Value chain · CLM-0697
In plain terms
The Chinese 6.6 cent figure ignores the cost of money. Once you charge interest on the capital, the same numbers give about 10 cents at a low interest rate and 21 cents at a high one. Even so, NASA's own figures stay between about 2 and 16 times more expensive, depending which of NASA's cases you pick.
The claim as recorded
CAST's headline 6.6 US cents/kWh is an undiscounted cost-over-energy ratio, not a levelised cost. Restated by the knowledge base's arithmetic as an LCOE with all capital at t=0, a 30-year life and uniform generation, it becomes 10.1 cents/kWh at 3 per cent real, 15.9 cents at 7 per cent and 20.9 cents at 10 per cent - 1.53x, 2.42x and 3.18x the unrounded ratio of 6.57 cents (1.52x, 2.41x and 3.17x the rounded 6.6). Against NASA OTPS's baseline lifecycle costs of 0.61 USD/kWh for RD1 and 1.59 USD/kWh for RD2, in FY22 dollars, the 3 per cent restatement leaves NASA 6.1x (RD1) to 15.8x (RD2) more expensive, across two dollar bases because CAST's year is not stated; against NASA's stated electric-propulsion figure of about 0.20 USD/kWh for RD1, NASA is still about 2.0x more expensive.
Scope and limits
This corrects a BASIS mismatch, not an input disagreement; CAST's underlying cost inputs are not reproduced in its paper. Confidence MEDIUM because the spend-profile assumption is crude and the basis year is unknown. Do not quote as CAST's own figure - it is a restatement of it recorded in the register.
What it assumes
All capital spent at t=0 and generation uniform from year 1 - the crude limiting case, chosen because the paper gives no spend profile. No currency conversion. No inflation adjustment, because CAST's USD basis year is not stated.
Where it comes from
This is the project's own working, shown in full:
Annuity factor for 30 years at r is (1-(1+r)^-30)/r: 19.600 at 3 per cent, 12.409 at 7 per cent, 9.427 at 10 per cent. Annual energy at 1 GW continuous is 8.76 bn kWh. LCOE = 17,272.7 M USD / (8.76 bn x annuity factor). Cost inputs are CLM-0689's self-checked totals. NASA's electric-propulsion figure is quoted from SRC-012 p.9 (doc p.viii) as "about 0.20 $/kWh for RD1", verbatim. NASA's baselines, SRC-012 p.8 (doc p.vii): "The baseline lifecycle cost of electricity for RD1 is 0.61 $/kWh and for RD2 is 1.59 $/kWh." NASA's dollar basis, SRC-012 p.4 (doc p.iii): "All cost estimates are measured in Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22) dollars."
Basis: USD, YEAR NOT STATED, REAL, DISCOUNTED
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-004 not published in this release
- Supersedes
- CLM-0690 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0697
CLM-0697, Energy Aperture, as of 2026-09-03.
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.
- Also from SRC-169
- CLM-0141A Chinese government-linked design study calculated that, outside the main beam of its proposed satellite, stray sidelobe power on the...CLM-0142A major Chinese government-linked design paper on a specific space solar power concept does not mention the upper atmosphere at all, and...CLM-0501A 2024 Chinese satellite design concept plans to beam down microwaves twice as strong as CASSIOPeiA's own typical figure, and its designers...CLM-0687The Chinese design says how it gets to orbit. Rockets carry the parts to a low orbit. A reusable space tug then moves each part up to the...CLM-0688The Chinese design shields the satellite parts from radiation during the climb to high orbit, using the tug itself as the shield. It also...CLM-0689The Chinese team published its own cost figures for a one-gigawatt system: about 17.3 billion US dollars over 30 years, which they put at...CLM-0692The Chinese design's own summary table adds up: the parts weigh what the total says they weigh. Its claimed 12.3 per cent efficiency is...CLM-0698The Chinese cost table states a transport price of 1,000 dollars per kilogram in its column heading, but its own numbers only work out at...More on the source page.