Unfortunately, I suspect both will produce the same thing: Medium grade computer graphics, piles of paper, enough hardware to fit in a truck (bigger NASA truck). No SBSP.

My (unrealistic) hope is that some billionaire is secretly planning on being the king of space and even as we speak is doing great things. Another hope is the Japanese. Otherwise, it is just depressing.

“what would be the outcome if a plane flew through the beam?”
Not too much, from the old (1970s) figures the beam (at aircraft altitudes and ground) was less intense than military grade radar at 5 or 6 miles. So, buzz on the radios, planes’ radar a little wonky. If a plane can take lightning storms a few minutes in the beam probably not too bad.

“… interference with aircraft and other communications…?”
While in the beam area there would likely be some interference, but the beam / receiver (once again working off the 1970s an my memory) had an area less than a square mile. There are lots of no fly zones (some military bases, Washington DC, etc.) just mark it on the maps. Outside the beam, probably not a problem.

Reply to Michael’s various comments:
” There’s no debating that this idea would cause man made global warming.” I’ll debate you: The major problem with humanity’s energy impact on the environment is not our waste energy (heat), but the toxins and gases released to generate that power. Compared to many existing large scale power generating (coal, nuke, oil) this produces no toxins and far less environmental impact in general. If coal alone was replaced the reduction in coal smoke (CO CO2) would, almost surely, REDUCE global warming.

The reservoirs you speak of are only marginally efficient on a large scale… Those pumps use power and put out waste heat, a small home system would almost surely use more power to store it this way than could be saved.

“electrolyzing water” is such a massively inefficient way to store power that the only way it makes much sense is if your electricity source is so cheap you don’t care. Unless we utilize some currently non existent power source (got a Mr. Fusion anyone?) it is not very useful. While I agree that a better energy storage system is what we need, until somebody starts selling Shipstones (fictional super battery) we need to use the technology available.

Daniel Baldacchino’s comment and Chris’s reply:
The other way to look at it is that the Earth casts a pretty small shadow that far out.

steven’s “environmental impact”:
This I suspect will be the PR problem that kills this (even if they get funding).

From a practical viewpoint the environmental impact will probably be pretty small i.e. if a SPS (Solar Power Satellite) produces the environmental impact of half a coal plant and replaces 10 of them = good thing. Compared to many existing large scale power generating (coal, nuke, oil) this produces no toxins and far less environmental impact.

On the “what sort of disruption it will be to fish, whales, man and other species.” problem:
The operators have vested interests on keeping the “beam” focused on the receiver, any spread is power that they can’t sell. Any power the receiver lets through to under the receiver is power that they can’t sell. The leakage through the (1970s again) receiver was low enough that the illustrations had farmers raising crops under them. You (bet you a dollar) have relied on this concept to keep you safe in your own home, the microwave oven is thousands of times more intense but the grid in the door window keeps (99.99+%) all the microwaves nicely off of you.

If the beam wandered off target and didn’t get turned off it would still not be much of a danger. People exposed to more intense microwaves than we are talking about report it as “warm”. Unless you kept it on a wrong spot for a long period (days?) I doubt one would notice without instruments. After many days it might raise the temp a degree or so.

If you put the receiver on the ocean (unlikely but could happen) “fish, whales,” might have a problem with it, the only one I can think of is if some of them use some unknown “compass” that radio waves might mess with. If the beam wandered off onto the ocean; it would be absorbed in the top inch, once again warming things mildly.

“other species.”:
Birds might be a problem, unlikely to be harmed if they fly through, but hard to say if they nest on top of the receiver for long periods. It would feel warm, so it might attract them. Under receiver probably not a problem.

Insects might be a problem too. Under receiver, once again, probably not a problem. But on top? I don’t see why they would be attracted to it (no food) but if they stayed there for years it might be bad for them.

BUT, compared to smoke from a smoky power plant or the fishkill from a hydroelectric dam I think this is pretty minor stuff environmental wise.

It makes sense environmentally, economically, and socially to me. If that is enough to have it come about… probably not.

Solar energy is being diverted to the earth that would normally pass it by.

This idea certainly would cause man made global warming since the earth would be receiving more solar energy than it would naturally. It doesn’t matter that it’s being converted to radio waves for transmission. Energy is energy. It cannot be created or destroyed. Once that extra energy is here on earth, it’s up to the earth to rid itself of it. There’s no debating that this idea would cause man made global warming.

There are already sufficient amounts of solar energy hitting the earth’s surface that we can harness. What we need to work on is better energy storage. There exists today upper and lower reservoirs where water is pumped up when demand is low, and allowed to flow down to produce electricity when the demand is high.

We need smaller residential type systems so that the stored energy is close to the consumer, reducing the need for transmission lines over long distances. I don’t like the idea of conventional batteries because you have to dispose of them when they die. A system of electrolyzing water, storage and fuel cell would be more desirable.

I really hope this idea gets shut down before any large amounts of money are wasted on it.