is there a business case for a
European space weather
service?
Chris Chaloner
[email protected]
Systems Engineering & Assessment Ltd (SEA)
ESA Contract:
18459/04/NL/LvH
ESA Study Manager: Alain Hilgers (Alexi Glover)
SEA Study Manager: Tim Woodward
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
1
structure
•
•
•
•
study context and objectives
methodology
results
summary and conclusion
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
2
previous studies
parallel studies
2000
project context
other studies
<2000
SW applications pilot project
SDA
infrastructure
C-B study
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
3
SDA = Service
Development Activity
SW mitigation:
decision logic
SW effect
impact on
system?
Y
residual
impact
don’t care
accept?
N
mitigate
N
Y
accept
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
4
generic SWS model
raw SW
measurements
data processing
and modelling
raw SW
measurements
database
users
SWS
data products
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
5
business case data summary
• SWS costs
• market data
• measurement
costs
• SW impacts
• SWS benefits
LoS
scenarios
SWS provider/SWENET
SWS user
raw SW
measurements
data processing
and modelling
users
raw SW
measurements
database
SWS
data products
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
6
data definition: benefit data
benefit
=

SW impacts
frequency
of SW
conditions
from
science +
observations
X
risk
to
system
from
users
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
7
X
effectiveness
of
SWS
from
providers +
users
benefits data: by SWS
forecast
nowcast
postcast
GIC
geomagnetic
field
ionosphere
1 000M€
space
environment
100M€
10M€
aurora
1M€
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
8
benefits data: by industry
SWS benefits by Industry: All Users in All Domains
10,000.00
Benefits (M€)
1,000.00
100.00
2006
2009
10.00
2011
2021
1.00
0.10
0.01
Space
Ionospheric
Ground-Based
Tourism
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
9
Research and
Education
levels of service: overview
Level of
Characteristics
Service
Costs
Risks
reliant on worldwide cooperation and
continuation of scientific measurement networks
Judged low-medium
LoS 1
ground-based
LoS 2
LoS1 +
hitch-hiker
spacecraft
reliant on host spacecraft owner cooperation:
difficult with commercial operators – relies on
<10M€/yr
operational institutional host
Judged high (commercial)/medium(institutional)
LoS 3
LoS2 +
dedicated
spacecraft
technical risks associated with operating a
<50M€/yr spacecraft constellation
Judged medium
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
10
net benefits
Ground-Based Options: All Users in All Domains
Net Benefit (M€)
6000
LoS1: ground based
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
Hitch-Hiker Options: All Users in All Domains
0
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
Net Benefit (M€)
2020
2022
2024
LoS2: hitchhiker
LoS 1 Option: 5
LoS 1 Option: 2
6000
4000
2000
0
-2000
2006
Dedicated Options: All Users in All Domains
2008
2010
2012
2014
8000
2016
2018
2020
2022
2024
2022
2024
Year
10000
Net Benefit (M€)
2018
Year
10000
8000
2016
LoS3: dedicated
LoS 2 Option: 1satellites
LoS 2 Option: 2
6000
• LoS1
– relies on continuation of
scientific networks
– provides nowcasts
• LoS3
– has low external
dependencies
– is more costly
– provides forecasts
– larger benefits
4000
2000
0
-2000
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2016
Year
11
LoS 3 Option: 5
2018
2020
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
LoS 3 Option: 7
conclusion
• costs are relatively straightforward
• benefits much more difficult to quantify
– some benefits are strategic and unquantifiable
• benefits split 50:50 between nowcasts and forecasts
• as usual:
– small initial investment brings large benefits
– but even the largest system has benefit:cost of ~5:1
SW CBA, ESWW, Brussels, Nov 2006
12