💰
Economics
Loading analysis...
ADS-B NETWORK SAS
Economics · White Paper 2026
💰 Economics · March 24, 2026
Cost comparison charts: underground geothermal datacenter vs orbital constellation vs lunar facility
Economic Analysis · Chapter 2

Economics — The Numbers That Matter

$25B TERAfab, 80% for space, no demonstrated customers. vs $0.8B underground geothermal, proven ROI, existing market. The comparison is unambiguous.

$1Bvs $25B for same 50MW capacity, proven market
📸 wp-hero-economics.jpg · 1200×800 · See image_prompts.md
$25B
TERAfab investment
Announced March 22 · No production timeline
$50/MWh
Geothermal energy cost
Underground EGS · 45% below grid average
10–12y
Underground ROI horizon
Proven model · Iron Mountain reference
$50B
SpaceX IPO target
Summer 2026 · Space DC = IPO narrative
Economic Analysis · Chapter 2

The Real Numbers Behind the Pitch Decks

TERAfab announced $25B on March 22, 2026 — with no production timeline and no demonstrated customers. Let's compare the real numbers.

CriterionUnderground Geothermal DC (50MW)TERAfab + LEO Constellation
Initial investment$0.8–1B (50 MW)$20–25B (fab alone)
Energy cost~$50/MWh geothermal 24/7Solar orbital — cooling = vacuum radiators
Profitability horizon10–12 years (proven model)Undefined — no market demonstration
Demonstrated customersYes — existing marketNo — market to be created
Contractable SLA99.999% — insurableNot insurable today
Refresh cycle costStandard rack replacementNew constellation launch every 18 months
IPO dependencyNoneCentral — SpaceX IPO $50B summer 2026
Environmental impactCO2-free + district heatingStratospheric soot + debris accumulation

The IPO sequence: TERAfab announced March 21, 2026 → SpaceX IPO targeting $50B announced for Summer 2026. The announcement precedes the proof. The IPO precedes the wafer. The narrative precedes the physics. A greenfield 2nm fab takes 4–5 years minimum under ideal conditions. Musk has zero semiconductor manufacturing background.

Cost Scenario Comparison

50 MW — 25-Year Total Cost of Ownership

TCO Comparison: Underground Geothermal vs Orbital DC — 25 years ($B)
Sources: Iron Mountain case · DOE EGS · Varda Space / McCalip estimates · ADS-B NETWORK SAS analysis
🌍
Underground Geothermal

$0.8–1B construction · $50/MWh energy · Standard maintenance · District heating revenue offset · Insurable SLA · 50-year facility life

✅ ~$2–3B over 25 years
🛰️
Orbital LEO

TMR triples hardware cost · Refresh every 18 months = new launch · Kessler risk reserve unquantifiable · No insurable SLA · No maintenance possible

⚠️ $50–100B+ over 25 years
🌕
Lunar

>60% landing failure rate · No operational energy source · Maintenance: $10–20B crew support · Regolith damage unmodelled · No SLA possible

🔴 Undefined — uninsurable
Geothermal Energy Economics

EGS — The Numbers That Work

Enhanced Geothermal Systems are no longer experimental. Google, Meta, Fervo Energy and Bedrock Energy are in active deployment.

EGS ParameterValueSource
Energy cost (grid-sited DC)~$75/MWhRhodium Group 2025
Energy cost (geothermal-sited DC)~$50/MWh (-45%)Rhodium Group 2025
US hyperscale demand coverage by 2030Up to 64%Rhodium Group 2025
Iron Mountain Boyers PAOperational · 60m underground · 35-acre water reservoirDOE Better Buildings
Cooling as % of DC energy40% (target for reduction)NREL 2025
Cold UTES reduction potentialSignificant peak load cutDOE / NREL project
Renewal Economics · NEW v2.0

The Perpetual Capital Destruction Model

The "fly-till-you-die" model transforms capex into permanent opex. A terrestrial datacenter amortises over 25 years. An orbital constellation rebuilds itself every 2–3 years — indefinitely.

Cost ComponentTerrestrial DC (1 GW)Orbital Constellation (1 GW)
Initial hardware capex~$15–20B>$50B (IEEE Spectrum estimate)
Refresh cycleModular rack swap: $2–5B/cycleNew constellation every 2–3 years
Annual GPU failure replacement<1% — technician on-site9% estimated (90,000 units/yr in 1M sat fleet)
Memory supply chainCommodity — global market, 8–39 wk leadBoutique MRAM — 2–3 fabs, 12–24 month lead
Fuel depletion (avoidance)Not applicable40K maneuvers/day shortens lifespan 30–50%
TCO over 10 years (1 GW)$25–30B (proven, modelled)Undefined — no public lifecycle model published
MoffettNathanson (100 GW)N/A at this scale$4–5 trillion capex estimate
Parity with terrestrial costAchieved todayDeutsche Bank: well after 2030 · Google: ~2035

The Starship math no one publishes: Musk's "basic math" — 1M tonnes of satellite per year for 100 GW — implies 25,000 Starship flights/year (aerospace engineer McCalip estimate). That is 68 launches per day. Every hour of every day. SpaceX's currently approved launch capacity: 69 flights/year total across Texas and Florida combined. The ratio is 362:1. Before this is an engineering challenge, it is a physical and regulatory impossibility at the stated timeline.

25-Year Total Cost of Ownership — Underground DC vs Orbital Constellation (1 GW, $B)
Sources: Iron Mountain · IEEE Spectrum · McCalip analysis · MoffettNathanson · ADS-B NETWORK SAS · March 2026
🌍
Underground DC — 25-Year TCO Profile

Construction: $0.8–1B. Energy: $50/MWh × 24/7 × 50 MW = ~$22M/yr. Maintenance: standard industrial. Hardware refresh: modular, on-site, ~$2–5B per 4-year cycle. District heating revenue offset. Total 25-year TCO (50 MW): $2–3B. Fully modelled. Proven at Iron Mountain scale.

✅ $2–3B over 25 years · Insurable · Proven
🛸
Orbital — 25-Year TCO Profile

Initial constellation: $50B+. Refresh every 2–3 years: new constellation cost each cycle. Fuel depletion from maneuvers: reduces lifespan. MRAM supply at scale: unpriced, supply chain non-existent. Kessler risk reserve: unquantifiable. GPU failure replacement (9%/yr): continuous launch cost. 25-year TCO: entirely undefined.

🔴 Undefined · Uninsurable · Unmodelled