economic analysis of a lunar in-situ … · 2012-04-04 · economic analysis of a lunar in-situ...

SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)www.sei.aero

1

Mr. A.C. CharaniaSenior FuturistSpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)[email protected]

Mr. Dominic DePasqualeSystems EngineerSpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)[email protected]

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF A LUNAR IN-SITU RESOURCE UTILIZATION (ISRU) PROPELLANT SERVICES MARKET:58th International Astronautical Congress (IAC)IAC-07-A5.1.03Hyderabad, India24-28 September 2007

Contents

IntroductionStudy OverviewSupply: ISRU Propellant CompanyDemand: Government CustomerEconomic Analysis ResultsConclusions


2

Introduction


3


4

About SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)

Overview:- Engineering services firm based in Atlanta (small business concern)- Founded in 2000 as a spin-off from the Georgia Institute of Technology- Averaged 130% growth in revenue each year since 2001 - 85% of SEI staff members hold degrees in engineering or science

Core Competencies:- Advanced Concept Synthesis for launch and in-space transportation systems- Financial engineering analysis for next-generation aerospace applications and markets- Technology impact analysis and quantitative technology portfolio optimization


5

- The Engineering Economics Group (EEG) of SEI can help forecast and analyze multiple future markets. Some of these include:

- Sub-orbital and orbital commercial space flight- Orbital space habitats/stations (vehicles and hotels)- Low Earth Orbit (LEO) payload delivery- International Space Station (ISS) crew and cargo services- Fast package point-to-point delivery on Earth- Propellant stations/depots in space- On-orbit servicing- Space manufacturing- Lunar propellant production- Lunar public commercial space flight- Asteroid mining- Space Solar Power (SSP)

Images copyright SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI) 2007, Artist: Phil Smith

Sample Markets


6

Sample Economic Analyses by SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)

Human Exploration Cost Estimates Scenarios of Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) Price Sensitivity

500

1,500

2,500

3,500

4,500

25% 50% 75%Turn-Around-Time Reduction

Pric

e Pe

r Pou

nd P

aylo

ad [$

/lb]

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]

Price Per Flight [$/lb]

Flight Rate [Flights/Year]

500

1,500

2,500

3,500

4,500


Pric

e Pe

r Pou

nd P

aylo

ad [$

/lb]

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]



1,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

10,000


Pric

e Pe

r Pou

nd P

aylo

ad [$

/lb]

20

25

30

35

40

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]



1,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

10,000


Pric

e Pe

r Pou

nd P

aylo

ad [$

/lb]

20

25

30

35

40

Flig

ht R

ate

[Flig

hts

Per

Yea

r]



Oper

atio

ns C

ost R

educ

tion

DDT&E AND TFU COST REDUCTION25% 75%

25%

75%

Components of LCC (FY06)

Other (Robotic/ISS/Shuttle)

CEV/CM

CLV

LSAM

CaLV-HLLV

EDS + CEV/SM

Technology Maturation Surface Systems

Facilities, Operations, and Flight Tests

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025

Year

$M

$111.3 B (2006-2018) $53.4 B (2019-2025)$164.7 B

NASA FY06 Exploration-Related Budget

See: http://www.sei.aero/library/technical.html for more information and technical papers on above analyses

Space Tourism Economic Modeling International Space Station (ISS) Support Market

-100M

-50M

0M

50M

100M

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Disc

ount

ed C

umul

ative

Ca

sh F

low

(US

$)

Project Year

Effect of Competition

Higher-End Operator

In Competition with Higher-End

Lower-End Operator

Effect of Market Entry Date

0 2 4 6 8 10 12Project Year

-40M-20M

0M20M40M60M80M

-60M-80M 2 Year Market Delay

4 Year Market Delay

Higher-End Operator

Lower-End Operator

5 Commercial Competitors + min. 2 CEV/Yr + Russian Competition

Study Overview


7


8

Task OverviewCopyright 2007 SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI); Artist Rhys Taylor

Human cis-lunar space exploration architectures could potentially utilize new commercial products (e.g. space hotels, propellant depots, orbital tourism)What would an actual scenario for lunar commerce look like, what products could be produced and what price points would exist that make companies financially viable? An economic analysis is performed of a commercially operated lunar In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) facilityCase 1: Lunar Surface

- 1A: Sale of propellant (LOX/LH2) on the Lunar surface- 1B: Sale of propellant and oxygen on the Lunar surface

Case 2: Low Lunar Orbit (LLO)- 2A: Sale of propellant to a government customer in LLO- 2B: Sale of propellant to a government customer in LLO and sale of oxygen on the Lunar surface- 2C: Sale of propellant to a government customer in LLO, sale of oxygen on the Lunar surface, and sale of

propellant on the Lunar surface


9

Components of Lunar Return: NASA’s Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS)Image sources: NASA, ESAS Report: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/news/ESAS_report.html


10

Commercial ISRU Company and NASA Exploration Architecture

EARTH

MOON

Low Earth Orbit

LunarOrbit

Ares V Ares I

LEO Rendezvous

Transfer to Moon (TLI + LOI)

EDS LSAM CEV/SM

CEV/CM

Note: Notional representation of lunar exploration architecture. Architecture elements may not be to scale.

LSAM Descent

Earth Arrival

GeostationaryEarth Orbit

LSAM Ascent

Earth Arrival

Return to Earth (TEI)

LSAM Descent StageFueling

ISRU Propellant Plant

Tanker Transfer

NASA elements and activity pathCommercial ISRU company elements and activity path


11

Program Development Roadmap

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Robotic Precursors

Lunar Lander Development

Lunar Heavy Launch Development

Earth Departure Stage Development

Government (NASA) Architecture

Commercial ISRU Company

1st Human CEV Flight 7th Human Lunar LandingLunar Outpost Buildup

Design, Development, Test

Facility Delivery Operations (10 years)

Tanker Delivery

Production

Facility Prep

Surface Systems Development

FY 2011-2015 FY 2016-2020 FY 2021-2025 FY 2026-2030

Supply: ISRU Propellant Company


12


13

ISRU Propellant Company Assets

Leverage government and existing commercial developments in the construction and delivery of company assetsDelivery of all assets to LLO through purchase of transportation from U.S. Government

- Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV) provides ETO launch of Cargo Lander with ISRU plant and Lunar Tanker Vehicle

- Earth Departure Stage (EDS) provides TLI for all elementsISRU plant sized to fit on NASA lunar cargo lander as described in ESAS, and is transported to the Lunar Surface from LLO by this landerReusable Lunar Tanker Vehicle (LTV) to perform transfer of propellant from the Lunar Surface to LLO and back

- Derived from NASA LSAM Descent Stage as described in ESAS

ESAS Baseline Lander Total Mass: 45.9 MT

“The alternative to this incremental [lunar outpost] approach is to develop a dedicated cargo lander that can deliver large payloads of up to 21 mT.”Source: NASA's Exploration Systems Architecture Study -- Final Report, August 2005, URL: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/news/ESAS_report.html, p.25.

Apollo LM Total Mass: 16.5 MT


14

Notional Elements of a Lunar ISRU Plant and Depot

Excavator

Water / SoilSeparator

Transporter Water / IceStorage

Electrolyzer / Dryer Radiators

Liquefiers / Radiators

LOx / LH2Storage

Tanker Loader

Solar Panels

Nuclear PowerPlant

Credit: Shimizu Corporation

ISRU plant system design, specifications, and capability provided by the Shimizu Corporation Space Project Office of Tokyo, JapanElements shown are not to scale, but represent those that are included in the plant landed by the lunar cargo lander


15

Lunar ISRU Plant Size for 21 MT Lunar Lander

5.91Soil and Water Management Sub-Total

20.94TOTAL

----------Lunar Habitat Module

0.07D8.6x0.45Solar Panels

2.15D1.6x4.3Storage LH2

1.23D1.6x2.1Storage LOX

0.585x3x0.3Radiators LH2

0.215x3x0.1Radiators LOX

0.420.5x1x1Liquefiers LH2

0.130.6x0.7x1Liquefiers LOX

0.043x3.1x0.05Dryer Radiators

1.081x1x1Electrolyzer

15.03Power and Transport Sub-Total

5.40D8.6x2Nuclear Power Station

4.802.5x1.6x2Wheel Crane

----------Wheel Loader

----------WTM Loader

1.43D2.0x1.7Water Storage

1.606x0.15x0.15Transporter

0.80D0.6x3Separator

1.002x0.1x0.1Excavator

Mass [MT]Size(stowed) [m]Components Assumes accessible water ice in the

lunar regolith at a concentration of one percent by weightTechnologies available

- Bucket wheel excavator- Water separation by heating method- Nuclear power plant for heat source- Assembly of lunar facilities by semi-

autonomous systemThe oxygen and hydrogen production rate is on average 20.0 kg/hourIf such a plant were operating continuously over a lunar 12 day period (daylight operation) then that would equate to 5.8 MT/month or 69.1 MT/year of processed waterWith a mixture ratio by mass of 8:1 Oxygen to Hydrogen in water, 49.4 MT/year of propellant (LOX/LH2 at a mixture ratio of 5.5:1) and 19.7 MT/year of additional Oxygen can be produced


16

Lunar Tanker Vehicle (LTV)

Reusable LTV performs transfer of propellant from the Lunar Surface to LLO and back- Assumed 1860 m/s of Delta-V required for one-way transfer- LOX/LH2 propellant with an O/F mixture ratio of 5.5

Derived from NASA LSAM Descent Stage as described in ESASLSAM Ascent Stage replaced with tanks to store the propellant for sale to the customer in LLOLTV is capable of delivering 22,000 kg propellant from the Lunar Surface to LLO and returning

- LTV burns 25,100 kg propellant while performing delivery mission (equivalent to the propellant capacity of the baseline ESAS LSAM Descent Stage upon which the LTV is based)

The amount of payload propellant delivered to LLO by the LTV is sufficient to fuel two NASA LSAM Descent Stages

7.5 meters

8.1

met

ers

Modified NASA Lunar Lander Descent Stage

LOX Payload Tanks (x4)

LOX Tanks (x4)

LH2Tanks (x4)

LH2Payload Tanks (x4)

5.3

met

ers


17

Monte Carlo Simulation: Triangular Distributions for Various Uncertainty Parameters

MaximumMinimumDeterministic / Most Likely

$35 M

$2,220 M$1,120 M$430 M$670 M

$ 1,019 M$67 M$198 M$54 M$700 M

$ 2,157 M$200 M$595 M$162 M

$1,200 M

Case 2: LLO

$35 M

$1,445 M$560 M$215 M$670 M

$319 M$67 M$198 M$54 M

-

$957 M$200 M$595 M$162 M

-

Case 1: Lunar Surface

+50%-10%Mission Operations Cost [$M/year, FY2006]

+25%-10%

Transportation Cost to Lunar Surface [$M, FY2006]Cargo Launch Vehicle (CaLV)***Earth Departure Stage (EDS)****

Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM)****

+75%-25%

Acquisition Cost [$M, FY2006]Nuclear Power Plant*

Excavation/Processing/Storage Facility Cost*Mass of Excavation/Processing/Storage Facility*

Lunar Tanker Vehicle**

+75%-25%

DDT&E Cost [$M, FY2006]Nuclear Power Plant*

Excavation/Processing/Storage Facility Cost*Mass of Excavation/Processing/Storage Facility*

Lunar Tanker Vehicle

All CasesAll CasesParameter

Notes:United States Dollars FY2006 unless otherwise noted* - Source: Shimizu Corporation (75% development cost, 25% acquisition cost)** - Source: SEI internal cost estimates derived from previous work; development cost to the commercial company is for modification of existing stages, not for complete development of a new vehicle*** - Source: Charania, A., "The Trillion Dollar Question: Anatomy of the Vision for Space Exploration Cost," AIAA-2005-6637, Space 2005, Long Beach, California, August 30 - September 1, 2005.**** - Source: Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS) Draft Report, Section 12.

Demand: Government Customer


18


19

Market for Case 1 (Lunar Surface) and Case 2 (LLO, Government Customer)

Case 1 (Lunar Surface)- Demand for propellant in Case 1 is equal to the production capacity of the ISRU plant, 49.4

MT per year- As the NASA Lunar Exploration Architecture and future Mars Exploration Architecture

evolves, there may be an advantage to fueling on the Lunar surface- Commercial companies may wish to purchase propellant on the lunar surface in support of

lunar tourism, mining, or other entrepreneurial activities

Case 2 (LLO, Government Customer)- Demand for propellant in Case 2 is equal to the amount required by two reference NASA

ESAS lunar landers to descend from LLO to the Lunar surface, 21 MT per year- In the years 2022 through 2031, it is anticipated that NASA will conduct two or more

expeditions to the Moon per year- It is assumed that each descent requires a Delta-V of 1860 m/s, which results in 10,500 kg of

propellant per lander


20

ISRU Propellant Market Case Studies

Case 1A plus excess oxygen produced is sold to government and/or commercial buyers on the Lunar surface.

49.4 MT/yr19.7 MT/yr

Propellant on Lunar SurfaceOxygen on Lunar Surface1B

Case 2A plus excess oxygen produced is sold to government and/or commercial buyers on the Lunar surface.

21.0 MT/yr22.5 MT/yr

Propellant to LLOOxygen on Lunar Surface2B

The commercial provider of ISRU propellant delivers and sells only the amount of propellant demanded by a government

customer in LLO.21.0 MT/yrPropellant to LLO2A*

21.0 MT/yr19.7 MT/yr3.3 MT/yr

49.4 MT/yr

Demand

2C

1A*

Case #

Case 2B plus excess propellant not demanded by the government is sold to a government and/or commercial

customer on the Lunar surface.

Propellant to LLOOxygen on Lunar SurfacePropellant on Lunar Surface

The commercial provider of ISRU propellant sells its maximum production capacity each year to government and/or

commercial buyers on the Lunar surface.Propellant on Lunar Surface

Case DescriptionProduct(s)

*Probabilistic results presented for Case 1A and Case 2A

Economic Analysis Results


21


22

Economic Analysis Methodology

In each economic simulation, the price per kg that the company must charge for its products in order to achieve a Net Present Value (NPV) of zero was determined

- NPV is an indicator of financial success, and is calculated as the sum of all future cash flows discounted to their present values

- Cash flows are discounted by Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC), a measure of the cost of capital which takes into account the debt and equity financing structure of the company

- An NPV of zero indicates that the company has broken even on its investment after financing charges to investors have been met

Sweeps of WACC were performed to investigate the sensitivity of the results to the cost of financing

- A company’s assets are financed by either debt or equity- WACC is the average of the costs of these sources of financing, each of which is weighted

by its respective use in the given situation- A firm's WACC is the overall required return on the firm as a whole and, as such, it is often

used internally by company directors to determine the economic feasibility of expansionary opportunities

- The baseline WACC is 21.7 % based on a debt to equity ratio of three, equity beta of comparable industries (Aerospace, Air Transport, E-Commerce), tax rate of 30%, average nominal interest rate of 7.5%, inflation of 2.1%, and risk-free rate of 4%

Probabilistic simulation of each case involved 1000 Monte Carlo runs with triangular distributions on the cost variables as previously defined


23

Case 1: Sale on Lunar Surface


24

Deterministic Price for ISRU Products (WACC = 21.7%)

$3,200 per kg

-

Price for Oxygen

-$25,600 per kg Propellant on Lunar SurfaceOxygen on Lunar Surface1B

$26,800 per kg

Price for Propellant

1A

Case #

-Propellant on Lunar Surface

Price for Excess Propellant on Lunar SurfaceProduct(s)

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Case 1A Case 1B

Price

per

Kilo

gram

($/kg

FY

2006

)Price for PropellantPrice for Oxygen


25

Cash Flows for Case 1A (Propellant On Lunar Surface)

-$400

-$200

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,20020

13

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

Year

US

$MTotal Cost (w/o Financing)Total Cost (w/ Financing)Discounted Value (Before Interest), WACCNet Income After Taxes

WACC = 21.7 %

Price = $26,800 (FY 2006)


26

Histogram of Price for Case 1A (Propellant on Lunar Surface)

0

10

20

30

40

50

21,7

53

22,4

97

23,2

42

23,9

87

24,7

31

25,4

76

26,2

21

26,9

65

27,7

10

28,4

55

29,2

00

29,9

44

30,6

89

31,4

34

32,1

78

32,9

23

33,6

68

34,4

12

35,1

57

35,9

02

36,6

46

37,3

91

38,1

36

38,8

80

39,6

25

Propellant Price ($/kg, FY2006)

Occ

urre

nces

Mean = $30,470/kgstd dev. = 3798

90% Certainty <= $36,035/kg

The probabilistic mean price for propellant on the Lunar Surface is $30,470 per kilogram in order for the company to break even in terms of NPV with a required rate of return (WACC) of 21.7%


27

Case 1A (Propellant on Lunar Surface): Price for Required Return

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

55,000

60,000

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC)

Prop

ella

nt P

rice

($/k

g, F

Y20

06)

Probabilistic Price: Mean Probabilistic Price: 90% Confidence (<=) Deterministic Price

Baseline WACC = 21.7%Price = $26,845/kg

WACCProbabilistic Price:

Mean

Probabilistic Price: 90%

Confidence (<=)Deterministic

Price10.0% $14,286/kg $16,196/kg $12,721/kg20.0% $27,548/kg $32,261/kg $24,240/kg21.7% $30,470/kg $36,035/kg $26,845/kg30.0% $49,584/kg $58,968/kg $43,491/kg


28

Case 2: Sale in LLO


29

Cost to Deliver Propellant to EDS Depot in LLO from Earth

$74,774/kg

$55,027/kg

$37,762/kg

$43,219/kg

$33,267/kg

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

Falcon 9 Heavy Delta IV Heavy Falcon 9 Heavy w/new U/S

Atlas V Heavy Ares V

Vehicle

$/kg

to D

eliv

er P

rope

llant

to L

ow L

unar

O

rbit

(LLO

) [FY

200

7]$/kgPrice that lunar ISRU plant on lunar surface must

match to be competitive with Earth propellant delivery to LLO

4Number of Successful

Flights Per Year

14 3 3 1

Notes: - For each vehicle, assume 20% of LLO payload is used for structure/non-propellant mass- Above prices include acquisition of EDS stage for propellant depot in LLO- Demand is the propellant required to fully re-supply two cargo LSAMS per year (total of 21.0 MT of propellant per year)- The prices listed are assuming all flights are successful, the overall reliability is given as a reference - Prices and reliabilities are based upon public sources and general estimates of as envisioned vehicles, thus they are first estimates and not mean to be definitive- Assumes no propellant available in EDS stage – steady state propellant loading condition after first use of EDS stage


30

Deterministic Price for ISRU Products (WACC = 21.7%)

$6,800 per kg

$7,200 per kg

-

Price for Oxygen

-$126,200 per kgPropellant to LLOOxygen on Lunar Surface2B

-$134,000 per kgPropellant to LLO2A

$119,000 per kg

Price for Propellant

2C

Case #

$54,200 per kgPropellant to LLOOxygen on Lunar SurfacePropellant on Lunar Surface

Price for Excess Propellant on Lunar SurfaceProduct(s)

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

Case 1A Case 1B Case 2A Case 2B Case 2C

Price

per

Kilo

gram

($/kg

FY

2006

)Price for PropellantPrice for OxygenPrice for Excess Propellant on Lunar Surface


31

Histogram of Price for Case 2A (Propellant in LLO, Government Customer)

0

10

20

30

40

50

111,

136

114,

895

118,

654

122,

413

126,

172

129,

932

133,

691

137,

450

141,

209

144,

968

148,

728

152,

487

156,

246

160,

005

163,

764

167,

524

171,

283

175,

042

178,

801

182,

560

186,

320

190,

079

193,

838

197,

597

201,

356

Propellant Price ($/kg, FY2006)

Occ

urre

nces

Mean = $152,906/kgstd dev. = 19,412

90% Certainty <= $180,874/kg

The probabilistic mean price for propellant in LLO to a government customer is $152,906 per kilogram in order for the company to break even in terms of NPV with a required rate of return (WACC) of 21.7%


32

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC)

Prop

ella

nt P

rice

($/k

g, F

Y20

06)

Probabilistic Price: Mean Probabilistic Price: 90% Confidence (<=) Deterministic Price

Baseline WACC = 21.7%Price = $133,947/kg

WACCProbabilistic Price: Mean

Probabilistic Price: 90%

Confidence (<=)Deterministic

Price10.0% $68,774/kg $79,010/kg $60,615/kg20.0% $137,621/kg $161,511/kg $120,495/kg21.7% $152,906/kg $180,874/kg $133,947/kg30.0% $254,795/kg $307,296/kg $220,987/kg

Case 2A (Propellant in LLO, Gov’t Customer): Price for Required Return


33

Case 2A (Propellant in LLO, Government Customer): Propellant Price Sensitivity to Costs

$2,220 M

$0 M

$1,200 M

$600 M

$0 M

$1,110 M

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

$100,000

$110,000

$120,000

$130,000

$140,000

$150,000

$160,000

$0 M $500 M $1,000 M $1,500 M $2,000 M $2,500 M

Cost ($M, FY2006)

Lunar Transportation CostsLTV Development Cost

Baseline Transportation Costs for 2 CaLV

launches, 2 EDS Stages, and 1 Cargo Lander

Baseline Development Cost for One LTV

Price for Propellant in LLO is fairly insensitive to transportation cost, but sensitive to LTV development cost

.

Price per Kilogram

($/kg FY 2006)

Conclusions


34


35

Lunar ISRU Propellant Market: Summary and Conclusions

Deterministic Prices per kilogram for LOX/LH2 propellant produced via Lunar ISRU are as follows (at 22.7% Weighted Average Cost of Capital):

- Sale to a government or commercial customer on the Lunar Surface: $26,900/kg- Delivery to LLO to fuel two government customer LSAM descent stages: $134,00/kg

Sale of excess oxygen extracted from water during propellant production results in a modest reduction of propellant price

Price per kilogram for propellant delivered to LLO is roughly 5 times the price of propellant purchased on the Lunar surface

- This difference in price is a direct result of costs for delivery of propellants to LLO- Development costs for the case of delivery to LLO, including development of a Lunar Transfer

Vehicle derived from an ESAS LSAM Descent Stage, are more than twice the development costs for the case of propellant on the Lunar surface

- Transportation costs from the Earth to the Moon are double that of the Lunar surface case due to the need to transport the Lunar Transfer Vehicle as well as the ISRU production plant

- The Lunar Transfer Vehicle must use 25 MT of propellant to deliver 21 MT of propellant for sale in LLO

Probabilistic simulation in all cases resulted in higher mean price per kilogram than deterministic analysis

- Due to distributions on cost variables skewed toward higher cost

The price for delivery of propellant to LLO is fairly insensitive to Lunar transportation costs, but sensitive to tanker vehicle development costs

For the architecture considered, the price per kilogram for delivery of propellant from the Lunar surface to a Government LLO customer does not provide an attractive alternative as compared to launch from Earth


36

www.sei.aero

Business Address:SpaceWorks Engineering, Inc. (SEI)1200 Ashwood ParkwaySuite 506Atlanta, GA 30338 U.S.A.

Phone: 770-379-8000Fax: 770-379-8001

Internet:WWW: www.sei.aeroE-mail: [email protected]

economic analysis of a lunar in-situ … · 2012-04-04 · economic analysis of a lunar in-situ...

Documents