[polemic]

Seems to me that a significant advantage of 'space solar' is that you can ditch a significant amount of ground based distribution infrastructure. Transformers are pretty efficient but lose about 2% per step up/down[1], power lines are another 1-4%/100 miles[2], then you have losses related to storage since you can't turn solar on/off at will like you can with hydro or fired plants.

If a single solar sattelite [multiple for redundancy, in reality] can replace a large proportion continent's energy infrastructure, it starts to sound a lot more attractive.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformer#Energy_losses

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission#Los...

[beambot]

You'd still have to distribute the power from ground-based receiving stations via the grid. No free lunch.

[chad_oliver]

Yes, but I believe his point was that you could have multiple smaller stations close to where the power is needed. If it isn't safe to have the receivers near cities, then I don't think there's much chance that any receiver (anywhere) will get past the regulatory hurdles.

[schiffern]

>a single solar sattelite [multiple for redundancy, in reality] can replace a large proportion continent's energy infrastructure

Woah there. Exactly how much power would each of these hypothetical satellites provide?