solid state devices with “fixed” individual power output. When coupled with the requirement that these elements be contiguous to preclude RF sidelobes on the beam, the power output of the array, the number of elements, and the size of the array must all be proportionaL As discussed in earlier cases, a smaller power level (e.g., 10’s of megawatts or less) dictates a smaller phased array and results in a rapid increase in the scale of the associated terrestrial rectenna sites and costs. Case 8 MEO Suntower (xl) Case 8 examines market-driven variations on the Case 6 scenario of a single SunTower deployed in MEO: (a) a single city at 1 GW, (b) a single Mega-town at 250 MW, (c) a single town at 50 MW and; (d) a remote site sized at 10 MW. This case illuminates differences for the basic MEO scenario that result from sizing the system to serve various market sizes. As with Case 7, a smaller power level dictates a smaller phased array and results in increases in the scale of the associated terrestrial rectenna sites and costs. This effect counters reductions due to changes in the size and costs of the SPS platform Case 9 LEO SunTower (xl) with 12 MEO Relays Case 9 presents an analysis of several variations on generation of power by a LEO sun-synchronous SunTower, and transmission by means of 12 Power Relay Satellites (PRS) of the “Reflect-Array” design in three MEO orbits. (See also Case 11 below.) Case 9 examines several market-driven variations with a single SunTower, in which the PRS, the LEO SPS and rectennas are deployed over 7 years. The variations include service for: (a) a single city at 1 GW, (b) a single Mega-town at 250 MW, (c) a single town at 50 MW and (d) a remote site sized at 10 MW. As in Cases 7 and 8, there is a significant variation in system cost with transmitted power level as a result of the use of solid state devices for RF power generation. In Case 9, the cost-to-first-power was minimized for Remote market sites, and the revenues maximized for the City market sites. Due to the tremendously greater masses associated with the active radio frequency “ReflectArray” system concepts, the total costs of the SSP systems are much greater than those of comparable architectures without relays. For example, the total cost for a single LEO SunTower SPS plus 12 PRS is $108 B for the Megatown market, versus $15 B for a single MEO SunTower, shown in Case 6, serving the same market. Variation of the design according to market size does not significantly improve the viability of the LEO SunTower/PRS. This family of cases never achieved a positive Net Present Value (NPV), and is not a viable candidate for further study. (Different PRS approaches must still be assessed.) Case 10 LEO SunTower (xl) with 7 GEO Relays Case 10 parallels Case 9, but substitutes seven GEO-based RF ReflectArray PRS for the twelve MEO-based PRS considered in the previous case. Both Cases use a single LEO sun-synchronous SunTower for power generation. Case 10 includes construction of seven rectennas, all in the final year of the year SPS deployment. It also examines the same suite of market-driven variations, as in Case 9. The results for Case 10 closely parallel those obtained in Case 9. The reduction in the number of PRS due to the transition from MEO to GEO is more than offset in cost by the increase in PRS scale with the increased relay distance to and from GEO. This family of cases never achieved a positive NPV and is not a viable candidate for further study. (Although, as in Case 9, different PRS approaches must be assessed.) Case 11 SunTower (x2) with 12 MEO Relays Case 11 represents a pair of SunTower SPS in a LEO sun-synchronous orbit at 1,500 km circular altitude. Eleven PRS at MEO orbits inclined about 30
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==