Sam Mendel

CEO, Co-founder @Network_Ocean_ building ocean data centers + energy ⬡ 🌊 (YC S24) @zfellows

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

day 1

[LMadgit @LMadgit]

18 years separate these two photos.

Let that sink in.

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@adatta02 @stevehou We have much to discuss

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@Willob awesome 🦈

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@robcgiani @network_ocean_

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@Ricburton @Willob @reflectorbital agreed!

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@joeljean9 🫡

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@bennbuilds @4TristanS @reflectorbital Lfg! very cool 🪩

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@AFitzgerald1992 @IsembardGroup Congrats! Great to see

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

$100k grant

an inflection point for the kind of builder that will have an outsized impact for humanity

the downstream effects of this will be wild

so sick @thewildstevenp

[Steven Pang @thewildstevenp]

A 10-minute application for $100,000.

A free, no-strings-attached prize for builders, scientists, operators.

Introducing the Eigenprize. ↓

run by @menemazarakis, @markkhrapko, & yours truly :)

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@thewildstevenp @menemazarakis @markkhrapko EIGENPRIZE! so cool @thewildstevenp

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@AndronOcean need to account for amortization.
land based lifespan conservatively 15yrs vs 5yr space

https://t.co/DkcXUNjwWo

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

ok time to chime in.
@andrewmccalip this model is miles better than anything else I’ve seen on here. kudos for the transparency.
That being said, in the pursuit of a more accurate analysis, there are a few fundamental oversights in the model.

After fixes (default case) ->
Space DCs are 10x more expensive than on-land
and still 62% more expensive in the most space-optimistic future case.

Here are the fixes:

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@Robotbeat https://t.co/HD3qXFtp2H

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

ok time to chime in.
@andrewmccalip this model is miles better than anything else I’ve seen on here. kudos for the transparency.
That being said, in the pursuit of a more accurate analysis, there are a few fundamental oversights in the model.

After fixes (default case) ->
Space DCs are 10x more expensive than on-land
and still 62% more expensive in the most space-optimistic future case.

Here are the fixes:

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@JeffSBennion @Object_Zero_ 👀 @network_ocean_

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@Object_Zero_ 🎯
https://t.co/HD3qXFtp2H

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

ok time to chime in.
@andrewmccalip this model is miles better than anything else I’ve seen on here. kudos for the transparency.
That being said, in the pursuit of a more accurate analysis, there are a few fundamental oversights in the model.

After fixes (default case) ->
Space DCs are 10x more expensive than on-land
and still 62% more expensive in the most space-optimistic future case.

Here are the fixes:

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@andrewmccalip @network_ocean_ see u and bob on the high seas 🫡

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

ok time to chime in.
@andrewmccalip this model is miles better than anything else I’ve seen on here. kudos for the transparency.
That being said, in the pursuit of a more accurate analysis, there are a few fundamental oversights in the model.

After fixes (default case) ->
Space DCs are 10x more expensive than on-land
and still 62% more expensive in the most space-optimistic future case.

Here are the fixes:

[Andrew McCalip @andrewmccalip]

Data centers in space.

It might not be economically rational. But it might be physically possible.

I’m trying to bring some quantitative structure to a conversation that’s been mostly big-number vibes.

https://t.co/R1xiyA14Jt

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@yekime @andrewmccalip so true

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@andrewmccalip https://t.co/DkcXUNjwWo

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

ok time to chime in.
@andrewmccalip this model is miles better than anything else I’ve seen on here. kudos for the transparency.
That being said, in the pursuit of a more accurate analysis, there are a few fundamental oversights in the model.

After fixes (default case) ->
Space DCs are 10x more expensive than on-land
and still 62% more expensive in the most space-optimistic future case.

Here are the fixes:

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

Great model @andrewmccalip, however there’s a few big oversights.
Accounted for, the default case is Space DCs are 10x more expensive than on-land currently
and still ~60% more expensive in the most space-optimist’s future case ($20/kg launch, $5/W satellite, 75.0 W/kg specific power)

For space data centers to be economically competitive, there needs to be an outsized increase in cost on-land due to delays (permitting, public opposition).

hmm I could think of one place with even fewer regulatory bodies than in space… 🤔@network_ocean_

https://t.co/Yiki83ezXu

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

@andrewmccalip lmaoo

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

The core question is “can you make space-based, commodity compute cost-competitive with the cheapest terrestrial alternative?”
The answer seems like a clear no.

The alluring potential of space DCs in the short term is absolutely space-based edge compute, and in the long term, the incredible scale of power (however this only becomes important at the 100TW+ scale, we will get there eventually…)

[Sam Mendel @SamMendel00]

- Amortization: Currently, terrestrial DC lifespan = satellite lifespan. No. Conservatively, DC infra lasts 15yrs on-land vs 5yr in space. Decouple DC amortization, analysis period, and satellite lifespan. Observe -62% for terrestrial costs @15 years.
For such different tech lifespans, a more useful metric for comparison would be $B/GW/yr.

- GPU Failure rate: Currently, the model takes X% failed GPUs to mean we need to spend X% more on satellite bodies. ??? Is this implying you replace the entire satellite (without launching)? More likely, you have multiple GPUs per satellite, and in each satellite X% of GPUs are not working. Also, GPU availability cannot be decoupled with DC financials. 1GW corresponds to ~$20B of IT hardware. 9%/yr failure rate over 5yrs = average of 80% availability, or ~$4B to space cost or +8% to space cost. You need autonomous maintenance to decrease this added cost.

- On-land generation: The only available model is natural gas turbines. The go-to plan has been turbines until grid connection, then use turbines mostly as backup/load following. Opex of turbines dominates capex, so switching over leads to -8% for terrestrial costs @8¢/kWh. Solar/BESS and nuclear are both trends that will likely further decrease $B/GW.

- Nits: A) Current space degradation model is set to produce an average of the nameplate capacity. Nameplate capacity should be the maximum power guarantee over the lifespan of the satellite, representing +5% to space cost. B) Add launch cost to GPU margin (assuming current maintenance model of replacing X% of GPUs/satellites). +13% for space cost.

Conclusion: