PRé Consultants

Jorrit Leijting

15 April 2010

ProSuite
LARGE SCALE TRANSPORTATION TO SPACE

1. Scope
This preliminary sustainability assessment concerns large scale transportation to space. In the near
future, large scale transportation to space could involve the transportation of Space Solar Power
Systems (SSPS). As the global energy demand rises as well as the call for sustainable energy, SSPS
may become a more and more interesting alternative. Compared with land based solar power
systems, the advantages of Space Solar Power Systems are the absence of clouds, no atmospheric
absorption and scattering and the lack of summer, winter- and day and night cycle. Every square
metre of space receives 1366 W of solar radiation while at ground level it has been reduced by
atmospheric absorption and scattering, weather, etc. to less than an average of 250 W/m 2 (National
Security Space Office, 2007). The disadvantages are the high energy use and emissions during
building and launching of the rockets which have to carry solar systems into space.

The principle of a Space Solar Power System is the placing of solar collectors in an earth orbit or on
the surface of the moon which transmit (beam) the received power to the earth via coherent radio
waves or via coherent visible or infrared light. A rectifying antenna (rectenna) converts the beam
into electricity for the grid (National Security Space Office, 2007).

Presently, at least two nations, the USA and Japan, are investigating the possibilities of SSPS with
the aim of implementing space solar power within a few decades. The USA already started to
conduct research on the idea of SSPS in the late sixties, published findings in reports, as in 1980
(U.S. Department of Energy and NASA, 1980) and 1997 when NASA published ‘A fresh look at the
feasibility of generating solar power in space’. For the USA, the reason of interest in SSPS is the
future scarcity of energy sources and indirect the prevention of resource conflicts by increasing
global populations and higher demands of energy. Also is there a need for more environmental
friendly and sustainable energy in order to reduce environmental problems such as global warming
(National Security Space Office, 2007). The Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, JAXA, has the
goal to launch a geostationary satellite by 2030 that could supply 500,000 homes on Earth with one
GW of power (Schirber, 2008).

The system boundary includes the construction, launching and the placing of solar panels in an
earth orbit. The construction of the whole SSPS includes launchers, rockets, solar panels, receivers
(rectanna’s) and buildings as well as travelling of researchers and VIPs. The functional unit selected
is one launch of a rocket with payload.

2. Economic impacts
Microeconomic Cost, Life Cycle Cost
Because the technology of Space Solar Power Systems still has to be developed, it is very hard to
estimate the costs of a certain system. Development and launching of rockets with the cargo
needed to build a solar based power system in orbit would need an enormous investment at the
beginning. Later on, when systems are running and gathering energy, the maintenance of the
systems will become more dominant. The US National Security Space Office has estimated that a
basic proof-of-concept demonstration and a substantial power demonstration in orbit which delivers
about 10 MWe to the earth are likely to cost between 5 billion - 10 billion US dollar (3.5 – 7 billion
euro) in total (National Security Space Office, 2007). It has been estimated that achieving launch
costs of $440/kg (320 euro) could make the use of SSPS as a clean alternative source feasible, if the
energy were sold at $ 0.08- 0.10 (0.06-0.07 euro) per kWh. At these cost numbers, projects that
produce SSPS systems could compete with other large capital infrastructure projects for finance
capital (e.g., coal-fired and nuclear power plants) (National Security Space Office, 2007). The

43227662.doc 1/6
PRé Consultants
Jorrit Leijting

15 April 2010

European Space Agency ESA indicated a permitted launch cost of 600 – 700 euro/kg for 0.5 GW – 500
GW space power systems in order to compete with terrestrial solar power (Summerer & Ongaro).
The Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency JAXA is aiming to produce power at a target price of $
0.065 (0.048 euro)per kWh which is in line with conventional power generation costs today
(Hornyak, 2008).

Contribution to sectoral growth and GDP

Research on new materials and technologies has a positive effect on the GDP and may generate an
important spin off as well. Historically, the space industry has been a generator for innovate
technology. For instance, the first solar panels was utilised on satellites. This may lead to the
utilisation of new products, cheaper production of present products etc. Also the development of
SSPS would give a boost to the development of solar panels for terrestrial as well as for
extraterrestrial purposes.

Energy security
According to the US National Security Space Office, Space Solar Power Systems have, considering
the energy for constructing and launch, net energy payback times of < 1 year (except for very small
0.5 GW plants) (National Security Space Office, 2007). Also the European Space Agency (ESA)
concluded that space solar systems with capacities higher than 0.5 GW have low energy payback
times, almost all space concepts produce within less than one year more energy than was needed to
produce and operate them (Summerer & Ongaro). For the ESA study, current solar power technology
has been chosen but with large cost reduction potential for the 2020/30 timeframe, the moment
when space solar power could start to play a significant role.

The energy payback times is in this case based on monetary values, i.e. the energy costs and not on
amounts of energy used, for instance for the launch, and gained by the solar panels. It is not clear
what the system boundaries were in these studies. In studies, the launching and operating has been
taken into account but not the financial input for research and development, testing etc.

Financial risks
The cost for launching is one of the major issues. At the moment, the United States, one of the
countries active in developing SSPS, has very limited capabilities to build or to move large
structures or very high power systems in orbit, the capabilities for in-space manufacturing and
construction or in-situ space resource utilization is extremely limited and there is no capability for
beamed power. Also, most launches to space today are on expendable vehicles (EELVs) while
reusable launch vehicles (RLVs like the Space Shuttle) are more appropriate. Development of RLVs
has likely been hindered by the lack of a sufficiently large market (payloads) thus far (National
Security Space Office, 2007).

Financial risks are heavily dependent on the oil price. The higher the price of oil, the more it
decreases the financial risks and the higher the interest to invest in SSPS.

Another financial risk could be the acceptance of SSPS by people. It will be very difficult to
introduce SSPS if groups of people or whole nations are, for different reasons, not accepting it.

3. Environmental and health impacts

Space Solar Power Systems will have net positive effects on the environment as soon as they are in
an earth orbit operating as energy providers. However, to bring Space Solar Power Systems into an
orbit, rockets has to be built and launched, ground stations has to be built and research has to be
carried out which includes long term studies with test launches and transportation of people
involved. Depending on the scale – the desired capacity of extraterrestrial solar power - all these
activities in one or the other way have an impact on the environment. It is probable that most
environmental impacts occur during the launching of the rocket which is on the one hand very
energy consuming and on the other releases exhaust gases like ozone depletion substances directly
in the stratospheric layer where the protective ozone layer is present. Also, it is probable that in
the near future the whole SSPS project(s) will lead to a large scale transportation of cargo which is

43227662.doc 2/6
PRé Consultants
Jorrit Leijting

15 April 2010

much higher than ever before, like for the transportation of satellites. This will lead to an extension
of ground stations, launching equipment and rockets.

In the following paragraphs, a short description of the environmental impact associated with
launching activities and land use will be given.

Impacts associated with launching activities

The emission of exhaust gases can affect the air quality in the lowermost troposphere and long-term
global changes in the composition of the stratosphere in which the ozone layer is located.

Ozone depletion substances

Studies have shown consistently that at current launch rates, ozone depletion from rocket exhaust
is with < 0.1% contribution insignificant compared to that of other ozone depleting substances (Ross
et al. 2009) but which may alter due to large increases of payload in the near future. Growth of a
factor of one hundred could cause several percent global ozone losses.

According to Ross et al., rockets have a significant potential to become a significant contributor to
the problem of stratospheric ozone depletion because of the following characteristics of rocket
emissions:
1) Rocket combustion products are the only human-produced source of ozone-destroying
compounds injected directly into the middle and upper stratosphere. The stratosphere is
relatively isolated from the troposphere so that emissions from individual launches
accumulate in the stratosphere;
2) Stratospheric ozone levels are controlled by catalytic chemical reactions driven by only
trace amounts of reactive gases and particles. Rocket engines are known to emit many of
these reactive gases and particles that drive ozone destroying catalytic reactions. This is
true for all propellant types. Even water vapour emissions, widely considered inert,
contribute to ozone depletion. Rocket engines cause more or less ozone loss according to
propellant type, but every type of rocket engine causes some loss; no rocket engine is
perfectly ‘‘green’’ in this sense.

The highly reactive radicals which are oxides of nitrogen, hydrogen, bromine, and chlorine referred
to as NOx, HOx, BrOx, and ClOx react with ozone on very short time scales, minutes to hours, so
that direct injection into the stratosphere over a limited area (a rocket plume, for example) will
cause a prompt, localized, ozone ‘hole’. H2O is the source gas for HOx radicals but also contributes
to the formation of the ice particles that cause the polar ozone hole.

Particles also play an important role in ozone destruction. Chemical reactions on particle surfaces
activate radicals from their reservoirs and therefore are responsible for ozone depletion. It is known
that such reactions can occur on the surface of aluminium oxide and possibly soot particles.
Particles with a diameter less than about 1 micron (µm) accumulate in the stratosphere because
they remain suspended for several years and become mixed on global scale by the stratospheric
circulation.

Rocket engine exhaust consists of chemically inert compounds (N2 and CO2), radicals (NO, OH, Cl),
radical sources and reservoirs (HCl, H2O), intermediate under oxidized compounds (H2, CO) and
aluminium oxide (alumina) or soot.

Greenhouse gases
The amount of greenhouse gases emitted by rockets on a global scale is insignificant compared to
other sources and is likely to remain so. Annual CO 2 emissions from rockets, for example, are about
several kilotons (kt) compared to emissions of several hundred kilotons from aircraft which is only a
few percent from all CO2 sources. Space launch emissions, even for the large growth scenarios, will
not likely be significant in future greenhouse gas regulatory schemes (Ross et al. 2009). However,
the infrastructure needed for commencing launches (which includes for example airplane travels by
scientist, mechanics, VIPs, production and use of buildings, roads etc.) has not been taken into
account.

43227662.doc 3/6
PRé Consultants
Jorrit Leijting

15 April 2010

Due to the amount of payload which has to be transported into space, Reusable Launch Vehicles
(RLVs) would become more interesting. They would provide delivery for cargo, (such as satellites –
space based solar power, communications, navigation, and/or earth observation etc); propellant to
future depots and for crew and cargo to the ISS, future Bigelow and/or other space stations.
Development of RLVs has likely been hindered by the lack of a sufficiently large market (payloads)
thus far. Together, RLV and space based solar power development can make one another viable
(National Security Space Office, 2007). An example of a Reusable Launch Vehicle is the Space
Shuttle.

Today the United States initiates less than 15 launches per year (at 25 Mt or less). Construction of a
single space based solar power satellite alone would require in excess of 120 such launches
(National Security Space Office, 2007).

Impacts associated with land use

There is a certain amount of area needed for ground receiving stations, dependent on the desired
electric power delivery levels. To transmit huge amounts of power in a focused beam, the
transmitting antenna in space needs to be roughly 2 kilometres wide. A receiving antenna of similar
size or bigger must be built on Earth (Schirber, 2008). The Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency
(JAXA) aims to build ground receiving stations of about 3 km in diameter which can produce 1 GW of
electricity which is enough power for about 500,000 homes (Shimbun, 2008). Compared to
terrestrial solar, the land usage for an equivalent amount of delivered energy is much lower for
Space Solar Power Systems due to the reduced need for overcapacity and storage to make up for
periods of low illumination. Microwave receiving rectennas allow greater than 90% of ambient light
to pass through but absorb almost all of the beamed energy. This means that the area underneath
the rectenna can continue to be used for agricultural purposes (National Security Space Office,
2007).

Impacts associated with transmitting energy

The energy which is generated by solar panels and transmitted to the earth might be about five
kW/m2 which is about five times that of the sun at noon on a clear summer day at mid latitudes
(Hornyak, 2008). This amount would not harm the human body. Other sources say that micro waves
can be transmitted at densities substantially lower than that of sunlight because the beams are
constant and the conversion efficiencies are high (National Security Space Office, 2007). This means
that biological effects are likely extremely small.

4. Social impacts
As the technology of SSPS is very new and in the broad public not yet percept as a realistic
possibility to solve energy problems, there are at this time no social surveys on the
subject. The following text refers to research results that cover parts of the technology,
as there are solar technology, other forms of public energy systems and large
transportation to space.

Employment
Utilisation of Space Solar Power Systems can generate employment in the R&D sector and the
production and supplier sector for, among others, rockets, launchers and photo voltaic systems (PV-
systems). But there could be also risks for economy. So the point was raced in the case of SEANGER
(a project with subject to large transportation so space in Germany). Some experts were concerned
that the technology might not be successful and would lead in a “technische Sackgasse“(like
“technological bind alley”) as much money would be lost or better to say invested at the wrong
place which would disapprove the situation for Space travel industries (see TA-Datenbank
Nachrichten 1992: 9)

Education and skills

Because of the high scientific level of the R&D necessary for utilising SSPS, this will have a great
effect on the demand of high educated people.

43227662.doc 4/6
PRé Consultants
Jorrit Leijting

15 April 2010

Equity concerns
Because of the very high costs for R&D and start up, the utilisation of SSPS will be probably
restricted to countries which have enough monetary funding and/or reserves. This would mean that,
for instance, third world countries will not be able to participate in space solar power and could
become dependent on electricity gained by Space Solar Power Systems when their energy sources
gets scarcer or more expensive. Also, because of the increasing utilisation of space, there could be
a question about claiming the use of earth orbit by different countries.
In a more national perspective there could also be the point raised that the fees that are invested
to develop such a technology and to bring it into work later on, might be invested in other things.
So for example the program for large transportation system to space called SAENGER which was
discussed in the German public very controversy for its risks on public budgets or as it is the case
with nuclear fusion (See Grunwald et al 2002:60; Weyer 1997: 471)

Voluntariness of adoption
As the decision whether to have SSPS or not is not a individual there might be controversies within
the society if there are different groups in favor and others in resistance for the new technology.
The controversy can even lead to open conflicts if the different points of view are incorporated by
stakeholder agencies.

Public acceptance
On the one hand people could be afraid for the presence of an energy collecting system in space
which beams the energy to the earth. Also, there can be fear for the fact that one nation or a few
nations may be able to control this system and therefore control energy fluxes or even use it as a
weapon in warfare. For the latter, according to the American National Security Space Office, the
energy beam is very unsuitable to be used as ‘secret weapon’. The distance from the geostationary
belt is so vast that beams diverge beyond the coherence and power concentration useful for a
weapon (National Security Space Office, 2007). It has been said already in paragraph 3.3 that the
amount of radiation will not be high enough to harm the human body.
Beneath these fears there is the monetary point which can be raised (see point equity concerns).
On the other hand, solar collecting systems are implemented geostationary very successful and
some people are very much in favour for space missions (see. Wassermann/Fuchs 2009: 40). Also the
technology might solve our energy problems. At this time it is almost impossible to say if SSPS will
be accepted by the society as whole, as a part or not.

Literature:

Fuchs, Gerhard/ Wassermann, Sandra 2009: Picking a winner? Innovation in Photovoltaics and the
political creation of niche markets. In Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Risiko- und Nachhaltigkeitsforschung.
Nr 13, August 2009.
Grundwald, Armin/ Grünwald, Reinhard, Oertel, Dagmar/Paschen, Herbert 2002: Kerfusion.
Sachstansbericht. In Internet: http://www.tab.fzk.de/de/projekt/zusammenfassung/ab75.pdf.
TA- Datenbank Nachrichten 1992: TA Datenbanknachrichten Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe –
Abteilung für angewandte Systemanalyse, Nr. 3 Okt. 1992.
Weyer, Johannes 1997: Technikfolgenabschätzung in der Raumfahrt. In: Westphalen, Raban von:
Technikfolgenabschätzung als politische Aufgabe. 465- 483. München/Wien, Oldenburg Verlag

5. Preliminary overall assessment

Solar power generated in space could be an interesting alternative for terrestrial sources as the
global energy demand rises as well as the call for more sustainable energy. The advantage of solar
power from space is that every square meter of space receives 1366 W of solar radiation while at
ground level it has been reduced to 250 W/m2. The disadvantage is the huge amount of energy and
emissions during building and launching of the rockets which carry solar systems into space. At the
moment, at least two nations, the USA and Japan, are conducting research on Space Solar Power
Systems aiming at starting gaining energy from space over 20 to 30 years from now. It is very
probable that large scale transportation of cargo (solar panels, transmitters, space stations etc.) to

43227662.doc 5/6
PRé Consultants
Jorrit Leijting

15 April 2010

space would have a high impact on the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer. Other
environmental impacts such as greenhouse effect and land use are considered to be low.

6. Bibliography
Hornyak, T. (2008). Farming solar energy in space. Scientific American, July 2008.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=farming-solar-energy-in-space

National Security Space Office (2007). Space-Based Solar Power as an opportunity for strategic
security, Release 0.1, 10 October 2007, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/nsso.htm

National Space Society (2010). http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/

Ross, Martin, Toohey, Darin, Peinemann, Manfred and Ross, Patrick (2009). Limits on the space
launch market related to stratospheric ozone depletion, Astropolitics, 7: 1, 50 — 82

Schirber, M. (2008). How satellites could power the future. LiveScience, 18 June 2008,
http://www.livescience.com/environment/080618-pf-space-solar.html

University of Colorado at Boulder (2009). "Rocket Launches May Need Regulation To Prevent Ozone
Depletion, Says Study." ScienceDaily 1 April 2009. 31 March 2010 http://www.sciencedaily.com
/releases/2009/03/090331153014.htm

Shimbun, H. (2008). JAXA testing space solar power system. @PinkTentacle, 8 February 2008.
http://pinktentacle.com/2008/02/jaxa-testing-space-solar-power-system/

Summerer, L. & F. Ongaro (date unknown). Advanced space technology for 21st century energy
systems: Solar power from space, European Space Agency (ESA).
http://www.esa.int/gsp/ACT/doc/POW/ACT-RPR-NRG-2005-RASTS-
SPS_for_21st_Century_Energy_Systems.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy and NASA (1980). Program assessment report statement of findings,
Satellite Power Systems concept development and evaluation program. November 1980, DOE/ER-
0085, http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/DOESPS-StatementOfFindings.pdf

43227662.doc 6/6