Engineering PapersSearch

Engineering topics

Phil Smith

Publications and source records attributed to Phil Smith.

Enabling America on the Space Frontier: The Evolution of NASA’s Commercial Space Development Toolkit

Throughout NASA’s history, the Agency has supported the development and growth of the U.S. commercial space sector via various mechanisms that have nurtured the technology, companies, people, and ideas driving an industry that today is a significant contributor to the American and global economies. This report identifies 17 such mechanisms and qualitatively examines how they have been applied across four distinct periods in NASA’s history: 1915–1960, which covers NASA’s predecessor, the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics (NACA), and NASA’s pre-Apollo years; 1961–1980, the Apollo era; 1981–2010, the Space Shuttle era; and 2011–present, the post-Shuttle commercial era. These eras are defined by dominant technologies, programs, or economic trends. Not all 17 mechanisms were applied during each era; some are relatively recent conceptions, while others have been used throughout the history of NASA and NACA. Additionally, there is inevitably some overlap between the mechanisms; this overlap adds an element of subjectivity to the categorizations in this report. In most eras, and for most mechanisms, there are far more examples than can reasonably be summarized in a single document. Therefore, this report should not be considered an exhaustive review of every iteration of any given mechanism’s implementation. Finally, with many of these mechanisms, such as contracts, commercial space capabilities sometimes resulted as a serendipitous by-product rather than a planned outcome.

economic policy

Space Based Solar Power

This study evaluates the potential benefits, challenges, and options for NASA to engage with growing global interest in space based solar power (SBSP). Utilizing SBSP entails in-space collection of solar energy, transmission of that energy to one or more stations on Earth, conversion to electricity, and delivery to the grid or to batteries for storage. Experts in both the aerospace and energy sectors are debating the benefits of SBSP as more organizations globally begin SBSP technology development programs. Proponents claim SBSP could deliver large amounts of electricity at competitive prices and with fewer greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions than terrestrial renewable electricity technologies while accelerating development of the space economy. Skeptics say SBSP has no clear development path and would divert billions of dollars from known terrestrial solutions while damaging the environment. While it is generally understood that SBSP is cost prohibitive and technically infeasible today, this study assesses operating SBSP systems in 2050. Part of NASA’s mission is to innovate for the benefit of humanity – it is through this lens that the Agency weighs whether and how to support SBSP development.

Space Based Solar Power

Space Based Solar Power

Space based solar power (SBSP) entails in-space collection of solar energy, transmission of that energy to one or more stations on Earth, conversion to electricity, and delivery to the grid or to batteries for storage. Experts in both the aerospace and energy sectors are debating the benefits of SBSP as more organizations globally begin SBSP technology development programs. We conducted a study to evaluate the potential benefits, challenges, and options for NASA to engage with growing global interest in SBSP. We performed a first order lifecycle study of two representative SBSP designs for 2 GW utility-scale power generation that, for the purposes of the study, are presumed to begin in 2050. 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 lifecycle cost of electricity and lifecycle GHG emission intensity of the SBSP designs to alternative 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 responses to 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. Though, we do find cost competitiveness may be achieved if a favorable combination of cost and capability improvements related to launch and manufacturing that are beyond the advancements assumed in the baseline assessment can be attained.

Erica Rodgers

Space Based Solar Power Study

Space based solar power (SBSP) entails in-space collection of solar energy, transmission of that energy to one or more stations on Earth, conversion to electricity, and delivery to the grid or to batteries for storage. Experts in both the aerospace and energy sectors are debating the benefits of SBSP as more organizations globally begin SBSP technology development programs. We conducted a study to evaluate the potential benefits, challenges, and options for NASA to engage with growing global interest in SBSP. We performed a first order lifecycle study of two representative SBSP designs for 2 GW utility-scale power generation that, for the purposes of the study, are presumed to begin in 2050. 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 lifecycle cost of electricity and lifecycle GHG emission intensity of the SBSP designs to alternative 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 responses to 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. Though, we do find cost competitiveness may be achieved if a favorable combination of cost and capability improvements related to launch and manufacturing that are beyond the advancements assumed in the baseline assessment can be attained.

solar