6. Exploration of cost and architecture models for a Space-Based Economy
6. Exploration of cost and architecture models for a Space-Based Economy
6.1 Introduction to the Space-Based Economy Concept
In this section
we present an architecture which will lead to an expanding human presence
beyond Earth, which will also provide a relevant framework for most of
the advanced concepts presented by NIAC innovators.
 |
Figure 6.1Evolution of the Space economy
Figure 6.1 considers the evolution of space-related economic enterprise. In the 1950s the primary challenge was to develop launch vehicles and systems to reach outer space. In the 1960s to the present, space-related enterprise has developed with communication satellites, research probes, exploration missions, the remote sensing business, the Global Positioning System, and of course the vast range of military missions to Space. The Mir space station and the International Space Station have developed a rudimentary system of routine missions to Space with semi-permanent occupancy. In the near future, we expect to see a maintenance business developing, with the stated intention of the military to refuel their satellites in order to enable more frequent orbit changes as required to monitor evolving situations anywhere on the globe.
Once a refueling capability develops, many expensive 3rd stage cryogenic engines may become recoverable, and an associated maintenance business will develop. Orbit transfers will thus become more routine and less expensive. Repairing and refurbishing large satellites in GEO will then become economically attractive, with an attendant reduction in the risk and insurance premiums for launches to GEO. The need to build heavy redundancies into large satellites in order to achieve 30-year lifetimes will no longer be essential. With this will come a growing demand for stored spare parts, fuel and materials in orbit, with provisions for saving the fuel left over in launch vehicles, as well as STS main tanks. Thus it will develop the need for larger stations at Earth-Moon L-1 or L-5.
At this point, the exploitation of lunar resources, especially oxygen,
becomes increasingly attractive. Once a demand for ISRU units for oxygen
extraction arises on the Moon, concepts for lunar solar power also should
develop. These in time should lead to a growing industrial presence on
the Moon. These developments will, in time, lead to a demand for orbital
habitats, and then to resource extraction from the Near-Earth Objects,
which appear to be promising sources of water ice, carbon and metals. As
these enterprises develop, the primary markets, and the primary suppliers,
of Space-related business will be located away from Earth – a true Space-based
economy. Given that resources accessible on Earth are only a very small
fraction of Solar System resources, it is evident that the Space-based
economy will surpass Earth’s within a relatively short time beyond this
stage, and has boundless potential for growth Below, we examine the costs
of accelerating much of this development sequence using a synergistic plan
to develop the first large habitat. Once this project develops infrastructure,
NEO resource extraction would become much more feasible – driving demand
to build large habitats in the NEO region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cost of building a habitat is dominated by the radiation shield and outer shell. With our proposed automatic technique, the cost of actually building the shell is made negligible in comparison with that of delivering the huge amount of material to L-2. The operating cost for this delivery is negligible (little recurring fuel cost except for orbit corrections of the Shepherds) compared to that of amortizing the electromagnetic launcher. The key to making such an immense project affordable is to ensure the congruence of various needs for such launchers on the Moon. Prior work on Space Manufacturing looks at manufacturing in space using non-Earth based resources and energy [35-38]. The Report of the National Commission on Space, 1986, [39, 40] emphasizes an economical, phased approach for space exploitation, which will be technically reasonable, and will support private enterprise. It focuses on the benefits that can accrue to humanity and the nation in particular. The report, however, stops short of outlining a clear vision of the concept that will integrate Science, Technology and Economics. That concept is the Space based Economy.
6.3 Snapshot of Today’s Space Economy
The human presence beyond Earth today is limited to a very few dedicated government employees and robots who are dependent on Earth-launch of all resources except sunlight. The only permanent facility beyond Earth is the ISS, whose total living space is comparable to that of a classroom. While commercial spending on Space, worldwide, surpassed government spending as of 1997 [41], and the satellite business generated over $81B in revenue [42] in 2000, the Space industry and the exploration / utilization programs cannot be described as being "healthy". What Scientific American saw as the "Gold Rush into Low Earth Orbit" [43] in 1999 has stalled, with most launch system startups reported to be in trouble. NASA's X-30, X-33 and X-34 programs stand canceled. The Mars program has seen a dramatic drop in ambition level from "Permanent bases by 2018" in 1985, to "robotic exploration missions to Mars Orbit until 2020" in 2001 [44]. Cost "growths"[45] on the ISS have forced NASA to cut into even these modest plans in 2001. In an environment of declining public interest and funding, the scientific debate about Space priorities pits proponents of various approaches in conflicting positions, perhaps destroying support for all missions.
6.4 Differences in Proposed Approach
It is appropriate to ask: "What can be done differently to improve the rate of progress?" The literature on Space Commerce has focused on transportation, communication, remote sensing, and, to some extent, manufacturing. "Infrastructure" has usually been taken to mean Earth-based infrastructure [46-49]. Table 6.1 summarizes the differences in concept between today's Space economy, and a true Space-Based Economy (SBE). The SBE provides a vision, which unifies proponents of robotic exploration, human exploration, lunar resource utilization, and asteroidal resource utilization - who today compete, often destructively, for a diminishing pool of public support and funding. The SBE vision follows a 'policy resilient approach', which builds up infrastructure to support multiple uses and goals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 6.1: Differences Between Today's Space Enterprise and a Space-Based Economy
|
Current
models of Space Enterprise
|
Space-Based
Economy
|
|
·Earth
as the only possible market.
·“Faster-better-cheaper”
to compete in today’s global business environment.
·Three-to-five year Return on Investment (ROI) expectation by investors. ·Terrestrial launch cost reduction as key enabler. ·Lack of infrastructure for repair or resupply sharply heightens risk for all investors. ·Support constituency: NASA Centers, Space launch companies, space science community ·Competition for decreasing government funds forces adversarial competition between segments of the Space-enthusiast community ·Limited and decreasing interest and funding |
·
Most raw materials and products originate outside Earth
·Large
Space-based infrastructure
·Extra-terrestrial raw materials extraction and processing, ·Large scale manufacturing capabilities in space, ·Exchange of products and services between space-based enterprises. ·Support constituency: diverse businesses and professions – broad cross-section of taxpaying public ·Required critical mass of funding and long-term investment rules out private funding. |
The concept of a Space based Economy can bring various businesses together. The business plan of a single industry that may appear risky and unsubstantiated when viewed by itself, can become realistic when patched into the network of a Space based Economy. From discussions with various graduate classes on Strategic Marketing, we conclude that the key to attracting public interest is the provision of clear knowledge and methods to reduce risks and calculate business models. This process involves technical, economic and political aspects which we summarize below. A detailed form of the Fishbone diagram shown in Fig. 6.2 can be used to develop every step needed for the SBE project. Technical risk can be reduced, and calculated, by developing alternative markets/ uses for all the technologies which require large investment in the process. Such a process will also clarify and allow articulation of the relevance of the SBE to all segments of society. The availability of knowledge on what has been tried before, and on all the studies which have been performed, is a vital step towards such risk-reduction, and is being undertaken at Georgia Tech’s Center for a Space-Based Economy (CSBE).
Table 6.2: Steps in Articulating a Space-Based Economy
|
Setting
up a space based Economy:
|
Key Requirements |
|
·Give
businesses a vision of the new markets to be explored and exploited in
space.
·Bring
together authorities from the Space Resource Utilization, tourism, construction,
aerospace, and other businesses with visionaries on space exploration to
work towards realizing this goal of a Space-Based economy.
·Outline key requirements needed to establish a space-based economy. ·Give examples of potential space business ventures to demonstrate feasibility of space-based businesses and benefits to exploration plans. ·Educate people about benefits to standard of living. ·Inform lawmakers of the prospects of improved tax base, and economic development of the nation as a whole. |
·A
clear vision of a Space-based economy, showing how most people and industries
can consider themselves to be stakeholders in this endeavor.
·Belief
that such a space-based economy will develop
·A credible plan on which to base this belief ·Concrete examples of ventures in space, and predicted returns to attract industry interest. ·Project planning, cost estimation and risk-reduction strategies to articulate the definite steps towards the space-based economy ·Communication of mutual interests between NASA, business, industry and lawmakers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure
6.3: Artist’s Conception of an Acoustic Shaping Plant on the Moon. Courtesy,
Justin Hausamann, Georgia Institute of Technology, School of Aerospace
Engineering, 2000.
6.7 Summary of Industry & Infrastructure Bootstrapped by Habitat Project
The following extraterrestrial industries and infrastructure will be enabled in a synergistic Habitat project through the architecture that is described above. Each is provided with an assured market, both from the habitat project, and from the other projects enabled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.8 Total market for lunar resources due to the Habitat Project
The total markets for lunar resources, enables by the Habitat project, are summarized below. Details are given in the next section
Notes:
1. The Radiation shield of 2m regolith is extremely conservative, and used only for illustration of very large-scale mass transport. Concepts for lunar hotel radiation shields use 0.4m of water.
2. Professors Ignatiev and Criswell now estimate that beyond an installed capacity of 1GW, their solar-powered lunar power plants could generate electricity at a marginal cost below $0.01. We have not included this drop in our cost estimation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ation, which outlines the Architecture of the Project. The Space Based Economy (SBE) concept helps in bringing together different technologies and enables them to reduce risks. This generic Architecture lays out a roadmap for SBE stakeholders in formulating plans that fit into the domain of the SBE. ucing H2O in the cylinder site may cut the mass requirement by a factor of 3
6.9 Architecture of the Space City Project:
It is a considerable challenge to argue in favor of the financial viability of Long term Space Projects, with their high risks and long gestation periods. It is vital to develop a coherent plan for the organization, which outlines the Architecture of the Project. The Space Based Economy (SBE) concept helps in bringing together different technologies and enables them to reduce risks. This generic Architecture lays out a roadmap for SBE stakeholders in formulating plans that fit into the domain of the SBE.
 |
6.10 Cost Model for the Space based Economy
In developing a cost and risk model for the project, we consider the implications of synergizing these technologies, with each providing assured markets / supplies / raw materials for others. Alternative technologies are considered for each major component of the project. The risks associated with the project are mitigated by laying out alternative products and intermediate markets for each major technology developed for the project.
The Cost Model for the Space based Economy (SBE)TM follows a Cost-Technology Matrix Approach (C-TMA)TM. The matrix factors both the risks of technologies available and the market elasticity, in order to select from among the various technologies available in the SBE. This means that we not only weigh the various technologies available for a particular process quantitatively on the basis of cost, but also rank them qualitatively by risk-rating against Technology, Ecology and Political Environment. The technologies available are worked out based on expert group opinions and literature search. The risks of technical obsolescence, scalability and sustainability are weighed into the technological availability by using a weighted questionnaire that ranks individual technologies. However, the unique aspect of a C-TMA is that the market elasticity of the chosen technology is taken into account. This is ideally done with the help of an Expert Group that assesses future markets for each technology using analogies, group discussions and extrapolation based on historic data. It is not possible to accurately forecast market demand for nascent technologies many years into the future. Also, prediction of a fixed market size could lead to errors in project planning. Thus the focus was on defining a credible range of future alternative users and assessing the demand elasticity for these technologies.
The most suitable technology is chosen by comparing the alternatives in the Cost-Technology Matrix (C-TM) TM against quantitative cost and qualitative risk terms. Once the most suitable technology is chosen and the Cost-Profit-Demand-Elasticity calculated, the Cost calculation of the Space City project can be done. The point to note is that the SBE not only helps the Space City project to choose among the various technologies, but also helps the Technology provider to know the Cost-Profit-Demand elasticity required to attract Capital funding. The SBE is the synergistic fulcrum that brings together the Technology providers into a common working space. The Cost Constants can be refined with the help of Expert Group analysis, extrapolation of earlier studies and analogies. The main Cost Drivers are identified as shown in Table 6.3. The cost analysis is also set up so that the elasticity of cost to these price constants could be calculated to find out the most probable cost as per Expert Group assessment. The final Cost assessment is given in Table 6.4.
Table
6.3 Cost-Drivers for the Cylindrical Habitat Project
| Item | Sub-item | Cost in US$ (2002) |
Units
|
References |
|
Material
Costs:
|
Cost of Steel on Earth |
5
|
per
kg
|
Present Cost |
| Cost of Aluminum on Earth |
3
|
per
kg
|
Present Cost | |
| Cost of Iron on Earth |
1
|
per
kg
|
Present Cost | |
| Cost of Steel on Moon |
12.5
|
per
kg
|
Expert Group | |
| Cost of Aluminum on Moon |
12.5
|
per
kg
|
Expert Group | |
| Cost of Iron on Moon |
12.5
|
per
kg
|
Expert Group | |
| Cost of Concrete on Moon |
5
|
per
kg
|
Expert Group | |
| Cost of Shepherd fuel on Moon |
10
|
per
kg
|
Expert Group | |
| Cost of Regolith on Moon |
0.06
|
per
kg
|
Ref: Excavation costs for lunar materials, David Carrier | |
Launch Costs
|
Cost of Launch from Earth to L2 |
4000
|
per
kg
|
Expert Group |
| Cost of Launch from Earth to Moon |
5000
|
per
kg
|
Expert Group | |
| Power Costs | Cost of Power on Moon |
0.4
|
per KWH | Ignatiev et al [51] |
| Cost of Solar panels at L2 |
50000
|
per
sq m
|
Expert Group |
Table 6.4 Final Cost Analysis for the Cylindrical
Habitat Project
| in US BN $ (2002) | |||||||
| Year | Process | Material Cost | Earth Launch cost | Launch Power Cost | Power-L2 cost | Fuel cost | Total |
|
|
Mass Driver Construction |
6.5
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
6.5
|
| Winch |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
| Shepherds |
0.0
|
0.0
|
1.0
|
0.0
|
31.8
|
32.8
|
|
| Crawlers |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
Wire Grid |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
|
Boxcars |
66.0
|
0.0
|
25.5
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
91.5
|
| Spin-up city |
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
| Total |
72.5
|
0.1
|
26.5
|
0.0
|
31.8
|
130.8
|
|
Power
Requirements: We assume an installed capacity of the Ignatiev
Power plant of 1,000 MW, distributed around the lunar equator. The cost
is assumed to be $ 0.40 per kWH. Table 6.5 considers the launch requirements.
From the table, we can see that the rated power capacity of the power plant
is capable of supporting 6 launches an hour, with an excess of 18% for
other uses, which amounts to 188,000 kW-h every hour.
Table 6.5 Power
requirements
| Ignatiev power production: 1GW capacity | ||||
|
3.6E+12
|
joules/hr | |||
|
1,000,000
|
kW-H- every hour | |||
| 6 launches/hr requires |
811,988
|
kW-H- every hour | ||
| Excess power available |
188,012
|
kW-H- every hour |
18.80119907
|
% |
Excess Launch
Capabilities:
The exact requirement of the number of launchers for construction period
of 10 years is 5.6 launchers. Since 6 launchers will be built, this gives
a considerable excess launch capacity, which can be used for other applications.
The details are shown in Table 6.6
| Launches for other uses | |||
| Time required for launch of all boxes with 6 launchers: |
9.307311091
|
years | |
| Time available for other launches |
0.692688909
|
years | |
| Extra boxes that can be launched |
36408
|
boxes | |
| Extra mass launch capability |
6,104,271,627
|
kgs | |
| can be used for other application launches | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.11 Technology Options
In this section, we lay out the conceptual process for reducing the risk and cost of the cylindrical habitat architecture. For each aspect, there are different competing technologies, of which one is taken as the preferred option, with alternatives which might become the preferred option if political or other technical developments so dictate.
|
Preferred
Option:
|
Alternatives:
|
|
·Lunar
Solar-Power Fields made by robotic rovers.
-20
power plants around the equator
·Cost estimate: $0.40 per kilowatt-hr (Ignatiev et al) |
·Nuclear
Power Plant on the Moon
·Beamed
Power from Space Solar Power Plant
|
Metal Mining & Extraction
|
Preferred
Option:
|
Alternatives:
|
|
·Lunar
open-pit mines for iron (est: 4 – 15% of lunar soil is Fe, occurring mostly
as oxides).
·Solar-heated
metal extraction processes – vapor separation more viable than chemical
reduction?
·Robotic fabrication plant shipped to the Moon for box-cars, launcher rails, structural cables, conductors and magnets for launcher |
·Pre-fab
delivery from Earth using tethers.
·Steel
production on Mars, delivery to Moon.
·Start with earth-delivered boxcars to build initial structure; Ship Fabrication plant to cylinder site; ship steel rods from Mars to cylinder site; land boxcars on Moon and re-use; ·Asteroid resources. |
|
Preferred Option:
|
Alternatives:
|
|
Electromagnetic rail launcher sized
to launch boxcar-sized loads at 8G, with carriage returning to starting
point. Some power is re-cycled during the deceleration leg.
•Power from local plants.
•6 launchers placed around lunar Equator to enable round-the clock operation. 80-90% of power plant capacity utilized by Cylinder project for 10 years; • Rest used for export of oxygen & tether counter-masses •Tethers and launchers form transportation system for industrial development on the Moon. |
Tethers (problem: counterweight
mass; repetition rate needed)
•Nuclear rockets (need propellant
gas)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.12 Concluding Remarks on the Space-Based Economy Approach to Building Habitats
This chapter takes an initial look at the requirements
for setting up a Space-Based Economy. The technical issues in building the massive
radiation shield for a human settlement are reviewed in the light of today's
capabilities for robotics and communication. By including the visions of several
concepts such as lunar-based power, mass drivers and resource extraction, it
is shown that the overall cost of such a major project can be brought down to
imaginable levels. As more business visions are enabled by the assurance of
a massive market provided by the infrastructure project, the level of public
funding needed for the infrastructure comes down, even before tax revenues begin.
The process for gathering public support for such an Economy is considered.
Unlike today's exploration-focused government Space program, and isolated business
plans for private ventures, the SBE can unite the public in supporting the Space
enterprise. The relevance of this discussion to the present NIAC project is
that it lays out the process for enabling the grand developments, which develop
demand for extraterrestrial resources. This demand in turn sets the scene for
the development of habitats to exploit resources from the Near Earth Object
region, Mars, and beyond.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|