical reasons relating to large space components needed for "first power," we don't think their microwave beaming approach is the way to go initially, the technology needs to be taken seriously.

Despite a strong endorsement by the recent Pentagon NSSO Report (see below), and major investments by Japan's space agency and Mitsubishi electric, the US has no agency-funded SBSP programs.  This is bad. Would we have ever gotten the Internet from private sector investments and venture capital only? Twenty years with DARPA and ten more with NSF funding were needed for the Internet, which changed, and continues to change the world, took off. Only logical that ARPA-E, whose charter is to make "transformative" energy systems real, should fund SBSP. It doesn't yet, nor does any other US agency. Most funders are inherently risk-averse. But ARPA presents a unique opportunity to explore a revolutionary energy technology that could run civilization on a global scale with minimum environmental impact. (We realize that this and other assertions on the state-of-the-art, on costs and on weapons implications, must be defended. That's what we want. But it needs doing at a sufficiently high organizational level that ARPA-E decision-makers and advisors, mainly yourself, but also Steve Chu, John Holdren, Jim Woolsey and senior ARPA-E program managers can engage the real issues.

We're fighting to be heard. Pretty accomplished guys (no false modesty here), my son and business partner Eric and I did get a chance to pitch SBSP to Dave Danielson last September at the L'Enfant Plaza ARPA-E offices.  Having received the official ARPA-E "discouragement letter" for our laser SBSP Concept paper along with 98% of fellow proposers -- I know, there wasn't enough money -- I was pleasantly surprised to be contacted by Dave, who informed me that our rejection should be seen perhaps more as a postponement of consideration.  There is not a lot of technological literacy about space solar power -- not surprising in light of the funding dessert we're in.  You have to pay the rent.  Lucky I'm an emeritus professor of physics and Eric has an active software business. It has been a long labor of love to nurture and develop these ideas.  But we, along with competent colleagues whom we have come to know well, can do this job. It might be a good idea to kick off this project for ARPA-E, if it happens, with a technical conference for the major players.  Initially skeptic, by the end of our presentation to Dave Danielson,  he told us that our case was compelling.  Please ask him about this. He has notes on our meeting, and has encouraged us to cite his conclusions. The next step, he said, was to convince you.

I suspect that you are not the only one to convince. I have heard from a colleague that during a recent talk at an IIT in India, Steve Chu was questioned about whether the US was willing to participate in joint research with India on solar power satellites, which the president of India had found exciting as a possible energy source.  His response, I am told, was that so far, Marty Hoffert had not convinced him SBSP costs would not be prohibitive. We have in fact developed a careful cost analysis showing current costs of terrestrial and space-based solar power for base load are comparable, and that both may be expected to drop along standard "learning by doing" curves to someday compete with coal for electricity -- Google's famous SE < C.  NREL's solar energy roadmap is based on these projections, and we have similar ones for launch costs to geostationary orbit. The Chu story may be apocryphal, but technical arguments and perceptions have to be engaged or we'll never get anywhere. We have to talk to you guys.

Hence our request to do a high level briefing on space-based solar power. The upcoming ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit, March 1-3, may or may not be the place for it.  I do see from the draft agenda that the Pre-Conference Workshop on Monday has morning and afternoon  breakout sessions on grid scale energy storage, power electronics, solar PV and solar thermal, all of which are component technologies of a space solar power system.  Perhaps you can find a slot for the briefing we propose, or alternately, we could make it another time or place. In any case I've made reservations to stay at the Gaylord Convention Center Feb. 28-March 2 (yesterday was the last day for the conventional rate). And I did indicate to your assistant Norman Kaufmann, my and Eric's desire to participate productively in the meeting in whatever way is useful, not only in giving this talk, but as panel members, etc.  Registration fees are another story as we have no present source of funds other than our pockets for this. We have, so far, not heard back. But I hope, you or Norman will find time from your busy schedule to get back to me soon.

Best regards,

Marty Hoffert
Professor Emeritus of Physics   
Andre and Bella Meyer Hall of Physics
4 Washington Place    
New York University
New York, NY 10003-6621    
                        
NYU Phone:  212-998-3747   
NYU Fax:     212-995-4016
Home Phone: 516-466-9418
Home Fax:    516-487-0734
Cellphone:     516-972-4779
Email:        marty.hoffert@nyu.edu 
Web page:  http://www.physics.nyu.edu/people/hoffert.martin.html

DOWNLOADABLE REFERENCES

TRANSFORMATIVE ENERGY TECHNOLOGY IN GENERAL

• Science paper first-authored by yours truly & co-authored by 17 energy/climate experts on advanced energy tech to address global climate change including letters to the editor &  responses thereto (1 Nov. 2002):

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/Hoffert_etal_Science+Lett.pdf

• Report in Andy Revkin's  New York Times dotEarth blog  (3 Dec. 2007) on a letter to Congress by yours truly co-signed by 36 energy/climate experts -- including three, who, like Steve Chu, are Nobel laureates -- supporting ramping-up investment to $30 billion per year to "develop, demonstrate, and stimulate the commercialization of a range of technologies and approaches that can provide affordable carbon-neutral energy, and to use that energy more wisely." This is similar to my Congressional testimony supporting transformative energy R & D at funding levels that can make a difference for carbon dioxide emission phaseout by midcentury -- a scale sufficient also to stimulate US job-creation near-term. The scaled-down version passed by Congress funds ARPA-E at $400 million for a limited time through the Stimulus Bill. It could only support 2% of round one Concept paper proposals received by ARPA-E -- a scale biased for various reasons against truly transformative carbon-neutral energy systems like space-base solar power.  Many economists now call for much larger energy tech investments for both environmental and economy stimulus reasons, as we did in '07:

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/Hoffert_etal_EnergyLetter.pdf

• My Video Interview on "CleanSkies" on ARPA-E proposal reviews & funding (8 Nov. 2009):

http://www.cleanskies.com/videos/some-question-doe-grant-process

• Science Magazine News article on ARPA-E funding citing my comments (22 August 2009):

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/Mervis-Science-ARPA-E_stum.pdf

• My TV interview on PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer on the release of the IPCC "Mitigation Report" making the case for innovative energy research to address climate change (10 Oct 2007):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdTb5xzUXJM

SPACE-BASED SOLAR POWER (SBSP)

• My recent talk as a PowerPoint File on "Solar Electricity from Orbit" presented at New Jersey Institute of Technology colloquium, Newark, NJ (4 Nov, 2009):

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/Hoffert-NJIT.ppt

• Eric & my ARPA-E Concept Paper, "Laser PV Tests for Space Based Solar Power" submitted from our startup, Versatility Energy Systems, South Orange, NJ (2 June 2009):

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/Hofferts_arpa-e_Concept_Pa.pdf

• On inter-generational collaboration on solar power from space (27 June 2008):

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/Hofferts%20-%20The%20Son%20Also%20Ri.pdf

• Google Tech Talk video of my overview lecture, "Electricity from Orbit: The Case for R & D," including a comparison of spot sizes on Earth for space mirrors, microwave and laser beams in geostationary orbit and the advantages of starting near-term with lasers, presented at NASA/Ames & Google, Mountain View, CA (5 Dec. 2007):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9YD9-_WTjk

• Pentagon National Security Space Office (NSSO) report supporting space-based solar power for strategic energy security, and the need for institutional research support by a US government agency to underwrite the risk of development (10 Oct. 2007):

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/NSSO-sbsp.pdf

• Space.com online article on Solaren proprietary plans for near-term electricity from orbiting ultralight SBSP employing microwave beaming to address California's 2020 goal of 33% carbon-neutral electricity by 2020 citing my initial response to the idea (2 Dec, 2009):

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/091202-space-power-beaming.html

• NPR News audio clip on Solaren concept for selling carbon-neutral electricity from space to PG & E by 2016, including new info on their distributed component concept from CEO Gary Spirnak (17 Dec., 2009):

http://homepage.mac.com/marty.hoffert/filechute/Solaren-NPR-12_17-09.2.m4a

EADS & SBSP

From: http://www.physorg.com/news183278937.html  retrieved 01-21-2010

Science and technology news

European space company wants solar power plant in spaceJanuary 21, 2010 by Lin Edwards Enlarge(PhysOrg.com) -- EADS Astrium, Europe's biggest space company, plans to put a solar power satellite in orbit to demonstrate the collection of solar power in space and its transmission via infrared laser to provide electricity on Earth.Ads by GooglePhotovoltaic Basic Course - Nationally Accredited Online Course w/ Live Student Support. Find More! - www.Training4Green.comPower Monitors - Pwr Monitors for all applications Energy Management software - www.Measurlogic.com Chief executive officer of Astrium, François Auque, said the system is at the testing stage, but that a viable system collecting and transmitting power from space could be within reach soon. Auque said space solar power is an attractive idea because it is an inexhaustible and clean form of energy. Unlike solar plants on Earth, orbital solar collectors can work around the clock, and there is no interference from clouds or atmospheric dusts or gases, which means the energy hitting photovoltaic cells in orbit is much greater than it would be for the same panels on the ground.Earlier concepts of beaming power to Earth from space were criticized because they relied on microwaves to transmit the power to the ground, which has safety concerns, so Astrium plans to use infrared lasers instead, which means that even if they were misdirected people and objects hit by the laser beams could not be scorched.The transmission of power via infrared laser has been tested in Astrium’s laboratories, and they are now concentrating on improving the system’s efficiency. Work on developing converters to convert received infrared energy to electricity is proceeding rapidly, and Astrium is collaborating in this work with scientists at the University of Surrey, in the UK. The company is hoping to achieve 80% efficiency in the conversion.According to Astrium’s chief technology officer, Robert Laine, at present the power handled by the system is limited by the size of the laser that can be built. A demonstration mission would also be necessary to prove the system works, and this should be possible within the present decade.The concept of harvesting solar power in space has been discussed for at least the last three decades, but the problems of power loss during transmission and the expense and difficulty of assembling large arrays of solar collectors in space have seemed almost insurmountable. However, Astrium is not the only company close to bringing the idea to fruition. Last September Japan announced it is planning to put a small demonstration solar collecting satellite in orbit by 2015. This system will transmit the power to Earth using microwaves.EADS Astrium is seeking investors and partners such as the EU, national governments, space agencies, or power companies, to fund and contribute in other ways to the development of its operational orbital solar collection and transmission system.More information: EADS Astrium -- http://www.astrium.eads.net/© 2010 PhysOrg.com

Astrium develops space power idea (BBC)

 

January 19, 2010

By Jonathan Amos

Europe's biggest space company is seeking partners to fly a demonstration solar power mission in orbit.

EADS Astrium says the satellite system would collect the Sun's energy and transmit it to Earth via an infrared laser, to provide electricity.

Space solar power has been talked about for more than 30 years. However, there have always been question marks over its cost, efficiency and safety.

But Astrium believes the technology is close to proving its maturity.

"Today we are not at an operational stage; it's just a test," said chief executive officer Francois Auque. "In order to implement a solution, of course, we would need to find partnerships and to invest, to develop operational systems," he told BBC News.

Those partnerships could comprise space agencies, the EU or national governments and even power companies, he said.

'Safe' system

Space solar power is an attractive concept because it would be clean, inexhaustible, and available 24 hours a day.

The amount of energy falling on photovoltaic cells placed in orbit is considerably greater than the same solar panels positioned on the Earth's surface. In space, the incidence of light is unaffected by clouds, dust or the filtering effects of atmospheric gases.

Critics, though, have always pointed to multiple hurdles - to the cost of launching and assembling large solar stations in orbit, to the losses in efficiency in conversion, and to the safety issues surrounding some wireless transmission methods, particularly those that use microwaves.

Astrium says the latter can be addressed by using infrared lasers which, if misdirected, would not risk "cooking" anyone in their path.

The company has already tested power transmission via laser in its labs, and is now working on improving the efficiencies of the end-to-end system.

Necessary efficiency

Robert Laine, Astrium's chief technology officer, acknowledges however that there are still some big challenges to be overcome.

"Today, we will be limited in power by the size of the laser we can build. That's a prime limitation," he said.

"On the receive side, the conversion of this infrared energy into electricity - that's something which is progressing very fast and we are working with the University of Surrey [in the UK] to develop converters.

"The principle is to get a very high efficiency of conversion of the infrared [laser light] into electricity. If we achieve 80% then it's a real winner."

Dr Laine said a small demonstration of the technology ought to be ready for launch in the coming decade.

"Like any technology, someone has to demonstrate it first before it can become an operational system," he told BBC News.

"We have reached a point where, in the next five years, we could build something which is in the order of 10-20 kW to transmit useful energy to the ground."