Value chain · CLM-0467
In plain terms
Using much more efficient solar cells would let the whole station be built with far less mass and far fewer launches, and that combined effect cuts the electricity cost by more than a launch-price cut alone would.
The claim as recorded
Raising RD1's solar cell efficiency from 0.35 to 0.70 (the report's own cited "state of the art", with system mass rescaled inversely to hold delivered power at 2 GW, a correlated pair) reduces this model's LCOE from 0.623 to 0.188 USD/kWh, a 70% reduction, larger than launch cost alone falling to 10M USD/launch.
Scope and limits
Does not address whether 70% solar cell efficiency (roughly NASA's own stated theoretical state of the art (the source separately gives NREL's tracked best research cell as 47.6 per cent) per the source report, not a flight-qualified state of practice) is manufacturable at the module cost and learning rate assumed; treats efficiency and cost-per-module as independent, which may not hold if higher-efficiency cells cost more per unit area.
What it assumes
Module count (and therefore manufacturing and launch cost) rescales exactly inversely with the efficiency-chain ratio, holding module areal design and cost-per-module otherwise fixed (ASSUMED, matching the report's own description of its efficiency sensitivity, printed p.75: "reduction in mass to deliver the same 2 GW of power").
Where it comes from
This is the project's own working, shown in full:
Trace, Section 7: solar cell efficiency 0.70 -> LCOE 0.1884 $/kWh, |delta| 0.4347.
Basis: FY2022 USD, nominal; discount rate 3%; RD1, mass rescaled inversely with efficiency (correlated)
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-038 not published in this release
- Supersedes
- CLM-0409 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0467
CLM-0467, 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.