xiii Conclusion We performed a first-order lifecycle study of two representative SBSP designs for 2 GW utility-scale power generation that are presumed to begin operating in 2050 to determine 1) the conditions under which SBSP would be a competitive option to achieving net zero GHG emissions; and 2) assuming SBSP can be competitive, the role, if any, NASA could play in its development. We assumed baseline capabilities to develop, assemble, operate, maintain, and dispose of the SBSP systems are a mix of capabilities that are above, below, or comparable to capabilities demonstrated to date. We then compared the LCOE and lifecycle GHG emission intensity of the SBSP designs to terrestrial renewable electricity production technologies. Our findings indicate the SBSP designs may produce lifecycle GHG emissions per unit of electricity that are comparable to terrestrial alternatives, pending further studies of upper atmosphere effect of launch emissions. We find the SBSP designs are more expensive than terrestrial alternatives and may have lifecycle costs per unit of electricity that are 12-80 times higher. However, cost competitiveness may be achieved through a favorable combination of cost and performance improvements related to launch and manufacturing beyond the advancements assumed in the baseline assessment. NASA is developing technologies and capabilities to meet its future mission needs, such as in-space servicing, assembly, and manufacturing (ISAM) and autonomy, which are enablers for SBSP. NASA could maintain its focus on core Agency missions and technologies, while documenting their relevance to SBSP. NASA may also enhance coordination with U.S. and international partners on technology development with relevance to SBSP. We recommend regular reviews of global SBSP developments and focused analyses of SBSP designs that may enable NASA’s core missions.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==