SPS

Joe Russo,

you might remember me when I used to
live in Cleveland, I was a member of Cuyahoga Valley
Space Society like you were.

>
> Yes, terrestrial solar is cheaper, however limitations to weather also is creating a problem. Additionally, having a factory in space of this type of energy, also means having the ability to sell it to other countries that will only have to develop a collector.
>

To say terrestrial solar power is cheaper is rather
meaningless.

The cost per watt of SPS could be less than for terrestrial solar power when integrated 24/7 over a year. Over most of the Earth, terrestrial solar power only provides 5% of the power of SPS.

> According to my research and verified by a NASA Official, modified hardware with a deadly beam can cook out dug in soldiers on the hill side or mountain. This
>

Well, it depends on what "modified" means.
The notion is really impractical, from GEO it would need
an antenna about 100 kilometres in diameter, depending on the power density you want. It is a darned expensive
solution. And microwaves cannot penetrate far through dirt, rock or simple shileding such as Aluminum foil.

=============
I work with NASA officials each week on this project. I can not disclose who or who I am currently working for
=============

Joe, this is a red flag, sorry. Have you signed a
non-disclosure agreement ?

You are in Cleveland, so that means you are near NASA Glenn Research Center, where there is a lot of
space energy research being done by folks such as Dr. Geoffrey Landis, who is a friend of mine. You should
at least talk to Geoff, if you are not already doing so.
He is one of the leaders of SPS research at NASA and his
identity is not secret.

too. What is nice about the SPS is that the cost to build one would go to National Defense and also be used

Joe, there are some good opportunities for synergy
with some defense applications for SPS technology,
but using an SPS as a power ray weapon is just plain daft.

The most interesting area for defense collaboration is in the area of large phased array transmitters. The
biggest of these are presently military radars, such as the Pave-PAWS ballitic missile detection system. This
technology is probably a good starting point for
designing an SPS transmitter antenna.

=================
on a commercial market to create a safe free energy or low cost energy for humanity. If we want SPS up in
=================

Joe, you have just scared everybody to death by claiming that SPS is a great sort of death ray thing,
now you want everybody to think it is safe.

Joe, the standard SPS design involves a beam of power
of less density than sunlight. It is bad enough trying
to convince people that sort of beam is safe, if you go around advertising SPS as a death ray, then you are
making it much more difficult to sell SPS to the public as safe.

> Lets push for it.
>

Let's not.

Please stop trying to sell SPS a a beam weapon. It is
no good for that purpose, it won't work, and it will
scare people unecessarily.

> Also, I believe that since we humans need a threat of mass distraction over our heads to keep us in check, why
>

What distraction are you referring to ?

Cheers,

Charles F. Radley