Well, I don't know if they're doing this, but PV can be much lighter in space. Much of the mass (and cost) of PV on Earth is structure to support it against gravity and weather. In space, a thin film PV array could be as little as a few microns thick (using for example CdTe, which absorbs light much more strongly than silicon).

Combine that with the 5-10x higher production from being in constant unfiltered sunlight, and lack of need for storage, and it could well be much cheaper to make the power in space.

▲

youngtaff 5 hours ago | parent [-]

How are you going to get rid on the heat?

And they won't all be in constant unfiltered sunlight some will be in the earth's shadow

▲

pfdietz 5 hours ago | parent [-]

By radiation. You know, like every other satellite does.

They will not be, or need not be, in orbits with substantial amounts of shadowed time.

▲

jfengel 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Most satellites aren't intended to produce thousands of watts of heat.

▲

pfdietz 2 hours ago | parent [-]

So now we're quibbling over numbers, not saying the problem is impossible.

These satellite will need larger radiators. It's an issue satellite designers have long dealt with, so the presumption that SpaceX has somehow missed the issue in their new design is not credible.

	▲	deeg 18 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		If I had any trust in Musk-run companies then I would agree with you but I think its closer to the hyperloop than reality.