{"id":21842,"date":"2022-12-08T02:34:54","date_gmt":"2022-12-08T02:34:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/12\/08\/debate-continues-over-what-to-do-about-the-fact-that-starlink-other-low-earth-orbit-satellite-systems-are-causing-irreversible-research-harming-light-pollution\/"},"modified":"2022-12-08T02:34:54","modified_gmt":"2022-12-08T02:34:54","slug":"debate-continues-over-what-to-do-about-the-fact-that-starlink-other-low-earth-orbit-satellite-systems-are-causing-irreversible-research-harming-light-pollution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/12\/08\/debate-continues-over-what-to-do-about-the-fact-that-starlink-other-low-earth-orbit-satellite-systems-are-causing-irreversible-research-harming-light-pollution\/","title":{"rendered":"Debate Continues Over What To Do About The Fact That Starlink, Other Low-Earth-Orbit Satellite Systems Are Causing Irreversible, Research-Harming Light Pollution"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n
<\/p>\n

\n

from the government-is-not-always-your-mortal-enemy,-weirdo<\/i> dept<\/h3>\n

For years, scientific researchers have warned that Elon Musk\u2019s Starlink low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite broadband constellations are\u00a0harming scientific research<\/a>. Simply put, the light pollution Musk claimed\u00a0would never happen in the first place<\/a>\u00a0is making it far more difficult to study the night sky, a problem researchers say can be\u00a0mitigated somewhat but never fully eliminated<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Musk and company claim they\u2019re working on upgraded satellites\u00a0that are less obtrusive<\/a>\u00a0to scientists, but it\u2019s Musk, so who knows if those solutions actually materialize. Musk isn\u2019t alone in his low-orbit satellite ambitions. Numerous other companies, including Jeff Bezos\u2019 Blue Origin, are planning to fling tens of thousands of these low-orbit satellite \u201cmegaconstallations\u201d into the heavens.<\/p>\n

One 2020 paper<\/a> argued that the approval of these low-orbit satellites by the FCC technically violated the environmental law embedded in the 1970 U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Scientific American notes how<\/a> the FCC has thus far\u00a0sidestepped NEPA\u2019s oversight<\/a>, thanks to a \u201ccategorical exclusion\u201d the agency was granted in 1986 \u2014 long before LEO satellites were a threat. <\/p>\n

Last week yet another study emerged<\/a> from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO, full study here<\/a>),\u00a0recommending that the FCC at least revisit the issue:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cWe think they need to revisit [the categorical exclusion] because the situation is so different than it was in 1986,\u201d says Andrew Von Ah, a director at the GAO and one of the report\u2019s two lead authors. The White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) recommends that agencies \u201crevisit things like categorical exclusions once every seven years,\u201d Von Ah says. But the FCC \u201chasn\u2019t really done that since 1986.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Despite the fact that low-earth orbit solutions like Starlink generally lack the capacity<\/a> to be meaningfully disruptive to the country\u2019s broadband monopolies, and are, so far, too expensive<\/a> to address one of the biggest obstacles to adoption (high prices due to said monopolies), the FCC has generally adopted a \u201cwe\u2019re too bedazzled by the innovation to bother\u201d mindset until recently. <\/p>\n

The FCC this year did recently decide to roll back nearly a billion in Trump-era subsidies<\/a> for Starlink (in part because the company misled regulators about coverage, but also because the FCC doubted they\u2019d be able to deliver promised speeds and coverage). And the FCC did recently enact laws tightening up requirements<\/a> for discarding older, failed satellites to address \u201cspace junk.\u201d <\/p>\n

But taking a tougher stand here would require the FCC taking a bold stance on whether or not NEPA actually applies to the \u201cenvironment\u201d of outer space and low-Earth orbit, which remains in debate. This is an agency that can\u2019t even be bothered to publicly declare with any confidence<\/a> that telecom monopolies exist or are a problem, so it seems pretty unlikely they\u2019d want to wade into such controversy. <\/p>\n

Like a lot of Musk efforts (like the fatal public potential of misrepresented \u201cfull self driving\u201d technology), the issue has been simplistically framed as one of innovation versus mean old pointless government bureaucracy. This simplistic distortion has resulted in zero meaningful oversight as problems mount, something that impacts not just the U.S. (where most launches occur), but every nation on the planet:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cOur society needs space,\u201d says Didier Queloz, an astronomer and Nobel laureate at the University of Cambridge. \u201cI have no problem with space being used for commercial purposes. I just have a problem that it\u2019s out of control. When we started to see this increase in satellites, I was shocked that there are no regulations. So I was extremely pleased to hear that there has been an awareness that it cannot continue like that.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

I\u2019d expect this issue gets punted into the bowels of agency policy purgatory. Even if the agency does act it will be years from now, and unlikely to apply to the satellite licenses already doled out to companies like Starlink and Amazon. And while there are several bills aimed at tightening up restrictions in the space, it seems unlikely any of them are going to survive a dysfunctional and corrupt Congress. <\/p>\n

That means that the light pollution caused by LEO satellites will continue to harm scientific researchers, who\u2019ve been forced to embrace expensive, temporary solutions to the problem that are very unlikely to scale<\/a> effectively as even more LEO companies set their sights on the heavens.<\/p>\n

\nFiled Under: astronomy<\/a>, gao<\/a>, high speed internet<\/a>, leo<\/a>, light pollution<\/a>, low earth orbit satellites<\/a>, mega constellations<\/a>, starlink<\/a>, telecom<\/a>
\n
Companies: spacex<\/a>, starlink<\/a>\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n