SRC-078

Study on Cost-Benefit Analysis of Space-Based Solar Power Generation for Terrestrial Energy Needs - Final Report

Commissioned by European Space Agency. Who paid for a study is recorded because it bears on how its conclusions should be read, not because it makes them wrong.

Published claims resting on this source

• CLM-0152 Two UK industry planning documents, from 2022 and 2025, each state a beam-intensity design figure in the 230-245 watts-per-square-metre range, but neither traces that number back to any official safety or interference standard: the 2022 report gives no source for its figure, and the 2025 report, for a system planned to launch in 2033, cites only an earlier internal Frazer-Nash report.
• CLM-0189 A separate 2022 study for the European Space Agency, by Frazer-Nash and London Economics, estimates the cost of electricity from a first full-scale unit, with investors expecting a 20% return, at between about 11 and 21 euro cents per kWh, and notes that if launch costs could reach levels already being observed for reusable NASA/SpaceX flights (about 400 euros per kg), the technology would become genuinely competitive.
• CLM-0190 This European study finds that a full Europe-wide space solar power programme would cost about 418 billion euros in today's money but return about 600 billion euros in benefits once the value of avoided fossil fuel generation, avoided CO2 emissions and R&D spillovers are all counted - a net benefit of roughly 150 to 260 billion euros depending on assumptions, and a net loss of about 171 billion euros if all its costs doubled. The value put on avoided CO2 emissions (about 233 billion euros) is larger than the whole net benefit, so the result rests on that valuation rather than on the electricity itself.
• CLM-0191 This 2022 report is one of two parallel studies the European Space Agency commissioned on the costs and benefits of space solar power: this one used the CASSIOPeiA design and was done by Frazer-Nash with London Economics; the report says the other, by Roland Berger and OHB on a different design, was done independently.
• CLM-0280 A 2022 ESA-commissioned study modelled that the first European space solar power satellite could produce electricity at a cost of 106 to 206 euros per megawatt-hour. It modelled that this could fall to about 88 to 156 euros per megawatt-hour once ten similar satellites had been built.
• CLM-0281 The study tested how much the cost of launching material into space changes the price of space solar power. It used launch-cost data from about 2022. The report says that if launch costs fell to about 400 euros per kilogram, which it describes as similar to costs seen for reusable SpaceX rockets at the time, space solar power could become highly competitive with other ways of generating electricity. The report does not give a source for the 400 euro figure.
• CLM-0282 A 2022 ESA-commissioned study modelled that, from 2022 to 2070, space solar power for Europe could deliver a net economic benefit of about 183 billion euros, counting avoided costs of building, fuelling and running power plants on the ground, avoided carbon emissions and other benefits. It also modelled that private investors would not fund the first satellite alone unless the government paid for a large share of development: roughly 58 percent if investors need a 20 percent return, or roughly 30 percent if they need a lower 15 percent return.
• CLM-0539 A UK consultancy, working for the European Space Agency and using the same design as its reference point, actually published a full weight breakdown -- something the original 2019 paper never did. It comes out lower than the headline claim, at about 0.70 kilowatts per kilogram rather than 1, even though it leaves out several categories of weight altogether. It also rates one of the satellite's power-conversion stages as barely more than an idea on paper, and its input notes say the lightest case for the radio equipment is an expert's judgement, not something anyone has measured or built.
• CLM-0967 The 2022 European study assumed it takes two years to build a satellite in orbit, and that getting parts launched could be the thing that makes it take longer.
• CLM-1412 A 2022 study for the European Space Agency describes the receiving station as a fairly open grid of small antennas about 10 centimetres apart, which might let the land underneath be used for something else. It says the basic layout goes back to Raytheon and NASA in the late 1970s.

Cite this