DOE Q&A About The Satellite Power System (SPS)

Cover	1
Title Page	3
Introduction	5
Foreword	7
Questions And Answers	9
I. About the System	9
1.1 Will an orbiting satellite the size of SPS be stable at GEO or will it de-orbit like the Skylab and be a potential danger to people on the ground?	9
1.2 How vulnerable is the SPS to partial or total destruction, especially the space segment? For example, do meteor showers pose any threat to the space segment?	10
1.3 Is there a way that rivals, unauthorized personnel, etc., can gain control of the SPS?	11
1.4 What is the basis for the claim that the satellite will have a 30-year lifetime?	12
1.5 Have maintenance requirements been considered in the analysis of the reference system concept? How could maintenance be performed?	12
1.6 Will new life support systems be required for space construction crews or is present technology sufficent?	13
1.7 What are the manpower and training requirements to build the satellite?	14
1.8 How should today's students be preparing themselves in terms of training and education so as to have a greater opportunity for more direct involvement in any future SPS undertaking?	15
1.9 Which is the cheaper reference system design - Rockwell's or Boeing's?	16
1.10 Is the DOE considering alternative reference system concepts? If so, how much money is being allocated for these studies relative to the current status reference design?	17
II. About the Comparative Analysis	47
2.1 Will there be a comparative analysis of the SPS with alternative energy technologies?	18
2.2 Has a net energy analysis been done which compares the SPS with alternative energy technologies?	19
2.3 How much disruption of human settlement patterns and wildlands will the SPS rectenna system create in comparison to coal and oil shale fuel cycles?	20
2.4 Would the SPS be functional soon enough to obviate massive coal and oil shale exploitation or do the timeframes for utilization of these alternative technologies and attendant environmental impacts overlap?	21
2.5 Would a breakthrough on fusion obviate the need for SPS? What forms and amounts of energy would fusion energy replace that would reduce the need for SPS?	22
2.6 Wouldn't a breakthrough in terrestrial solar technologies reduce or eliminate the need for SPS? In particular, wouldn't advances in photovoltaics benefit terrestrial applications to the point where the SPS would be obsolete or comparatively uneconomical?	22
2.7 What impact will development of the SPS have on the labor market compared to alternate energy endeavors - Will it be labor-intensive or capital-intensive?	22
III. About the Environmental Effects	23
3.1 A prominent concern is the microwave bio-effects of the SPS power transmission system. What happens to people and ecosystems outside the rectenna site should control of beam directionality be lost?	23
3.2 What are the atmospheric heating effects of decentralized solar energy systems compared to the SPS?	23
3.3 Will the SPS damage the ozone layer and create a "greenhouse" effect by heating up the atmosphere?	24
3.4 Why have only two years been allotted for atmospheric impact studies?	25
3.5 Will communication systems already in place be disrupted by SPS operations?	25
3.6 Would the current SPS reference system design create significant additional conflict over utilization of the geostationary orbit?	26
3.7 How will SPS's in GEO affect the aesthetics of the night sky?	27
3.8 Have psychological factors affecting manned operations in the space environment been taken into account in studies of the health and safety of the space workers?	28
IV. About the Societal Effects	28
4.1 Why do we need centralized (baseload) power and a national energy gird? Wouldn't a centralized system like the SPS reinforce the control that large institutions exert over people's lives? Wouldn't reliance on the SPS inhibit a widely expressed desire to be more self-reliant through control of one's own energy supply?	28
4.2 How could. SPS development lead to decentralization of social institutions and decision-making structures?	30
4.3 What are the opportunity costs of developing the SPS? Won't the diversion of so much capital rob other promising energy technologies of development funds and leave the nation less flexible in responding to energy needs? What does the country do for its energy while it waits for the SPS to come on line?	31
4.4 Who will be the economic beneficiaries of the SPS? The impression is that only aerospace companies and their workers will benefit.	32
4.5 Who win provide insurance for the SPS? For damage from occupational exposure, wandering beams and crashes a. la Sky Lab?	33
4.6 Why is it necessary to study the military implications of the SPS? Is the SPS's primary purpose a military one? How vulnerable is the system to sabotage and therefore to disruption in the supply of energy?	34
4.7 Will development of the SPS seriously deplete any of the earth's resources?	35
4.8 Have other countries been approached to participate in SPS studies? If so, which ones?	36
4.9 Who would provide SPS development funds and who would control and maintain the SPS once it was developed?	36
4.10 Is a disruption of SPS power likely? What happens to an area which derives some or all of its energy from an SPS should such an event occur?	37
4.11 Is there any public awareness of the SPS as a major candidate for long term energy generation?	38
4.12 What constituencies are being studied for their probable response to the SPS?	39
V. About the DOE Program	39
5.1 Why is DOE even involved in the evaluation and development of the SPS? Why isn't the private sector doing this on its own?	39
5.2 Many respondents appear to believe that the objective of the CDEP effort is to plan for the commercialization of the SPS. The actual objectives of the DOE study are not clearly understood. To what areas of investigation are the program funds being allocated? How much of the total is going to environmental studies?	40
5.3 Just how much information on the SPS is available to the general public? Has such information appeared in the media? What agencies of the federal government have information that the public could obtain?	41
5.4 How realistic does DOE consider the SPS to be?	43
5.5 On what does success of the SPS depend? How much will it cost to decide whether or not to go ahead with the SPS?	43
5.6 Can energy self-sufficiency be arrived at through the	44
V.7 Does the DOE believe that SPS development will reinvigorate the U.S. internally and give it a renewed position of leadership abroad?	46
neat mailing label	52

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==