Value chain · CLM-0193
In plain terms
To get to a competitive cost, NASA's own 2024 analysis needs launch costs to halve, solar cells to get much more efficient, satellites to last half as long again, and manufacturing to get cheaper faster, all at the same time, not just one improvement on its own; and there is a small but real inconsistency inside the NASA report itself about exactly how low the resulting cost estimate for the smaller design (RD1) is - Table 3 says 4 cents per kWh, the summary text says 3 cents.
The claim as recorded
NASA OTPS's "favourable combination" sensitivity case (verified against a rendered page image of Table 1) simultaneously assumes: launch cost $500/kg with 15% block-buy discount to $425/kg; orbital transfer via electric propulsion instead of refuel launches (at a stated +17.2% mass/manufacturing cost penalty); 100 reuses per vehicle (unchanged from baseline); 50% solar cell efficiency (up from 35%); unchanged operations costs of $1.2M/month; a longer 15-year hardware lifetime (up from 10 years); initial hardware costs reduced to $1M/$100M/$50M; and steeper manufacturing learning curves of 70%/80%/85%; Table 1 itself reports the resulting LCOE as "0.04 and 0.08" $/kWh, which does not match the body text's statement, elsewhere in the same report, that "This favorable combination reduces the LCOE to 0.03 $/kWh for RD1 and 0.08 $/kWh for RD2"; Table 3 (PDF p.39, printed p.22) also gives 0.04 for RD1, so Table 3 says 0.04 where the summary text says 0.03.
Scope and limits
Does not establish that any of these eight improvements, individually or jointly, are achievable on the report's own terms - the report frames the underlying baseline itself as containing "beyond", "comparable" and "below" assumptions already, so the sensitivity case pushes multiple parameters further still. The 0.03-vs-0.04 discrepancy is small in absolute terms but is exactly the kind of table-vs-text mismatch the sourcing rules exist to catch; both figures should be treated as approximate (single-significant-figure) results, not precise to the cent, given the discrepancy. The same passage has a second mismatch of the same kind: PDF p.9 gives the combined-case emissions as "3.78 gCO2eq./kWh for RD1", while Table 3 (PDF p.39, printed p.22) gives 3.87.
What it assumes
All eight parameter changes shown in the Multi-Variable Sensitivity column are achieved simultaneously - this is explicitly a combined, not single-variable, scenario.
Where it comes from
Table 1, Multi-Variable Sensitivity column, verified against rendered page image: "Launch Cost... $500/kg ($425/kg)"; "Orbital Transfer Method... Electric Propulsion (+17.2% mass, mfg cost)"; "Reuses of each launch vehicle... 100"; "Solar Cell Efficiency... 50%"; "Operations Costs... 1.2M / month"; "Hardware Lifetime... 15 years"; "Initial Hardware Costs... 1M, 100M, 50M"; "Manufacturing Learning Curves... 70%, 80%, 85%"; "Results... LCOE $/kWh... 0.04 and 0.08" (p.vi, image-verified at 8x zoom, two independent crops). Body text: "This favorable combination reduces the LCOE to 0.03 $/kWh for RD1 and 0.08 $/kWh for RD2, figures that are competitive with terrestrial alternatives." (p.viii-ix, text-extracted).
Basis: USD/kg and USD/kWh, Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22) dollars (report PDF p.4, printed p.iii)
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-042 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0193
CLM-0193, 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-0144A 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...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-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.