I pannelli solari nello spazio potrebbero tagliare le esigenze di energia rinnovabile terrestre dell’Europa dell’80% entro il 2050, ha scoperto uno studio
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/21/solar-panels-in-space-could-provide-80-of-europes-renewable-energy-by-2050
di nohup_me
17 commenti
so many questions, where, how, who pays, what of the degrading satellites, what of impacts from debris, this, that, and the third.
this is science fiction
Or, and I’m just putting this out there, solar panels on the ground would help *right now*.
As they are doing, happily.
just need to invent some magic, and this will be a piece of cake
*Note to self:*
*Do not write papers for publication whilst having a good time in a coffeeshop.*
Hopes and wishes.
Pipedreams..
Maybe, and hear me out; *maybe* it’s cheaper to build sustainable energy on earth. Wind, solar and different forms of fission reactors comes to mind.
Other news: Putting the sun into a Dyson sphere could cut Earth’s terrestrial renewable energy needs by 100%. by 3050, a study has found.
A Dyson Sphere could cut Earth’s renewable energy needs by 100%!
Stop trying to postpone the fucking solutions.
This is just giving China new ideas.
Most commenters seem to react negatively to this article. But the article is not about a country deciding to pause their terrestrial solar panels because they are waiting for spaced-based solar panels in 25 years. It’s a space agency (which has no business with terrestrial solar panels), studying under which condition would SBSP be cheaper / less carbon intensive than solar panels. To see if it’s worth studying further / making partnerships.
In their “beyond” scenario, SBSP would become both cheaper and less carbon-intensive than ground-based solar panels. I am no specialist, but the hypotheses they make don’t strike me as crazy. For instance, they only assume that the cost of launch would decrease by 50% in 25 years. That would be a slowdown of progress : [according to this graph](https://www.futuretimeline.net/data-trends/6.htm) the costs decreased 68% in 14 years (1981->1995), then 79% in 21 years (1995->2016), and 83% in 4 years (2016->2020).
Are we sure this will work? No. But I think it’s a good idea that NASA is studying technology which could both decrease carbon emissions and save money, in the long term. Powering the world with solar panels + wind + batteries would have looked like science fiction 40 years ago. Something looking hard, and counter-intuitive doesn’t mean it’s not worth studying it.
I’m no expert and you probably are, but when it comes to technology I would never discount the ability of humans to overcome hurdles with creation of new tech or inventions. Technology is our crowning achievement as a human race but it has not been used wisely or responsibly for the most part.
only way europe gets solar panels in space is if the US says so
Solar panels in soace for ground power needs never works . Can we stop with this bullshit already ?
You know what’s also neat? If you put them in space lowly peasant can’t get the sun for free anymore. Also combats global warming.
Wouldnt tiny rocks and debris damage them continuously?
I feel like I’ve seen this fantasy before, are we moving into Gundam 00 universe now?