Value chain · CLM-0048
In plain terms
An international scientific body reviewed the proposed figures, found them ranging from 230 to 1,000 watts per square metre, and chose 300 on health grounds, with 10 at the edge of the receiving site.
The claim as recorded
The URSI White Paper records that different central power flux values have been proposed between 230 W/m2 and 1000 W/m2, and adopts 300 W/m2 as a conservative value on the grounds that it is less dangerous biologically, with a Gaussian ground distribution and a rectenna edge flux of 10 W/m2 chosen for safety reasons.
Scope and limits
URSI white papers are consensus documents on controversial subjects and state that they do not necessarily reflect the views of individual member committees. This is an adopted design assumption for URSI's own reference calculation, not a recommended regulatory limit.
What it assumes
No assumptions are recorded against this claim.
Where it comes from
Verbatim: "Different values have been proposed, between 230 W/m2 and 1000 W/m2 [1, Table 2.3.2]. Here, a conservative value of 300 W/m2 (which is less dangerous from a biological point of view: see [1, Section 4.3]) is adopted for the central power flux. Assuming a Gaussian distribution of the power at the ground, and assuming further that the power flux at the edge of the rectenna is equal to 10 W/m2 (for safety reasons ...)".
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-001 not published in this release
- Contradicts
- CLM-0018 The most recent UK government report calls 230 watts per square metre a limit to be reached...
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0048
CLM-0048, Energy Aperture, as of 2007-06.
Connected records
Other published records linked to this one. A list, not a judgement.
- Also from SRC-100
- CLM-0032In 2007 the international radio science union published a white paper saying that nobody had measured this heating effect from the ground...CLM-0047Heating falls with the square of frequency. In 2007 no ground-based measurement of it was available at gigahertz frequencies, and...CLM-0049The stated design intent in a 2007 URSI white paper is that the beam would be shaped to fall to 10 watts per square metre by the edge of...CLM-0067According to a 2007 international report, Japanese designs of the time chose their beam strength on cost and land grounds; the report does...CLM-0079The 1978 paper modelled both a ground facility and a satellite case, and its 500 watts per square metre figure is a power flux for a given...CLM-0083The formula is the right type but nobody has said how far it can be pushed, and at space solar power frequencies the wave is about 200...CLM-0101The 1978 contract required the researchers to report fixes if ionospheric disturbance pushed the pilot-beam phase error past 2 to 3...CLM-0137In four major space solar power studies from 1978 to 2007, none put a number on how much of the beam's energy would be lost if the beam...More on the source page.
- Contradicted by
- CLM-0018The most recent UK government report calls 230 watts per square metre a limit to be reached because it lowers cost, and cites an earlier...