The next-generation biological solar cell could be useful in green energy. And in the power supply of manned space stations

Right) "The ice plant succulent shown here can become a living solar cell and power a circuit using photosynthesis. Credit: Adapted from ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2022, DOI: 10.1021/acsami.2c15123" (ScitechDaily.com/Scientists Have Developed a Living “Bio-Solar Cell” That Runs on Photosynthesis)

The long-term space mission that is limited inside the asteroid belt is also challenging. The spacecraft or space stations can travel between Mars and earth by using ion motors that get their electricity from solar panels. Also, the Mars- and moon stations can use solar panels for energy production. The same technology that is used in Mars or Moon stations can use in the isolated research stations on Earth. 

And places like Antarctica can use to develop this kind of technology. The idea is that those stations are used to test things like closed-cycle life-support. If food can produce at the moon station, that radically decreases its costs. And moon station can use to test the technology, that is needed for the Mars station. 

There is a possibility that spacecraft or space station gets at least part of their electricity from a biological source. In this case, biological solar cells can use along with regular solar panels. When we think about the use of biological solar panels at isolated places, that thing makes the station more energy efficient than before. Even in the dark seasons the ability to recycle part of the energy that is used in the greenhouse. 

That is producing food is making the system more energy efficient. The solar-power can use along with things like wind generators. And in the summertime in Antarctica, the operators can fix wind generators when solar panels are used to make electricity. Also, biological solar panels can recycle part of the energy that is used in greenhouses. 

But the thing is that the living solar cells that are photosynthetic and can create electricity from living vegetables are an interesting alternative. In that case, the same system can create electricity, it can clean the air by using photosynthesis. And that kind of living solar cell can also offer nutrients for the spacecraft's or space station's crew. That thing allows using limited space more effectively than otherwise. 

Developing green energy is important. And always at the beginning of the system is in small-scale systems. But then those systems can escalate to everyday use. 

https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-have-developed-a-living-bio-solar-cell-that-runs-on-photosynthesis/

https://astronomyandtechnology.blogspot.com/

Something must do to stop climate change.

Image:  Olkiluoto 3 Nuclear plant (YLE)

The new threat is attacks against energy infrastructure. 

Something must do to stop climate change. But the problem is where we are taking replacement energy. And the second question is: what is the power supply architecture in the future? If we want to make some new solutions that guarantee energy supply in crisis. We must make investments in those solutions. Energy infrastructure is a good target for strikes. 

Everything in modern society is running on electricity. Also, things like air-defense radars need electricity. And that's why energy infrastructure is a good target for attacks. And a hostile actor can make those attacks. 

* By using weapons like drones.

* Or they can just shut down gas and oil deliveries. 

We are facing a problem with climate change. The problem is that we still have a cheap energy source called natural gas. If we start to use biogas, which is forming in landfills and wastewater refineries, that gas doesn't remove the problem called carbon dioxide. So biofuel is not a synonym for carbon-free fuel. 

And if we want to remove carbon dioxide we must use something else, than hydrocarbon-based fuel. But if we want to use something new energy like wind, geothermal energy, or solar power, we must make investments in that kind of technology. And that means we must pay money for it. 

There are two main versions of the energy supply architecture. 

*One centralized solution. In this version, only a couple of power units produce energy for the network. The problem is that this kind of solution is vulnerable to attacks. 

*Networked solutions where a large number of smaller units are producing energy. In that case, the need to shut down one unit has not so a big effect as in a centralized solution.

Things like portable nuclear reactors are still on the desk. They are based on the same technology that is created for nuclear submarines. But the fact is that nuclear waste is always a very big problem. So nuclear power can be a short-term solution. But we must also notice one threat that we can see in Ukraine. That is a purposeful attack against energy infrastructure. 

Energy infrastructure is a good target for attacks. And that's why we must not put all eggs in the same basket. If somebody attacks against nuclear power plant or its critical infrastructure like transformers there must be something that guarantees the energy supply also in cases that somebody attacks a power supply like nuclear plants. 

We can make one single energy production platform, but in the cases, where there is some problem we must have a backup solution. The networked power-supply solution is less vulnerable to attacks. If some power-supply units must shut down in a networked solution, some other units can take their place. 

https://yle.fi/a/74-20008660