Ian McKay’s Post

It’s not really that hard. The problem is most decarbonization efforts rely on the myth that electricity is somehow going to come abundantly from wind and solar. This is more or less been turned into some kind of religion amongst the green Tech community. The truth is nuclear technology, specifically high nuclear technology can produce net electrical output as well as fuel outputs. The recent bipartisan efforts of Washington to promote nuclear clear indicator of this reality. Also, the effort to decarbonize aviation the larger picture that there are 1.4 billion internal combustion engines operating around the planet. And that synthetic fuel made from CO2 and water have the ability to close the carbon loop and a carbon negative infrastructure. All capital invested on paradigms that involve limitless solar is wasted.

There is a possibility to require even less infrastructure, if you use future solar farms. I think this is the key, using solar farms, surface mounted (like those of Erthos), with an upper antenna layer. With this, using a km2 farm, you can beam with 100 W/m2 or less at low altitude, there is no need for additional wires since it is similar to the power generated by a solar panel. Since 0.5% of the US should be covered by solar panels by 2050, there should be plenty of stations like this (1 every 10 miles in average), sufficient to cover the whole continental US routes. Rectennas are also not absolutely necessary, with classical underwing engines, we could receive without rectifying to heat up the air downstream of the HP compressor (or heat up that air using absorbent materials as for the microwave rocket of K. Parkin), thermal efficiency is about 50% in modern jet engines.

This is the same IEEE Spectrum that said wireless power for #SBSP is a terrible idea last month…