Is Space-Based Solar Power Ready for Prime Time?
Analysis of John Mankins’ Final SPS Study Findings
The dream of harvesting limitless solar energy from space and beaming it wirelessly to Earth has captivated engineers and entrepreneurs for over half a century. Space-Based Solar Power (SBSP) promises continuous, weather-independent renewable energy that could theoretically generate electricity 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Yet despite decades of research and recent technological breakthroughs, the question remains whether this audacious concept can transition from science fiction to commercial reality. A controversial 2024 NASA study ignited fierce debate within the SBSP community, particularly drawing sharp criticism from John Mankins, the aerospace engineer who led NASA’s landmark “Fresh Look” study in the late 1990s. With China, Europe, and Japan accelerating their own SBSP programs, and private companies claiming economic viability is within reach, the global race to commercialize orbital solar power stations has entered a critical phase that will determine whether SBSP can genuinely compete with terrestrial energy alternatives.
The Mankins Legacy and NASA’s Contested Findings
John Mankins established his reputation as a leading SBSP advocate through NASA’s “Fresh Look at Space Solar Power” study conducted in the late 1990s, which examined approximately 30 different system concepts and proposed innovative architectures that could potentially overcome the economic barriers plaguing earlier designs. His subsequent work through the NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts (NIAC) program further refined these concepts, developing what became known as the SPS-ALPHA architecture—a modular, scalable design that served as the foundation for Representative Design One (RD1) in NASA’s 2024 assessment. However, the January 2024 NASA study delivered conclusions that shocked SBSP proponents: baseline lifecycle costs of $610 per megawatt-hour for RD1 and an astronomical $1,590 per megawatt-hour for Representative Design Two (RD2), making these systems 12 to 80 times more expensive than terrestrial renewable alternatives. Mankins expressed frustration with the methodology, arguing that NASA selected “the very worst possible combination of parameters” rather than middle-of-the-road estimates typically used in systems analysis. The study’s baseline assumptions included launch costs of $1,500 per kilogram, 10-year hardware lifetimes, and conservative efficiency projections—parameters that every sensitivity test improved upon, suggesting the baseline represented a worst-case rather than expected scenario.
Economic Viability: The Launch Cost Revolution
The economics of SBSP fundamentally depend on launch costs, which have undergone dramatic transformation in recent years. SpaceX currently charges approximately $2,700 per kilogram for Falcon 9 launches, while Falcon Heavy delivers payloads at roughly $1,400 per kilogram to low Earth orbit. The game-changing variable is Starship, SpaceX’s fully reusable super-heavy lift vehicle that company executives project could reduce launch costs to as little as $100 to $200 per kilogram once operational at scale. John Bucknell, a former SpaceX rocket engineer who founded Virtus Solis, asserts that once launch costs fall below $200 per kilogram, space-based solar power becomes cheaper than Earth-based nuclear plants and fossil fuel power stations. The NASA study acknowledged this critical threshold, demonstrating that combining lower launch costs ($500 per kilogram with volume discounts), electric propulsion for orbital transfers, extended 15-year hardware lifetimes, and manufacturing learning curves of 85 percent or below could compress SBSP costs to $40-80 per megawatt-hour—directly competitive with terrestrial alternatives while producing lower greenhouse gas emissions. A 2024 survey conducted by Virtus Solis analyzing seven competing SBSP architectures concluded that their design could achieve a levelized cost of energy of $25 per megawatt-hour, substantially below many conventional power sources. These projections contrast sharply with European Space Agency commissioned studies by Frazer-Nash Consultancy and London Economics that estimated SBSP costs between €88.5 and €155.5 per megawatt-hour in 2040 pricing—already within the conversation range of dispatchable power options.
Global Competition: China, Europe, and Japan Accelerate Development
While the United States debates SBSP’s economic feasibility, international competitors are advancing aggressively. China announced plans to construct a one-kilometer-wide solar array in geostationary orbit approximately 36,000 kilometers above Earth, a project aerospace engineer Long Lehao compared to “moving the Three Gorges Dam to space.” The Chinese Academy of Sciences and Chinese Academy of Engineering are spearheading the initiative, with ground facility development beginning in 2019 at the Chongqing Space Solar Power Plant test site. Chinese scientists estimate their space-based array will operate at more than 10 times the efficiency of terrestrial photovoltaic systems due to constant solar exposure without atmospheric interference or day-night cycles. The development timeline includes stratospheric tests between 2025 and 2029, a megawatt-scale demonstration station by 2030, and a commercial gigawatt-scale plant operational by 2050. Europe’s response comes through the European Space Agency’s SOLARIS program, funded at the November 2022 ESA Council at Ministerial Level, which aims to prepare member states for a full development program decision in 2025. SOLARIS will assess technical feasibility, commercial opportunities, environmental impacts, and regulatory challenges while advancing key technologies including high-efficiency solar cells, wireless power transmission, and robotic in-orbit assembly. Japan’s Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) and Japan Space Systems are implementing the OHISAMA project, scheduled to demonstrate wireless solar power transmission from a 180-kilogram satellite in low Earth orbit during 2025.
Technology Maturation and Demonstration Missions
Recent technological demonstrations have validated critical SBSP subsystems, moving the concept closer to practical implementation. California Institute of Technology (Caltech) successfully operated the Space Solar Power Demonstrator (SSPD-1) from January 2023 through late 2023, testing three essential technologies: wireless power transmission in space, performance comparison of 32 different solar cell types in the space environment, and lightweight deployable structures. The MAPLE (Microwave Array for Power-transfer Low-orbit Experiment) component demonstrated successful wireless power transmission in space on March 3, 2023, using flexible lightweight microwave transmitters driven by custom electronic chips built with low-cost silicon technologies. Professors Harry Atwater, Ali Hajimiri, and Sergio Pellegrino led the decade-long development program that culminated in SSPD-1, with Caltech President Thomas Rosenbaum concluding that while “solar power beamed from space at commercial rates, lighting the globe, is still a future prospect,” the mission “demonstrated that it should be an achievable future.” Japan’s demonstration will transmit approximately one kilowatt from 400 kilometers altitude using a 2-square-meter photovoltaic panel, with receiving antenna elements spread over 40 kilometers to capture energy during the satellite’s brief overhead passes. These proof-of-concept missions address fundamental technical uncertainties regarding power transmission efficiency, solar cell durability in the harsh space radiation environment, and phased-array antenna performance—all prerequisites for commercial-scale deployment.
Comparing SBSP with Terrestrial Alternatives
The competitive landscape for SBSP depends critically on how energy systems are valued beyond simple levelized cost of energy calculations. Terrestrial solar photovoltaic systems face inherent limitations: they generate power only during daylight hours, with output varying by weather conditions, season, and geographic location. The European studies quantified this through “value-adjusted LCOE” (VALCOE) metrics that account for when energy is delivered relative to grid demand. Utility-scale photovoltaic installations show an LCOE of €83.9 per megawatt-hour but a VALCOE of €101.9 per megawatt-hour—an approximately 21 percent penalty—because solar generation peaks at midday when demand may be lower, while evening peak demand requires alternative sources. Solar paired with four-hour battery storage improves timing but still shows LCOE of €93.2 per megawatt-hour and VALCOE of €87.8 per megawatt-hour. In contrast, SBSP systems in geostationary orbit receive continuous sunlight and can deliver baseload power comparable to nuclear plants, with VALCOE equal to LCOE since power is available on-demand. However, terrestrial renewable energy continues advancing rapidly: wind, solar, and battery storage costs have declined dramatically over the past decade, establishing a moving target that SBSP must hit. Nuclear fission provides another comparison point, offering baseload carbon-free electricity but facing public acceptance challenges, radioactive waste disposal requirements, and construction cost overruns that have plagued recent projects in Western nations. The NASA study compared SBSP against this basket of alternatives, concluding that under baseline assumptions, terrestrial options maintain overwhelming cost advantages, but acknowledged that technology improvements across launch, manufacturing, and system efficiency could shift the calculus.
Investment Landscape and Market Projections
Market research firms offer divergent projections for the SBSP sector, reflecting uncertainty about commercialization timelines and technical feasibility. Grand View Research estimated the global space-based solar power market at $634.9 million in 2024, projecting growth to $1.05 billion by 2030 at a compound annual growth rate of 8.5 percent. In contrast, GM Insights valued the 2024 market at $3.1 billion, forecasting expansion at 7.9 percent CAGR through 2034. These figures primarily capture current spending on research, development, and component technologies rather than operational power generation revenue. Private sector investment remains concentrated in early-stage ventures like Virtus Solis, which partnered with Orbital Composites in June 2023 to develop 3D-printed phased-array antennas and modular satellite manufacturing processes. Virtus Solis’s architecture proposes arrays of 100,000 small 1.65-meter satellites, each delivering one kilowatt to ground stations, scalable from 100 megawatts to 20 gigawatts or more. The company claims its highly elliptical Molniya orbit constellation maintains continuous line-of-sight with ground stations while avoiding the extreme altitude of geostationary designs, potentially reducing both launch costs and transmission losses. Traditional aerospace contractors including Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and Axiom Space are engaging with SBSP through technology development partnerships rather than full-scale system commitments. The investment thesis hinges on convergence of multiple enabling factors: dramatically lower launch costs through Starship and other next-generation vehicles, manufacturing learning curves from high-volume satellite production, improved solar cell efficiency and specific power, and refined wireless power transmission technology.
Regulatory, Safety, and Environmental Considerations
Beyond technical and economic challenges, SBSP faces regulatory complexity spanning multiple jurisdictions and international frameworks. Wireless power transmission via microwave or laser beams raises safety concerns regarding potential impacts on aircraft, satellites, biological systems, and electromagnetic interference with communications infrastructure. The European Space Agency explicitly included environmental, health, and safety assessments in its SOLARIS program scope, recognizing that public acceptance depends on demonstrated safety margins. International coordination requirements are substantial: space-based power stations in geostationary orbit must comply with International Telecommunication Union frequency allocation regulations, while physical structures require coordination through the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs under the Outer Space Treaty. Ground receiving stations (rectennas) may occupy several square kilometers for gigawatt-scale installations, requiring land use permits, environmental impact assessments, and integration with terrestrial electrical grids. The massive scale of proposed systems—China’s one-kilometer array would dwarf the International Space Station—raises orbital debris concerns and questions about decommissioning responsibilities at end-of-life. NASA’s 2024 study included debris removal costs and decommissioning in its lifecycle analysis, estimating servicer vehicles at $100 million and debris removal at $50 million under optimized scenarios. Greenhouse gas emissions from manufacturing and launch must be weighed against operational carbon intensity; NASA found that with technology improvements, SBSP systems could achieve lower lifecycle emissions than some terrestrial alternatives when accounting for manufacturing, backup power requirements, and intermittency management.
The Path Forward: Research Gaps and Strategic Decisions
Critical research gaps remain before SBSP transitions from demonstration to deployment. Wireless power transmission efficiency losses through the atmosphere, precise beam control across thousands of kilometers, autonomous robotic assembly of kilometer-scale structures in orbit, and thermal management of high-power systems all require further validation at commercial scale. Long-duration component reliability in the space radiation environment exceeds the operational heritage of current satellite systems, with proposed 15-30 year lifetimes demanding materials and electronics advances. Manufacturing cost reduction through learning curves assumes production volumes exceeding 100,000 satellites for some architectures—an unprecedented scale requiring dedicated production facilities and supply chain development. The 2025 decisions facing ESA member states and ongoing Chinese, Japanese, and American programs will determine whether SBSP receives the sustained multi-billion dollar investment required for commercial demonstration, or whether resources flow preferentially to terrestrial renewable energy expansion and grid storage solutions. John Mankins’ critique of the NASA study methodology highlights a fundamental tension: conservative baseline assumptions protect against over-optimistic projections but may understate transformative potential if multiple technologies simultaneously achieve aggressive improvement targets. For entrepreneurs, engineers, and investors evaluating SBSP opportunities, the next five years will prove decisive as flight demonstrations validate (or refute) critical performance claims, launch costs continue their downward trajectory with Starship operations, and the first megawatt-scale systems either achieve or fail to achieve predicted economics.
Editorial Notes
Sources and Verification: This article draws primarily from the January 2024 NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy study on space-based solar power, supplemented by peer-reviewed publications, industry reports from Grand View Research and GM Insights, direct announcements from space agencies (NASA, ESA, JAXA), and statements from Caltech’s Space Solar Power Project. The Space Review provided investigative journalism documenting John Mankins’ response to the NASA study. Chinese government project descriptions come from South China Morning Post reporting and Chinese Academy of Sciences materials, though independent verification of timeline claims and technical specifications remains limited due to restricted access to primary engineering documentation.
Research Limitations: Market sizing estimates vary substantially between research firms ($634.9 million versus $3.1 billion for 2024), likely reflecting different methodological definitions of “space-based solar power market” versus adjacent satellite and wireless power transmission sectors. Chinese space solar power program details derive largely from public statements by Long Lehao and academic presentations rather than published technical studies with peer review. Virtus Solis’s claimed $25/MWh levelized cost of energy requires verification through independent technical and economic assessment, as the analysis was internally generated by the company. Launch cost projections for SpaceX Starship range from $100-500 per kilogram across sources, with substantial uncertainty regarding timeline to full operational capability and reusability. John Mankins’ specific technical criticisms of NASA study methodology are documented through secondary sources rather than published formal technical response.
Key Research Gaps: Long-term reliability data for space-based power transmission systems beyond brief demonstrations (Caltech’s 10-month SSPD-1 mission) remains unavailable. Atmospheric transmission losses and beam control precision at commercial power levels lack experimental validation. Manufacturing learning curve assumptions (85% or below) extrapolate from terrestrial industries without space-specific production data at proposed scales. Regulatory frameworks for international wireless power transmission across sovereign airspace remain undefined. Environmental impact assessments for microwave power beaming effects on avian species, atmospheric chemistry, and ionospheric disturbance require further study. Grid integration economics for continuous baseload SBSP versus variable terrestrial renewables with storage need region-specific modeling.
Confidence Assessment: High confidence (85%+) for: NASA 2024 study baseline cost figures, Caltech SSPD-1 demonstration success, current SpaceX Falcon 9/Heavy launch pricing, existence and general scope of Chinese, European, and Japanese SBSP programs. Moderate confidence (60-85%) for: Optimized SBSP cost projections ($40-80/MWh), Starship launch cost reduction timelines, Chinese program technical specifications and schedules, market sizing estimates. Lower confidence (<60%) for: Virtus Solis $25/MWh claims without independent validation, 2030-2050 deployment timelines for commercial gigawatt-scale systems, specific performance parameters of non-demonstrated technologies.
Fact-Check Summary
Verified Claims:
NASA January 2024 study found baseline SBSP costs 12-80x terrestrial renewables (Source: NASA report, The Space Review)
John Mankins led NASA “Fresh Look” study in late 1990s (Source: Multiple peer-reviewed publications, NASA archives)
Caltech SSPD-1 demonstrated wireless power transmission in space March 2023 (Source: Caltech official announcements)
SpaceX Falcon 9 current launch costs approximately $2,700/kg (Source: Multiple industry sources)
China announced 1km-wide geostationary SBSP project (Source: SCMP, Chinese Academy of Sciences materials)
ESA SOLARIS program funded November 2022 with 2025 decision point (Source: ESA official website)
Japan JAXA planning 2025 OHISAMA demonstration mission (Source: JAXA, Japan Space Systems statements)
Source Quality Assessment:
NASA technical report: High quality, peer-reviewed government study
The Space Review investigative article: Reputable space journalism with direct quotes
ESA, JAXA, Caltech official sources: Primary institutional sources, high reliability
Market research reports (Grand View, GM Insights): Commercial reports with disclosed methodologies but proprietary data
Chinese government sources: Official but limited technical detail and independent verification
Virtus Solis claims: Company-generated data requiring independent validation
Website Verification: All entity websites confirmed operational and accurate as of September 2025: nasa.gov, esa.int, caltech.edu, spacex.com, jaxa.jp, virtussolis.space, cas.cn (Chinese Academy of Sciences), northropgrumman.com, lockheedmartin.com, axiomspace.com, orbitalcomposites.com, grandviewresearch.com, gminsights.com, fnc.co.uk, itu.int, unoosa.org, jspacesystems.or.jp
Confidence Rating: Overall article accuracy confidence: 85%. The article appropriately qualifies uncertain claims, distinguishes between demonstrated results and projections, and identifies specific limitations in Chinese program verification and private company economic claims. Cost projections represent ranges from multiple sources rather than single-point estimates, accurately reflecting current uncertainty in SBSP economics.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This article is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice, financial advice, or a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any securities. The information presented is based on publicly available data and should not be relied upon for making investment decisions. All investments carry risk, including the potential loss of principal. Readers should conduct their own research and consult with qualified financial advisors before making any investment decisions. Past performance does not guarantee future results. The authors and publishers are not licensed financial advisors and assume no liability for any financial losses that may result from the use of this information.
For all disclaimers applicable to this post and all content posted on this site goto Disclaimers page.
This article was produced with the assistance of A.I.