My wife was reading this novel called POWERSAT (1) the other day, It is about a geosynchronous satellite which collects solar electric power, converts to RF using magnetrons and focuses to earth where the RF is converted back to DC power through "rectantennas". If this sounds familiar it is, because the concept was described years ago, in magazines like Popular Science etc . In fact there is today, a website for such a company called POWERSAT and the technology apparently lives on.
Apart from the premise of the novel which is pretty hokey (focusing the beam with a *_smaller_* antenna and zapping Washington DC!) and a very poor read (I skimmed it for the good stuff, found little), has anyone considered the theoretical efficiency of such a system?
- The free space loss from geosynchonous orbit at 2.4 GHz? (191 dB)
- The required dish size for unity path loss? Two parabolic dishes of ~2 miles diameter! (101 dB gain each!) The author does not describe the antenna system adequately but defines a wide arrray of rectantennas deployed at White Sands Missile Base.
- The efficiency of the respective transmit and receive antenna systems? A parabolic antenna if I recall correctly is only about 55% efficient at the feedpoint. The rectantennas would be another issue with respect to RF to DC conversion and I2R losses.
- Pointing accuracy required?
- Solar cell efficiency?
- Magnetron efficiency?
- Redundancy/module uptime availability? Assume at best 95% of magnetron and solar modules are serviceable.
My point is that simply constructing a solar array on earth has got to be far more efficient than launching one into space? Am I correct? Or can they make "applesauce from rain (2)"?
(1) Author Ben Bova (2) A tiring, repetetive, corny quote from this book!