Value chain · CLM-0319
In plain terms
The register's recommended way to check space solar power's economics against something other than plain cost-per-unit is the IEA's value-adjusted cost, whose formula is now public, checked against a US value-for-money ratio whose underlying figures are published, plus a comparison against an illustrative cost of firm, reliable power in today's electricity markets.
The claim as recorded
The register should report value alongside plain LCOE in two roles: IEA's VALCOE as the definition of value-adjusted cost, since its formula is now public (LCOE adjusted by energy, capacity and flexibility value against the system average), with every VALCOE figure naming the model run, region, year and renewable share it comes from; and a LACE-style value-cost ratio as the cross-check, since EIA publishes the LACE and LCOE figures behind each ratio while VALCOE's value terms come from the IEA's own model; paired with an explicit cost-per-unit-of-firm-capacity cross-check built on Lazard's illustrative ELCC and Net-CONE firming-cost methodology, since that comparison produced the single most damning, best-evidenced finding against the claim that SBSP's cost premium is explained by its firmness.
Evidence behind this: T0-ANALYSIS, so no CALC is owed: this claim derives no number. Method, stated so a reader can dispute it: three published alternative metrics are compared on two criteria, whether their formula and the figures behind each result are public, and which value elements they cover (energy, capacity, flexibility), resting on CLM-0307 (LACE: published figures, energy and capacity value, US only), CLM-0308 (VALCOE: formula held since 2026-10-09, all three elements, values from the IEA's own model) and CLM-0312 (Lazard firming-cost methodology). The output is a recommendation about the register's own reporting practice, not a measurement, and it is recorded as a judgement rather than a finding.
Scope and limits
This is a methodological recommendation for how the register should work, not an empirical finding about SBSP. Its earlier trigger, IEA's VALCOE formula becoming independently verifiable, was met on 2026-10-09 (SRC-762 p.59), which moved VALCOE from not recommended to the definition; a VALCOE figure still cannot be recomputed without the IEA's model, and "network integration costs are not included" (SRC-762 p.60). LACE is also a model output (EIA's projections) and covers the United States only (CLM-0307), so the cross-check cannot be applied outside the US. It should be revisited if a primary study applies any of these metrics to SBSP directly. The Lazard cross-check firms only the renewable side; its gas combined-cycle comparator carries no offsetting firming charge (SRC-146 p.17, and CLM-0470's limits). A firm-capacity comparison built on it must state the comparator's own firming treatment before it is applied to SBSP.
What it assumes
No assumptions are recorded against this claim.
Where it comes from
Reasoning drawing on CLM-0307 (LACE: EIA publishes the LACE and LCOE figures behind each ratio, Table 4a), CLM-0308 (VALCOE: formula held since 2026-10-09, SRC-762 p.59, its energy value from the IEA model's simulated hourly prices, run hourly only for the United States, European Union, China and India, p.59), and CLM-0312 (Lazard's firming-cost methodology, the sharpest evidence found; firming adds about 8% to 85% to unsubsidised regional LCOE).
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-021 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0319
CLM-0319, Energy Aperture, as of 2026-09.