Value chain · CLM-0144
In plain terms
A NASA study found that launching everything into space is by far the biggest cost of a space solar power system, and that most of those launches would just be carrying fuel to move earlier payloads from a low orbit up to the final, much higher orbit, not carrying useful hardware.
The claim as recorded
NASA OTPS's (2024) first-order lifecycle cost model finds launch is the largest single cost driver for both representative SBSP designs (71% of lifecycle cost for RD1, 77% for RD2), requiring 2,321 launches to deliver 5.9 Mkg of mass for RD1 and 3,960 launches to deliver 10 Mkg for RD2, and states that "12 of every 13" of these launches serve only to refuel payloads in LEO for transfer to GEO, not to deliver payload mass itself.
Scope and limits
A MODELLED first-order lifecycle cost estimate, not a measured programme cost; one of two "representative designs," not an assessment of every possible SBSP architecture. The already-recorded LCOE and sensitivity figures from the same study are not restated here. THE PASSAGE EXISTS IN TWO HELD DOCUMENTS, WORD FOR WORD: SRC-012, the NASA OTPS report at T3, and SRC-255, the AIAA ASCEND conference paper at T5. Two independent lines identify the ASCEND paper as where this claim's cited pages come from - NTRS 20230017756 returns STI type Conference Paper for ASCEND, and the cited p.5-6 is page 5 of 10 in SRC-255 against page 8 of 108 in SRC-012. SRC-012 is cited nonetheless, and the tier stays T3 honestly, because the T3 agency report DOES say it - attaching SRC-255 instead would drop the claim two tiers to describe the same sentences. The page locator therefore refers to SRC-012's printed page at PDF page 8, not to p.5-6.
What it assumes
The ~87-parameter scenario model's assumed launch vehicle (Starship-class), launch cadence and orbital-transfer architecture (chemical refuelling in LEO before GEO transfer) are as stated; this is a scenario model for a system assumed to begin operating in 2050, not an existing system.
Where it comes from
NASA OTPS (2024), SRC-012 PDF p.8 (printed p.vii): "Launch is the largest cost driver (71% of RD1 and 77% of RD2) as 2,321... launches are required to deliver 5.9Mkg of mass for RD1 and 3,960 are needed to deliver 10Mkg of mass for RD2. Most of these launches (12 of every 13) serve only to refuel payloads in LEO for transfer to GEO." The elision is footnote marker 6, which the text layer glues to the number; p.35 prints "the 2,321 LEO launches".
Basis: percentage of total lifecycle cost; launch count; payload mass in Mkg; FY22 dollars
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-001 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0144
CLM-0144, Energy Aperture, as of 2024-01.
Connected records
Other published records linked to this one. A list, not a judgement.
- Also from SRC-012
- CLM-0006None of the five main studies mentions the international radio-frequency exposure limits, or any safety standard, or a restricted area...CLM-0123NASA's own 2024 study puts space solar power at 12 to 80 times the cost it expects in 2050 from power stations on the ground, a set it...CLM-0124NASA also found that if several things improve at once, rather than just one, space solar power does become cost competitive.CLM-0125On carbon, NASA found space solar power within the range of five renewable ways of making power on the ground (wind, solar, solar thermal...CLM-0192The full list of assumptions behind the headline result of NASA's 2024 study, that space solar power would cost far more than ground...CLM-0193To get to a competitive cost, NASA's own 2024 analysis needs launch costs to halve, solar cells to get much more efficient, satellites to...CLM-0240A from-scratch cost model of the "Innovative Heliostat Swarm" design gets almost the same electricity cost as NASA's own study: about 62...CLM-0241For the "Mature Planar Array" design, an independent cost model built the same way as for the other design gets a materially lower...More on the source page.
- Cited in articles