Value chain · CLM-0256
In plain terms
If several other improvements happen together -- better propulsion, much better solar cells, faster manufacturing learning, and hardware that lasts 15 to 20 years -- then a launch price of roughly 15-30 million dollars per flight would be enough to bring this design's electricity down to about 5 US cents a kilowatt hour. For 2050 NASA projects about 2 to 5 cents for five renewable sources on the ground (wind and solar with storage about 2 cents; geothermal, hydro and solar thermal about 5) and about 5 cents for nuclear, which NASA counts with them though it is not renewable. So 5 cents matches the dearest of these, not the cheapest.
The claim as recorded
Fixing a companion package of electric propulsion (refuel removed, +17.2% mass), solar cell efficiency at 0.70 (mass rescaled), and servicer learning rate at 0.75 (all correlated/paired changes), RD1 reaches 0.05 USD/kWh at a 20-year hardware lifetime and 0.70 module learning rate if launch cost falls to approximately 27.4M USD/launch (about 233 USD/kg to LEO); at a 15-year lifetime and the same learning rate, the break-even launch cost is approximately 14.1M USD/launch (about 119 USD/kg to LEO).
Scope and limits
A break-even point under a specific, favourable, ASSUMED bundle of simultaneous technology improvements, not a forecast that this bundle will occur; several of the "not reachable" cells in the same table (e.g. 10-year lifetime at any tested learning rate) show the result is highly sensitive to which improvements are bundled.
What it assumes
The full companion package (electric propulsion + 0.70 efficiency + 0.75 servicer learning rate) is held fixed while solving for launch cost; none of these four changes has independently been shown feasible on the stated timeline.
Where it comes from
This is the project's own working, shown in full:
Trace, Section 8, break-even table: 20yr/0.70 -> $27.4M/launch, $233/kg; 15yr/0.70 -> $14.1M/launch, $119/kg.
Basis: FY2022 USD, nominal; discount rate 3%; RD1; companion package as stated
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-042 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0256
CLM-0256, Energy Aperture, as of 2026-09.
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-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...More on the source page.