I'm finding details a little light in my casual searching.
as for the 1.7 million square miles, I'm trying to find out if the new Gretzel dye-sensitized solar cells can be used in space or the moon, the weight of the indivudal cell, and the number of cells it would require. Not to mention if production of the panels themselves can be made from moon based resources (thus eliminating the need for the costly transfer of materials).
As for your question about using it as the sole energy source. I doubt Hydroelectric and nuclear are going anywhere as the cost to disable the sites far outweighs the benefits.
"4. Every single nation in the World totally dependent on one single source of energy.
Who would control it and decide how much energy each zone/community/country should get?"
United Nations-esque entity, built soley for the dissemination of energy and the upkeep of the global power system. This is one of those things that transcends the normal concept of 'country' or 'nation' and exists soley on a global scale. The exact details of this would be entirely dependent on the amount of energy we can draw this way. If the total amount of energy gained is exponentially higher than the total amount used by the planet then we really dont have much of a problem. It's a resource like any other, the question is whether the limiting factor is the energy gained or the countries infrastructure to support the energy.
What is also interesting is the global effects that a massive or near infinite influx of energy would bring. Literally, the only resource we would have to worry about is land for the population explosion as food and water production increases dramatically over the world.
Conversely, if this station only provided the power for a few nations, then the conflict over this station would likely result in world war 3 and the death of us all.
Keep Up with TechRepublic