Commercial Life-Support Break-Even Simulator

Mission Parameters

Crew size 4

Mission duration 365 d

Launch cost $2,700/kg

Recycling closure η 85%

Cost Readout — Day 0

Open-loop total

Closed-loop total

Break-even day

—

Savings so far

Open-loop — resupply launches, no recycling Closed-loop — regenerative ECLSS hardware + residual resupply

How it works

Every kilogram lifted to orbit has to be paid for. A commercial operator choosing life-support hardware is really solving a break-even problem between two architectures:

Open-loop (expendable):
  cost(t) = crew · t · r · P

Closed-loop (regenerative ECLSS):
  cost(t) = C(η) + m_hw · P + crew · t · r · (1-η) · P

r  = 27 kg / crew-day  (food + O2 + potable & hygiene water,
                          NASA ECLSS trade-study baseline with
                          zero recycling)
P  = launch cost, $/kg
η  = fraction of consumables recovered by the recycler
C(η) = R&D + hardware capital cost, rising with η
m_hw = 600 kg  (recycler hardware mass, launched once)

Setting the two cost curves equal gives the break-even mission length:

t_break = ( C(η) + m_hw·P ) / ( crew · r · η · P )

This is exactly why the article's market split makes engineering sense: short space-tourism hops (days) are cheaper to fly open-loop — there is no time to earn back the recycler's capital cost — while long-duration commercial stations and orbital manufacturing outposts only become profitable once the regenerative hardware is installed, because every extra day past t_break compounds the saving. Drag launch cost down (reusable rockets) or closure η up (better recyclers) and watch the break-even day shrink — the two levers commercial operators actually pull.

Day 0simulating…

⚠ Couldn't load the 3D engineThree.js failed to load from the CDN. Check your connection and reload.