Jump to content

User:Rfassbind/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User:Rfassbind · talk

[edit]

Infobox planet color scheme

[edit]
Main page: User:Rfassbind/sandbox/color-scheme

Solar System—Farthest regions

[edit]
Further information: Solar System § Farthest regions
From the Sun to the nearest star: The Solar System on a logarithmic scale in astronomical units (AU)

The point at which the Solar System ends can be defined by two by two separate forces—the solar wind and the Sun's gravity:

  • The limit of the Suns's solar winds and its embedded magnetic field: This is the heliosphere, the bubble-like region of space dominated by the stream of charged particles and magnetic field of the solar wind. The outer boundary of the heliosphere is considered the beginning of the interstellar medium.[1] The radius of the Heliosphere is roughly 100 AU, or a hundred times the Earths's distance from the Sun.
  • The limit of the Sun's gravitational influence: The Sun's Hill sphere is the effective range of its gravitational dominance, its sphere of influence. This solar gravitational sphere extends much further than the solar wind's heliosphere. It is thought to extend up to a thousand times farther and encompasses the theorized Oort cloud, with the inner cloud at 2,000 to 20,000 AU and the outer Oort cloud reaching out up to 100,000 AU, or a thousand times further than the heliosphere.[2]

The Sun's sphere of influence depends on which of its property is considered to define the outer boundary of the Solar System.

Tunguska event (revision summary)

[edit]
Main article: Tunguska event
Tunguska event
Location of the event in Siberia (modern map)
EventExplosion in forest area (10–15 Mtons TNT)
Time30 June 1908
PlacePodkamennaya Tunguska River in Siberia, Russian Empire
EffectsFlattening 2,000 km2 (770 sq mi) of forest
DamageMostly material damages to trees
CauseProbable air burst of small asteroid or comet
Coordinates60°55′N 101°57′E / 60.917°N 101.950°E / 60.917; 101.950

The Tunguska event was a large explosion of a meteor near the Stony Tunguska River in what is now Krasnoyarsk Krai, a sparsely populated region of the Eastern Siberian Taiga, Russia. The event occured in the morning of June 30, 1908 (N.S.).[3][4]

It flattened 2,000 km2 (770 sq mi) of forest and caused no known casualties.

It is classified as an impact event, even though no impact crater has been found and the meteor is believed to have burst in mid-air at an altitude of 5 to 10 kilometres (3 to 6 miles) rather than hit the surface of the Earth.[5]

Different studies have yielded varying estimates of the superbolide's size, on the order of 60 to 190 metres (197 to 623 feet), depending on whether the meteor was a comet or a denser asteroid.[6] It is the largest impact event on Earth in recorded history.

Since the 1908 event, there have been an estimated 1,000 scholarly papers (mainly in Russian) published on the Tunguska explosion. Many scientists have participated in Tunguska studies: the best known are Leonid Kulik, Yevgeny Krinov, Kirill Florensky, Nikolai Vladimirovich Vasiliev, and Wilhelm Fast. In 2013, a team of researchers led by Victor Kvasnytsya of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine published analysis results of micro-samples from a peat bog near the center of the affected area showing fragments that may be of meteoritic origin.[7][8]

Estimates of the energy of the air burst range from 30 megatons of TNT (130 PJ) to 10 and 15 megatons of TNT (42 and 63 PJ),[9] depending on the exact height of burst estimated when the scaling-laws from the effects of nuclear weapons are employed.[9][10] While more modern supercomputer calculations that include the effect of the object's momentum estimate that the airburst had an energy range from 3 to 5 megatons of TNT (13 to 21 PJ), and that simply more of this energy was focused downward than would be the case from a nuclear explosion.[10]

Using the 15 megaton nuclear explosion derived estimate is an energy about 1,000 times greater than that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan; roughly equal to that of the United States' Castle Bravo ground-based thermonuclear test detonation on March 1, 1954; and about two-fifths that of the Soviet Union's later Tsar Bomba (the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated).[11]

It is estimated that the Tunguska explosion knocked down some 80 million trees over an area of 2,150 square kilometres (830 sq mi), and that the shock wave from the blast would have measured 5.0 on the Richter scale. An explosion of this magnitude would be capable of destroying a large metropolitan area,[12] but due to the remoteness of the location, no fatalities were documented. This event has helped to spark discussion of asteroid impact avoidance.

"Missing" elements

[edit]
  • meteor - superbolide/detonating fireball (terms)
  • Expedition
  • Eyewitness/contemporary summary, what has been observed. Nearby: light, sound, shock wave. From afar: earth quakes, atmospheric changes.
  • History and current status of scientific debate: "comet vs asteroid"
  • Speculation, probabilistics, NEOs

LAST

[edit]

The Tunguska event was a large explosion, caused by a meteor, which occurred near the Stony Tunguska River in what is now Krasnoyarsk Krai, Russia, in the morning of June 30, 1908 (N.S.).[3][4] The explosion over the sparsely populated Eastern Siberian Taiga flattened 2,000 km2 (770 sq mi) of forest and caused no known casualties. It is classified as an impact event, even though no impact crater has been found and the meteor is believed to have burst in mid-air at an altitude of 5 to 10 kilometres (3 to 6 miles) rather than hit the surface of the Earth.[13] Different studies have yielded varying estimates of the superbolide's size, on the order of 60 to 190 metres (197 to 623 feet), depending on whether the meteor was a comet or a denser asteroid.[14] It is the largest impact event on Earth in recorded history.

Since the 1908 event, there have been an estimated 1,000 scholarly papers (mainly in Russian) published on the Tunguska explosion. Many scientists have participated in Tunguska studies: the best known are Leonid Kulik, Yevgeny Krinov, Kirill Florensky, Nikolai Vladimirovich Vasiliev, and Wilhelm Fast. In 2013, a team of researchers led by Victor Kvasnytsya of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine published analysis results of micro-samples from a peat bog near the center of the affected area showing fragments that may be of meteoritic origin.[15][16]

Estimates of the energy of the air burst range from 30 megatons of TNT (130 PJ) to 10 and 15 megatons of TNT (42 and 63 PJ),[9] depending on the exact height of burst estimated when the scaling-laws from the effects of nuclear weapons are employed.[9][10] While more modern supercomputer calculations that include the effect of the object's momentum estimate that the airburst had an energy range from 3 to 5 megatons of TNT (13 to 21 PJ), and that simply more of this energy was focused downward than would be the case from a nuclear explosion.[10]

Using the 15 megaton nuclear explosion derived estimate is an energy about 1,000 times greater than that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan; roughly equal to that of the United States' Castle Bravo ground-based thermonuclear test detonation on March 1, 1954; and about two-fifths that of the Soviet Union's later Tsar Bomba (the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated).[17]

It is estimated that the Tunguska explosion knocked down some 80 million trees over an area of 2,150 square kilometres (830 sq mi), and that the shock wave from the blast would have measured 5.0 on the Richter scale. An explosion of this magnitude would be capable of destroying a large metropolitan area,[18] but due to the remoteness of the location, no fatalities were documented. This event has helped to spark discussion of asteroid impact avoidance.

Ocean (bug GiF overlay wikitable)

[edit]
Rotating series of maps showing alternate divisions of the oceans
Various ways to divide the World Ocean

Oceanic divisions

[edit]
Further information: Borders of the oceans

Though generally described as several separate oceans, these waters comprise one global, interconnected body of salt water sometimes referred to as the World Ocean or global ocean.[19][20] This concept of a continuous body of water with relatively free interchange among its parts is of fundamental importance to oceanography.[21]

The major oceanic divisions – listed below in descending order of area and volume – are defined in part by the continents, various archipelagos, and other criteria.[22][23][24]

Rank (by area) Ocean Location Area
(km2)
(%)		 Volume
(km3)
(%)		 Avg. depth
(m)		 Coastline
(km)
1 Pacific Ocean Separates Asia and Oceania from the Americas[25][NB] 168,723,000
46.6		 669,880,000
50.1		 3,970 135,663
2 Atlantic Ocean Separates the Americas from Eurasia and Africa[26] 85,133,000
23.5		 310,410,900
23.3		 3,646 111,866
3 Indian Ocean Washes upon southern Asia and separates Africa and Australia[27] 70,560,000
19.5		 264,000,000
19.8		 3,741 66,526
4 Southern Ocean Sometimes considered an extension of the Pacific, Atlantic and Indian Oceans,[28][29] which encircles Antarctica 21,960,000
6.1		 71,800,000
5.4		 3,270 17,968
5 Arctic Ocean Sometimes considered a sea or estuary of the Atlantic,[30][31] which covers much of the Arctic and washes upon northern North America and Eurasia[32] 15,558,000
4.3		 18,750,000
1.4		 1,205 45,389
Total – World Ocean 361,900,000
100 		1.335×10^9
100 		3,688 377,412[33]

NB: Volume, area, and average depth figures include NOAA ETOPO1 figures for marginal South China Sea.

Oceans are fringed by smaller, adjoining bodies of water such as seas, gulfs, bays, bights, and straits.

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference Voyager was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Littmann, Mark (2004). Planets Beyond: Discovering the Outer Solar System. Courier Dover Publications. pp. 162–163. ISBN 978-0-486-43602-9.
  3. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Farinella-2001 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ a b Trayner, C (1994). "Perplexities of the Tunguska meteorite". The Observatory. 114: 227–231. Bibcode:994Obs...114..227T. {{cite journal}}: Check |bibcode= length (help)
  5. ^ "APOD: 2007 November 14 – Tunguska: The Largest Recent Impact Event". Antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov. Retrieved 2011-09-12.
  6. ^ Lyne, J. E.; Tauber, M. (1995). "Origin of the Tunguska Event". Nature. 375 (6533): 638–639. Bibcode:1995Natur.375..638L. doi:10.1038/375638a0. S2CID 4345310.
  7. ^ Peplow, Mark (Jun 10, 2013). "Rock samples suggest meteor caused Tunguska blast". Nature News.
  8. ^ Kvasnytsya, Victor; R. Wirth; L. Dobrzhinetskaya; J. Matzel; B. Jacobsen; I. Hutcheon; R. Tappero; M. Kovalyukh (2013). "New evidence of meteoritic origin of the Tunguska cosmic body". Planet. Space Sci. 84: 131–140. Bibcode:2013P&SS...84..131K. doi:10.1016/j.pss.2013.05.003.
  9. ^ a b c d Shoemaker, Eugene (1983). "Asteroid and Comet Bombardment of the Earth". Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences. 11 (1). US Geological Survey, Flagstaff, Arizona: 461–494. Bibcode:1983AREPS..11..461S. doi:10.1146/annurev.ea.11.050183.002333.
  10. ^ a b c d "Sandia supercomputers offer new explanation of Tunguska disaster". Sandia National Laboratories. 2007-12-17. Retrieved 2007-12-22.
  11. ^ Verma (2005), p1.
  12. ^ Longo, Giuseppe (2007). "18: The Tunguska event". In Bobrowsky, Peter T.; Rickman, Hans (eds.). Comet/Asteroid Impacts and Human Society, An Interdisciplinary Approach (PDF). Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer-Verlag. pp. 303–330. ISBN 978-3-540-32709-7. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-10-14.
  13. ^ "APOD: 2007 November 14 – Tunguska: The Largest Recent Impact Event". Antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov. Retrieved 2011-09-12.
  14. ^ Lyne, J. E.; Tauber, M. (1995). "Origin of the Tunguska Event". Nature. 375 (6533): 638–639. Bibcode:1995Natur.375..638L. doi:10.1038/375638a0. S2CID 4345310.
  15. ^ Peplow, Mark (Jun 10, 2013). "Rock samples suggest meteor caused Tunguska blast". Nature News.
  16. ^ Kvasnytsya, Victor; R. Wirth; L. Dobrzhinetskaya; J. Matzel; B. Jacobsen; I. Hutcheon; R. Tappero; M. Kovalyukh (2013). "New evidence of meteoritic origin of the Tunguska cosmic body". Planet. Space Sci. 84: 131–140. Bibcode:2013P&SS...84..131K. doi:10.1016/j.pss.2013.05.003.
  17. ^ Verma (2005), p1.
  18. ^ Longo, Giuseppe (2007). "18: The Tunguska event". In Bobrowsky, Peter T.; Rickman, Hans (eds.). Comet/Asteroid Impacts and Human Society, An Interdisciplinary Approach (PDF). Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer-Verlag. pp. 303–330. ISBN 978-3-540-32709-7. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-10-14.
  19. ^ "Ocean". Sciencedaily.com. Retrieved 2012-11-08.
  20. ^ ""Distribution of land and water on the planet". UN Atlas of the Oceans. {{cite web}}: External link in |work= (help)
  21. ^ Spilhaus, Athelstan F. (July 1942). "Maps of the whole world ocean". 32 (3). American Geographical Society: 431–5. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  22. ^ Cite error: The named reference sciencedaily was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  23. ^ "Volumes of the World's Oceans from ETOPO1". NOAA. Retrieved 2015-03-07.
  24. ^ "CIA World Factbook". CIA. Retrieved 2015-04-05.
  25. ^ "Pacific Ocean". http://www.eoearth.org. Retrieved 2015-03-07. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  26. ^ "Atlantic Ocean". http://www.eoearth.org. Retrieved 2015-03-07. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  27. ^ "Indian Ocean". http://www.eoearth.org. Retrieved 2015-03-07. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  28. ^ "Southern Ocean". http://www.eoearth.org. Retrieved 2015-03-10. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  29. ^ "Limits of Oceans and Seas, 3rd edition" (PDF). International Hydrographic Organization. 1953. Retrieved 7 February 2010.
  30. ^ Tomczak, Matthias; Godfrey, J. Stuart (2003). Regional Oceanography: an Introduction (2 ed.). Delhi: Daya Publishing House. ISBN 81-7035-306-8.
  31. ^ "'Arctic Ocean' - Encyclopædia Britannica". Retrieved 2012-07-02. As an approximation, the Arctic Ocean may be regarded as an estuary of the Atlantic Ocean.
  32. ^ "Arctic Ocean". http://www.eoearth.org. Retrieved 2015-03-07. {{cite web}}: External link in |publisher= (help)
  33. ^ "Recommendation ITU-R RS.1624: Sharing between the Earth exploration-satellite (passive) and airborne altimeters in the aeronautical radionavigation service in the band 4 200-4 400 MHz (Question ITU-R 229/7)" (PDF). ITU Radiotelecommunication Sector (ITU-R). Retrieved 2015-04-05. The oceans occupy about 3.35×108 km2 of area. There are 377412 km of oceanic coastlines in the world.

Astronomical object (lead)

[edit]
Main article: Astronomical object
"Celestial object" and "Celestial body" redirect here. For other uses, see Celestial (disambiguation).
This page is about naturally occurring objects. For artificial objects, see Satellite.
Above the round domes of La Silla Observatory, three astronomical objects in the Solar System—Jupiter (top), Venus (lower left), and Mercury (lower right).[1]

(test) Astronomical objects or celestial objects are naturally occurring physical entities, associations or structures that current science has demonstrated to exist in the observable universe.[2] The term astronomical object is sometimes used interchangeably with astronomical body. Typically, an astronomical (celestial) body refers to a single, cohesive structure that is bound together by gravity (and sometimes by electromagnetism). Examples include the asteroids, moons, planets and the stars. Astronomical objects are gravitationally bound structures that are associated with a position in space, but may consist of multiple independent astronomical bodies or objects. These objects range from single planets to star clusters, nebulae or entire galaxies. A comet may be described as a body, in reference to the frozen nucleus of ice and dust, or as an object, when describing the nucleus with its diffuse coma and tail.

The universe can be viewed as having a hierarchical structure.[3] At the largest scales, the fundamental component of assembly is the galaxy, which are assembled out of dwarf galaxies. The galaxies are organized into groups and clusters, often within larger superclusters, that are strung along great filaments between nearly empty voids, forming a web that spans the observable universe.[4] Galaxies and dwarf galaxies have a variety of morphologies, with the shapes determined by their formation and evolutionary histories, including interaction with other galaxies.[5] Depending on the category, a galaxy may have one or more distinct features, such as spiral arms, a halo and a nucleus. At the core, most galaxies have a supermassive black hole, which may result in an active galactic nucleus. Galaxies can also have satellites in the form of dwarf galaxies and globular clusters.

Celestial objects can be studied with radio telescopes.[6]

The constituents of a galaxy are formed out of gaseous matter that assembles through gravitational self-attraction in a hierarchical manner. At this level, the resulting fundamental components are the stars, which are typically assembled in clusters from the various condensing nebulae.[7] The great variety of stellar forms are determined almost entirely by the mass, composition and evolutionary state of these stars. Stars may be found in multi-star systems that orbit about each other in a hierarchical organization. A planetary system and various minor objects such as asteroids, comets and debris, can form in a hierarchical process of accretion from the protoplanetary disks that surrounds newly formed stars.

The various distinctive types of stars are shown by the Hertzsprung–Russell diagram (H–R diagram)—a plot of absolute stellar luminosity versus surface temperature. Each star follows an evolutionary track across this diagram. If this track takes the star through a region containing an intrinsic variable type, then its physical properties can cause it to become a variable star. An example of this is the instability strip, a region of the H-R diagram that includes Delta Scuti, RR Lyrae and Cepheid variables.[8] Depending on the initial mass of the star and the presence or absence of a companion, a star may spend the last part of its life as a compact object; either a white dwarf, neutron star, or black hole.

Bar chart PHA discovery statistics

[edit]
Main article: Potentially hazardous object
50
100
150
200
prev.
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
PHA-KM: potentially hazardous asteroids larger than 1 kilometer – Cumulative number of discovered PHA by end of year (first of December). As of August 2015, there are a total of 154 PHAs larger than one kilometer.
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
prev.
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
PHA: total number of potentially hazardous asteroids – Cumulative number of all discovered PHA by end of year (first of December). As of August 2015, there are a total of 1606 PHAs.


[edit]
Main article: Barycenter

Images are representative (made by hand), not simulated.

  • Two bodies with the same mass orbiting a common barycenter (similar to the 90 Antiope system)
    Two bodies with the same mass orbiting a common barycenter (similar to the 90 Antiope system)
  • Two bodies with a difference in mass orbiting a common barycenter external to both bodies, as in the Pluto–Charon system
    Two bodies with a difference in mass orbiting a common barycenter external to both bodies, as in the Pluto–Charon system
  • Two bodies with a major difference in mass orbiting a common barycenter internal to one body (similar to the Earth–Moon system)
    Two bodies with a major difference in mass orbiting a common barycenter internal to one body (similar to the Earth–Moon system)
  • Two bodies with an extreme difference in mass orbiting a common barycenter internal to one body (similar to the Sun–Earth system)
    Two bodies with an extreme difference in mass orbiting a common barycenter internal to one body (similar to the Sun–Earth system)
  • Two bodies with the same mass orbiting a common barycenter, external to both bodies, with eccentric elliptic orbits (a common situation for binary stars)
    Two bodies with the same mass orbiting a common barycenter, external to both bodies, with eccentric elliptic orbits (a common situation for binary stars)
  • Sideview of a star orbiting the barycenter of a planetary system. The radial-velocity method makes use of the star's wobble to detect extrasolar planets
    Sideview of a star orbiting the barycenter of a planetary system. The radial-velocity method makes use of the star's wobble to detect extrasolar planets
  • Scale model of the Pluto system: Pluto and its five moons, including the location of the system's barycenter. Sizes, distances and apparent magnitude of the bodies are to scale.
    Scale model of the Pluto system: Pluto and its five moons, including the location of the system's barycenter. Sizes, distances and apparent magnitude of the bodies are to scale.


Mission objectives table format (discouraged)

[edit]
Science objective
Primary objectives (required)
– Characterize the global geology and morphology of Pluto and Charon
– Map chemical compositions of Pluto and Charon surfaces
– Characterize the neutral (non-ionized) atmosphere of Pluto and its escape rate
Secondary objectives (expected)
– Characterize the time variability of Pluto's surface and atmosphere
– Image select Pluto and Charon areas in stereo
– Map the terminators (day/night border) of Pluto and Charon with high resolution
– Map the chemical compositions of select Pluto and Charon areas with high resolution
– Characterize Pluto's ionosphere (upper layer of the atmosphere) and its interaction with the solar wind
– Search for neutral species such as H2, hydrocarbons, HCN and other nitriles in the atmosphere
– Search for any Charon atmosphere
– Determine bolometric Bond albedos for Pluto and Charon
– Map surface temperatures of Pluto and Charon
– Map any additional surfaces of outermost moons: Nix, Hydra, Kerberos, and Styx
Tertiary objectives (desired)
– Characterize the energetic particle environment at Pluto and Charon
– Refine bulk parameters (radii, masses) and orbits of Pluto and Charon
– Search for additional moons and any rings

List of minor planets visited by spacecraft

[edit]

Since the 1990s, a total of 13 minor planets – currently all of them are asteroids and dwarf planets – have been visited by space probes. Note that moons (not directly orbiting the Sun), comets and planets are not minor planets and thus are not included in the table below.

In addition to the listed objects, two asteroids have been imaged by spacecraft at distances too large to resolve features (over 100,000 km), and are hence not considered as "visited". Asteroid 132524 APL was imaged by New Horizons in 2006 at a distance of 101,867 km, and 2685 Masursky by Cassini in 2000 at a distance of 1,600,000 km. The Hubble Space Telescope, a spacecraft in Earth orbit, has imaged several large asteroids, including 2 Pallas and 3 Juno.

Minor planet Space probe
Name Image Dimensions
in km(a) 		Discovery
year 		Name Visiting
year 		Closest approach Remarks
in km in radii(b)
1 Ceres
952 1801 Dawn 2015–present 200
approx.
(planned)
 0.42 first "close up" picture of Ceres taken in December 2014; probe entered orbit in March 2015; first dwarf planet visited by a spacecraft, largest asteroid visited by a spacecraft
4 Vesta 529 1807 Dawn 2011–2012 200
approx.
 0.76 space probe broke orbit on 5 September 2012 and headed to Ceres; first "big four" asteroid visited by a spacecraft, largest asteroid visited by a spacecraft at the time
21 Lutetia
120×100×80 1852 Rosetta 2010 3,162 64.9 flyby on 10 July 2010; largest asteroid visited by a spacecraft at the time
243 Ida
56×24×21 1884 Galileo 1993 2,390 152 flyby; discovered Dactyl; first asteroid with a moon visited by a spacecraft, largest asteroid visited by spacecraft at the time
253 Mathilde
66×48×46 1885 NEAR Shoemaker 1997 1,212 49.5 flyby; largest asteroid visited by a spacecraft at the time
433 Eros
13×13×33 1898 NEAR Shoemaker 1998–2001 0 0 1998 flyby; 2000 orbited (first asteroid studied from orbit); 2001 landing; first asteroid landing, first asteroid orbited by a spacecraft, first near-Earth asteroid (NEA) visited by a spacecraft
951 Gaspra
18.2×10.5×8.9 1916 Galileo 1991 1,600 262 flyby; first asteroid visited by a spacecraft
2867 Šteins
4.6 1969 Rosetta 2008 800 302 flyby; first asteroid visited by the ESA
4179 Toutatis 4.5×~2 1934 Chang'e 2 2012 3.2 0.70 flyby[9]; closest asteroid flyby, first asteroid visited by China
5535 Annefrank
4.0 1942 Stardust 2002 3,079 1230 flyby
9969 Braille
2.2×0.6 1992 Deep Space 1 1999 26 12.7 flyby; followed by flyby of Comet Borrelly; failure, missed it during flyby
25143 Itokawa 0.5×0.3×0.2 1998 Hayabusa 2005 0 0 landed; returned dust samples to Earth; first asteroid with returned samples, smallest asteroid visited by a spacecraft, first asteroid visited by a non-NASA spacecraft
134340 Pluto
2,344 1930 New Horizons 2015 12,500 10.5 flyby; first trans-Neptunian object visited
Notes:
a A minor planet's dimensions may be described by x, y, and z axes instead of an (average) diameter due to its non-spherical, irregular shape.
b Closest approach given in multiples of the minor planet's mean radius
 ·  Default order of list: by the minor planet's designation, ascending.

List of comets visited by spacecraft

[edit]

alternative layout for List of minor planets and comets visited by spacecraft, sectionList of comets visited by spacecraft

Commet Space probe
Name Image Dimensions
in km(a) 		Discovery
year 		Name Visiting
year 		Closest approach Remarks
in km in radii(b)
Giacobini–Zinner
2 1900 ICE 1985 7,800 7,800 flyby
Halley
15×9 Known
since
antiquity 		Vega 1 1986 8,889 1,620 flyby
Vega 2 1986 8,030 1,460 flyby
Suisei 1986 151,000 27,450 distant flyby
Giotto 1986 596 108 flyby
Grigg–Skjellerup
2.6 1902 Giotto 1992 200 154 flyby
Borrelly
8×4×4 1904 Deep Space 1 2001 2,171 814 flyby; closest approach in September 2001 when probe entered the comet's coma[10]
Wild 2
5.5×4.0×3.3 1978 Stardust 2004 240 113 flyby; returned samples to Earth;
also see: sample return mission
Tempel 1
7.6×4.9 1867 Deep Impact 2005 0 0 flyby; blasted a crater using an impactor
Stardust 2011 181 57.9 flyby; imaged the crater created by Deep Impact
Hartley 2
1.4 1986 EPOXI
(was Deep Impact) 		2010 700 1,000 flyby; smallest comet visited
Churyumov–Gerasimenko
4.1×3.3×1.8 1969 Rosetta 2014 6 3.91
5.37 		in orbit as of 2015; OSIRIS captured image with 11 cm/px-resolution in Spring 2015[11]
Philae
(Rosetta's lander) 		2014 0 0 landed in November 2014
Notes:
(a)  Due to a non-spherical, irregular shape, a comet's x, y, and z axes instead of an (average) diameter are often used to describe its dimensions.
(b) Closest approach given in multiples of the comet's (average mean) radius
 ·  List ordered in descending order of a comet's first visit

VLT

[edit]
Main article: Very Large Telescope

Primary mirrors

[edit]
Recoating Yepun's mirror

The primary mirrors of the ESO 8-m class Very Large Telescopes are actively supported, thin Zerodur menisci, 8-.2-m diameter. The mirror blanks are produced by SCHOTT; the optical figuring, manufacturing and assembling of interfaces and auxiliary equipment are done by REOSC. Three mirror blanks have already been delivered by SCHOTT to REOSC. In November 1995 the project met a critical and very successful milestone, with the completion and testing of the first finished VLT primary mirror at REOSC. Specifications, manufacturing and above all testing methodology will be addressed, and the final results will be detailed. Optical performance at telescope level will be assessed as well.

The 8.2-m Zerodur primary mirrors (figure 1) of the ESO Very Large Telescope are 175 mm thick and their shape is actively controlled (active optics) by means of 150 axial force actuators,the necessary active corrections being obtained from wavefront sensors located off-axis on the image surface. The 23-tons mirror blanks (figure 2) are procured from SCHOTT Glaswerke and the optical figuring from REOSC (subsidiary of Groupe SFIM), together with the interfaces with the mirror cell and auxiliary equipment such as transport containers. REOSC responsibility starts at the delivery of the mirror blanks at SCHOTT premises and ends at the delivery of the finished mirrors ex works. Dedicated facilities were built by the two companies to execute their respective contracts.

Procurement of the mirror blanks started in 1988with the signature of the SCHOTT contract. The first mirror blank was delivered to REOSC in July 1993, the second in November 1994 and the third one in September 1995. The delivery of the last mirror blank is scheduled for September 1996.

The contract with REOSC for the optical figuring was formalized in 1989. Polishing of two mirrors has been completed;the first one was verified in October-November 1995 and the second is undergoing final tests at the time of redaction of this article.After active correction these two first mirrors are diffraction-limited at Ha wavelength.

The successful production of these mirrors represents a major breakthrough not only in terms of manufacturing processes but also in terms of metrology. Indeed the accurate and reliablemeasurement of a thin, flexible 50m2 optical surface represents a serious challenge.

After reviewing the specifications of the primary mirrors, manufacturing and testing plans will be presented andthe results obtained with three blanks and two finished mirrors will be detailed.

The SPHERE instrument attached to the VLT Unit Telescope 3.[12]
  1. ^ "Three Planets Dance Over La Silla". ESO Picture of the Week. Retrieved 5 June 2013.
  2. ^ Task Group on Astronomical Designations from IAU Commission 5 (April 2008). "Naming Astronomical Objects". International Astronomical Union (IAU). Archived from the original on 2 August 2010. Retrieved 4 July 2010.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  3. ^ Narlikar, Jayant V. (1996). Elements of Cosmology. Universities Press. ISBN 81-7371-043-0.
  4. ^ Smolin, Lee (1998). The life of the cosmos. Oxford University Press US. p. 35. ISBN 0-19-512664-5.
  5. ^ Buta, Ronald James; Corwin, Harold G.; Odewahn, Stephen C. (2007). The de Vaucouleurs atlas of galaxies. Cambridge University Press. p. 301. ISBN 978-0-521-82048-6.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  6. ^ "Stars Rain over ALMA". www.eso.org. ESO Picture of the Week. Retrieved 22 April 2015.
  7. ^ Elmegreen, Bruce G. (January 2010). "The nature and nurture of star clusters". Star clusters: basic galactic building blocks throughout time and space, Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union, IAU Symposium. Vol. 266. pp. 3–13. Bibcode:2010IAUS..266....3E. doi:10.1017/S1743921309990809.
  8. ^ Hansen, Carl J.; Kawaler, Steven D.; Trimble, Virginia (2004). Stellar interiors: physical principles, structure, and evolution. Astronomy and astrophysics library (2nd ed.). Springer. p. 86. ISBN 0-387-20089-4.
  9. ^ Chang'E 2 images of Toutatis – December 13, 2012 – The Planetary Society
  10. ^ "Deep Space 1 – NSSDC/COSPAR ID: 1998-061A". NASA. 26 August 2014. Retrieved July 2015. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  11. ^ "Rosetta Spacecraft Sees Its Shadow on a Comet (Photo)". Space.com. 5 March 2015. Rosetta flew just 3.7 miles (6 kilometers) from Comet 67P's surface, resulting in a resolution of 4.3 inches (11 centimeters) per pixel [for OSIRIS].
  12. ^ "The Strange Case of the Missing Dwarf". ESO Press Release. European Southern Observatory. Retrieved 27 February 2015.

Combined map

[edit]
PV watts per capita in Europe for 2014 and 2015 (projection)
  <0.1, n/a
  1–10
  50–100
  150–200
  300–450
  0.1–1
  10–50
  100–150
  200–300
  >450
(also see animated map, 1992–2014)
Photovoltaic per-capita distribution in Europe (watts per inhabitant).
  <0.1, n/a
  0.1–1
  1–10
  10–50
  50–100
  100–150
  150–200
  200–300
  300–450
  >450
(see animated map, 1992–2014)
(see projection of 2015-version of map)

Planet lead-image

[edit]
Further information: User:Rfassbind/sandbox/Leadimage compilations § Planet lead-image

Cheapest solar PPA's worldwide

[edit]
Cheapest PPA in cts./kWh
2.5
5
7.5
10
12.5
15
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
Cheapest PPA in 2013 2014 (index, Year, country, price, Name/who)
  • A: Andhra Pradesh, India, FS
  • B: Brazil, company unknown
  • C: New Mexico, USA, FS
  • D: Jordan 7.67¢
  • E: Texas, USA, Recurrent Energy
  • F: Dubai, UAE, FRV & Saudi ALJE
  • G: Jordan 6.49¢
  • H: Jordan 6.13¢
  • I: Dubai, UAE, ACWA Power

  Price in cts./kWh
  subsidies

Source: Cleantechnia[1][2]
Share of renewable energies in gross final energy consumption in EU-28 countries in 2013 (in %).[3]

Summary Forecast 2015

[edit]
Summary 2015-projections
Forecast by PV installations
IEA1 38 GW
SPE 51 GW
DB 54 GW
MC 55 GW
BNEF 55 GW
IHS 57 GW
Average 54.2 GW
 1 excluding outdated IEA basecase

IEA annual installation forecast

[edit]
IEA – projected annual PV installations
Year 2013-Edition diff 2014-Edition
2013 30 GW +9 39 GW
2014 30 GW +9 39 GW
2015 33 GW +5 38 GW
2016 36 GW +3 39 GW
2017 38 GW -2 36 GW
2018 40 GW -3 37 GW
2019 n.a. n.a. 38 GW
2020 n.a. n.a. 39 GW
Sources and desc

EPIA 2015 forecast

[edit]
Projected Global Growth (MW)
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
2009
2011
2013
2015
2017
2019
Projected global cumulative capacity in MW

  historical cumulative capacity
  consensus projections for 2015
  low scenario reaches 396 GW by 2019
  high scenario reaches 540 GW by 2019 (add'l)

Source: SPE (EPIA), Global Market Outlook 2015–2019,[4]: 14  amended with 2015-consensus projection of 232 GW.[5]

Solar energy table

[edit]

Based on this version, as June, 10 in article Solar energy

Annual Solar Energy Potential (Exajoules) [6]
Region North America Latin America and Caribbean Western Europe Central and Eastern Europe Former Soviet Union Middle East and North Africa Sub-Saharan Africa Pacific Asia South Asia Centrally planned Asia Pacific OECD
Minimum 181.1 112.6 25.1 4.5 199.3 412.4 371.9 41.0 38.8 115.5 72.6
Maximum 7,410 3,385 914 154 8,655 11,060 9,528 994 1,339 4,135 2,263
Note:
  • Total global annual solar energy potential amounts to 1,575 EJ (minimum) to 49,837 EJ (maximum)
  • Data reflects assumptions of annual clear sky irradiance, annual average sky clearance, and available land area. All figures given in Exajoules.

Quantitative relation of global solar potential vs. primary energy consumption:

  • Ratio of potential vs. current consumption (402 EJ) as of year: 3.9 (minimum) to 124 (maximum)
  • Ratio of potential vs. projected consumption by 2050 (590–1,050 EJ): 1.5–2.7 (minimum) to 47–84 (maximum)
  • Ratio of potential vs. projected consumption by 2100 (880–1,900 EJ): 0.8–1.8 (minimum) to 26–57 (maximum)

Source: According to United Nations Development Programme World Energy Assessment (2000)[6]

Annual Solar Energy Potential (Exajoules) [6]
Region Minimum Maximum
North America 181.1 7410
Latin America and Caribbean 112.6 3385
Western Europe 25.1 914
Central and Eastern Europe 4.5 154
Former Soviet Union 199.3 8655
Middle East and North Africa 412.4 11060
Sub-Saharan Africa 371.9 9,528
Pacific Asia 41.0 994
South Asia 38.8 1339
Centrally planned Asia 115.5 4135
Pacific OECD 72.6 2263
Total 1575.0 49,837
Ratio to current primary energy consumption (402 exajoules) 3.9 124
Ratio to projected primary energy consumption in 2050 (590 - 1,050 exajoules) 2.7-1.5 84-47
Ratio to the projected primary energy consumption in 2100 (880-1900 exajoules) 1.8-0.8 57-26
Data reflects assumptions of annual clear sky irradiance, annual average sky clearance, and available land area.
All figures given in Exajoules
According to United Nations Development Programme World Energy Assessment (2000)[6]

Hydroelectricity producers

[edit]

[http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/KeyWorld2014.pdf IEA- Key World Energy Statistics 2014, p.19 Remarks: % of Country hydro (top-ten in total producers) domestic electricity generation. Note: only top ten producers are considered for %-generation of domestic electricity. IEA could have (should have) merged the two data sets into one table (it's rather misleading otherwise without explicit note. Paraguay, Costa Rica, Austria and Switzerland would definitely rank in the %-chart).

Top 10 PV-Countries of Year 2014 in (MW)
Produced Electricity (TWh)
1. China China 872
2. Brazil China 415
3. Canada Canada 381
4. United States United States 298
5. Russia Russia 167
6. Norway Norway 143
7. India India 126
8. Japan Japan 84
9. Venezuela Venezuela 82
10. Sweden Sweden 79
  Worldwide 3,756
% of domestic generation
1. Norway Norway 96.7
2. Brazil Brazil 75.2
3. Venezuela Venezuela 64.8
4. Canada Canada 60.0
5. Sweden Sweden 47.5
6. China China 17.5
7. Russia Russia 16.5
8. India India 11.2
9. Japan Japan 8.1
10. United States United States 7.0
  Worldwide 16.5

Data: IEA - Key World Energy Statistics 2014, p.19 report, March 2014: 19 

History of German feed-in tariffs

[edit]
Feed-in tariff for rooftop Solar PV
10
20
30
40
50
60
2001
2005
2010
2015
Development of feed-in tariff for small rooftop PV systems small than 10 kilowatt-peak capacity since 2001 in Euro-cents per kilowatt-hour[7]
DEVELOPMENT OF THE FEED-IN TARIFF (FIT) FOR SMALL ROOFTOP SYSTEMS (< 10KW)[8]
10
20
30
40
50
60
2002
2006
2010
2014

Renewable energy in Germany

[edit]
Renewables as a percentage of primary energy consumption
2.5
5
7.5
10
12.5
15
1990
1994
1998
2002
2006
2010
2014
Year 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
%-share 1.3% 1.3% 1.4% 1.6% 1.8% 1.9% 1.8% 2.4% 2.6% 2.8%
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
%-share 2.9 2.9 3.2 3.8 4.5 5.3 6.3 7.9 8.0 8.9
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
%-share 9.9 10.8 10.3 10.4 11.1 – – – – –

Timeline

[edit]
Timeline of the New Horizons mission
Date Event Description References
June 8, 2001 New Horizons selected by NASA. After a three-month concept study before submission of the proposal, two design teams were competing: POSSE (Pluto and Outer Solar System Explorer) and New Horizons. [9]
June 13, 2005 Spacecraft departed Applied Physics Laboratory for final testing. Spacecraft undergoes final testing at Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). [10]
September 24, 2005 Spacecraft shipped to Cape Canaveral It was moved through Andrews Air Force Base aboard a C-17 Globemaster III cargo aircraft. [11]
December 17, 2005 Spacecraft ready for in rocket positioning Transported from Hazardous Servicing Facility to Vertical Integration Facility at Space Launch Complex 41. [citation needed]
January 11, 2006 Primary launch window opened The launch was delayed for further testing. [citation needed]
January 16, 2006 Rocket moved onto launch pad Atlas V launcher, serial number AV-010, rolled out onto pad. [citation needed]
January 17, 2006 Launch delayed First day launch attempts scrubbed because of unacceptable weather conditions (high winds). [12][13]
January 18, 2006 Launch delayed again Second launch attempt scrubbed because of morning power outage at the Applied Physics Laboratory. [citation needed]
January 19, 2006 Successful launch at 14:00 EST (19:00 UTC) The spacecraft was successfully launched after brief delay due to cloud cover. [14][15]
April 7, 2006 Passes Mars The probe passed Mars: 1.7 AU from Earth. [16][17]
June 13, 2006 Flyby of asteroid 132524 APL The probe passed closest to the asteroid 132524 APL in the Belt at about 101,867 km at 04:05 UTC. Pictures were taken. [18]
November 28, 2006 First image of Pluto The image of Pluto was taken from a great distance. [19]
January 10, 2007 Navigation exercise near Jupiter Long-distance observations of Jupiter's outer moon Callirrhoe as a navigation exercise. [20]
February 28, 2007 Jupiter flyby Closest approach occurred at 05:43:40 UTC at 2.305 million km, 21.219 km/s. [21]
June 8, 2008 Passing of Saturn's orbit The probe passed Saturn's orbit: 9.5 AU from Earth. [21][22]
December 29, 2009 The probe became closer to Pluto than to Earth Pluto was then 32.7 AU from Earth, and the probe was 16.4 AU from Earth [23][24][25]
February 25, 2010 Half mission distance reached Half the travel distance of 2.38×109 kilometers (1,480,000,000 mi) was completed. [26]
March 18, 2011 The probe passed Uranus's orbit This is the fourth planetary orbit the spacecraft crossed since its start. New Horizons reached Uranus's orbit at 22:00 GMT. [27][28]
December 2, 2011 New Horizons drew closer to Pluto than any other spacecraft has ever been. Previously, Voyager 1 held the record for the closest approach. (~10.58 AU) [29]
February 11, 2012 New Horizons was 10 AU from Pluto. Happened at around 4:55 UTC. [30]
July 1, 2013 New Horizons captures its first image of Charon Charon is clearly separated from Pluto using the Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (LORRI). [31][32]
October 25, 2013 New Horizons was 5 AU from Pluto. [30][33]
July 20, 2014 Photos of Pluto and Charon Images obtained showing both bodies orbiting each other, distance 2.8 AU. [34]
August 25, 2014 The probe passed Neptune's orbit This was the fifth planetary orbit crossed. [35]
December 7, 2014 New Horizons awoke from hibernation. NASA's Deep Sky Network station at Tidbinbilla, Australia received a signal confirming that it successfully awoke from hibernation. [36][37]
Jan 2015 Observation of Kuiper belt object VNH0004 Distant observations from a distance of roughly 75 million km (~0.5 AU) [38]
January 15, 2015 New Horizons is now close enough to Pluto and begins observing the system [39][40]
March 10–11, 2015 New Horizons was 1 AU from Pluto. [41]
March 20, 2015 NASA invited general public to suggest names to surface features that will be discovered on Pluto and Charon [42]
May 15, 2015 Better than Hubble Images exceed best Hubble Space Telescope resolution. [43]
July 14, 2015 Flyby of Pluto, Charon, Hydra, Nix, Kerberos and Styx Flyby of Pluto around 11:47 UTC at 13,695 km, 13.78 km/s. Pluto is 32.9 AU from Sun. Flyby of Charon around 12:01 UTC at 29,473 km, 13.87 km/s. [21]
2016–20 Possible flyby of one or more Kuiper belt objects (KBOs) The probe will perform flybys of other KBOs, if any are in the spacecraft's trajectory. [44]
January 2019 Possible flyby of 1110113Y 1110113Y is currently the most possible known target in the Kuiper belt.
2026 Expected end of the mission [45]
2038 New Horizons will be 100 AU from the Sun. If still functioning, the probe will explore the outer heliosphere. [46]

PV Barometer Table for 2014

[edit]
Photovoltaic Barometer Report - PV Capacity in the European Union in 2014[47]: 7–10 
Country Added 2014 (MW) Total 2014 (MW) Generation 2014
off-
grid 		on-
grid 		Capacity off-
grid 		on-
grid 		Capacity Watt per
capita 		in
GWh 		in
%
Austria Austria – 140.0 140.0 4.5 766.0 770.5 90.6 766.0 –
Belgium Belgium – 65.2 65.2 0.1 3,105.2 3,105.3 277.2 2,768.0 –
Bulgaria Bulgaria – 1.3 1.3 0.7 1,019.7 1,020.4 140.8 1,244.5 –
Croatia Croatia 0.2 14.0 14.2 0.7 33.5 34.2 8.1 35.3 –
Cyprus Cyprus 0.2 29.7 30.0 1.1 63.6 64.8 75.5 104.0 –
Czech Republic Czech Republic – – – 0.4 2,060.6 2,061.0 196.1 2,121.7 –
Denmark Denmark 0.1 29.0 29.1 1.5 600.0 601.5 106.9 557.0 –
Estonia Estonia – – – 0.1 – 0.2 0.1 0.6 –
Finland Finland – – – 10.0 0.2 10.2 1.9 5.9 –
France France 0.1 974.9 975.0 10.8 5,589.0 4,697.6 87.6 5,500.0 –
Germany Germany – 1,899.0 1,899.0 65.0 38,236.0 38,301.0 474.1 34,930.0 –
Greece Greece – 16.9 16.9 7.0 2,595.8 2,602.8 236.8 3,856.0 –
Hungary Hungary 0.1 3.1 3.2 0.7 37.5 38.2 3.9 26.8 –
Ireland Ireland 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.9 0.2 1.1 0.2 0.7 –
Italy Italy 1.0 384.0 385.0 13.0 18,437.0 18,450.0 303.5 23,299.0 –
Latvia Latvia – – – – 1.5 1.5 0.8 0.0 –
Lithuania Lithuania – – – 0.1 68.0 68.1 23.1 73.0 –
Luxembourg Luxembourg – 15.0 15.0 – 110.0 110.0 200.1 120.0 –
Malta Malta – 26.0 26.0 – 54.2 54.2 127.5 57.8 –
Netherlands Netherlands – 361.0 361.0 5.0 1,095.0 1,100.0 65.4 800.0 –
Poland Poland 0.5 19.7 20.2 2.9 21.5 24.4 0.6 19.2 –
Portugal Portugal 1.2 115.0 116.2 5.0 414.0 419.0 40.2 631.0 –
Romania Romania – 270.5 270.5 – 1,292.6 1,292.6 64.8 1,355.2 –
Slovakia Slovakia – 2.0 2.0 0.1 590.0 590.1 109.0 590.0 –
Slovenia Slovenia – 7.7 7.7 0.1 255.9 256.0 124.2 244.6 –
Spain Spain 0.3 21.0 21.3 25.5 4,761.8 4,787.3 102.7 8,211.0 –
Sweden Sweden 1.1 35.1 36.2 9.5 69.9 79.4 8.2 71.5 –
United Kingdom United Kingdom – 2,448.0 2,448.0 2.3 5,228.0 5,230.3 81.3 3,931.0 –
European Union European Union 4.9 6,878.4 6,883.3 167.1 86,506.8 86,673.9 171.5 91,319.7 –
Country off-
grid 		on-
grid 		Capacity off-
grid 		on-
grid 		Capacity Watt per
capita 		in
GWh 		in
%
Added 2014 (MW) Total 2014 (MW) Generation 2014

Pie chart

[edit]

Worldwide solar PV capacity. Total of 177 GW in 2014.[48]

  China & Taiwan (16.37%)
  Japan (13.16%)
  Germany (21.58%)
  Italy (10.43%)
  United Kingdom (2.88%)
  Rest of Europe (14.52%)
  United States (10.33%)
  Australia (2.34%)
  Canada (0.97%)
  South Africa (0.52%)
  Rest of the World (6.90%)

IEA projections of global PV deployment

[edit]
Projected Global Growth (MW)
100
200
300
400
500
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
IEA projections

Top windpower electricity producing countries in 2014

[edit]
Top windpower electricity producing countries in 2012 (TWh)
Country Windpower Production % of World Total
United States 140.9 26.4
China 118.1 22.1
Spain 49.1 9.2
Germany 46.0 8.6
India 30.0 5.6
United Kingdom 19.6 3.7
France 14.9 2.8
Italy 13.4 2.5
Canada 11.8 2.2
Denmark 10.3 1.9
(rest of world) 80.2 15.0
World Total 534.3 TWh 100%
Source:Observ'ER – Electricity Production From Wind Sources[49]

PV short-term projection

[edit]
Projected Global Growth (MW)
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
Short-term growth projection of global cumulative solar PV capacity in MW until 2018

  cumulative capacities of previous years
  preliminary figure for 2014[48]
  current projections for 2015 (average)
  low scenario (projection)
  additional capacity for high scenario

Source: EPIA, global market outlook,[50]: 42  amended with estimates (2014) and projections for (2015).

Cost analysis LCOE

[edit]
UDS/W 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000
$1.00 $0.10 $0.09 $0.08 $0.08 $0.07 $0.07 $0.06 $0.06 $0.06 $0.05 $0.05
$1.20 $0.12 $0.10 $0.10 $0.09 $0.08 $0.08 $0.07 $0.07 $0.06 $0.06 $0.06
$1.40 $0.13 $0.12 $0.11 $0.10 $0.09 $0.09 $0.08 $0.08 $0.07 $0.07 $0.07
$1.60 $0.15 $0.13 $0.12 $0.11 $0.10 $0.10 $0.09 $0.09 $0.08 $0.08 $0.07
$1.80 $0.16 $0.15 $0.13 $0.12 $0.11 $0.11 $0.10 $0.09 $0.09 $0.08 $0.08
$2.00 $0.18 $0.16 $0.15 $0.13 $0.13 $0.12 $0.11 $0.10 $0.10 $0.09 $0.09
$2.20 $0.19 $0.17 $0.16 $0.15 $0.14 $0.13 $0.12 $0.11 $0.11 $0.10 $0.10
$2.40 $0.21 $0.19 $0.17 $0.16 $0.15 $0.14 $0.13 $0.12 $0.11 $0.11 $0.10
$2.60 $0.22 $0.20 $0.18 $0.17 $0.16 $0.15 $0.14 $0.13 $0.12 $0.12 $0.11
$2.80 $0.24 $0.21 $0.20 $0.18 $0.17 $0.16 $0.15 $0.14 $0.13 $0.12 $0.12
$3.00 $0.25 $0.23 $0.21 $0.19 $0.18 $0.17 $0.16 $0.15 $0.14 $0.13 $0.13
$3.20 $0.27 $0.24 $0.22 $0.20 $0.19 $0.18 $0.17 $0.16 $0.15 $0.14 $0.13

US PV system prices

[edit]
U.S PV System Prices in ($/W)
1
2
3
4
5
redidential
commercial
utility-scale
Different price estimates for PV systems in the United States for 2013 and expected prices in 2014. Prices in USD/Watt.[51]
     IEA 2013
     NREL 2013 (median or weighted avg.
     NREL 2013 modeled}
     NREL 2014 (expected

Solar PV forecast bar chart

[edit]
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
2010
2012
2014
2016
2018
EPIA's short-term global growth projection for cumulative solar PV capacity (estimate for 2014).[50]: 18 
  Installed worldwide capacity of previous years
  Last year (tentative figure)
  Low scenario (projection)
  Additional capacity for high scenario

PV installation chart

[edit]

Price of PV-Installation in €/Wp

Standard Bar-Char country Growth

[edit]
Belgium Growth of PV Capacity in Megawatts since 2005[52][53]
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013

Solar power in Canada

250
500
750
1,000
1,250
1,500
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012

Solar power in the United States

2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
12,500
15,000
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012

Solar power in Australia

1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012

Solar power in the People's Republic of China

5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012

BIPV

[edit]

BIPV-keynote-ICBEST.pdf nd-BIPV-WS_CHAMBERY_AIT-MR_16092014.pdf

GiPV-Anwendungen

Energy Payback Time

[edit]

Executive Summary Energy Payback Time

Main article: Solar_cell_efficiency § Energy_payback
Further information: Solar_cell_efficiency § Energy_payback

Net energy gain

  • Material usage for silicon cells has been reduced significantly during the

last 5 years from around 16 g/Wp to 6 g/Wp due to increased efficiencies and thinner wafers.

  • The Energy Payback Time for Si PV modules is about one year for

locations in Southern Europe; thus the net clean electricity production of a solar module is 95 %.

  • The Energy Payback Time of PV systems is dependent on the

geographical location: PV systems in Northern Europe need around 2.5 years to balance the inherent energy, while PV systems in the South equal their energy input after 1.5 years and lesss.

[About PV-Ribbon Cells]

  • The Energy Payback Time for CPV-Systems in Southern Europe is less than 1 year.
Energy Payback Time in Years
Radiation Crystaline Silicon Thin-film
kWh/m²/a Mono Multi Ribbon CIS CdTe
1900 ~1,5 ~1,5 ~0,9 ~1,1 ~0,7
1700 ~1,7 ~1,7 ~1,1 ~1,3 ~0,8
1200 ~2,4 ~2,4 ~1,5 ~1,7 ~1,2

PAGE Net energy gain note: the term redirects to this section Energy_payback_time#Sustainables

Vertical bar graph

[edit]

Module:Chart is a Lua module that may be used to create several different types of vertical bar graphs.


Line charts

[edit]

The template {{Line chart}} implements line charts, such as:

Euler–Discoveries

[edit]

GJ3021

[edit]

Price

[edit]

Price of PV-Installation in €/kWp

History of average overall prices for PV-Systemsin €/kWp for systems smaller than 100 kWp. Sources: for 2006-2008, page 4 data since 2009


[prices history] [[]http://www.photovoltaik-guide.de/pv-preisindex Preisindex]

Solar Price Installation

[edit]

[1]

1
2
3
4
5
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Price History: Complete Solar Installation in € per watt

German Energy Mix 2014 (first half)

[edit]
Nuclear: 45 TW (17.1%)Brown Coal: 69.7 TW (26.5%)Hard Coal: 50.9 TW (19.3%)Natural Gas: 16.6 TW (6.3%)Wind: 26.7 TW (10.1%)Solar: 18.3 TW (7.0%)Biogas: 25.6 TW (9.7%)Hydro: 10.5 TW (4.0%)
  •   Nuclear: 45 TW (17.1%)
  •   Brown Coal: 69.7 TW (26.5%)
  •   Hard Coal: 50.9 TW (19.3%)
  •   Natural Gas: 16.6 TW (6.3%)
  •   Wind: 26.7 TW (10.1%)
  •   Solar: 18.3 TW (7.0%)
  •   Biogas: 25.6 TW (9.7%)
  •   Hydro: 10.5 TW (4.0%)
German Mix 2014 (first half)

Electricity mix in 2014 (

  Nuclear (17.1%)
  Brown Coal (26.5%)
  Hard Coal (19.3%)
  Natural Gas (6.3%)
  Solar (7.0%)
  Wind (10.1%)
  Biogas (9.7%)
  Hydro (4.0%)

Electricity mix in 2013 (

  Nuclear (15.4%)
  Brown Coal (25.5%)
  Hard Coal (19.4%)
  Natural Gas (10.6%)
  Solar (4.8%)
  Wind (8.5%)
  Biogas (6.7%)
  Hydro (3.3%)
  Waste incineration (0.8%)
  Petroleum products (1.0%)
  Other (4%)

Thin film

[edit]

aktuelle-fakten-zur-photovoltaik-in-deutschland.pdf, p.34

PV systes by size

  <10kWp (13.25%)
  10–100 kWp (43.25%)
  100–500 kWp (14%)
  lbl4 (29%)

Worldwide market-share by technology in 2013.

  CI(G)S (2.0%)
  a-Si (2.0%)
  CdTe (5.1%)
  Mono-Si (36.0%)
  Multi-Si (54.9%)
Thin-film: 3.2 TW (9.1%)Mulit-Si: 19.2 TW (54.9%)Mono-Si: 12.6 TW (36.0%)
  •   Thin-film: 3.2 TW (9.1%)
  •   Mulit-Si: 19.2 TW (54.9%)
  •   Mono-Si: 12.6 TW (36.0%)
PV Production deployment by Technology in 2013. Thin-film technologies () account for about 9% of worldwide deployment.
CdTe: 1.8 GW (5.1%)CI(G)S: 0.7 GW (2.0%)a-Si: 0.7 GW (2.0%)Mulit-Si: 19.2 GW (54.9%)Mono-Si: 12.6 GW (36.0%)
  •   CdTe: 1.8 GW (5.1%)
  •   CI(G)S: 0.7 GW (2.0%)
  •   a-Si: 0.7 GW (2.0%)
  •   Mulit-Si: 19.2 GW (54.9%)
  •   Mono-Si: 12.6 GW (36.0%)
PV Production deployment in gigawatt (GW) by technology in 2013. Thin-film technologies (in colors) account for about 9% of worldwide deployment, while 91% being crystalline silicon.[54]

Solar energy in the European Union

[edit]
Main article: Solar energy in the European Union

source[55]

Energy Payback Time

test "previous-revision" [2] w/index.php?title=European_Space_Agency&action=edit&oldid=620039758 [3] [4]

Worldwide Growth of Photovoltaics
in MW grouped by region[50]
25,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
125,000
150,000
2001
2004
2007
2010
2013

Iceland

[edit]

Solar power in Iceland is almost non-existant. This is not only because of Iceland's high latitude, but mainly because there are other renewable energy sources, such as geothermal and hydro power that provide almost 100 percent of the country's electricity needs. Due to the abundant and inexpensive renewable energy, Iceland plays an increasingly important role in the silicon industry, as a world leader in the production of metallurgical grade "green silicon" with several production plants being under construction.[56]

Full blown chart

[edit]
see full sized chart
Worldwide Growth of Photovoltaics
Cumulative Capacity in Megawatts [MWp] Grouped by Region[50]
25,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
125,000
150,000
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
     Europe          Asia-Pacific          Americas          China          Middle East and Africa          Rest of the World
Year end 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Capacity (MWp) 5,100 6,600 9,100 15,800 23,200 40,300 70,500 100,500 138,900
Growth (year-to-year) 35% 29% 38% 74% 47% 73% 75% 43% 38%

EPBT variant

[edit]
Energy Payback Time in Years for different locations and technologies
Location
Examples 		Crystaline Silicon Thin-film Radiation
Map Color 		Global Solar Potential in kWh/m²/a
Mono Multi Ribbon CIGS CdTe
North-and Central Europe, Canada, New England 2,4 2,4 1,5 1,7 1,2 1200 kWh
Southern Europe, South Africa, USA. South America 1,7 1,7 1,1 1,3 0,8 1700 kWh
American Southwest, Australia, North Africa, Middle East 1,5 1,5 0,9 1,1 0,7 1900 kWh
Source:

Alternative TBL

[edit]
Energy Payback Time in Years for differnt locations and technologies
Location
Examples 		Crystaline Silicon Thin-film Radiation
Map Color 		Global Solar Potential in kWh/m²/a
Mono Multi Ribbon CIGS CdTe
North-and Central Europe, Canada, New England 2,4 2,4 1,5 1,7 1,2 1200 kWh
Southern Europe, South Africa, USA. South America 1,7 1,7 1,1 1,3 0,8 1700 kWh
American Southwest, Australia, North Africa, Middle East 1,5 1,5 0,9 1,1 0,7 1900 kWh
Source:

Lab cells

[edit]

Approx- estimated figures to be amended In 2013, record lab cell efficiency was highest for crystalline silicon. However, multi-silicon is followed closely by Cadmium Telluride and Copper indium gallium selenide solar cells

  1. 25.0% – mono-Si cell
  2. 20.4% – mulit-Si cell
  3. 19.8% – CIGS cell
  4. 19.6% – CdTe cell
Best Research Cell Efficiency in the Laboratory
Technology 2014 2011 2008
mono-Si 25.0% 25.0% 25.0%
multi-Si 20.4% 20.4% 20.4%
CIGS 21.7% 19% 18%
CdTe 21.0% 17% 16%

Composition of atmosphere

[edit]
Major constituents of dry air, by volume[57]
Gas Volume(A)
Name Formula in ppmv(B) in %
Nitrogen N2 780,840 78.084
Oxygen O2 209,460 20.946
Argon Ar 9,340 0.9340
Carbon dioxide CO2 397 0.0397
Neon Ne 18.18 0.001818
Helium He 5.24 0.000524
Methane CH4 1.79 0.000179
Not included in above dry atmosphere:
Water vapor(C) H2O 10–50,000(D) 0.001%–5%(D)
notes:

(A) volume fraction is equal to mole fraction for ideal gas only,
    also see volume (thermodynamics)
(B) ppmv: parts per million by volume
(C) Water vapor about 0.25% by mass over full atmosphere
(D) Water vapor strongly varies locally[58]

Silicon producers

[edit]
World producer of ferrosilicon
Country 2009 2013
 Bhutan(B) n.a. 61
 Brazil 224 230
 Canada 53 35
 China 4310 5100
 France 66 170
 Iceland 81 80
 India(B) 59 70
 Norway 301 175
 Russia 537 700
 South Africa 116 130
 Ukraine(B) 98 78
 United States 139 360
 Venezuela(B) 54 60
 Other countries 266 430
 World total(i) 6,310 7,700
Source: minerals.usgs.gov 2013, 2009
Ferrosilicon grades include the two standard grades of ferrosilicon50% and 75% siliconplus miscellaneous silicon alloys, (ii) rounded

Coal

[edit]

Original Table in article Coal

German Classification English Designation Volatiles % C Carbon % H Hydrogen % O Oxygen % S Sulfur % Heat content kJ/kg
Braunkohle Lignite (brown coal) 45–65 60–75 6.0–5.8 34-17 0.5-3 <28,470
Flammkohle Flame coal 40-45 75-82 6.0-5.8 >9.8 ~1 <32,870
Gasflammkohle Gas flame coal 35-40 82-85 5.8-5.6 9.8-7.3 ~1 <33,910
Gaskohle Gas coal 28-35 85-87.5 5.6-5.0 7.3-4.5 ~1 <34,960
Fettkohle Fat coal 19-28 87.5-89.5 5.0-4.5 4.5-3.2 ~1 <35,380
Esskohle Forge coal 14-19 89.5-90.5 4.5-4.0 3.2-2.8 ~1 <35,380
Magerkohle Nonbaking coal 10-14 90.5-91.5 4.0-3.75 2.8-3.5 ~1 35,380
Anthrazit Anthracite 7-12 >91.5 <3.75 <2.5 ~1 <35,300
Percent by weight

LCOE - IEA

[edit]
Projections for LCOE for new-built utility-scale PV plants to 2050
USD/MWh 2013 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
 Minimum 119 96 71 56 48 45 42 40
 Average 177 133 96 81 72 68 59 56
 Maximum 318 250 180 139 119 109 104 97
Source: IEA – Technology Roadmap: Solar Photovoltaic Energy report[59]: 24 

Note: All LCOE calculations in this table rest on 8% real discount rates as in ETP 2014 (IEA, 2014b). Actual LCOE might be lower with lower WACC.

System cost alternative

[edit]
Residential PV system prices
Country Cost ($/W)
Australia 1.8
China 1.5
France 4.1
Germany 2.4
Italy 2.8
Japan 4.2
United Kingdom 2.8
United States 4.9
For residential PV systems in 2013[59]: 15 
Commercial PV system prices
Country Cost ($/W)
Australia 1.7
China 1.4
France 2.7
Germany 1.8
Italy 1.9
Japan 3.6
United Kingdom 2.4
United States 4.5
For commercial PV systems in 2013[59]: 15 
Utility-scale PV system prices
Country Cost ($/W)
Australia 2.0
China 1.4
France 2.2
Germany 1.4
Italy 1.5
Japan 2.9
United Kingdom 1.9
United States 3.3
For utility-scale PV systems in 2013[59]: 15 

Storage Batteries

[edit]

Source Citi Research, DarwinismII, p.21 20. Comparison of major storage device technologies: Lithium-ion batteries offer high voltages and storage densities

Comparison of major storage device technologies: Lithium-ion batteries offer high voltages and storage densities
Battery
type 		Lithium
ion 		Nickel
Hydrogen 		Nickel
Cadmium 		Lead
Acid 		NAS Redox
Flow 		EDLC Lithium ion
Capacitor
Discharge potential (V) 2.4-3.8 1.2 1.2 2.1 2.08 1.4 0-3 2.2-3.8
Power density (W/kg) 400-4,000 150-2,000 100-200 100-200 – – 1,000-5,000 1,000-5,000
Energy density (Wh/kg) 120-200 70 50 35 100 30 2-20 10-40
Cycle life (times) 500-6,000 500-1,000 500-1,000 500-5,000 4,500 10,000> 50,000> 50,000>
Charging efficiency 95% 85% 85% 80% 75-85% 80% 95% 95%
Cost Poor Good Good Excellent Poor Poor Very poor Very poor
Safety Poor Excellent Good Good Very poor Excellent Excellent Excellent
Cathode material Lithium compounds Nickel hydroxide Nickel hydroxide Lead oxide Sulfur Carbon NA NA
Anode material Graphite Hydrogen storing alloy Cadmium hydroxide Lead Sodium Carbon NA NA
Electrolyte Organic solvent lithium salt Potassium hydroxide solution Potassium hydroxide solution Dilute sulfuric acid βAlumina Vanadium sulfate solution NA NA
Characters Risk of combustion Self-discharge
Memory effect 		Memory effect
Cadmium is toxic 		Easily deteriorated
Lead is toxic 		Operation at 300°C
Risk of combustion 		Pump circulation
Vanadium is toxic 		Good power density
Self-discharge 		Good power density
Self-discharge
Source: Company data, Citi Research Energy Darwinism II, 2014[60]

Number of PV systems

[edit]
Households with solar power 2013
Country # PV systems
Australia 1,000,000
France 300,000
Germany 1,400,000
India 7,000,000
Japan 1,400,000
United Kingdom 510,000
United Kingdom(A) 440,000
Sources: Citi Research (A)US-figures[61]

Timeline of the largest PV power stations in the world

[edit]
Year Name of PV power station Country Capacity
MW
1982 Lugo United States 1
1985 Carrisa Plain United States 5.6
2005 Bavaria Solarpark (Mühlhausen) Germany 6.3
2006 Erlasee Solar Park Germany 11.4
2008 Olmedilla Photovoltaic Park Spain 60
2010 Sarnia Photovoltaic Power Plant Canada 97
2011 Huanghe Hydropower Golmud Solar Park China 200
2012 Agua Caliente Solar Project United States 290
2014 Topaz Solar Farm United States 550
sources, table article, year= Final commissioning

Comparing capacity to other technologies

[edit]
Main article: List of largest power stations in the world

For comparison, the largest power stations by technology are:

Capacity
(MW)		 Technology Largest power station Info and list
392 concentrated solar thermal (CSP) Ivanpah Solar Power Facility Example
8,200 Nuclear power Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant Operation suspended since 2011, List of nuclear power stations
22,500 Hydro power Three Gorges Dam Example
Example [[Wind power Example Example
Example Example Example Example

Table AU examples

[edit]
Object AU Range Comment and reference point Refs
Earth 0.0003 ± 0.02 Circumference of the Earth at the Equator (rounded) –
Moon 0.0026 ± 0.0001 Average distance from the Earth. It took the Apollo missions about 3 days to travel that distance. –
Mercury 0.39 ± 0.09 Average distance from the Sun –
Venus 0.72 ± 0.01 Average distance from the Sun –
Earth 1.00 ± 0.02 Average distance from the Sun –
Mars 1.52 ± 0.14 Average distance from the Sun –
Ceres 2.77 ± 0.22 Average distance from the Sun –
Jupiter 5.20 ± 0.25 The largest planet's average distance of from the Sun –
Betelgeuse 5.5 – Mean diameter of the red supergiant –
NML Cygni 7.67 – Radius of the largest known star –
Saturn 9.58 ± 0.53 Average distance from the Sun –
Uranus 19.23 ± 0.85 Average distance from the Sun –
Neptune 30.10 ± 0.34 Average distance from the Sun –
Kuiper belt 30 – Begins at roughly that distance from the Sun [62]
New Horizons 31.46 – Spacecraft's distance from the Sun, as of 21 January 2015 [63]
Pluto 39.3 ± 9.6 Average distance from the Sun. Varies by almost 10 AU due to its elliptic orbit. –
Scattered disc 45 – Roughly begins at that distance from the Sun. It overlaps about 10 AU with Kuiper Belt –
Kuiper belt 52 ± 3 Ends at that distance from the Sun –
Eris 68.01 29.64 The dwarf planets distance from the Sun –
90377 Sedna 76 – Closet distance from the Sun (perihelion) –
90377 Sedna 87 – Current distance from the Sun, as of 2012. It is an object of the scattered disc and takes 11,400 years to orbit the Sun. [64]
Termination shock 94 – Distance from the Sun of boundary between solar winds/interstellar winds/interstellar medium –
Eris 96.7 – Distance form the Sun, as of 2009. Eris and its moon are currently the most distant known objects in the Solar System apart from long-period comets and space probes. [65]
Heliosheath 100 – The region of the heliosphere beyond the termination shock, where the solar wind is slowed down, turbulent and compressed due to the interstellar medium –
Voyager 1 125 – as of August 2013, the space probe is the furthest human-made object from the Sun; it is currently traveling at about 3½ au/yr. [66]
90377 Sedna 942 – Farthest distance from the Sun (aphelion) –
Hills cloud 2,000 ± 1000 Beginning of Hills cloud/inner Oort cloud –
Hills cloud 20,000 – Ending of Hills cloud/inner Oort cloud, beginning of outer Oort cloud –
Light-year 63,241 – The distance light travels in 1 Julian year (365.25 days, rounded) –
Oort cloud 75,000 ± 25,000 Distance of the outer limit of Oort cloud from the Sun (estimated, corresponds to 1.2 ly) –
Parsec 206,265 – Distance of one parsec in AU (rounded) –
Hill/Roche sphere 230,000 – Maximum extent of influence of the Sun's gravitational field ()—beyond this is true interstellar medium. This distance is 1.1 parsecs (3.6 light-years). [67][67]
Proxima Centauri 268,000 est Distance to the nearest star to our Solar System –
Sirius 544,000 – Distance of the brightest star in the Earth's night sky (corresponds to 8.6 light-years) –
Betelgeuse 40,663,000 – Distance to the star in the constellation of Orion (corresponds to 643 light-years) –
Galactic Center 1,700,000,000 – Distance from the Sun to the center of the Milky Way 1.7×109 au –
Note: figures in this table are generally rounded, estimates, often rough estimates, and may considerably differ from other sources. Table also includes other units of length for comparison.

Growth PV+CSP barcheart

[edit]
Test to confirm functionallity

Event time has passed.

Deployment of Solar Power
Capacity in MW by Technology
25,000
50,000
75,000
100,000
125,000
150,000
2006
2010
2013
Worldwide deplyoment of solar power by technology since 2006.[68][69]: 51 [70][71]

     Solar PV         CSP - Solar thermal

Refs

[edit]
  1. ^ http://cleantechnica.com/2015/01/24/cheapest-solar-world-michael-liebreich-interview-series/
  2. ^ http://www.webcitation.org/6YhQ1nMjw
  3. ^ Share of renewable energy up to 15% of energy consumption in the EU28 in 2013. Eurostat News Release, 11 March 2015.
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference epia-2015 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Consensus projection for 2015 is an overall average of estimates from IEA, SPE (EPIA), IHS, MC, Deutsche Bank, and BNEF
  6. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference World Energy Assessment was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  7. ^ "Annual Report 2014". IEA-PVPS. 21 May 2015. pp. 49, 78.
  8. ^ "Annual Report 2014". IEA-PVPS. 21 May 2015. pp. 49, 78.
  9. ^ Cite error: The named reference Savage was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  10. ^ New Horizons at the Cape The Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory September 26, 2005
  11. ^ Cite error: The named reference SpaceDaily was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  12. ^ Cite error: The named reference nytimes.com was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  13. ^ Cite error: The named reference Space.com was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  14. ^ Cite error: The named reference Amir was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  15. ^ Cite error: The named reference Harwood was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  16. ^ Cite error: The named reference Malik was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  17. ^ "Distance between Mars and Earth on April 7, 2006".
  18. ^ Olkin, Catherine B.; Reuter; Lunsford; Binzel; et al. (2006). "The New Horizons Distant Flyby of Asteroid 2002 JF56". Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society. 38: 597. Bibcode:2006DPS....38.5922O.
  19. ^ Cite error: The named reference LORRI was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  20. ^ "New Horizons Jupiter Encounter Timeline". The Planetary Society. Retrieved October 24, 2014.
  21. ^ a b c "Mission Timeline". Johns Hopkins APL. Archived from the original on 2008-07-23. Retrieved August 1, 2012.
  22. ^ "Distance between Saturn and Earth on June 8, 2008". Retrieved March 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  23. ^ Villard, R. (December 29, 2009). "New Horizons Crosses Halfway Point to Pluto". Discovery Communications, LLC. Archived from the original on March 9, 2011. Retrieved January 12, 2011.
  24. ^ "Distance between Pluto and Earth on December 29, 2009". Retrieved March 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  25. ^ "New Horizon properties on December 29, 2009". Retrieved March 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)
  26. ^ "Spacecraft Hits Midpoint on Flight to Pluto". Space.com. February 26, 2010. Retrieved August 11, 2011.
  27. ^ "Space Spin – New Horizons ventures beyond Saturn's orbit". June 9, 2008. Retrieved March 14, 2011.
  28. ^ SPACE.com Staff (March 18, 2011). "NASA Pluto Probe Passes Orbit of Uranus". SPACE.com. Retrieved March 19, 2011.
  29. ^ "Twitter.com – NewHorizons2015".
  30. ^ a b "New Horizons on Approach: 22 AU Down, Just 10 to Go". JHU/APL. February 10, 2012. Retrieved March 22, 2012.
  31. ^ Plait, Phil (July 11, 2013). "New Horizons Gets a First Glimpse of Pluto's Moon Charon". Slate.
  32. ^ "Charon Revealed! New Horizons Camera Spots Pluto's Largest Moon". New Horizons; Headlines. The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. July 10, 2013.
  33. ^ "On the Path to Pluto, 5 AU and Closing". New Horizons; Headlines. The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. October 25, 2013.
  34. ^ "New Horizons Spies Charon Orbiting Pluto". Johns Hopkins APL.
  35. ^ "Passing the Planets". Johns Hopkins APL. March 18, 2011. Retrieved April 3, 2012.
  36. ^ Cite error: The named reference awoketwitter was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  37. ^ Nally, Jonathan. "Ready for a Close Encounter". Australian Sky & Telescope (83): 14. ISSN 1832-0457.
  38. ^ NewHorizons2015. "About the Jan 21o5 KBO, It's VNH0004". Retrieved August 21, 2012.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
    • Buie, Marc W. "Orbit Fit and Astrometric record for VNH0004". User pages. Southwest Research Institute Planetary Science Directorate. Retrieved August 21, 2012.
  39. ^ Cite error: The named reference NASA-20150115 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  40. ^ "New Frontier News". December 6, 2014. Retrieved January 8, 2015.
  41. ^ http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/News-Center/News-Article.php?page=20150310
  42. ^ http://www.ourpluto.org/
  43. ^ http://www.seeplutonow.com/
  44. ^ "Why Go to Pluto?". Johns Hopkins APL. Retrieved July 14, 2011.
  45. ^ NASA (July 20, 2011). "New Horizons". NASA Solar System Exploration. National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Retrieved February 21, 2012.
  46. ^ "New Horizons Salutes Voyager". Johns Hopkins APL. August 17, 2006. Archived from the original on March 9, 2011. Retrieved November 3, 2009.
  47. ^ Cite error: The named reference pv-barometer-2014 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  48. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference iea-pvps-snapshot-1992-2014 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  49. ^ "Worldwide Electricity Production From Renewable Energy Sources: Stats and Figures Series: Fifteenth Inventory – Edition 2013" (PDF). 2.2 Electricity Production From Wind Sources: Main Wind Power Producing Countries – 2012 (text & table): Observ'ER. Retrieved 14 May 2014.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  50. ^ a b c d "Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics 2014-2018". www.epia.org. EPIA - European Photovoltaic Industry Association. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 June 2014. Retrieved 12 June 2014.
  51. ^ Photovoltaic System Pricing Trends
  52. ^ "Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics 2014-2018". www.epia.org. EPIA - European Photovoltaic Industry Association. p. 34. Archived from the original (PDF) on 12 June 2014. Retrieved 12 June 2014.
  53. ^ collected historical data from article growth of photovoltaics
  54. ^ Photovoltaics Report, Fraunhofer ISE, July 28, 2014, pages 18,19
  55. ^ "Photovoltaics Report". Fraunhofer ISE. 28 July 2014. Archived from the original (PDF) on 31 August 2014. Retrieved 31 August 2014.
  56. ^ Iceland’s Growing Silicon Industry
  57. ^ Source for figures: Carbon dioxide, NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory, (updated 2013-03). Methane, IPCC TAR table 6.1, (updated to 1998). The NASA total was 17 ppmv over 100%, and CO2 was increased here by 15 ppmv. To normalize, N2 should be reduced by about 25 ppmv and O2 by about 7 ppmv.
  58. ^ Cite error: The named reference WallaceHobbs was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  59. ^ a b c d http://www.iea.org (2014). "Technology Roadmap: Solar Photovoltaic Energy" (PDF). IEA. Archived from the original on 7 October 2014. Retrieved 7 October 2014. {{cite web}}: External link in |author1= (help)
  60. ^ Citi research (25 September 2014). "Energy Darwinism II" (PDF). http://icg.citi.com/icg/citi_research/index.jsp. Citigroup Global Markets Inc. p. 21. Archived from the original on 3 November 2014. Retrieved 3 November 2014. {{cite web}}: External link in |website= (help)
  61. ^ http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/u.s.-solar-market-grows-41-has-record-year-in-2013
  62. ^ Alan Stern; Colwell, Joshua E. (1997), "Collisional Erosion in the Primordial Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt and the Generation of the 30–50 au Kuiper Gap", The Astrophysical Journal, 490 (2): 879–882, Bibcode:1997ApJ...490..879S, doi:10.1086/304912, S2CID 123177461.
  63. ^ As of 21 January 2015 Where Is New Horizons?
  64. ^ AstDys (90377) Sedna Ephemerides, Department of Mathematics, University of Pisa, Italy, retrieved 5 May 2011
  65. ^ Chris Peat, Spacecraft escaping the Solar System, Heavens-Above, retrieved 25 January 2008
  66. ^ Voyager 1, Where are the Voyagers – NASA Voyager 1
  67. ^ a b Chebotarev, G.A. (1964), "Gravitational Spheres of the Major Planets, Moon and Sun", Soviet Astronomy, 7 (5): 618–622, Bibcode:1964SvA.....7..618C
  68. ^ "Global Market Outlook for Photovoltaics 2014-2018" (PDF). www.epia.org. EPIA - European Photovoltaic Industry Association. 2014. p. 17. Archived from the original on 12 June 2014. Retrieved 12 June 2014.
  69. ^ REN21 (2014). "Renewables 2014: Global Status Report". Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 September 2014.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  70. ^ CSP Facts & Figures. Csp-world.com. Retrieved on 22 April 2013.
  71. ^ Concentrating Solar Power. irena.org, p. 11.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Rfassbind/sandbox&oldid=1126873917"