TRACKER EARENDIL-1 CONTROVERSY SPACEX SATELLITES FAQ
THE CORE DISTINCTION

One Word That Changes Everything: Conversion

The critical difference is whether sunlight is converted or reflected.

Space-based solar power (SBSP) captures sunlight with photovoltaic panels in orbit, converts it to electricity, then transmits that electricity to Earth as microwave radiation or laser light, where a ground receiver converts it back to usable power. The chain is: sunlight → electricity → microwave/laser → electricity. Every conversion step loses energy. The value proposition is uninterrupted solar collection — no night, no weather, no atmosphere.

Space mirrors skip all conversion. A reflective surface in orbit catches sunlight and redirects it optically to a ground target — a solar farm, a city, a search zone. What arrives on the ground is sunlight. The ground's own solar panels then convert it to electricity, exactly as they would with direct sunlight. The chain is: sunlight → reflected sunlight → electricity (on the ground). No energy conversion happens in space at all.

These are not variations of the same idea. They share only the fact that they put something in orbit to interact with sunlight.

// SBSP VS SPACE MIRROR · PHYSICS COMPARISON FIG. 01 · NOT TO SCALE SPACE-BASED SOLAR POWER SUN SOLAR ARRAY + TRANSMITTER RECTENNA MICROWAVE RECEIVER EARTH SUNLIGHT CONVERTS → ELECTRICITY MICROWAVE / LASER GRID CONVERSION STEPS: 3 1. Sunlight → electricity 2. Elec → microwave/laser 3. Microwave → electricity 3. Microwave → electricity SPACE MIRROR SUN THIN-FILM MIRROR PASSIVE REFLECTOR SOLAR FARM GROUND PANELS SUNLIGHT REFLECTS → SUNLIGHT REFLECTED SUNLIGHT GRID CONVERSION STEPS: 1 1. Sunlight → electricity (on the ground, as normal)
COMPARISON TABLE

Side-by-Side

ATTRIBUTE SPACE-BASED SOLAR POWER SPACE MIRRORS
CORE CONCEPT Generate electricity in orbit via photovoltaic panels; transmit to Earth as microwave or laser Reflect sunlight optically from orbit to a ground target; ground panels convert it normally
WHAT ARRIVES ON GROUND Microwave radiation or laser light (electromagnetic, not visible sunlight) Reflected sunlight (visible spectrum, same as direct sun)
IN-SPACE CONVERSION Yes — sunlight to electricity, electricity to microwave/laser None — passive reflection only
SATELLITE COMPLEXITY Very high — photovoltaic array, power conditioning, phased-array transmitter, attitude control, thermal management Low — thin-film reflective surface, attitude control, command/telemetry radio
SATELLITE MASS / COST Hundreds to thousands of tonnes for GW-scale system; cost estimated at hundreds of billions 10s to 100s of kg per satellite; constellation scale-up more affordable
OPERATIONAL ORBIT Typically geostationary (GEO) at 35,786 km for continuous coverage Low Earth orbit (LEO) at 400–600 km — only altitude where reflected beam intensity is useful
COVERAGE CONTINUITY GEO provides 24/7 coverage of a fixed ground area LEO: 3–5 min per pass per satellite; constellation required for near-continuous coverage
PROGRAMME MATURITY Research phase since 1968; no commercial deployment; small demo missions underway (JAXA, ESA, CalTech) Concept proven by Soviet Znamya experiments (1993, 1999); first commercial attempt underway (Reflect Orbital)
EFFICIENCY CHAIN ~25% (PV) × ~85% (RF transmission) × ~85% (rectenna) ≈ 18% end-to-end ~85–90% reflection × ground panel efficiency (~22%) ≈ 18–20% — similar result, far simpler path
BEAM SAFETY Microwave beam must be designed to safe intensity; beam wandering a safety concern; significant regulatory complexity Reflected sunlight at sub-direct-sun intensity; large footprint reduces intensity; no ionising radiation
MAIN ACTIVE PROGRAMMES JAXA (Japan), ESA SOLARIS, CalTech SSPP demo (2023), UK SBSP programme Reflect Orbital (Eärendil-1 mission, US)
THE PHYSICS IN DETAIL

Why the Distinction Matters for Efficiency

SBSP — ENERGY CONVERSION CHAIN

Sunlight hits photovoltaic panels in orbit (approximately 25–30% efficient). The generated electricity feeds a transmitter — typically a phased-array microwave system — that converts electricity to microwave radiation (approximately 85% efficient). The beam travels to Earth and hits a rectenna (rectifying antenna), which converts microwave back to electricity (approximately 85% efficient). The compounded result is roughly 18–20% of the original solar energy delivered to the grid. This is not much better than ground solar, but the satellite is in constant sun — no night, no clouds. That continuity is the value proposition SBSP programmes are betting on.

SPACE MIRROR — ONE CONVERSION

Sunlight hits the mirror surface (approximately 85–92% reflectivity depending on material and age). The reflected beam travels to Earth and hits a solar farm. The solar panels convert it to electricity, exactly as they would with direct sunlight. There is no in-space conversion step. The total system efficiency is simply the reflectivity of the mirror multiplied by the efficiency of the ground panels — comparable numbers to SBSP, but achieved with vastly simpler hardware. The tradeoff is that a mirror's ground illumination intensity is always lower than direct sunlight, spread over a larger area, and available only during orbital passes. See Solar Economics for the energy analysis.

ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS

Why the Cost Structures Are Completely Different

SBSP is an enormously capital-intensive technology. A commercially viable SBSP system capable of producing gigawatts of power would require putting hundreds or thousands of tonnes of photovoltaic panels, power conditioning hardware, and microwave transmitters into geostationary orbit — at launch costs measured in billions of dollars per tonne until dramatically cheaper access to space exists. The UK government's 2021 assessment estimated a commercial SBSP system at approximately £16 billion in development cost before first watt is delivered. Japan's JAXA has spent decades and significant public funding on smaller demonstrators. As of 2026, no SBSP system has delivered commercial power.

Space mirrors start from a radically different cost base. A thin-film mirror satellite has very few components: the reflective film, a lightweight structure to deploy it, attitude control hardware, and a small radio for command and telemetry. Reflect Orbital's Eärendil-1 demonstrator is designed to launch as a small satellite. The company's argument is that the per-satellite cost is low enough that a multi-satellite constellation can be built incrementally, with each satellite generating revenue as it operates. The capital requirement is orders of magnitude lower than SBSP — which is precisely why a startup, rather than a national space agency, is attempting it first.

The economic weakness of space mirrors is intensity. The ground footprint receives sunlight at less than direct solar irradiance (approximately 1,361 W/m² in space, reduced by atmospheric passage and the mirror's non-unity reflectivity). Spread over a 5–8 km footprint, the per-square-metre addition to a solar farm's output is real but modest. The business case depends on capturing the premium electricity price during twilight hours — not on delivering large absolute power quantities. See Solar Economics for the full analysis.

WHO IS BUILDING WHAT

Active Programmes by Category

SPACE-BASED SOLAR POWER PROGRAMMES

JAXA (Japan) LONG-TERM RESEARCH
Japan's national space agency has studied SBSP since the 1980s and conducted small ground demonstrations of wireless power transmission. A roadmap toward a commercial GW-scale SBSP system extends to the 2040s or beyond.
ESA SOLARIS CONCEPT STUDY
The European Space Agency's SOLARIS initiative, formally proposed to ESA's ministerial council in 2022, studied SBSP feasibility for European energy needs. It recommended continued investment in enabling technologies without committing to a deployment programme.
CalTech SSPP DEMO LAUNCHED 2023
The California Institute of Technology's Space Solar Power Project (SSPP) launched a technology demonstrator — the Space Solar Power Demonstrator (SSPD-1) — aboard a Momentus Vigoride spacecraft in January 2023. It successfully demonstrated wireless power transmission from orbit in a small-scale test, a significant experimental milestone.
UK SBSP Programme GOVERNMENT STUDY
A 2021 study commissioned by the UK government (conducted by Frazer-Nash Consultancy) assessed SBSP viability for UK energy needs. It found the technology feasible but requiring significant investment in launch cost reduction and in-space manufacturing before it becomes economically competitive.

SPACE MIRROR PROGRAMMES

Reflect Orbital (US) ACTIVE — FCC REVIEW
The only active commercial space mirror programme as of 2026. Its Eärendil-1 demonstrator is proceeding through FCC licensing. See Reflect Orbital and Eärendil-1 for current status.
WHY MEDIA CONFLATES THEM

How the Confusion Happens

The conflation between SBSP and space mirrors is understandable: both put hardware in orbit to do something with sunlight, and both are described in shorthand as "orbital solar" or "space solar." The confusion is compounded by the fact that some SBSP proposals have included space mirrors as a component — large orbital reflectors designed to concentrate additional sunlight onto the SBSP satellite's panels, boosting their output. In those hybrid proposals, a mirror is a subsystem of an SBSP architecture, which muddies the conceptual separation.

Coverage of the Chengdu "artificial moon" proposal (2018) and Reflect Orbital's Eärendil-1 has repeatedly appeared alongside SBSP stories in technology journalism. The terms "space solar power," "solar power satellite," and "space mirror" are used inconsistently even within single articles. This disambiguation page exists because the two technologies have almost nothing in common beyond orbit and sunlight — and readers researching one should not end up misled about the other.

If you arrived here researching space-based solar power, the CalTech SSPP demonstration and JAXA's published roadmaps are the most current technical references. If you arrived researching space mirrors, our What Is a Space Mirror? page is the starting point, and Eärendil-1 is the most current active programme.

TERMINOLOGY NOTE
"Space solar power" and "space-based solar power" (SBSP) refer to the same concept. "Solar power satellite" (SPS) is an older term for the same thing, originating from Peter Glaser's 1968 paper that first proposed the concept seriously. "Space mirror," "orbital mirror," and "solar reflector satellite" refer to the passive-reflection concept. For all terminology on this site, see the Glossary.
FREQUENTLY ASKED

Common Questions

Is Reflect Orbital building space-based solar power?+
No. Reflect Orbital is building space mirrors — passive optical reflectors that redirect sunlight to ground solar farms. There is no electricity generation in space, no microwave transmitter, and no rectenna on the ground. The ground solar farm's own panels convert the redirected sunlight to electricity, exactly as they would with direct sunlight. See Reflect Orbital and Eärendil-1 for the mission specifics.
Which is further along — SBSP or space mirrors?+
Space mirrors have further hardware heritage. The Soviet Znamya experiments flew real hardware in 1993 and 1999, demonstrating optical reflection from orbit. SBSP has never delivered commercial power from orbit; the CalTech SSPP demonstrator (2023) is the most advanced test, transmitting a small amount of power wirelessly in orbit. Neither technology has a commercial product. Space mirrors are being pursued by a startup with a near-term launch target; SBSP remains in research and feasibility-study phases at national space agencies.
Could you use a space mirror to boost an SBSP satellite's output?+
In principle, yes — concentrating additional reflected sunlight onto a GEO SBSP satellite's solar panels is a concept that has been studied. In practice, the geometry is extremely difficult: a LEO mirror satellite moves rapidly relative to a GEO platform, making sustained pointing to a fixed target in a very different orbit almost impossible with current technology. The idea appears in academic literature but has not been part of any active programme.
Why does space-based solar power use microwaves rather than visible light?+
Microwaves pass through clouds and atmosphere with very low losses, making them reliable regardless of weather. Laser transmission (which uses visible or near-infrared light) is more efficient over clear sky but is badly attenuated by clouds — a significant problem for a system delivering power continuously. Some SBSP proposals use laser transmission, accepting the weather limitation in exchange for tighter beam geometry. Microwaves require a large rectenna on the ground but deliver power reliably in nearly all conditions. Reflected sunlight from a space mirror is subject to cloud cover just like direct sunlight.
Is space-based solar power more efficient than ground solar?+
In terms of potential output, an SBSP satellite in geostationary orbit receives solar irradiance approximately 8–10× more per year than a ground panel in a good location, because there is no night and no atmospheric losses in space. But the end-to-end conversion chain (PV → microwave → rectenna → electricity) loses roughly 80–85% of that energy. After accounting for these losses, SBSP delivers roughly the same energy per square metre of collector as a well-located ground solar farm — but continuously, 24 hours a day. The economics depend on the value of that continuity, offset against the very high capital cost of building and launching the system.