# Research Musing — 2026-04-25

**Research question:** What does updated Starship V3 evidence (tripled payload + Raptor 3 manufacturing costs) imply for the $/kg cost trajectory timeline — and does the Kairos Power molten salt reactor follow the same CSP-borrowing heritage pattern as TerraPower's Natrium?

**Belief targeted for disconfirmation:** Belief 2 — "Launch cost is the keystone variable, and chemical rockets are the bootstrapping tool." Specific disconfirmation path: even with V3's tripled payload, structural factors (regulatory pace, operational cadence constraints, FAA licensing bottlenecks, reuse learning curves) may prevent the theoretical $/kg improvements from materializing on projected timelines. If so, the $100/kg "civilization-enabling" threshold extends significantly beyond current projections. Secondary: if Kairos Power is also a CSP-heritage adaptation (not independent nuclear innovation), the "solar-nuclear thermal storage convergence" pattern found in yesterday's session becomes a structural feature of advanced reactor design more broadly — which would be a noteworthy cross-domain finding.

**Why these questions:**
1. Yesterday (2026-04-24) identified "Pursue Direction A" for Starship V3: the tripled payload (35 MT → >100 MT) + Raptor 3 cost reduction (4x vs Raptor 1) creates a compound economics improvement that the KB's current cost projections don't reflect. Getting the updated cost curve right matters for multiple KB claims including the ODC activation threshold, ISRU economics, and the megastructure bootstrapping sequence.
2. Yesterday's "Pursue Direction B" for nuclear was Kairos Power CSP heritage. Natrium's molten salt storage was confirmed as CSP-borrowed technology. If Kairos (the other leading advanced reactor company making AI data center deals) also adapted CSP thermal technology, this becomes a structural pattern: the solar and nuclear industries are convergent on the same thermal storage technology from opposite heat source directions. This is the "solar-nuclear convergence" claim candidate worth verifying.
3. Keystone belief (Belief 1) disconfirmation: I'll specifically search for academic arguments that single-planet resilience (bunkers, biosecurity, AI alignment) makes multiplanetary expansion unnecessary or even counterproductive. This is the counterargument I've *acknowledged* but never actively searched for. Session 2026-04-21 tested the planetary defense angle — today I'll test the "anthropogenic risk + coordination failure" angle: does Mars actually help with risks that follow humanity because they stem from human nature?

**What would change my mind on Belief 2:** Evidence that V3's operational cadence is structurally constrained to <20 flights/year regardless of manufacturing capacity, OR that FAA launch licensing reforms have failed to keep pace with SpaceX's operational tempo, would materially extend the $100/kg timeline and weaken the "bootstrapping" narrative.

**Tweet feed:** 22nd consecutive empty session. Web search used for all research.

---

## Main Findings

### 1. Kairos Power CSP Heritage CONFIRMED — Solar-Nuclear Convergence Is Structural

**CLAIM CANDIDATE confirmed with second data point:**

Yesterday's session established that TerraPower's Natrium reactor uses molten salt storage borrowed from CSP. Today's search confirms Kairos Power's KP-FHR design does the same, but in the secondary heat transfer circuit rather than storage:

- Kairos KP-FHR uses "solar salt" — 60:40 sodium nitrate/potassium nitrate — in its intermediate loop
- The company explicitly states it "leverages existing technology and suppliers of nitrate salts that are used in the concentrated solar power industry"
- This is not an abstraction — it's the same industrial salt, same supply chain, same equipment suppliers as CSP plants
- Kairos broke ground on a dedicated salt production facility and has already started molten salt system operations

Both leading advanced reactor companies winning major AI data center deals (TerraPower for Meta/Microsoft/Google at 9+ GW; Kairos for Google at 500 MW) independently adapted CSP nitrate salt technology for their heat management systems. In Natrium it's for thermal storage (buffering). In Kairos it's for heat transfer in the secondary circuit. Different applications, same underlying industrial technology and supply chain.

**Why this matters for the KB:** This is a structural cross-industry technology transfer — the solar and nuclear industries are convergent through shared thermal storage/transfer technology. The CSP industry essentially funded the development and supply chain for a thermal technology that is now flowing into advanced nuclear. This is NOT the story told in most nuclear renaissance coverage, which frames nuclear and solar as competing in the energy transition. They are competing as electricity sources but collaborating at the thermal engineering level.

**Kairos Google deal specifics:**
- Master Plant Development Agreement signed October 2024
- 500 MW total fleet by 2035
- First deployment: Hermes 2 at Oak Ridge, Tennessee (TVA grid) — 50 MW target, operations in 2030
- TVA is the first US utility to sign a PPA for a Gen IV reactor
- In January 2026, DOE finalized HALEU fuel supply contract with Kairos for Hermes 1
- Construction on Hermes 1 started in Oak Ridge; targeting completion as early as 2027

---

### 2. Starship V3 Economics: Theoretical Breakthrough, Structural Bottleneck

**Disconfirmation finding for Belief 2:**

V3's compound economics are impressive on paper:
- Payload: >100 MT reusable (3x V2's ~35 MT)
- Engines: Raptor 3 is 4x cheaper to manufacture than Raptor 1
- Two launch pads (Pad 1 and Pad 2 at Starbase) effectively doubles annual capacity
- All 33 Raptor 3 engines successfully static-fired April 15, 2026; Flight 12 targeting first half of May

Updated $/kg math at same reuse rates:
- V3 at 6 reuse cycles: ~$25-30/kg (vs V2's $78-94/kg — ~3x improvement from tripled payload alone)
- V3 crosses $100/kg threshold at 2-3 reuse cycles (vs V2 requiring 6+)

**BUT: FAA investigation cycle is the structural bottleneck.**

Key finding: FAA approved 25 Starship launches/year at Boca Chica — up from a prior cap of 5. But actual cadence is structurally constrained by mishap investigation cycles:
- Post-anomaly investigations run 2-5 months historically
- Prediction markets in April 2026 show "<5 Starship launches reaching space in 2026" as a "coin flip"
- The 25-launch approval is a theoretical ceiling; actual execution depends on zero anomalies

**Implication for Belief 2:** The chemical rocket bootstrapping thesis depends on cadence building rapidly to drive reuse counts and cost curves. The FAA investigation cycle creates a structural impediment: every anomaly costs months of cadence. With a new vehicle (V3) learning a new operational paradigm, the probability of zero anomalies in any given year is low. The $100/kg threshold is achievable with V3 at surprisingly low reuse rates (2-3 flights), but the TIMELINE to reach those reuse rates extends because of investigation-induced pauses. The $10-100/kg "civilization" threshold timeline likely slips 2-3 years from naive calculations based purely on vehicle economics.

**This is a genuine Belief 2 refinement, not falsification:** The keystone variable claim is sound. The bootstrapping sequence is sound. But the timeline is longer than vehicle economics alone suggest because of the investigation-cycle overhead on every new vehicle generation.

---

### 3. New Glenn Manifest Cascade: Deeper Risk Than Initially Apparent

**Previous archive covered BlueBird 7 loss. New finding: customer manifest concentration.**

Amazon (Project Kuiper, rebranded Amazon Leo in Nov 2025) contracted New Glenn for:
- 12 confirmed launches + options for 15 more = up to 27 total launches
- Each launch carries 61 Kuiper satellites
- First Kuiper New Glenn launch planned mid-2026 — NOW AT RISK
- FCC deadline: Amazon must launch half the constellation by July 30, 2026

**BUT — Amazon has diversified launch providers (SpaceX Falcon 9, Vulcan Centaur, Ariane 6). They are described as "on track to meet deployment obligations through combination of providers." Amazon can work around New Glenn grounding for Kuiper deployment.**

**Blue Moon MK1 has NO backup — this is the critical risk:**
- First Blue Moon MK1 mission ("Endurance") scheduled for late summer 2026 — ONLY launch option is New Glenn
- VIPER is on the SECOND Blue Moon MK1 mission (not Endurance) — planned late 2027
- Investigation timeline unknown: comparable grounding (NG-2, ~3 months) would push Blue Moon to late 2026 or early 2027
- If Blue Moon MK1 slips to 2027, VIPER slips to 2028+ — which pushes Phase 2 ISRU operational timeline beyond 2032

**Pattern 2 intensification:** This is the FOURTH consecutive session confirming ISRU prerequisite chain fragility:
- PRIME-1: failed (no lunar surface ISRU demo)
- PROSPECT: slipped from 2026 to 2027
- VIPER: now dependent on Blue Moon MK1 success, which depends on New Glenn return to flight
- Each slip adds another year to the chain

Belief 4 (cislunar attractor 30 years) is further weakened — not falsified, but the ISRU prerequisite chain is now 3 links deep in failure/delay, with a new launch vehicle risk added.

---

### 4. Beijing Institute = Orbital Chenguang — Confirmed (Closes Open Question)

**Yesterday's archive flagged this as unresolved. Confirmed today.**

The "Beijing Institute to Build China's First Space Computing Center 800 km Above Earth" IS Orbital Chenguang. The full entity name is "Astro-future Institute of Space Technology" (Beijing), which is the research arm of the same organization that created Orbital Chenguang as its commercial entity. Same 700-800 km altitude, same Chenguang-1 experimental satellite (target launch end 2025/early 2026 — hasn't launched yet).

There are TWO programs in China's orbital computing portfolio, not three:
1. Three-Body (ADA Space + Zhejiang Lab) — operational, 12 satellites, production AI workloads running
2. Orbital Chenguang (Beijing Astro-future Institute = Beijing state-backed) — pre-commercial, first satellite not yet launched

China's strategy is dual-track (civilian academic operational + state infrastructure pre-commercial), not triple-track. Closes yesterday's open question.

---

### 5. Belief 1 Disconfirmation: Anthropogenic Risks Are ACCELERATING

**Null result on "single-planet resilience sufficient" counterargument, with informative absence.**

Searched specifically for academic voices arguing that AI alignment, biosecurity, and bunker/resilience strategies make multiplanetary expansion unnecessary. Found none. What I found instead:
- AI-bio convergence is increasing biosecurity risk dramatically (FRI study: AI could make pandemic "5x more likely")
- Engineered pandemic risk is growing, not shrinking
- Federal regulation trying to catch up (frameworks effective April 26, 2025 and October 2026)
- No major voice in the biosecurity space argues that terrestrial solutions are sufficient

**This is the OPPOSITE of disconfirmation.** The strongest counterargument to Belief 1 ("anthropogenic risks follow humanity to Mars") is logically sound — spreading humanity to Mars doesn't prevent coordination failures. But the evidence shows the risks are accelerating in severity, which makes the argument for a backup population elsewhere MORE urgent, not less. Mars doesn't prevent a pandemic; it provides a recovery population if a terrestrial pandemic achieves near-extinction levels.

The absence of any credible "single-planet resilience is sufficient" academic literature (after specifically searching for it) is informative: this counterargument exists as a logical position but lacks serious proponents in the scholarly or policy literature.

---

## Follow-up Directions

### Active Threads (continue next session)

- **Starship V3 Flight 12 (early-mid May):** Binary event approaching. Watch for: (1) upper stage reentry/survival (the "headline success/operational failure" pattern test), (2) catch vs. splash confirmation, (3) any anomaly triggering new FAA investigation. Don't check until after the May launch window opens. This is the most consequential upcoming data point.
- **New Glenn investigation timeline:** Root cause still "BE-3U thrust deficiency — mechanism unknown." Check for preliminary investigation report ~mid-May. The key question: systematic design flaw (months grounding) or random hardware failure (weeks grounding)? Blue Moon MK1 summer launch viability depends on this answer.
- **Kairos Hermes 1 construction progress:** Now in nuclear construction (started May 2025); targeting completion as early as 2027 for Hermes 1. Hermes 2 (the 50 MW Google unit) targets 2030. Watch for NRC operating license application submission — Kairos preparing to submit in early 2026.
- **Amazon Kuiper FCC July 30 deadline:** Amazon must launch half its constellation by July 30, 2026. With New Glenn grounded, do they shift Kuiper launches to Falcon 9? If SpaceX picks up Kuiper launches that were planned for New Glenn, this is another data point in the SpaceX monopoly risk pattern.

### Dead Ends (don't re-run these)

- **"Single planet resilience sufficient" academic literature:** Spent a session searching for this. No credible proponents found. The counterargument is a logical exercise, not a live scholarly debate. Don't repeat this search.
- **Kairos Power CSP origins:** CONFIRMED. The secondary circuit uses solar salt from the CSP supply chain. This is done — write the claim.
- **Orbital Chenguang = Beijing Institute overlap:** CONFIRMED same entity. Not a third program. Closed.

### Branching Points (one finding opened multiple directions)

- **Solar-nuclear convergence with two data points:** Direction A — Check whether Terrestrial Energy's IMSR (molten salt reactor) or X-energy's Xe-100 (pebble bed) ALSO use CSP-derived nitrate salt. If a third or fourth advanced reactor company adapted CSP thermal technology, the "solar-nuclear convergence" is a sector-wide pattern worthy of a standalone KB claim. Direction B — Investigate whether CSP thermal storage suppliers (e.g., SolarReserve IP, Sandia National Labs research) have formal licensing relationships with nuclear reactor companies, or whether the technology transfer was informal/independent. **Pursue Direction A** — if the pattern holds across more companies, the claim is stronger.
- **Amazon Kuiper FCC deadline + New Glenn grounding:** Direction A — Track whether Amazon shifts planned New Glenn Kuiper launches to SpaceX, documenting SpaceX's dominance as the default backup provider. Direction B — Track Blue Origin's second launch pad construction at Cape Canaveral (filed April 9, 2026) as indicator of whether Blue Origin is scaling capacity despite NG-3 setback. **Pursue Direction B next** — Blue Origin's infrastructure investment decisions during grounding reveal their confidence in return to flight timeline and future cadence.

