Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
The US Public Interest Research Group (US PIRG), a federation of public interest advocacy groups, has asked the FCC to halt low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite launches until the environmental consequences of space pollution can be better managed.
Those concerns were underscored on Thursday when one of China's Long March 6A rockets broke apart in LEO after deploying 18 satellites for Shanghai Spacecom Satellite Technology group's Thousand Sails constellation. Reports suggest as many as 900 pieces of debris were scattered as a result of the disintegration.
US Space Command said at least 300 pieces are large enough to be tracked, each being 10cm (4 inches) or more across, though added it has observed no "immediate threats."
China hopes to put as many as 15,000 broadband-relaying sats into orbit in that Qianfan constellation.
Writing last week, US PIRG directed its concern at SpaceX, dubbing Elon Musk's rocket show "WasteX" for the "mega-constellations" of communications satellites shot into the sky by the Texas-based firm's Starlink subsidiary.
"Over just five years Starlink has launched more than 6,000 units and now make up more than 60 percent of all satellites," said Lucas Gutterman, director of the US PIRG Education Fund's Designed to Last project, in an online article. "The new space race took off faster than governments were able to act."
[...] "That launching 30,000 to 500,000 satellites into low Earth orbit doesn’t even warrant an environmental review offends common sense," he said, pointing to a 2022 US Government Accountability Office report that found the federal telecoms watchdog has no documented reason for deciding that satellite swarms should not be subject to environmental review.
Starlink is said to have proposed a mega-constellation of 30,000 to 40,000 satellites to support its wireless communication service. And when proposals from Amazon’s Project Kuiper, OneWeb, and other outfits are considered, the number exceeds 500,000.
[...] "There are more than 200 million pieces of trash currently in orbit that are capable of doing damage to an operational satellite if they hit it," she said.
"And almost 30,000 of them are larger than a roll of toilet paper. And the risk isn't just to satellites. Only two months ago, a piece of junk from the International Space Station fell through the roof and two floors of a house in Naples [Florida]. With the whole Space Station due to become trash in 2030, it's time we got serious about the waste in space."
With the whole Space Station due to become trash in 2030, it's time we got serious about the waste in space
(Score: 3, Interesting) by anubi on Thursday August 22 2024, @11:07AM (2 children)
Say, if worse comes to worse and we have a full blown Kessler Event in LEO, knowing LEO is not viable for the long term due to atmospheric drag, how long will it be before space is accessible again?
Until atmospheric drag returns all the debris to earth, space will be like a rifle range with satellite parts flying every which-a-way.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by crm114 on Thursday August 22 2024, @11:16AM (1 child)
That was exactly my thought.
Its LEO, so with atmospheric drag, its just a matter of time until the problem solves itself. OTOH it is bad for Starlink or DISH TV, etc. subscribers
(Score: 3, Interesting) by turgid on Thursday August 22 2024, @12:17PM
For a cubesat, atmospheric drag on the solar panels can deorbit the satellite in the order of 18 months. However, clouds of hundreds of thousands of fragments all withh different velocities due to the collisions will behave very differently. I can imagine thousands of dangerous fragments staying in orbit for decades or even centuries.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Revek on Thursday August 22 2024, @11:49AM (1 child)
All of these objects are in an orbit that will degrade fairly quickly. If there were some mass event the problem would be more short term compared with a similar event in geosynchronous orbit. Its far more likely these shills are just there at the behest of the companies that have been left behind. The only group that has a legitimate gripe is the astronomers and amateur start gazers.
This page was generated by a Swarm of Roaming Elephants
(Score: 2) by Username on Thursday August 22 2024, @02:57PM
I was thinking military assets in space would be at risk, so instead of coming out and saying, "our nuclear armed missle satellite might rain down radioactive materials when hit by junk," we'll make it look like space hippies crying about pollution and global space warming.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by sonamchauhan on Thursday August 22 2024, @11:50AM (1 child)
Why cannot these satellites constellations offer peering arrangements? It's not like my ISP installs its own routers all over the world -- in my city, and in London, Paris, and Timuktu too.
Do we really need that many satellites? It's not like mobile connectivity is expensive and Starlink terminals are cheap.
And then there's the small matter of destroying our environment and our health:
https://www.space.com/megaconstellations-threat-to-ozone-layer-recovery [space.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 22 2024, @01:09PM
From my perspective:
They can, but to offer peering, there needs to be other networks to peer with.
You also need standards for inter-satellite communications. On the space industry scale of things, this technology is still in its infancy, as in almost no one does it. Like everything, you need to ramp up the production of satellites with such a technology, then when you get to a good number, you can push the industry towards a standard.
We’re talking about satellites to cover the whole globe. There’s a lot of downrange space to cover, and there’s a lot of… space in space to put satellites.
Also, how much competition is enough? None, as in only one provider for a certain coverage area? Two competing (or colluding) providers? The more competitors, the lower the risk of price-fixing.
Mobile connectivity may be cheap where you and I live. But for a large part of the global population, either mobile or fixed connectivity is expensive, outrageously expensive ("old space" satcom), desperately slow (not enough bandwidth to the rest of the world), or simply unavailable (remote places, no sales in x country because "not interested", export or import control restrictions, corruption…)
(Score: 2, Funny) by hey_popey on Thursday August 22 2024, @12:13PM
I can't wait for the FCC to stop all these Chinese launches by way of a quite stern memo.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 22 2024, @04:34PM
Just more Elon Hate.