Also Read: Japan\u2019s Moon ring would turn lunar soil, robots, and a 6,800-mile solar belt into a power system designed to beam energy back to Earth<\/a><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nA key detail is that this is presented as a \u201cDream\u201d concept, not a funded public works project with contracts and a build schedule. In earlier reporting, Shimizu\u2019s adviser Tetsuji Yoshida said construction could start by 2035 if funding materialized, but he also acknowledged cost and timelines were still uncertain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Concept](\"https:\/\/indux.vozpopuli.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/moon-solar-ring-luna-ring-space-based-solar-power-japan-concept.jpg\" "\\"\\"")
A proposed lunar solar belt would circle the Moon, generating continuous power and transmitting it to Earth via energy beams.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nWhy the Moon looks like a solar cheat code<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
On Earth, solar power has a familiar problem. Night falls, clouds roll in, and output drops, sometimes right when demand spikes and everyone turns on their air conditioner<\/a>. That intermittency is why storage and grid upgrades matter so much.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOn the Moon, the pitch is that sunlight is more reliable because there is effectively no atmosphere to block it. Yoshida told ABC News that even in ideal conditions, Earth-based solar panels can generate only \u201cone-twentieth\u201d of the energy produced in outer space.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Not everyone uses the same multiplier, and that is worth noticing. Caltech, which has tested key pieces of space solar hardware, has said space solar power could \u201cpotentially\u201d yield eight times more power than solar panels \u201cat any location on Earth\u2019s surface,\u201d depending on assumptions and design.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Getting that energy back to Earth<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Shimizu\u2019s pathway is straightforward on paper. Solar cells convert sunlight to electricity, cables move that electricity to the Moon\u2019s Earth-facing side, and then transmission sites convert it into microwaves and laser energy aimed at receiving stations on the ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Those ground stations include \u201crectennas,\u201d short for rectifying antennas, which convert microwave energy back into electric power. Shimizu also says the receiving side could convert the incoming energy into hydrogen for fuel and energy storage, which is one way to turn a steady energy stream into something shippable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is easy to picture it like a giant space charger for the planet. But in practical terms, you are talking about precision pointing, conversion losses at multiple steps, and the need to integrate output into national grids that already struggle with transmission constraints.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Power beaming is still a science project<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The good news is that pieces of this have moved from theory into experiments. NASA\u2019s 2024 space-based solar power report notes that beaming electricity from space to ground was first demonstrated in June 2023, but at a very small experimental scale.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Caltech\u2019s Space Solar Power Demonstrator<\/a> adds detail to what \u201csmall scale\u201d really means. In 2023, Caltech reported that its MAPLE experiment could wirelessly transmit power in space and that a signal was detected on a campus rooftop receiver on May 22, showing basic end-to-end detectability.<\/p>\n\n\n\nJapan has also tested the guidance and control side that real power beaming would depend on. JAXA<\/a> described a ground demonstration of microwave wireless power transmission using a 5.8 GHz system, with about 1.8 kW transmitted over roughly 180 feet, and even noted the test had to be postponed earlier because of rain. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe \u201cno clouds\u201d advantage does not help much if the receiver hardware still lives on Earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Robots, regolith, and lunar industry<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Even if power beaming works, there is still the construction problem. Yoshida told ABC News the project would \u201clargely rely on robots\u201d for building, with astronauts supporting them on site, which is a realistic admission of how hard and expensive human labor is beyond Earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\nAlso Read: What looked impossible from geostationary orbit just happened with 2 watts, as China pushed a laser downlink past Starlink from 36,000 kilometers<\/a><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nShimizu\u2019s concept leans heavily on using local resources to avoid hauling everything from Earth. Its materials describe \u201cmoon sand\u201d as an oxide compound and claim that with imported hydrogen, operations could produce water and oxygen, and potentially make concrete, ceramics, glass fiber, and even solar cells from lunar materials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That is the part where readers should pause and ask a simple question. Do we have the industrial base on the Moon to do that at meaningful scale yet, or is it still a research ambition? Shimizu\u2019s own framing is aspirational, and the gap between a prototype plant and a 6,800-mile production line is enormous.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The bill for all this is the big unknown<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Luna Ring\u2019s biggest obstacle has never been a lack of sunlight. It has always been cost, and even supporters say the numbers are not pinned down. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
In 2011, Yoshida said he did not have a concrete cost estimate for the Luna Ring, while an energy economist interviewed by ABC News argued the approach \u201ccosts too much\u201d and urged focusing on nearer-term alternatives like geothermal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
NASA\u2019s more recent assessment shows why sticker shock keeps returning in these discussions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Its 2024 report points out that NASA feasibility studies in the 1970s and 1990s found space-based solar power \u201cprohibitively expensive,\u201d including a $1 trillion estimate in then-year dollars for a demonstration in the 1970s and a $250 billion estimate in then-year dollars for the first commercial kilowatt in the 1990s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Those are not prices you \u201cvalue engineer\u201d away with a better spreadsheet. To a large extent, the economics depend on major cost declines in launch, autonomous assembly, high-efficiency conversion, and safe power-beam operations, all at once.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Why this matters for business and security<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
There is a reason this idea keeps resurfacing. Space-based solar power research activity is rising, and NASA notes that publications on the topic nearly doubled from 2018 to 2022, with work concentrated in places like China, the U.S., the European Union, Japan, and Russia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It is also not purely a civilian story. NASA\u2019s report highlights that U.S. federal research includes efforts tied to power beaming, including DARPA\u2019s POWER program<\/a> for terrestrial applications and Air Force Research Laboratory<\/a> work on an in-space power beaming experiment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAlso Read: The Laramie Range is no longer being treated like open land, as wind, solar, and storage projects begin turning a Wyoming corridor into one system<\/a><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nThat overlap does not make Luna Ring a weapon, but it does explain why governments watch these technologies closely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So what should readers keep in mind the next time the \u201csolar ring around the Moon\u201d headline pops up? Watch for concrete milestones such as larger space-to-ground demonstrations, credible safety and regulatory frameworks for beams, and a believable cost curve. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Until then, the Luna Ring remains what Shimizu presents it as, a bold vision that usefully spotlights where clean energy meets the realities of space engineering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The original report was published on NASA.gov<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Japan is flirting again with an idea that sounds like it belongs in a science-fiction movie. A Japanese construction firm, … <\/p>\n
Why the Moon looks like a solar cheat code<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
On Earth, solar power has a familiar problem. Night falls, clouds roll in, and output drops, sometimes right when demand spikes and everyone turns on their air conditioner<\/a>. That intermittency is why storage and grid upgrades matter so much.<\/p>\n\n\n\n On the Moon, the pitch is that sunlight is more reliable because there is effectively no atmosphere to block it. Yoshida told ABC News that even in ideal conditions, Earth-based solar panels can generate only \u201cone-twentieth\u201d of the energy produced in outer space.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Not everyone uses the same multiplier, and that is worth noticing. Caltech, which has tested key pieces of space solar hardware, has said space solar power could \u201cpotentially\u201d yield eight times more power than solar panels \u201cat any location on Earth\u2019s surface,\u201d depending on assumptions and design.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Shimizu\u2019s pathway is straightforward on paper. Solar cells convert sunlight to electricity, cables move that electricity to the Moon\u2019s Earth-facing side, and then transmission sites convert it into microwaves and laser energy aimed at receiving stations on the ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Those ground stations include \u201crectennas,\u201d short for rectifying antennas, which convert microwave energy back into electric power. Shimizu also says the receiving side could convert the incoming energy into hydrogen for fuel and energy storage, which is one way to turn a steady energy stream into something shippable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is easy to picture it like a giant space charger for the planet. But in practical terms, you are talking about precision pointing, conversion losses at multiple steps, and the need to integrate output into national grids that already struggle with transmission constraints.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The good news is that pieces of this have moved from theory into experiments. NASA\u2019s 2024 space-based solar power report notes that beaming electricity from space to ground was first demonstrated in June 2023, but at a very small experimental scale.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Caltech\u2019s Space Solar Power Demonstrator<\/a> adds detail to what \u201csmall scale\u201d really means. In 2023, Caltech reported that its MAPLE experiment could wirelessly transmit power in space and that a signal was detected on a campus rooftop receiver on May 22, showing basic end-to-end detectability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Japan has also tested the guidance and control side that real power beaming would depend on. JAXA<\/a> described a ground demonstration of microwave wireless power transmission using a 5.8 GHz system, with about 1.8 kW transmitted over roughly 180 feet, and even noted the test had to be postponed earlier because of rain. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cno clouds\u201d advantage does not help much if the receiver hardware still lives on Earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Even if power beaming works, there is still the construction problem. Yoshida told ABC News the project would \u201clargely rely on robots\u201d for building, with astronauts supporting them on site, which is a realistic admission of how hard and expensive human labor is beyond Earth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Shimizu\u2019s concept leans heavily on using local resources to avoid hauling everything from Earth. Its materials describe \u201cmoon sand\u201d as an oxide compound and claim that with imported hydrogen, operations could produce water and oxygen, and potentially make concrete, ceramics, glass fiber, and even solar cells from lunar materials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That is the part where readers should pause and ask a simple question. Do we have the industrial base on the Moon to do that at meaningful scale yet, or is it still a research ambition? Shimizu\u2019s own framing is aspirational, and the gap between a prototype plant and a 6,800-mile production line is enormous.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Luna Ring\u2019s biggest obstacle has never been a lack of sunlight. It has always been cost, and even supporters say the numbers are not pinned down. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2011, Yoshida said he did not have a concrete cost estimate for the Luna Ring, while an energy economist interviewed by ABC News argued the approach \u201ccosts too much\u201d and urged focusing on nearer-term alternatives like geothermal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n NASA\u2019s more recent assessment shows why sticker shock keeps returning in these discussions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Its 2024 report points out that NASA feasibility studies in the 1970s and 1990s found space-based solar power \u201cprohibitively expensive,\u201d including a $1 trillion estimate in then-year dollars for a demonstration in the 1970s and a $250 billion estimate in then-year dollars for the first commercial kilowatt in the 1990s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Those are not prices you \u201cvalue engineer\u201d away with a better spreadsheet. To a large extent, the economics depend on major cost declines in launch, autonomous assembly, high-efficiency conversion, and safe power-beam operations, all at once.<\/p>\n\n\n\n There is a reason this idea keeps resurfacing. Space-based solar power research activity is rising, and NASA notes that publications on the topic nearly doubled from 2018 to 2022, with work concentrated in places like China, the U.S., the European Union, Japan, and Russia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is also not purely a civilian story. NASA\u2019s report highlights that U.S. federal research includes efforts tied to power beaming, including DARPA\u2019s POWER program<\/a> for terrestrial applications and Air Force Research Laboratory<\/a> work on an in-space power beaming experiment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n That overlap does not make Luna Ring a weapon, but it does explain why governments watch these technologies closely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So what should readers keep in mind the next time the \u201csolar ring around the Moon\u201d headline pops up? Watch for concrete milestones such as larger space-to-ground demonstrations, credible safety and regulatory frameworks for beams, and a believable cost curve. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Until then, the Luna Ring remains what Shimizu presents it as, a bold vision that usefully spotlights where clean energy meets the realities of space engineering.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The original report was published on NASA.gov<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Japan is flirting again with an idea that sounds like it belongs in a science-fiction movie. A Japanese construction firm, … <\/p>\nGetting that energy back to Earth<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Power beaming is still a science project<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Robots, regolith, and lunar industry<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Also Read: What looked impossible from geostationary orbit just happened with 2 watts, as China pushed a laser downlink past Starlink from 36,000 kilometers<\/a><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
The bill for all this is the big unknown<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Why this matters for business and security<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Also Read: The Laramie Range is no longer being treated like open land, as wind, solar, and storage projects begin turning a Wyoming corridor into one system<\/a><\/h4>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n