h a l f b a k e r yA hive of inactivity
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I dont know if anyone ever thought of this, but why dont we build a giant sphere around the earth, and cover its outside with solar panels? I have read that the earth recieves more energy as sunlight in a week, than we have used since the dawn of civilization. Which means if the entire sphere were covered
in solar cells, then we would have an abundance of energy. The Inside of the Sphere would be striped with florescent bulbs, that when lit, would look like a general florescent sky. Of Course we would have to have the sphere made of some super light weight, abundant material, that could withstand the construction phase, after that, it would fall on itself, and be held in equilibrium. A hole would be required, as well as points where satelite transmitions could pass. Then we need a cluster of mainframes to control the lights, so that we could control the heating patterns of the earth. If England wants a sunny day, it simply brightens slightly over england. Or Dulls over SO.Cal to cool it down and make it rain. CAlculating every need and delivering the best weather conditions needed at that time. Not to mention the need for cables to hold the thing in place so it doesnt fall to one side and to bring the excess electricity to earth, so we can run our electric cars, and power our cities with it. Seems Like a Good Idea to me. Just need the govornments to front the bill. Salem Al Salem
Dyson Sphere FAQ
http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/dysonFAQ.html
[theircompetitor, Oct 04 2004]
Eliminate Night on HalfBakery
http://www.halfbake...a/Eliminate_20Night
[theircompetitor, Oct 04 2004]
[link]
|
| |
heeeheeeheee.. I look forward to some of the annotations on this one. |
|
| |
//I have read that the earth recieves more energy as sunlight in a week, than we have used since the dawn of civilization//
|
|
| |
Don't forget that our use of energy is hugely exponential. In the long run, are solar panels more proficient than mother nature at soaking up energy from the sun? Also, it doesn't stike me as efficient to block off the sun, and then spend energy on artificial light. Maybe a better idea would be to create huge solar farms, across large parts of the ocean? |
|
| |
Mind you, if you used the right architect, the whole project could make a wonderful, erm, statement. |
|
| |
Salem Al Salem, you are so clever. |
|
| |
A giant bubble around the earth, eh? And covered
entirely in solar cells? Heh. |
|
| |
No more asteroid sky watching? What about all the static
electricity that would build up? BOOM... which way would
the percussion travel? Would it squash us or suck our
atmosphere into deep space. Won't the moon's
gravitational pull eventually shred it to pieces? Wouldn't
this generate a lot of noise from all those solar cells
clanking around? Would the friction cause our atmoshere
to catch fire? Won't moisture condensing on the inside of
this redundant gas sack short out all those fluourescent
lights?... |
|
| |
How many trolls does it take to change all of the light
bulbs!? Hmm? |
|
| |
...questions questions questions |
|
| |
Haven't heard this one before. |
|
| |
magic i think would be the correct repsonse... |
|
| |
SalemALS -- there is a concept advanced by Freeman Dyson called a Dyson Sphere. This sphere would actually encompass an entire solar system and capture all the energy of the sun. A very advanced civilization would thus be enabled, but it would be cut off from the rest of the universe, in a sense, as a partial solution to the Fermi Paradox. Actually cutting off the Earth from the sun does not seem to be worth it in terms of retranslating the energy. |
|
| |
As a separate point, there have been discussions about having localized "sunspots" using reflectors, i.e. artificial moons. They've been controversial. Links should be up shortly |
|
| |
Hot potato. Wrap in foil, bake, unwrap, eat. |
|
| |
Worldwide flourescents? Seems Like a Bad Idea to me. |
|
| |
I don't know whether to fishbone
this for its audacious impracticality
... or bun it for same. |
|
| |
Apart from the oh half a dozen
problems to do with basic
inefficiency, weather disruption,
no more stars at night, no
ground-based astronomy, the fact
is you're spending money on solar
cells which will spend half their life
... in the dark! |
|
| |
Better to build a flat disk of solar
cells facing the sun, radius 2 x
earth's, free-floating at a Lagrange
point (far less money spent on
structural support), and run the
power back to Earth with, oh, a
really long piece of flex. |
|
| |
Conservation of energy anyone? |
|
| |
No thanks [wagster] I just ate. |
|
| |
Bad science. There are 3 major problems: a.
Putting up the solar panels in space would cost
over 3 million dollars per square km. Since the circumference of earth is over 24,000 km a simple
calculation of the size of wrapping is pie are times
square. Times square is at least 40.72 meters long,
and no one knows why its called square when it's
actually round. But that can be overcome, so it is
not considered a separate problem. |
|
| |
Last but not least: The atmosphere is brittle at
the heights you are talking about (it has to be at
least high enough that trucks don't crash into it).
The stratosphere can reach 900,000 degrees Kelvin
which is millions more in Fahrenheit. So current
technology of PV cells would simply break down
and disintegrate into Barium and Carbon
Monoxide. |
|
| |