My bad that isn't the original article. I read it on live science or something. Looks like that is a blog referencing it. I had it in my favorites but deleted it when I realized it was fake, uh let me check.
Some problems are.
You'd either have to have 24 receivers for once per hour, or send it all in one wave once per hour.
What would that much energy beamed to earth do to the planet in terms of radiation, etc.
The barrier to solar on earth is the clouds but the atmosphere also blocks out radiation.
I'd love to believe in the technology, I was excited when I first read it but then got discouraged.
Those links are slightly more legit-looking than the article I read but.
Seriously, is it going to be cheaper to build that on the moon than on Earth? If we can build a 3km-400km wide belt, we could just blanket an entire desert in these panels at much cheaper cost.
On Earth, if you placed them at the equator, you would get a lot of sunlight.
Ok its a picture but here are some points posted on the companies website:
Eliminates inefficiency due to bad weather: Does it? You still have to beam it to Earth, its also extremely expensive to get it up there. And whats the effect of adding that much heat to the Earth.
Achieves 24/7 continuous power generation: Not any more than solar cells on Earth. At some point those cells are going to be facing away from the sun as it rotates the earth, so there will not be continuous 24/7 power generation in that sense.
For example, why not build a moon space elevator, then build a giant solar array in geo-synchronous orbit that rotates and always faces the sun. I'm, not sure exactly how that would work, it might have a slight interruption if it went behind the earth, but the array itself would be a square facing the sun head on most of the time.
I mean it may be possible. I can't find the original article I read last week. If it is legit and could work I'd throw my money at it.