Space Datacenter Economics

Alternative Launch Systems: Can Any Reach $10/kg?

A Survey of Proposed and Operational Systems


The Complete Landscape#

SystemTypeProjected $/kgTRLStatus
Orbital airship (JP Aerospace)Buoyancy + propulsion$0.31/kg1Fantasy — quoted to Jerry Pournelle
Launch loop (Lofstrom)Electromagnetic$3–300/kg1–2Theoretical paper only (1985)
Mass driver (Earth-based)EM rail<$1 electricity + massive capital2–3Small demos only, no full-scale prototype
Space elevatorTether climber$100–500/kg1–2Requires non-existent materials (CNT ribbon)
StarTram Gen 1Maglev launch (cargo only)$20–50/kg2Conceptual; estimated $60B+ capital cost
Starship (Musk target)Chemical rocket$10/kg (aspirational)5–6Flying, not yet reusable
Starship (Citi 2040 bull)Chemical rocket$33/kgBest-case investment bank projection
Starship (Citi 2040 base)Chemical rocket$100/kgMid-case projection
Starship (Citi 2040 bear)Chemical rocket$300/kgConservative projection
Starship (realistic near-term)Chemical rocket$78–94/kgPartial reusability, 6 flights/vehicle
Falcon Heavy (current)Chemical rocket$1,410/kg9Operational, partially reusable
Falcon 9 (current)Chemical rocket$2,720–2,940/kg9Operational, first stage reusable

Key Observations#

Only Fantasy Systems Project Below $10/kg#

The only launch concepts claiming sub-$10/kg costs are:

  1. Purely theoretical — launch loops, orbital airships, mass drivers with no full-scale prototype
  2. Require non-existent materials — space elevator requires carbon nanotube ribbon at lengths, strengths, and defect densities never demonstrated
  3. Require enormous capital — StarTram needs $60B+ and a mountain-top maglev track at 22 km altitude

The Space Elevator Comparison Is Devastating#

The space elevator has fundamentally superior physics compared to chemical rocketry:

  • No oxidizer — uses grid electricity, so ~75% of propellant mass is eliminated
  • No rocket equation — the climber mass fraction problem is dramatically easier
  • Continuous operation — no launch windows, weather constraints, or range safety
  • Reusable by design — the climber goes up and comes back down

Despite all these advantages, serious engineering estimates for a space elevator land at $100–500/kg — an order of magnitude above Musk's $10/kg target for a system that carries oxidizer, fights the rocket equation, and operates in the most extreme thermal environment of any machine.

If even a space elevator can't reach $10/kg, it's extraordinary to claim a chemical rocket will.

The Launch Loop#

Keith Lofstrom's launch loop (proposed 1985) is the most optimistic credible non-rocket concept. At the low end, it projects $3/kg — but only at:

  • $30B+ capital investment
  • 6 million tonnes/year throughput (for context, total global launch mass to orbit in 2024 was ~2,000 tonnes)
  • Decades to build and commission
  • Demand levels that don't exist and may never exist

At more realistic throughput, launch loop costs rise to $100–300/kg.

What This Tells Us About Starship#

Musk claims a chemical rocket — the thermodynamically worst architecture for reaching orbit (carries oxidizer, fights exponential mass ratio, extreme temperatures and pressures) — will achieve costs that even purpose-built electromagnetic ground infrastructure only theoretically matches.

This is not an engineering argument. It's a marketing claim.


The Credibility Gradient#

Arranged by decreasing credibility of the $/kg claim:

  1. Falcon 9/Heavy current pricing — verified by actual commercial transactions. High confidence.
  2. Starship at $300/kg (Citi bear) — requires ~10 reuses, which F9 has demonstrated. Plausible within 5–10 years.
  3. Starship at $100/kg (Citi base) — requires 30–50 reuses with rapid turnaround. Optimistic but within realm of possibility by 2040.
  4. Starship at $33/kg (Citi bull) — requires 100 reuses of a vehicle not yet reused once. Speculative.
  5. Starship at $10/kg (Musk) — requires markup ratio no transport industry has achieved, in the harshest operating environment. Aspirational.
  6. Space elevator at $100/kg — requires materials that don't exist. Decades away if ever.
  7. Launch loop at $3/kg — requires infrastructure that doesn't exist and demand that doesn't exist. 50+ years.
  8. Orbital airship at $0.31/kg — not a serious proposal.

Conclusion for Space Datacenter Economics#

$200–500/kg is the practical floor for the 10–20 year timeframe, even assuming everything goes right for Starship reusability. The $10–50/kg figures are marketing numbers, not engineering estimates.

At $200–500/kg, the total launch cost for a 100 MW space datacenter (2–5 million kg) remains $400M–$2.5B — comparable to or exceeding the total cost of a terrestrial facility that comes with easy maintenance, fiber connectivity, and upgrade paths.

The only way to break below $100/kg with confidence requires either non-rocket technology (decades away, if ever) or a reuse cadence for chemical rockets that would itself be a historical first by an order of magnitude.