Seth Potter says SBSP is $240/watt (was Why Sustainable Power is Uns

> Seth Potter of Boeing recently made a case for 5-gigawatt GEO
> power sats in the range of $240,000/kW:
> http://www.sspi.gatech.edu
> http://www.sspi.gatech.edu/aiaa-2009-0462_ssp_alternatives_potter.pdf

From the same chart on page 33, the 5GW satellite would weigh about 23kt.
$240/W * 5GW = $1.2 trillion
$1.2 trillion / 23kt = $52,173 per kilogram delivered to GSO.

That an 'I can prove Bumblebees can't fly' figure. It assumes no reduction
in launch costs. Quite the oposite in fact. Eeven if you include
construction, it appears to assume massive increases in GSO cost. No
advances in space technology. It doesn't even assume usage and deployment of
*existing* technology; or even five year old technology. Solar electric
propulsion of any kind makes a ccomplete mockery of this figure. With that
GSO would be a small percentage increase on LEO cost. If we assume LEO is
$10k/kg then GSO would be $15k/kg. The other $37k/kg is spent on ... what?

Consider spending a whole $100B developing a launch system that cut costs to
1/10th their current value. (You'll find few reputable individuals in the
aerospace industry who would dispute such a claim.) The total cost of this
trillion dollar satellite is now 'only' $220B. By investing $100B, you have
saved $800B. If we assume that Boeing has made this assumption, then their
numbers become even more unjustified.

The report contains much interesting information, but nothing that even
remotely justifies that $52k/kg figure. So I simply don't believe it. And
without evidence, or logical arguement, or theory, (which this report does
not supply) I don't have to.