Fig. 3.3 presents the relative burdening of GEO by a SPS-distri- bution according to scenarios A and B by only just little orbital offset allowances of satellites against rectenna longitude positions. Nine sections within the considerable longitudes can be defined according to the consumption area geographies, in which a minimum steady separation of satellite stations can be achieved. They range from one to six percent of total incorporated power capacity per degree longitude or per 736 km in-orbit distance. The smoothing of the scenario B can be seen as a most uniform distribution of power capacity along section II to VII ranging over 21 degrees longitude or 60 % of total considerable GEO portion. Slight positioning variations as a reaction of future special spot claims for other GEO services could be better performed by a little bit higher flexibility with this scenario B. Fig. 3.4 presents a numerical comparison of the scenarios A and B with respect to the sections. Scenario A is applicated with different Energy Mix Fractions of the SPS system of providing one fifth, one third, and one half of the 2025-EC-Energy demand which has been estimated prior, whilst the scenario B is specifically junctioned to 48 satellites by its uniform spreaded 0,5 degreeseparation . The last figure on this subject (fig. 3.5) summarizes the total orbital implementation potential according to 5 GW-rectenna busbar output per satellite. (That is Reference System optional size). It ranges from reasonable minimum of 1000 TWh/year delivered by at least 24 satellites to just below 3000 TWh/year or 60 %-rate of energy mix with the absolute maximum of 70 satellites employed at a 95 %-plant factor. As can be seen, the corresponding maximum averaged spacing comes up to only 1.45 degrees or 1 060 km in-orbit distance. This envelope may gain suitable validity, if interim space of distributed SPS-stations remains fully useable to other services at and above the 0.5 degree spacing criterium.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==