TESTIMONY OF DR. GERARD K. O'NEILL. PROFESSOR. PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, PRINCETON. N.J. Dr. O'Neill. Thank you, Senator. My comments will be similar in spirit but somewhat different in detail—and I am going to try to keep them brief so as to leave plenty of time for questions. My comments will reinforce the viewpoint that exploratory research into all aspects of satellite power should be carried on vigorously. My contribution builds on the pioneering work of Dr. Peter Glaser and on the later work of Mr. Woodcock, Mr. Stine, and others. It is important that we search for economical approaches to satellite power. Our position in regard to satellite power is much like that of a band of explorers who come up against a great mountain barrier, apparently stretching to the horizon on left and right. The difficulties and dangers of a direct frontal assault are obviously great, so it makes sense to explore to the left and right to see if there may be a low pass that will permit our getting through easily and safely. There are two weaknesses in the satellite power concept as it now stands, I think. The first is the risk of ecological damage from the low-intensity microwave beam. This question can only be answered by research. But there is no reason why that research has to involve expensive operations in space. The second, probably much more serious weakness, is that satellite power based on launch f om the ground can only succeed economically if several goals, none of them attainable at the present time, can all be reached in full. The most difficult of these goals are the reduction by very large factors of the mass of powerplants and of the cost of lifting that mass to geosynchronous orbit. In the original version of the satellite power concept, the goal of lower mass was more than 15 times beyond the figure that NASA is willing even now to baseline for its satellite of the mid-1980's. The corresponding requirement on lift vehicles puts them in a new breed, well beyond what can be obtained directly through Shuttle developments. In the more recent turbogenerator approach to space solar power, which we have just heard about, there appears to be no possibility of reaching such low mass values, and therefore, an even greater burden is put on the lift vehicles which are required to operate at roughly one-tenth of the operating cost of a Shuttle-derived vehicle. In both the solar cell and the turbogenerator methods, a real solution to the Nation's energy needs would require a launch vehicle fleet so large that many tens of millions of tons of combustion products would be released into the upper atmosphere. Maybe these goals can all be reached and maybe on environmentalist objections to so large a launch-vehicle fleet will appear. I don't know. The chief problem with ground-launched satellite power systems is that no one can know for sure—we can only guess. The alternative approach is like searching for a pass in the chain of mountains. If there is an easier way and we don't even search for it, we will look rather foolish later on. If the easier way exists, it should allow us to reach the goal sooner and with less risk and at lower cost.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==