Search This Blog

Saturday, January 31, 2015

Space-based solar power


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NASA Suntower concept.

Space-based solar power (SBSP) is the concept of collecting solar power in space (using an "SPS", that is, a "solar-power satellite" or a "satellite power system") for use on Earth. It has been in research since the early 1970s.

SBSP would differ from current solar collection methods in that the means used to collect energy would reside on an orbiting satellite instead of on Earth's surface. Some projected benefits of such a system are a higher collection rate and a longer collection period due to the lack of a diffusing atmosphere and night time in space.

Part of the solar energy (55-60%) is lost on its way through the atmosphere by the effects of reflection and absorption. Space-based solar power systems convert sunlight to microwaves outside the atmosphere, avoiding these losses, and the downtime (and cosine losses, for fixed flat-plate collectors) due to the Earth's rotation.

Besides the cost of implementing such a system, SBSP also introduces several new hurdles, primarily the problem of transmitting energy from orbit to Earth's surface for use. Since wires extending from Earth's surface to an orbiting satellite are neither practical nor feasible with current technology, SBSP designs generally include the use of some manner of wireless power transmission. The collecting satellite would convert solar energy into electrical energy on board, powering a microwave transmitter or laser emitter, and focus its beam toward a collector (rectenna) on Earth's surface. Radiation and micrometeoroid damage could also become concerns for SBSP.

History


A laser pilot beam guides the microwave power transmission to a rectenna.

In 1941, science fiction writer Isaac Asimov published the science fiction short story "Reason", in which a space station transmits energy collected from the Sun to various planets using microwave beams.

The SBSP concept, originally known as satellite solar-power system (SSPS), was first described in November 1968.[1] In 1973 Peter Glaser was granted U.S. patent number 3,781,647 for his method of transmitting power over long distances (e.g. from an SPS to Earth's surface) using microwaves from a very large antenna (up to one square kilometer) on the satellite to a much larger one, now known as a rectenna, on the ground.[2]

Glaser then was a vice president at Arthur D. Little, Inc. NASA signed a contract with ADL to lead four other companies in a broader study in 1974. They found that, while the concept had several major problems – chiefly the expense of putting the required materials in orbit and the lack of experience on projects of this scale in space – it showed enough promise to merit further investigation and research.[3]

Between 1978 and 1986, the Congress authorized the Department of Energy (DoE) and NASA to jointly investigate the concept. They organized the Satellite Power System Concept Development and Evaluation Program.[4][5] The study remains the most extensive performed to date (budget $50 million).[6] Several reports were published investigating the engineering feasibility of such an engineering project. They include:

Artist's concept of Solar Power Satellite in place. Shown is the assembly of a microwave transmission antenna. The solar power satellite was to be located in a geosynchronous orbit, 36,000 miles above the Earth's surface. NASA 1976
  • Resource Requirements (Critical Materials, Energy, and Land)[7]
  • Financial/Management Scenarios[8][9]
  • Public Acceptance[10]
  • State and Local Regulations as Applied to Satellite Power System Microwave Receiving Antenna Facilities[11]
  • Student Participation[12]
  • Potential of Laser for SBSP Power Transmission[13]
  • International Agreements[14][15]
  • Centralization/Decentralization[16]
  • Mapping of Exclusion Areas For Rectenna Sites[17]
  • Economic and Demographic Issues Related to Deployment[18]
  • Some Questions and Answers[19]
  • Meteorological Effects on Laser Beam Propagation and Direct Solar Pumped Lasers[20]
  • Public Outreach Experiment[21]
  • Power Transmission and Reception Technical Summary and Assessment[22]
  • Space Transportation[23]
The project was not continued with the change in administrations after the 1980 US Federal elections.

The Office of Technology Assessment[24] concluded
Too little is currently known about the technical, economic, and environmental aspects of SPS to make a sound decision whether to proceed with its development and deployment. In addition, without further research an SPS demonstration or systems-engineering verification program would be a high-risk venture.
In 1997 NASA conducted its "Fresh Look" study to examine the modern state of SBSP feasibility.[25] In assessing "What has changed" since the DOE study, NASA asserted that:
US National Space Policy now calls for NASA to make significant investments in technology (not a particular vehicle) to drive the costs of ETO [Earth to Orbit] transportation down dramatically. This is, of course, an absolute requirement of space solar power.
Conversely, Dr. Pete Worden claimed that space-based solar is about five orders of magnitude more expensive than solar power from the Arizona desert, with a major cost being the transportation of materials to orbit. Dr. Worden referred to possible solutions as speculative, and that would not be available for decades at the earliest.[26]

On Nov 2, 2012, China proposed space collaboration with India that mentioned SBSP, " . . . may be Space-based Solar Power initiative so that both India and China can work for long term association with proper funding along with other willing space faring nations to bring space solar power to earth."[27]

SERT


SERT sandwich concept.NASA

In 1999, NASA's Space Solar Power Exploratory Research and Technology program (SERT) was initiated for the following purposes:
  • Perform design studies of selected flight demonstration concepts.
  • Evaluate studies of the general feasibility, design, and requirements.
  • Create conceptual designs of subsystems that make use of advanced SSP technologies to benefit future space or terrestrial applications.
  • Formulate a preliminary plan of action for the U.S. (working with international partners) to undertake an aggressive technology initiative.
  • Construct technology development and demonstration roadmaps for critical Space Solar Power (SSP) elements.
SERT went about developing a solar power satellite (SPS) concept for a future gigawatt space power system, to provide electrical power by converting the Sun’s energy and beaming it to Earth's surface, and provided a conceptual development path that would utilize current technologies. SERT proposed an inflatable photovoltaic gossamer structure with concentrator lenses or solar heat engines to convert sunlight into electricity. The program looked both at systems in sun-synchronous orbit and geosynchronous orbit.

Some of SERT's conclusions:
  • The increasing global energy demand is likely to continue for many decades resulting in new power plants of all sizes being built.
  • The environmental impact of those plants and their impact on world energy supplies and geopolitical relationships can be problematic.
  • Renewable energy is a compelling approach, both philosophically and in engineering terms.
  • Many renewable energy sources are limited in their ability to affordably provide the base load power required for global industrial development and prosperity, because of inherent land and water requirements.
  • Based on their Concept Definition Study, space solar power concepts may be ready to reenter the discussion.
  • Solar power satellites should no longer be envisioned as requiring unimaginably large initial investments in fixed infrastructure before the emplacement of productive power plants can begin.
  • Space solar power systems appear to possess many significant environmental advantages when compared to alternative approaches.
  • The economic viability of space solar power systems depends on many factors and the successful development of various new technologies (not least of which is the availability of much lower cost access to space than has been available), however, the same can be said of many other advanced power technologies options.
  • Space solar power may well emerge as a serious candidate among the options for meeting the energy demands of the 21st century. Space Solar Power Satellite Technology Development at the Glenn Research Center—An Overview] James E. Dudenhoefer and Patrick J. George, NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio.
  • Launch costs in the range of $100–$200 per kilogram of payload to low Earth orbit are needed if SPS are to be economically viable.[6]

JAXA

The May 2014 IEEE Spectrum magazine has a lengthy article "It's Always Sunny in Space" by Dr. Susumu Sasaki.[28] "It’s been the subject of many previous studies and the stuff of sci-fi for decades, but space-based solar power could at last become a reality—and within 25 years, according to a proposal from researchers at the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA)."

Advantages

The SBSP concept is attractive because space has several major advantages over the Earth's surface for the collection of solar power.
  • There is no air in space, so the collecting surfaces could receive much more intense sunlight, unobstructed by the filtering effects of atmospheric gasses, cloud cover, there is no night, dust to be cleaned, clouds and other weather events. Consequently, the intensity in orbit is approximately 144% of the maximum attainable intensity on Earth's surface.[citation needed]
  • A satellite could be illuminated over 99% of the time, and be in Earth's shadow a maximum of only 72 minutes per night at the spring and fall equinoxes at local midnight.[29] Orbiting satellites can be exposed to a consistently high degree of solar radiation, generally for 24 hours per day, whereas the average earth surface solar panels currently collect power for an average of 29% per day.[30]
  • Power could be relatively quickly redirected directly to areas that need it most. A collecting satellite could possibly direct power on demand to different surface locations based on geographical baseload or peak load power needs. Typical contracts would be for baseload, continuous power, since peaking power is ephemeral.
  • Elimination of plant and wildlife interference.

Disadvantages

The SBSP concept also has a number of problems.
  • The large cost of launching a satellite into space
  • Inaccessibility: Maintenance of an earth-based solar panel is relatively simple, but construction and maintenance on a solar panel in space would typically be done telerobotically. In addition to cost, astronauts working in GEO orbit are exposed to unacceptably high radiation dangers and risk and cost about one thousand times more than the same task done telerobotically.
  • After being decommissioned, parts of it may stay in orbit and become space debris. This space debris can create trouble for other space satellites.
  • The space environment is hostile; panels suffer about 8 times the degradation they would on Earth.[31]
  • Space debris is a major hazard to large objects in space, and all large structures such as SBSP systems have been mentioned as potential sources of orbital debris.[32]
  • The broadcast frequency of the microwave downlink (if used) would require isolating the SBSP systems away from other satellites. GEO space is already well used and it is considered unlikely the ITU would allow an SPS to be launched.[33]
  • The large size and corresponding cost of the receiving station on the ground.

Design


Artist's concept of a solar disk on top of a LEO to GEO electrically powered space tug.

Space-based solar power essentially consists of three elements:
  • a means of collecting solar power in space, for example via solar concentrators, solar cells or a heat engine
  • a means of transmitting power to earth, for example via microwave or laser
  • a means of receiving power on earth, for example via a microwave antenna (rectenna)
The space-based portion will not need to support itself against gravity (other than relatively weak tidal stresses). It needs no protection from terrestrial wind or weather, but will have to cope with space hazards such as micrometeors and solar flares.

Two basic methods of conversion have been studied: photovoltaic (PV) and solar dynamic (SD). Photovoltaic conversion uses semiconductor cells to directly convert photons into electrical power. Solar dynamic uses mirrors to concentrate light on a boiler. The use of solar dynamic could reduce mass per watt. Most analyses of SBSP have focused on photovoltaic conversion (commonly known as “solar cells”).

Wireless power transmission was proposed early on as a means to transfer energy from collection to the Earth's surface, using either microwave or laser radiation at a variety of frequencies.

Microwave power transmission[edit]

William C. Brown demonstrated in 1964, during Walter Cronkite's CBS News program, a microwave-powered model helicopter that received all the power it needed for flight from a microwave beam. Between 1969 and 1975, Bill Brown was technical director of a JPL Raytheon program that beamed 30 kW of power over a distance of 1-mile (1.6 km) at 84% efficiency.[34]
Microwave power transmission of tens of kilowatts has been well proven by existing tests at Goldstone in California (1975)[34][35][36] and Grand Bassin on Reunion Island (1997).[37]

Comparison of laser and microwave power transmission. NASA diagram

More recently, microwave power transmission has been demonstrated, in conjunction with solar energy capture, between a mountain top in Maui and the island of Hawaii (92 miles away), by a team under John C. Mankins.[38][39] Technological challenges in terms of array layout, single radiation element design, and overall efficiency, as well as the associated theoretical limits are presently a subject of research, as it is demonstrated by the Special Session on "Analysis of Electromagnetic Wireless Systems for Solar Power Transmission" to be held in the 2010 IEEE Symposium on Antennas and Propagation.[40]

In 2013, a useful overview was published, covering technologies and issues associated with microwave power transmission from space to ground. It includes an introduction to SPS, current research and future prospects.[41]

Laser power beaming

Laser power beaming was envisioned by some at NASA as a stepping stone to further industrialization of space. In the 1980s, researchers at NASA worked on the potential use of lasers for space-to-space power beaming, focusing primarily on the development of a solar-powered laser. In 1989 it was suggested that power could also be usefully beamed by laser from Earth to space. In 1991 the SELENE project (SpacE Laser ENErgy) had begun, which included the study of laser power beaming for supplying power to a lunar base. The SELENE program was a two-year research effort, but the cost of taking the concept to operational status was too high, and the official project ended in 1993 before reaching a space-based demonstration.[42]

In 1988 the use of an Earth-based laser to power an electric thruster for space propulsion was proposed by Grant Logan, with technical details worked out in 1989. He proposed using diamond solar cells operating at 600 degrees to convert ultraviolet laser light.

Orbital location

The main advantage of locating a space power station in geostationary orbit is that the antenna geometry stays constant, and so keeping the antennas lined up is simpler. Another advantage is that nearly continuous power transmission is immediately available as soon as the first space power station is placed in orbit; other space-based power stations have much longer start-up times before they are producing nearly continuous power.

A collection of LEO (Low Earth Orbit) space power stations has been proposed as a precursor to GEO (Geostationary Orbit) space-based solar power.[43]

Earth-based receiver

The Earth-based rectenna would likely consist of many short dipole antennas connected via diodes. Microwave broadcasts from the satellite would be received in the dipoles with about 85% efficiency.[44] With a conventional microwave antenna, the reception efficiency is better, but its cost and complexity are also considerably greater. Rectennas would likely be several kilometers across.

In space applications

A laser SBSP could also power a base or vehicles on the surface of the Moon or Mars, saving on mass costs to land the power source. A spacecraft or another satellite could also be powered by the same means. In a 2012 report presented to NASA on Space Solar Power, the author mentions another potential use for the technology behind Space Solar Power could be for Solar Electric Propulsion Systems that could be used for interplanetary human exploration missions.[45] [46][47]

Dealing with launch costs

One problem for the SBSP concept is the cost of space launches and the amount of material that would need to be launched.

Reusable launch systems are predicted to provide lower launch costs to low Earth orbit (LEO).[48][49] As of November 2013, one company, SpaceX, is two years along on a privately funded multi-year development program for a reusable rocket launching system with the stated intention to commercialize "fully and rapidly reusable" launch technology.[50][51][52] SpaceX has completed eight test flights of their low-altitude booster return prototype, Grasshopper,[53] and one test flight of a high-altitude/high-velocity booster return test vehicle, with a second booster return test flight planned for early 2014.[54][55]

Much of the material launched need not be delivered to its eventual orbit immediately, which raises the possibility that high efficiency (but slower) engines could move SPS material from LEO to GEO at an acceptable cost. Examples include ion thrusters or nuclear propulsion.

Power beaming from geostationary orbit by microwaves carries the difficulty that the required 'optical aperture' sizes are very large. For example, the 1978 NASA SPS study required a 1-km diameter transmitting antenna, and a 10 km diameter receiving rectenna, for a microwave beam at 2.45 GHz. These sizes can be somewhat decreased by using shorter wavelengths, although they have increased atmospheric absorption and even potential beam blockage by rain or water droplets. Because of the thinned array curse, it is not possible to make a narrower beam by combining the beams of several smaller satellites. The large size of the transmitting and receiving antennas means that the minimum practical power level for an SPS will necessarily be high; small SPS systems will be possible, but uneconomic.

To give an idea of the scale of the problem, assuming a solar panel mass of 20 kg per kilowatt (without considering the mass of the supporting structure, antenna, or any significant mass reduction of any focusing mirrors) a 4 GW power station would weigh about 80,000 metric tons, all of which would, in current circumstances, be launched from the Earth. Very lightweight designs could likely achieve 1 kg/kW,[56] meaning 4,000 metric tons for the solar panels for the same 4 GW capacity station. This would be the equivalent of between 40 and 150 heavy-lift launch vehicle (HLLV) launches to send the material to low earth orbit, where it would likely be converted into subassembly solar arrays, which then could use high-efficiency ion-engine style rockets to (slowly) reach GEO (Geostationary orbit). With an estimated serial launch cost for shuttle-based HLLVs of $500 million to $800 million, and launch costs for alternative HLLVs at $78 million, total launch costs would range between $11 billion (low cost HLLV, low weight panels) and $320 billion ('expensive' HLLV, heavier panels).[citation needed] To these costs must be added the environmental impact of heavy space launch emissions, if such costs are to be used in comparison to earth-based energy production. For comparison, the direct cost of a new coal[57] or nuclear power plant ranges from $3 billion to $6 billion per GW (not including the full cost to the environment from CO2 emissions or storage of spent nuclear fuel, respectively); another example is the Apollo missions to the Moon cost a grand total of $24 billion (1970s' dollars), taking inflation into account, would cost $140 billion today, more expensive than the construction of the International Space Station.

However in 2013 based on Recent innovations, Electric Space: Space-Based Solar Power Technologies & Applications [58] suggested a new way to reduce costs by replacing smaller satellites and in lower Orbits.

Building from space

From lunar materials launched in orbit

Gerard O'Neill, noting the problem of high launch costs in the early 1970s, proposed building the SPS's in orbit with materials from the Moon.[59] Launch costs from the Moon are potentially much lower than from Earth, due to the lower gravity. This 1970s proposal assumed the then-advertised future launch costing of NASA's space shuttle. This approach would require substantial up front capital investment to establish mass drivers on the Moon.[60]

Nevertheless, on 30 April 1979, the Final Report ("Lunar Resources Utilization for Space Construction") by General Dynamics' Convair Division, under NASA contract NAS9-15560, concluded that use of lunar resources would be cheaper than Earth-based materials for a system of as few as thirty Solar Power Satellites of 10GW capacity each.[61]

In 1980, when it became obvious NASA's launch cost estimates for the space shuttle were grossly optimistic, O'Neill et al. published another route to manufacturing using lunar materials with much lower startup costs.[62] This 1980s SPS concept relied less on human presence in space and more on partially self-replicating systems on the lunar surface under remote control of workers stationed on Earth. The high net energy gain of this proposal derives from the Moon's much shallower gravitational well.

Having a relatively cheap per pound source of raw materials from space would lessen the concern for low mass designs and result in a different sort of SPS being built. The low cost per pound of lunar materials in O'Neill's vision would be supported by using lunar material to manufacture more facilities in orbit than just solar power satellites.

Advanced techniques for launching from the Moon may reduce the cost of building a solar power satellite from lunar materials. Some proposed techniques include the lunar mass driver and the lunar space elevator, first described by Jerome Pearson.[63] It would require establishing silicon mining and solar cell manufacturing facilities on the Moon.[citation needed]

On the Moon

David Criswell suggests the Moon is the optimum location for solar power stations, and promotes lunar solar power.[64][65] The main advantage he envisions is construction largely from locally available lunar materials, using in-situ resource utilization, with a teleoperated mobile factory and crane to assemble the microwave reflectors, and rovers to assemble and pave solar cells,[66] which would significantly reduce launch costs compared to SBSP designs. Power relay satellites orbiting around earth and the Moon reflecting the microwave beam are also part of the project. A demo project of 1 GW starts at $50 billion.[67] The Shimizu Corporation use combination of lasers and microwave for the lunar ring concept, along with power relay satellites.[68][69]

From an asteroid

Asteroid mining has also been seriously considered. A NASA design study[70] evaluated a 10,000 ton mining vehicle (to be assembled in orbit) that would return a 500,000 ton asteroid fragment to geostationary orbit. Only about 3,000 tons of the mining ship would be traditional aerospace-grade payload. The rest would be reaction mass for the mass-driver engine, which could be arranged to be the spent rocket stages used to launch the payload. Assuming that 100% of the returned asteroid was useful, and that the asteroid miner itself couldn't be reused, that represents nearly a 95% reduction in launch costs. However, the true merits of such a method would depend on a thorough mineral survey of the candidate asteroids; thus far, we have only estimates of their composition.[71] One proposal is to capture the asteroid Apophis into earth orbit and convert it into 150 solar power satellites of 5 GW each or the larger asteroid 1999 AN10 which is 50x the size of Apophis and large enough to build 7,500 5-Gigawatt Solar Power Satellites[72]

Gallery

  • A Lunar base with a mass driver (the long structure that goes toward the horizon). NASA conceptual illustration
  • An artist's conception of a "self-growing" robotic lunar factory.
  • Microwave reflectors on the moon and teleoperated robotic paving rover and crane.
  • “Crawler” traverses Lunar surface, smoothing, melting a top layer of regolith, then depositing elements of silicon PV cells directly on surface
  • Sketch of the Lunar Crawler to be used for fabrication of lunar solar cells on the surface of the Moon.
  • Shown here is an array of solar collectors that convert power into microwave beams directed toward Earth.
  • A solar power satellite built from a mined asteroid.

Counter arguments

Safety

The use of microwave transmission of power has been the most controversial issue in considering any SPS design.

At the Earth's surface, a suggested microwave beam would have a maximum intensity at its center, of 23 mW/cm2 (less than 1/4 the solar irradiation constant), and an intensity of less than 1 mW/cm2 outside the rectenna fenceline (the receiver's perimeter).[73] These compare with current United States Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) workplace exposure limits for microwaves, which are 10 mW/cm2,[74] - the limit itself being expressed in voluntary terms and ruled unenforceable for Federal OSHA enforcement purposes.[citation needed] A beam of this intensity is therefore at its center, of a similar magnitude to current safe workplace levels, even for long term or indefinite exposure. Outside the receiver, it is far less than the OSHA long-term levels[75] Over 95% of the beam energy will fall on the rectenna. The remaining microwave energy will be absorbed and dispersed well within standards currently imposed upon microwave emissions around the world.[76] It is important for system efficiency that as much of the microwave radiation as possible be focused on the rectenna. Outside the rectenna, microwave intensities rapidly decrease, so nearby towns or other human activity should be completely unaffected.[77]

Exposure to the beam is able to be minimized in other ways. On the ground, physical access is controllable (e.g., via fencing), and typical aircraft flying through the beam provide passengers with a protective metal shell (i.e., a Faraday Cage), which will intercept the microwaves. Other aircraft (balloons, ultralight, etc.) can avoid exposure by observing airflight control spaces, as is currently done for military and other controlled airspace.

The microwave beam intensity at ground level in the center of the beam would be designed and physically built into the system; simply, the transmitter would be too far away and too small to be able to increase the intensity to unsafe levels, even in principle.

In addition, a design constraint is that the microwave beam must not be so intense as to injure wildlife, particularly birds. Experiments with deliberate microwave irradiation at reasonable levels have failed to show negative effects even over multiple generations.[78]

Some have suggested locating rectennas offshore,[79][80] but this presents serious problems, including corrosion, mechanical stresses, and biological contamination.

A commonly proposed approach to ensuring fail-safe beam targeting is to use a retrodirective phased array antenna/rectenna. A "pilot" microwave beam emitted from the center of the rectenna on the ground establishes a phase front at the transmitting antenna. There, circuits in each of the antenna's subarrays compare the pilot beam's phase front with an internal clock phase to control the phase of the outgoing signal. This forces the transmitted beam to be centered precisely on the rectenna and to have a high degree of phase uniformity; if the pilot beam is lost for any reason (if the transmitting antenna is turned away from the rectenna, for example) the phase control value fails and the microwave power beam is automatically defocused.[77] Such a system would be physically incapable of focusing its power beam anywhere that did not have a pilot beam transmitter.

The long-term effects of beaming power through the ionosphere in the form of microwaves has yet to be studied, but nothing has been suggested which might lead to any significant effect.

Timeline

  • 1941: Isaac Asimov published the science fiction short story "Reason," in which a space station transmits energy collected from the sun to various planets using microwave beams.
  • 1968: Dr. Peter Glaser introduces the concept of a "solar power satellite" system with square miles of solar collectors in high geosynchronous orbit for collection and conversion of sun's energy into a microwave beam to transmit usable energy to large receiving antennas (rectennas) on Earth for distribution.
  • 1973: Dr. Peter Glaser is granted United States patent number 3,781,647 for his method of transmitting power over long distances using microwaves from a large (one square kilometer) antenna on the satellite to a much larger one on the ground, now known as a rectenna.[2]
  • 2000: John Mankins of NASA testifies in the U.S. House of Representatives, saying "Large-scale SSP is a very complex integrated system of systems that requires numerous significant advances in current technology and capabilities. A technology roadmap has been developed that lays out potential paths for achieving all needed advances — albeit over several decades.[6]
  • 2001: Dr. Neville Marzwell of NASA states, "We now have the technology to convert the sun's energy at the rate of 42 to 56 percent... We have made tremendous progress. ...If you can concentrate the sun's rays through the use of large mirrors or lenses you get more for your money because most of the cost is in the PV arrays... There is a risk element but you can reduce it... You can put these small receivers in the desert or in the mountains away from populated areas. ...We believe that in 15 to 25 years we can lower that cost to 7 to 10 cents per kilowatt hour. ...We offer an advantage. You don't need cables, pipes, gas or copper wires. We can send it to you like a cell phone call—where you want it and when you want it, in real time."[82]
  • 2001: NASDA (One of Japan's national space agencies before it became part of JAXA) announces plans to perform additional research and prototyping by launching an experimental satellite with 10 kilowatts and 1 megawatt of power.[83][84]
  • 2003: ESA studies[85]
  • 2007: The US Pentagon's National Security Space Office (NSSO) issues a report[86] on October 10, 2007 stating they intend to collect solar energy from space for use on Earth to help the United States' ongoing relationship with the Middle East and the battle for oil. A demo plant could cost $ 10 billion, produce 10 megawatts, and become operational in 10 years.[87] The International Space Station may be the first test ground for this new idea, even though it is in a low-earth orbit.
  • 2010: Professors Andrea Massa and Giorgio Franceschetti announce a special session on the "Analysis of Electromagnetic Wireless Systems for Solar Power Transmission" at the 2010 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation.[100]
  • 2010: The Indian Space Research Organisation and US' National Space Society launched a joint forum to enhance partnership in harnessing solar energy through space-based solar collectors. Called the Kalam-NSS Initiative after the former Indian President Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, the forum will lay the groundwork for the space-based solar power program which could see other countries joining in as well.[101]
  • 2010: The National Forensics League announces the resolution for the 2011–2012 debate season to be substantial space exploration and/or development. Space Based Solar Power becomes one of the most popular affirmative arguments.
  • 2012: China proposed joint development between India and China towards developing a solar power satellite, during a visit by former Indian President Dr APJ Abdul Kalam.[102]

In fiction

Space stations transmitting solar power have appeared in science-fiction works like Isaac Asimov's Reason (1941), that centers around the troubles caused by the robots operating the station. Asimov's short story "The Last Question" also features the use of SBSP to provide limitless energy for use on Earth.

In the video game Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, the player can construct a city improvement called an "Orbital Power Transmitter" which, while expensive, provides energy to all other cities. Constructing many of these results in huge bonuses to energy production for all cities the player owns.

In the novel "Skyfall" (1976) by Harry Harrison an attempt to launch the core of powersat from Cape Canaveral ends in disaster when the launch vehicle fails trapping the payload in a decaying orbit.

Several Simcity games have featured space-microwave power plants as buildable options for municipal energy, along with (unrealistic) disaster scenarios where the beam strays off the collector and sets fire to nearby areas.

In the manga and anime Mobile Suit Gundam 00, an orbital ring containing multiple solar collectors and microwave transmitters, along with power stations and space elevators for carrying power back down to Earth's surface, are the primary source of electricity for the Earth in the 22nd century.

at

Organic solar cell


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An organic solar cell or plastic solar cell is a type of polymer solar cell that uses organic electronics, a branch of electronics that deals with conductive organic polymers or small organic molecules,[1] for light absorption and charge transport to produce electricity from sunlight by the photovoltaic effect.

The plastic used in organic solar cells has low production costs in high volumes. Combined with the flexibility of organic molecules, organic solar cells are potentially cost-effective for photovoltaic applications. Molecular engineering (e.g. changing the length and functional group of polymers) can change the energy gap, which allows chemical change in these materials. The optical absorption coefficient of organic molecules is high, so a large amount of light can be absorbed with a small amount of materials. The main disadvantages associated with organic photovoltaic cells are low efficiency, low stability and low strength compared to inorganic photovoltaic cells.

Physics


Fig 1: Examples of organic photovoltaic materials

A photovoltaic cell is a specialized semiconductor diode that converts visible light into direct current (DC) electricity. Some photovoltaic cells convert infrared (IR) or ultraviolet (UV) radiation into DC. A common characteristic of both the small molecules and polymers (Fig 1) used in photovoltaics is that they all have large conjugated systems. A conjugated system is formed where carbon atoms covalently bond with alternating single and double bonds; in other words these are chemical reactions of hydrocarbons. These hydrocarbons' electrons pz orbitals delocalize and form a delocalized bonding π orbital with a π* antibonding orbital. The delocalized π orbital is the highest occupied molecular orbital (HOMO), and the π* orbital is the lowest unoccupied molecular orbital (LUMO). The voltage separation between HOMO and LUMO is considered the band gap of organic electronic materials. The band gap is typically in the range of 1–4 eV.[2]

When these materials absorb a photon, an excited state is created and confined to a molecule or a region of a polymer chain. The excited state can be regarded as an electron-hole pair bound together by electrostatic interactions, i.e. excitons. In photovoltaic cells, excitons are broken up into free electron-hole pairs by effective fields. The effective fields are set up by creating a heterojunction between two dissimilar materials. Effective fields break up excitons by causing the electron to fall from the conduction band of the absorber to the conduction band of the acceptor molecule. It is necessary that the acceptor material has a conduction band edge that is lower than that of the absorber material.[3][4][5][6]

Junction types

Single layer


Fig 2: Sketch of a single layer organic photovoltaic cell

Single layer organic photovoltaic cells are the simplest form. These cells are made by sandwiching a layer of organic electronic materials between two metallic conductors, typically a layer of indium tin oxide (ITO) with high work function and a layer of low work function metal such as Aluminum, Magnesium or Calcium. The basic structure of such a cell is illustrated in Fig 2.

The difference of work function between the two conductors sets up an electric field in the organic layer. When the organic layer absorbs light, electrons will be excited to the LUMO and leave holes in the HOMO, thereby forming excitons. The potential created by the different work functions helps to split the exciton pairs, pulling electrons to the positive electrode (an electrical conductor used to make contact with a non-metallic part of a circuit) and holes to the negative electrode.[3][4][5]

Examples

In 1958 the photovoltaic effect or the creation of voltage of a cell based on magnesium phthalocyanine (MgPc)—a macrocyclic compound having an alternating nitrogen atom-carbon atom ring structure—was discovered to have a photovoltage of 200 mV.[7] An Al/MgPc/Ag cell obtained photovoltaic efficiency of 0.01% under illumination at 690 nm.[8]

Conjugated polymers were also used in this type of photovoltaic cell. One device used polyacetylene (Fig 1) as the organic layer, with Al and graphite, producing an open circuit voltage of 0.3 V and a charge collection efficiency of 0.3%.[9] An Al/poly(3-nethyl-thiophene)/Pt cell had an external quantum yield of 0.17%, an open circuit voltage of 0.4 V and a fill factor of 0.3.[10] An ITO/PPV/Al cell showed an open circuit voltage of 1 V and a power conversion efficiency of 0.1% under white-light illumination.[11]

Issues

Single layer organic solar cells do not work well. They have low quantum efficiencies (<1 a="" and="" between="" conductive="" conversion="" difference="" efficiencies="" electric="" electrode.="" electrodes="" electrons="" excitons.="" field="" from="" holes="" is="" low="" major="" often="" p="" power="" problem="" reaching="" recombine="" resulting="" seldom="" split="" sufficient="" that="" the="" them="" to="" two="" with="" without="">

Bilayer


Fig 3: Sketch of a multilayer organic photovoltaic cell.

Bilayer cells contain two layers in between the conductive electrodes (Fig 3). The two layers have different electron affinity and ionization energies, therefore electrostatic forces are generated at the interface between the two layers. The materials are chosen to make the differences large enough that these local electric fields are strong, which splits excitons much more efficiently than single layer photovoltaic cells. The layer with higher electron affinity and ionization potential is the electron acceptor, and the other layer is the electron donor. This structure is also called a planar donor-acceptor heterojunction.[3][4][5][6]

Examples

C60 has high electron affinity, making it a good acceptor. A C60/MEH-PPV double layer cell had a relatively high fill factor of 0.48 and a power conversion efficiency of 0.04% under monochromatic illumination.[12] PPV/C60 cells displayed a monochromatic external quantum efficiency of 9%, a power conversion efficiency of 1% and a fill factor of 0.48.[13]

Perylene derivatives display high electron affinity and chemical stability. A layer of copper phthalocyanine (CuPc) as electron donor and perylene tetracarboxylic derivative as electron acceptor, fabricating a cell with a fill factor as high as 0.65 and a power conversion efficiency of 1% under simulated AM2 illumination.[14] Halls et al. fabricated a cell with a layer of bis(phenethylimido) perylene over a layer of PPV as the electron donor. This cell had peak external quantum efficiency of 6% and power conversion efficiency of 1% under monochromatic illumination, and a fill factor of up to 0.6.[15]

Issues

The diffusion length of excitons in organic electronic materials is typically on the order of 10 nm. In order for most excitons to diffuse to the interface of layers and split into carriers, the layer thickness should be in the same range as the diffusion length. However, a polymer layer typically needs a thickness of at least 100 nm to absorb enough light. At such a large thickness, only a small fraction of the excitons can reach the heterojunction interface.

Discrete heterojunction

A three-layer (two acceptor and one donor) fullerene-free stack achieved a conversion efficiency of 8.4%. The implementation produced high open-circuit voltages and absorption in the visible spectra and high short-circuit currents. Quantum efficiency was above 75% between 400 nm and 720 nm wavelengths, with an open-circuit voltage around 1 V.[16]

Bulk heterojunction


Fig 4: Sketch of a dispersed junction photovoltaic cell

In bulk heterojunction cells, the electron donor and acceptor are mixed, forming a polymer blend (Fig 4). If the length scale of the blend is similar to the exciton diffusion length, most of the excitons generated in either material may reach the interface, where excitons split efficiently. Electrons move to the acceptor domains then were carried through the device and collected by one electrode, and holes move in the opposite direction and collected at the other side.[4][5][7]

Most bulk heterojunction cells use two components, although three-component cells have been explored. The third component, a secondary p-type donor polymer, acts to absorb light in a different region of the solar spectrum. This in theory increases the amount of absorbed light. These ternary cells operate through one of three distinct mechanisms: charge transfer, energy transfer or parallel-linkage.

In charge transfer, both donors contribute directly to the generation of free charge carriers. Holes pass through only one donor domain before collection at the anode. In energy transfer, only one donor contributes to the production of holes. The second donor acts solely to absorb light, transferring extra energy to the first donor material. In parallel linkage, both donors produce excitons independently, which then migrate to their respective donor/acceptor interfaces and dissociate.[17]

Examples

C60 and its derivatives are used as electron acceptors, as in dispersed heterojunction photovoltaic cells. A cell with the blend of MEH-PPV and a methano-functionalized C60 derivative as the heterojunction, ITO and Ca as the electrodes[18] showed a quantum efficiency of 29% and a power conversion efficiency of 2.9% under monochromatic illumination. Replacing MEH-PPV with P3HT produced a quantum yield of 45% under a 10 V reverse bias.[19][20]

Polymer/polymer blends are also used in dispersed heterojunction photovoltaic cells. A blend of CN-PPV and MEH-PPV with Al and ITO as the electrodes, yielded peak monochromatic power conversion efficiency of 1% and fill factor of 0.38.[21][22]

Dye sensitized photovoltaic cells can also be considered important examples of this type.

Graded heterojunction

The electron donor and acceptor are mixed in such a way that the gradient is gradual. This architecture combines the short electron travel distance in the dispersed heterojunction with the advantage of the charge gradient of the bilayer technology.[23][24]

Examples

A cell with a blend of CuPc and C60 showed a quantum efficiency of 50% and a power conversion efficiency of 2.1% using 100 mW/cm2 simulated AM1.5G solar illumination for a graded heterojunction.[25]

Continuous junction

Similar to the graded heterojunction the continuous junction concept aims at realizing a gradual transition from an electron donor to an electron acceptor. However, the acceptor material is prepared directly from the donor polymer in a post-polymerization modification step.[26]

Current challenges and recent progress

Difficulties associated with organic photovoltaic cells include their low external quantum efficiency (up to 70%)[27] in comparison with inorganic photovoltaic devices; due largely to the large band gap of organic materials. Instabilities against oxidation and reduction, recrystallization and temperature variations can also lead to device degradation and decreased performance over time. This occurs to different extents for devices with different compositions, and is an area into which active research is taking place.[28]

Other important factors include the exciton diffusion length; charge separation and charge collection; and charge transport and mobility, which are affected by the presence of impurities.

Effect of film morphology


Fig 5: Highly folded heterojunction (a); heterojunction with controlled growth (b)

As described above, dispersed heterojunctions of donor-acceptor organic materials have high quantum efficiencies compared to the planar hetero-junction, because in dispersed heterojunctions it is more likely for an exciton to find an interface within its diffusion length. Film morphology can also have a drastic effect on the quantum efficiency of the device. Rough surfaces and the presence of voids can increase the series resistance and also the chance of short-circuiting. Film morphology and, as a result, quantum efficiency can be improved by annealing of a device after covering it by a ~1000 Å thick metal cathode. Metal film on top of the organic film applies stresses on the organic film, which helps to prevent the morphological relaxation in the organic film. This gives more densely packed films and at the same time allows the formation of phase-separated interpenetrating donor-acceptor interface inside the bulk of organic thin film.[29]

Controlled growth heterojunction

Charge separation occurs at the donor acceptor interface. Whilst traveling to the electrode, a charge can become trapped and/or recombine in a disordered interpenetrating organic material, resulting in decreased device efficiency. Controlled growth of the heterojunction provides better control over positions of the donor-acceptor materials, resulting in much greater power efficiency (ratio of output power to input power) than that of planar and highly disoriented hetero-junctions (as shown in Fig 5). Thus, the choice of suitable processing parameters in order to better control the structure and film morphology is highly desirable.[17]

Progress in growth techniques

Mostly organic films for photovoltaic applications are deposited by spin coating and vapor-phase deposition. However each method has certain draw backs, spin coating technique can coat larger surface areas with high speed but the use of solvent for one layer can degrade the already existing polymer layer. Another problem is related with the patterning of the substrate for device as spin-coating results in coating the entire substrate with a single material.

Vacuum thermal evaporation


Fig 6: Vacuum thermal evaporation (a) and organic phase vapor deposition (b)

Another deposition technique is vacuum thermal evaporation (VTE) which involves the heating of an organic material in vacuum. The substrate is placed several centimeters away from the source so that evaporated material may be directly deposited onto the substrate, as shown in Fig 6(a). This method is useful for depositing many layers of different materials without chemical interaction between different layers. However, there are sometimes problems with film-thickness uniformity and uniform doping over large-area substrates. In addition, the materials that deposit on the wall of the chamber can contaminate later depositions. This "line of sight" technique also can create holes in the film due to shadowing, which causes an increase in the device series-resistance and short circuit.[30]

Organic vapor phase deposition

Organic vapor phase deposition (OVPD, Fig 6(b)) allows better control of the structure and morphology of the film than vacuum thermal evaporation. The process involves evaporation of the organic material over a substrate in the presence of an inert carrier gas. The resulting film morphology can be tuned by changing the gas flow rate and the source temperature. Uniform films can be grown by reducing the carrier gas pressure, which will increase the velocity and mean free path of the gas, and as a result boundary layer thickness decreases. Cells produced by OVPD do not have issues related with contaminations from the flakes coming out of the walls of the chamber, as the walls are warm and do not allow molecules to stick to and produce a film upon them.

Another advantage over VTE is the uniformity in evaporation rate. This occurs because the carrier gas becomes saturated with the vapors of the organic material coming out of the source and then moves towards the cooled substrate, Fig. 6(b). Depending on the growth parameters (temperature of the source, base pressure and flux of the carrier gas) the deposited film can be crystalline or amorphous in nature. Devices fabricated using OVPD show a higher short-circuit current density than that of devices made using VTE. An extra layer of donor-acceptor hetero-junction at the top of the cell may block excitons, whilst allowing conduction of electron; resulting in improved cell efficiency.[30]

Organic solar ink

Organic solar ink is able to deliver higher performance in fluorescent lighting conditions in comparison to amorphous silicon solar cells, and said to have a 30% to 40% increase in indoor power density in comparison to the standard organic solar technology.[31]

at
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Distance education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distance_...

  • Islamic State and the Levant
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant الدولة الإسلامية في العراق والشام   ( ...
  • Heart Sutra
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia A reproduction of the palm -leaf manuscript in Siddham script ...
  • Slum
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...