Virtus Solis: Affordable Space Solar Power

Conceptual illustration of a Virtus Solis satellite array beaming power to central California (not to scale). Credits: Virtus Solis Technologies. NOTE: all images in this post are credited to Virtus Solis Technologies

Ever since I was in high school space solar power has been the holy grail of space advocates. I even wrote a report on the topic based on Peter Glaser’s vision in my high school physics class before Gerard K. O’Neill popularized the concept in The High Frontier leveraging it as the economic engine behind orbiting space settlements. But the technology was far from mature back then, and O’Neill knew back in 1976 the other main reason why after all these years space solar power has not been realized:

“If satellite solar power is an alternative as attractive as this discussion indicates, the question is, why is it not being supported and pushed in vigorous way? The answer can be summarized in one phrase: lift costs.” – Gerard K. O’Neill, The High Frontier

John Bucknell, CEO and Founder of Virtus Solis, the company behind the first design to cost space solar power system (SSPS), believes that recent technological advances, not the least of which are plummeting launch costs, will change all that.  He claims that his approach will be able to undercut fossil fuel power plants on price.  He recently appeared on The Space Show (TSS) with Dr. David Livingston discussing his new venture.  SSP reached out to him for an exclusive interview and a deep dive on his approach, the market for space solar power and its impact on space development.

SSP: Technological advancements of all the elements of a space solar power system have gradually matured over the last few decades such that size, mass and costs have been reduced to the point where there are now experiments in space to demonstrate feasibility.  For example, SSP has been following the first test of the Naval Research Laboratory’s Photovoltaic Radio-frequency Antenna Module (PRAM) aboard the Air Force’s X37 Orbital test vehicle.  Caltech’s Space-based Solar Power Project (SSPP) has been working on a tile configuration that combines the photovoltaic (PV) solar power collection, conversion to radio frequency power, and transmission through antennas in a compact module.  According to your write-up in Next Big Future on a talk given to the Power Satellite Economics Group by the SSPP project manager Dr. Rich Madonna, they plan a flight demonstration of the tile configuration this December.  The Air Force Research Laboratory’s Space Solar Power Incremental Demonstrations and Research (SSPIDR) project also plans a flight demonstration later this year with an as yet unannounced configuration.  Which configuration of this critical element (PRAM or tile) do you think is the most cost effective and can you say if your system will be using one of these two configurations or some other alternative?

Bucknell: There is a lot of merit to the tile configuration as it shares much of it’s manufacturing process with existing printed circuit board (PCB) construction techniques. The PRAM itself is a version of the tile, but as it was Dr. Paul Jaffe’s doctoral dissertation prototype (from 2013) it did not use PCB techniques and should not be considered an intended SSPS architecture. Details of Caltech’s latest design aren’t released, but it appears they intend to deploy a flexible membrane version of the tile to allow automated deployment. Similar story with SSPIDR. As space solar power is a manufacturing play as much as anything, you would choose known large scale manufacturing techniques as your basis for scaling if you intend earth-based manufacturing – which we do. So yes, we are planning a version of the tile configuration.

SSP: You’ve said that the TRL levels of most of the elements of an SSPS are fairly mature but that the wireless power transmission of a full up phased array antenna from space to Earth is at TRL 5-6.  The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) plans a prototype flight as the next phase of the SSPIDR project with demonstration of wireless power transmission from LEO to Earth in 2023.  What is your timeline for launching a demo and will it beat the Air Force?

Bucknell: Our timescales are similar for a demonstrator, but I suspect the objectives of a military-focused solution would be different than ours.  We would plan a LEO technology demonstrator meeting most of the performance metrics required for a MEO commercial deployment.

SSP: Your solution is composed of mass produced, factory-built components including satellites that will be launched repeatedly as needed to build out orbital arrays.  Will multiple satellites be launched in one payload or will each module be launched on its own?  What is the mass upper limit of each payload and how many launches are needed for the entire system?

Bucknell: We intend a modular solution, such that very few variants are required for all missions. A good performance metric for a SSP satellite would be W/kg – and we believe we can approach 500 W/kg for our satellites (Caltech has demonstrated over 1000 W/kg for their solution). With known launchers and their payloads a 100MW system would take three launches of a Starship, with less capable launchers requiring many more. Since launch cost is inversely related to payload mass, we expect Starship to be the least expensive option although having a competitive launch landscape will help that aspect of the economics with forthcoming launchers from Relativity Space, Astra and Rocket Lab being possibilities.

SSP: The way you have described the Virtus Solis system, it sounds like once your elements are in orbit, additional steps are needed to coordinate them into a functional collector/phased array. Presumably, this requires some sort of on-orbit assembly or automated in-space maneuvering of the modules into the final configuration. I know you are in stealth mode at this point, but can you reveal any details about how the system all comes together?

Bucknell: An on-orbit robotic assembly step is necessary, although the robotic sophistication required is intentionally very low.

SSP: Your system is composed of a constellation of collection/transmitter units placed in multiple elliptical Molniya sun-synchronous orbits with perigee 800-km, apogee 35,000-km and high inclination (e.g. > 60 degrees).  I understand this allows the PV collectors to always face the sun while the microwave array can transmit to the target area without the need for physical steering, which simplifies the design of the spacecraft.  Upon launch, will the elements be placed in this orbit right away or will they be “assembled” in LEO and then moved to the destination orbit.  Do the individual elements or each system assembly as a whole have on-board propulsion?

Bucknell: The concept of operations is array assembly in final orbit, mostly to avoid debris raising from lower orbits.

Schematic illustration of a three-array Virtus Solis constellation in Molniya orbits serving Earth’s Northern Hemisphere and a two-array constellation serving the Southern Hemisphere of Luna

SSP: The primary objective of the AFRL SSPIDR project is delivery of power to forward deployed expeditionary forces on Earth which would assure energy supply with reduced risk and lower logistical costs.  It sounds like your system would not work for this application given the need for 2-km diameter rectenna.  Could this potential market be a point of entry for your system if it were scaled down or reconfigured in some way?

Bucknell: Wireless Power Transmission (WPT) at orbital to surface distances suffer from diffraction limits, which is true for optics of all kinds.  It is not physically possible to place all the power on a small receiver, and therefore the military will likely accept that constraint.  As a commercial enterprise, we could not afford to not collect the expensively-acquired and transmitted energy to the ground station. There are also health and safety considerations for higher intensity WPT systems – ours cannot exceed the intensity of sunlight for example, and therefore is not weaponizable.

SSP: You said on TSS that your strategy would, at least initially, bypass utilities in favor of independent power producers.  What criteria is required to qualify your system for adoption by these organizations?  You mentioned you have already started discussions with one such group.  Can you provide any further details about how they would incorporate an SSPS into their existing assets? 

Bucknell: One of the key features of space solar power is on-demand dispatchability.  Grid-tied space solar power generation has the benefit of being able to bid into existing grids when generation is needed and task the asset to other sites when demand is low.  This all assumes that penetration will be gradual, but some potential customers might desire baseload capacity in which case there is not as much need for dispatchability.  Each customer’s optimal generation profile is likely to be unique so it is preferable to attempt to match that with a flexible system.

Conceptual illustration of a 1GW Virtus Solis rectenna array next to Topaz Solar Farm of 550MW capacity in San Luis Obispo County, California

SSP: Other companies have alternative SSPS designs planned for this market.  For example, SPS – ALPHA by Solar Space Technologies in Australia and CASSIOPeiA by International Electric Company in the UK. How does Virtus Solis differentiate itself from the competition?

Bucknell: From a product perspective, we are able to provide baseload capacity at far lower cost. Also, we intentionally selected orbits to not only reduce costs but to induce sharing of the orbital assets across the globe such that this is not a solution just for one country or region.

SSP: How big is the likely commercial market for your product/services going to be by the time you are ready to start commercial operations?  Can you share some of your assumptions and how they are derived?

Bucknell: Recent data indicates that electrical generation infrastructure worldwide is about $1.5T annually.  If you add fossil fuel prospecting, it is $3.5T.  Total worldwide generation market size is about $8T.  All of this is derived from BP’s “Statistical Review of World Energy – June 2018” and the report from the International Energy Agency “World Energy Investment 2018

SSP: For your company to start operations, what total funding will be required, and will it come from a combination of government and private sources, or will you be securing funding only from private investors? 

Bucknell: As a startup, especially in hardware, funding comes from where you can get it.  To date no governmental funding opportunities have matched our technology, but that might change.  Our early raise has been from angel investors and venture capital firms.  Over the course of the research and development efforts, we expect demand for capital will be below $100M over the next several years but accurately forecasting the future is challenging.  We would note this level of required investment is far below our competition.

SSP: For hiring your management team, since this business is not mature, what analogous industries would you be looking at to recruit top talent?

Bucknell: Everything in our systems exist today elsewhere.  The wireless data industry (5G for example) has the tools and experience for developing radio frequency antennas and associated broadcast hardware.  The automotive industry has extensive experience with manufacturing electronics at low cost in high volumes, including power and control electronics.  Controls software engineering is a large field in aerospace and automotive, but in a large distributed system like ours the controls software will extend far beyond guidance, navigation and control (GNC).

SSP: O’Neill envisioned the production of SSPSs as the market driver for space settlements, in addition to replication of more space colonies.  This approach seems to have gathered less steam over the years as economics, technological improvements, and safety concerns have taken people out of the equation to build SSPSs in space.  In a recent article in the German online publication 1E9 Magazine you talked about SSPSs being useful for settlements on the Moon and Mars.  What role do you see them playing in free space settlements and could they still help realize O’Neill’s vision?

Bucknell: We stand at a cross-roads for in-space infrastructure.  For the first time access to space costs look to be low enough to make viable commercial reasons to deploy large amounts of infrastructure into cislunar space and beyond.  To date the infrastructure beyond earth observation and telecom has been deployed to mostly satisfy nation-state needs for science unable to be performed anywhere else as well as exploration missions (also a form of science).  However, there has to be a strong pull/demand to spur the construction of access to space hardware (heavy lift rockets) that consequently lowers the cost further through economies of scale.  As I described in my Space Show interview there are only a few commercial in-space businesses that are viable with today’s launch costs.  We have had telecom for a long time, followed closely by military and then commercial earth observation.  Now we have a large constellation of “internet of space”.  Even with those applications, there is not a large pull to scale reusable launch vehicle production – as reusability is counter-productive for economies of scale.  A large, self-supporting in-space infrastructure would be needed to bootstrap launch production sufficiently to self-fulfil low cost access to space – Space Solar Power is that infrastructure.  Space tourism, asteroid mining and others do not have scale nor potential lofted mass to scale the launch market adequately.  In that way, O’Neill’s vision is right – and the follow-on markets can leverage the largely paid-for launch infrastructure to make themselves viable.  Space solar power will be the enabler for humanity to live and work off-Earth, and Virtus Solis is leading the way.