Sign up to see the future, today<\/p>\n
Can\u2019t-miss innovations from the bleeding edge of science and tech<\/p>\n
Earlier this week, a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launched from the Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, successfully delivering 25 Starlink satellites into orbit.<\/p>\n
While such launches have become astonishingly commonplace, the company achieved a major milestone that day: getting <\/strong>more than 10,000 active Starlink satellites orbiting the Earth at one time, according to data compiled by Harvard astronomer Jonathan McDowell<\/a>.<\/p>\n The extent of SpaceX\u2019s megaconstellation of broadband-beaming satellites is staggering \u2014 a seismic shift in the number of spacecraft in our planet\u2019s orbit that has turned out to be a massive headache for astronomers worldwide<\/a>.<\/p>\n At first, the satellites reflected most of the Sun\u2019s light, appearing as bright streaks<\/a> in ground-based night sky observations. In fact, they\u2019ve proven bright enough to be visible to the naked eye, often <\/strong>being mistaken for UFOs<\/a>.<\/p>\n Updated versions of the small, mostly aluminum terminals were designed to alleviate the problem with black paint and mirror film<\/a> \u2014 changes that, while welcome, have yet to completely address the issue<\/a>.<\/p>\n Eventually, today\u2019s Starlink satellites may look like a mere prelude. In January, SpaceX filed plans with the Federal Communications Commission<\/a> for up to one million additional satellites<\/a> designed to function as orbital data centers to power the company\u2019s AI ambitions.<\/p>\n As Space.com reports<\/a>, the plans were met with alarm by astronomers, who have spent years collaborating with SpaceX to stop Starlink satellites from ruining their work.<\/p>\n \u201cIt really feels like it\u2019s undermining what we have achieved in the last few years, which wasn\u2019t ideal for astronomy, but was a far cry from what we feared in 2019 when the Starlink program began,\u201d astronomer and dark sky consultant John Barentine told Space.com.<\/p>\n Barentine, alongside a consortium of astronomers, filed a challenge to SpaceX\u2019s FCC filing. <\/p>\n \u201cWe felt we were heading in the right direction that was reasonably sustainable,\u201d he added. \u201cAnd this feels like a complete reversal of that.\u201d<\/p>\n Instead of hiding in \u201cEarth\u2019s shadow\u201d most of the time, Barentine warned that the planned orbital data centers \u201cwill be in high-inclination orbits and will be fully illuminated by sunlight even as seen from the ground at midnight.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis is a challenge unlike any we have encountered thus far in this new era of commercial space,\u201d he told Space.com.<\/p>\n Apart from threatening ground-based astronomy, having decommissioned or malfunctioning satellites burn up in the Earth\u2019s atmosphere \u2014 SpaceX\u2019s preferred method of disposing of its spacecraft \u2014 could result in copious amounts of pollutants filling the planet\u2019s upper atmosphere<\/a>, Barentine warned. According to his calculations, a spacecraft could eventually be reentering Earth\u2019s orbit every three minutes.<\/p>\n Researchers have warned that frequent rocket launches and spacecraft reentries could fundamentally alter the atmosphere\u2019s chemistry<\/a> by releasing high concentrations of aluminum oxides and lithium<\/a>, among other pollutants.<\/p>\n Scientists are only beginning to understand the environmental consequences of this increased traffic, but preliminary studies certainly don\u2019t bode well \u2014 finding, for instance, that holes in the Earth\u2019s ozone layer could be prevented from healing<\/a>.<\/p>\n SpaceX\u2019s filing only contains a vague nod to its willingness to \u201cminimize any atmospheric impacts resulting from the deorbit of a large number of spacecraft,\u201d but didn\u2019t elaborate beyond that.<\/p>\n It\u2019s a situation that could develop quickly. In its FCC filing, SpaceX asked to fast-track environmental impact assessments.<\/p>\n The regulatory body appeared to be eager to work with Musk\u2019s company, taking just days, instead of the usual weeks, if not months<\/a>, to open up the application for a public comment period.<\/p>\n \u201cThe FCC welcomes and now seeks comment on the SpaceX application for Orbital Data Centers,\u201d chairman Brendan Carr tweeted<\/a> days after SpaceX filed its application.<\/p>\n Dectrators had only until March 6 to file any grievances. According to the CBC<\/a>, the vast majority of the 1,000 comments begged the FCC not to proceed. Amazon, which has a storied history of trying to get in the way<\/a> of SpaceX\u2019s ambitions, has also asked the FCC to reject the company\u2019s application<\/a>.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, the astronomy community is watching helplessly as SpaceX gears up to build out its next megaconstellation.<\/p>\n \u201cWe saw this transition from thousands of satellites to 10,000 satellites largely done through SpaceX,\u201d Outer Space Institute co-director and University of British Columbia physics professor Aaron Boley told the CBC. \u201cAnd we were very worried about maintaining a healthy orbital environment with that.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis just blows right past that,\u201d he added. \u201cAnd by almost all metrics that we can think of, this is just a bad idea in terms of our long-term use and access to space.\u201d<\/p>\n