Value chain · CLM-0843
In plain terms
Other research groups around the world are publishing on space solar power, but none of the works this search found takes a position on the argument about which carbon-accounting method is right, and this search found no new carbon-per-kilowatt-hour figure published since 2023.
The claim as recorded
Research groups independent of the University of Strathclyde and Metasat group behind the process-based assessments have published on space-based solar power and adjacent space life-cycle topics since 2023, including groups whose OpenAlex institution fields give King's College London with Xi'an Jiaotong, Yonsei with Hong Kong Polytechnic, University College London, Waterloo with MIT, the European Space Agency and the German Aerospace Center; but none of the citing works located adjudicates, replicates or rebuts the specific input-output versus process-based dispute, and no new lifecycle carbon intensity figure for any SBSP design published from 2023 onwards was confirmed by this search.
Scope and limits
The "no new figure" finding is an OPEN GAP, not a null. Three located works could not be retrieved on 2026-09-04: the Joule paper returned HTTP 403 at the Cell Press PDF endpoint and a bare redirect stub at its Elsevier landing page; the Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews paper returned only a bare redirect stub at its Elsevier landing page; and the Sustainability paper returned HTTP 403 at MDPI despite open access. None of those full texts was read then, so none could be said to contain or lack a lifecycle figure; they were unexamined, not empty. Affiliations are recorded from index metadata and no living person's role or position is asserted beyond that. The independence judgement covers only works located by this search. HALF OF THIS IS NOW WRONG, corrected 2026-09-06. THE JOULE PAPER IS HELD AND HAS BEEN EXAMINED. It is registered as SRC-264, status LIVE, held as the arXiv preprint (arxiv:2504.05052, 24 pages, 7.95 MB) and already cited by CLM-0286. The 403 was at the Cell Press endpoint for the Joule version of record, and "could not be retrieved" was written of the paper when it applied only to that one rendering of it. Examined 2026-09-06: the preprint contains ZERO occurrences of gCO2, gCO2e, CO2e, life cycle, lifecycle, life-cycle, LCA, embodied or g/kWh. Its only emissions treatment is operational CO2 intensity taken from a technology-data database for thermal plant - oil 0.2571, coal 0.3361 tCO2/MWh thermal and so on - with the stated assumption that "All other energy sources are assumed to have zero CO2 emissions", which is to say this study models SBSP itself as zero-emission and therefore could never have supplied a lifecycle figure. So the "no new figure" finding is STRENGTHENED, not weakened: for this paper the absence is now established rather than assumed. The Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews half stands unchanged: that paper is not held and remains unexamined, as does the Sustainability paper. The Joule version of record was read 2026-10-10 (SRC-264): it keeps the same operational CO2 treatment and the sentence that all other energy sources are assumed to have zero CO2 emissions (PDF p.14), and its text has no lifecycle carbon figure for SBSP, so the finding holds for the published paper too.
What it assumes
No assumptions are recorded against this claim.
Where it comes from
Affiliations are taken from OpenAlex institution fields rather than asserted. Independent works returned by OpenAlex citation queries of the two anchors with citations, 2026-09-04: a 2024 Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews review of space-based solar power in smart grids (Yonsei and Hong Kong Polytechnic), the only located work citing two anchors at once; a 2024 Sustainability paper on the environmental impacts of manufacturing low Earth orbit constellations (University College London); and a 2026 Energy Conversion and Management X paper on space-based solar power in a lunar resource economy (Waterloo and MIT). Located by title search but NOT returned by the citation queries, so not confirmed as citing any anchor: a 2025 Joule assessment of space-based solar power for European-scale power system decarbonisation (King's College London and Xi'an Jiaotong), and a 2023 European Space Power Conference paper, "A Power Engineer View on Space Based Solar Power" (European Space Agency). Separately located, not a forward citation of any anchor: a CEAS Space Journal paper, February 2026, open access, from the German Aerospace Center, a systematic review of life-cycle sustainability assessment indicators for space activities, which cites two other papers by the process-based group but none of the four anchors and does not adjudicate the method dispute.
Related records
- Answers question
- QST-008 not published in this release
Cite this
energyaperture.com/c/clm-0843
CLM-0843, Energy Aperture, as of 2026-09-04.
Connected records
Other published records linked to this one. A list, not a judgement.
- Also from SRC-264
- CLM-0286A 2025 peer-reviewed study modelled space solar power inside a detailed model of Europe's future electricity system, using the more...CLM-1429A search on 13 October 2026 found no published model of Britain's power system that is free to decide how much space solar power to build...CLM-1476The European study states that it used a 3 per cent interest rate for the cost of the space solar satellites. It does not say, in the paper...