Re: What would you do to save the environment?

Paul Ciszek wrote:

So, now we deal with the issue of the transmission beam. It will not
be perfectly efficient either, nor will the antennas that are used to
capture it. So the question is, how much of the energy of the beam
will be wasted? If the answer is 50%, you're doing better, waste-heat-
wise, than an earthbound generator. There is also the benefit of not
generating any greenhouse gasses, but the same can be said for nukes.


The Wikipedia article I cited elsethread suggests considerably better than 50% is possible.

Hop
.