space solar- expensive energy for dupes.

>
> What does "uh-uh" mean? Engineers have done the math. Can you point to
> a mistake?

sure. Spend one trillion dollars and get a giant piece of space junk
and say 100 terawats/hour of power from space, or spend one billion dollars and get 100 terawats/hour from earth.

At one one thousandth the cost, its not hard to see the realities.

"> Those broadcast widely. We're talking about a focused beam."

And every focused beam has particle and energy scatter.
In this case, which is far more dangerous than the beam itself.

"> > They are
> > affecting migrating birds. I care about this..for those who don't:
> > some think they are the reason for the collapsing honey bee colonies,
> > who are needed for about a third of all our agricultural crops.
>
> Those who think that are wrong; the bees are suffering a 1-2 punch from
> an infectious fungus and a virus. "
As well as assorted human created problems including our uses of pesticides and our pollution of the earths radio and microwave background.

(As it happens, I just read about
> this in one of my science mags the other day.)
One article in a magazine does not make proof that other things are not also effecting birds and bees.

In the age of propaganda, all you have is a source reference you didn't even bother to name.

"
>
> > Aside from that, SPS just aren't needed. Ground-based solar could
> > supply *all* the energy needs of the world, not just electricity as
> > would be the case with SPS.
>
> That's silly. Ground-based solar produces electricity too. Neither
> directly produces gasoline or natural gas, but both could be used to
> produce such fuels if necessary.
>
> And ground-based solar can't supply our energy needs at night or when
> it's cloudy,"

Which is what geothermal is good for.

"> SPS has its own engineering problems, but glossing over the problems of
> ground-based solar isn't fair."

Nobodies glossing over anything. space solar is a waste of time and energy until we have asteroids up there which we can use to build them with.

">
> > This would have the advantage of being less centralized and providing
> > more commercial competition than either the setup we have now or the
> > *highly* centralized power sources that SPS would represent.
>
> SPS isn't centralized. "

Yes it is. You clearly don't understand the meaning of "centralized."

"If used on a large scale, there would be many
> hundreds of them, each delivering power locally to an area."

That won't ever happen. Space solar will only ever be meaningfully practical as a way to deliver energy to targets in space.