FCC Approves Reflect Orbital's Space Mirror Satellite That Astronomers Hate (pcmag.com)
- Reference: 0184398188
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/26/07/10/2230254/fcc-approves-reflect-orbitals-space-mirror-satellite-that-astronomers-hate
- Source link: https://www.pcmag.com/news/fcc-approves-reflect-orbitals-giant-mirror-satellite-that-astronomers-hate
> The approval is only for one satellite, dubbed Earendil-1, which is meant to test Reflect Orbital's technology for shining sunlight back to Earth. The satellite will boast a steerable thin-film reflector measuring about 60 feet by 60 feet, with the goal of powering solar farms at night or illuminating disaster-struck areas after dark to help rescue teams. Reflect Orbital envisions operating over 50,000 satellites by 2035, effectively surrounding the Earth with a fleet of mirrors. The proposal has faced stiff pushback from environmental groups and astronomers who are concerned that the satellites will unleash intrusive light pollution. The opposition has been so strong that the FCC received over 1,800 public comments on the application, many of them objecting to Reflect Orbital's plan for Earendil-1.
>
> [...] [T]he FCC approved the satellite, noting the grant is only "for a single demonstration satellite" to test an innovative technology that could advance American leadership in space. "The Communications Act states that it is the policy of the United States to 'encourage the provision of new technologies and services to the public,' and Reflect Orbital's demonstration satellite is an example of a potentially groundbreaking technology that the Commission has found is in the public interest to support," the order says. But on the most controversial aspect of the satellite, the FCC said the concerns around Reflect Orbital's solar reflector are "unrelated to the Commission's role in authorizing use of radiofrequency spectrum, and even if the Commission had authority to review and condition these operations (which it does not), these harms are unlikely to occur.
>
> In addition, the commission said that U.S. courts have blocked the FCC from using "a generalized public interest requirement beyond its statutory authority in regulating communications. Accordingly, the operations of a solar reflector in space would not be reviewed as part of the Bureau's public interest analysis." The regulator also noted that conducting an environmental review for the satellite went beyond its authority. Even if the FCC did have the power, the commission emphasized that the grant is for a single satellite, not 50,000. "The majority of these comments focus on a hypothetical plan to deploy tens of thousands of satellites, and those who argue the single satellite will harm the human environment do not demonstrate with specificity the potential harm will be caused by the single satellite, but rather rely on the same studies as the commenters objecting to a larger constellation," the FCC adds.
[1] https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-706A1.pdf
[2] https://www.pcmag.com/news/fcc-approves-reflect-orbitals-giant-mirror-satellite-that-astronomers-hate
copyright trolls to the rescue! (Score:5, Interesting)
Our only saviour could be the Tolkien Foundation who's been very active suing everyone who dares to refer to any of JRR's works. And copyright has been given such a strength that the FCC has no chances, they may at most pay the extortionists.
Re: (Score:2)
Quick google says Tolkien co. allows fanfiction, but not if the authors are trying to sell it at a profit. That a fanfiction author did self-publish his fanfiction book, then sued Amazon and Tolkien for ripping off his plot, and lost the suit because he didn't have rights to publish in the first place.
Isn't that what you'd expect? Is there more going on?
Re: (Score:2)
Anduril, Palantir, Mithril Capital, Valar Vantures, Erebor Capital, Rohan AI, Rivendell One, Lembas LLC, Sauron Systems......All in open use today. The worst part is its all racist/classist dog whistles. They use this framing to indicate they are fighting to save 'the Western World' and all the shittiness that entails.
Oooo (Score:3)
Space lasers about time we got there.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you mean "disproven"? Are you saying that mirrors don't reflect, that it won't be cost effective, or what?
Someone watching bond movies (Score:3)
Die Another Day (and all the Bond movies) have been playing on the TV. Someone must have liked the Icarus weapon and thought, "let's work up to that".
Barely more than moonlight... (Score:5, Interesting)
If we assume a best case scenario, that is all sunlight is captured by the 60 x 60 feet reflector and then send down to earth in a 3 mile diameter circle this would correspond to a light intensity of approximately 0.02 W / m2 or 2 Lux.
This is barely brighter than the light from a full moon. Probably not even enough for any color vision. So in which scenario does that help? And that already entails that a full satellite is only dedicated to you. Someone with more economical knowledge than me might want to give an estimate what the hourly rate of a satellite of that size might be.
The whole idea then goes brr by assuming thousands of satellites (1000 Lux would be bright office lighting) which is still not enough for any photovoltaic usage. So this is only an investment vehicle for people that dream without basic math.
Try this (Score:2)
> If we assume a best case scenario, that is all sunlight is captured by the 60 x 60 feet reflector and then send down to earth in a 3 mile diameter circle this would correspond to a light intensity of approximately 0.02 W / m2 or 2 Lux.
> This is barely brighter than the light from a full moon. Probably not even enough for any color vision. So in which scenario does that help? And that already entails that a full satellite is only dedicated to you.
Try this: go outside away from the city during a full moon.
I think you'll be surprised.
In the middle ages, when it was too hot during the day, farmers used to till and plant fields at night under the full moon. It allowed them to get more work done during the planting season.
Also try this: go outside between the hours of 2:00 PM and 7:00 PM in Spain right now (July).
I think you'll be surprised.
Re: (Score:2)
What is this inane comment supposed to mean? Instead of suggesting what people to to make them "surprised" explain in clear terms exactly what you think this will be useful for. Support your assertions.
Re: (Score:2)
Surprised how full of light a clear sky is at night. And hence the landscape.
Can't be so hard to grasp.
Re: (Score:2)
Try reading my entire comment and responding to all of it. Nobody is going to be "surprised" by how "bright" it can be a nighttime. This is not some closely held knowledge and you're not special for knowing it. What good is a few square feet of this illumination supposed to do? At what cost/benefit? Now scale that up and explain the cost/benefit.
Re: Try this (Score:2)
This is barely brighter than the light from a full moon
And the full moon is quite bright. I think this is what he's referring too. People in a city don't realise just how bright.
I'm certainly not advising for this mirror thing, though. And most certainly not thousands of them...
Barely enough for..dual-use? (Score:2)
Perhaps we're not thinking dual-use enough.
Perhaps there is an application for a barely more than moonlight mod within a schedule that demands action now.
Some military-looking "rescue" teams deployed on a moonless night along the Southern border to execute sub-sonic suppressor tests with a new satellite-powered night vision enhancement? You don't say..
Re: (Score:2)
This is a small prototype, not a full-scale mirror.
Also, ignoring that, pretending light brighter than the full moon is useless is... silly? For generating power, sure, but for illumination, it absolutely is not.
Re: (Score:2)
> So in which scenario does that help
With 50k satellites it can become an effective space weapon. Assume about 250ish miles orbital altitude. also assume the satellites you target with this weapon are at about the same altitude. That makes for roughly 140 miles average between satellites in the cluster and target, but much of the time there will be multiple satellites closer than this. Even low amounts of light coming from unexpected angles can blind sensors like surveillance cameras, but at shorter distances if the mirror has appropriate
Re: (Score:2)
> Someone with more economical knowledge than me might want to give an estimate what the hourly rate of a satellite of that size might be.
"... the company would charge about $5,000 an hour for the light of one mirror if a customer signed an annual contract for at least 1,000 hours. " -- NYT (https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/10/climate/fcc-space-mirror.html) One time events and emergencies would be more expensive.
That would be for the production mirrors, much bigger than this prototype. "The largest mirrors are planned to be nearly 180 feet wide, reflecting as much light as 100 full moons." (Ibid.)
It's not stated that the production target wo
Again (Score:4, Informative)
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Russians tried this in the 1990s. Seriously underwhelming, and not likely to be much better this time around.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Znamya_(satellite)
Re: (Score:2)
But this time it is done by proper capitalists!
Re: (Score:2)
But this time it is done by proper capitalists!!!
Re: (Score:2)
> But this time it is done by proper capitalists!!!
It'll have pretty much the same outcome. 8^)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably what Putin's July 4th call to dear leader was about.
How Much Power? (Score:4, Informative)
I think that they should do this experiment. Launch it test it. And, within a year, burn it up on re-entry.
Knowing the results of this experiment are good.
The idea of putting 50,000 of these to power a massive PV array and heat the Earth is a dog shit idea. It's bad on too many levels.
Re: (Score:2)
Especially given how easy it is to just drop down more PV on land.
Testbed for solar sail. (Score:2)
It's more interesting as a test for a solar sail.
The way it fails will be the interesting part.
This could disrupt our food production (Score:2)
If this ever does get to 50,000 satellites, and it is used a lot, it could disrupt our food production. Plants use the light cycle to time fruiting and growth and if that cycle gets disrupted, they can get stress and their output could be reduced or non-existent. There should really be some further testing/thought about what unintended side effects this could produce.
Did nobody do the math at FCC? (Score:1)
The solar constant is roughly 1361 Watts per square meter. The mirror is 60x60 feet or A_mirror = 335 mÂ. The target area is about 3 miles wide or 5.8 km (assuming a square) or A_target = 5.8 mn mÂ. The mirror will be tilted at 45 degrees give or take, so we need to take the cosine of 45 degrees = 0.7071 into account. The earth's atmosphere has a transparency of estimated 80 percent in clear weather conditions. Taken together, the energy flux on the ground will be solar constant x A_mirror
Re: Did nobody do the math at FCC? (Score:2)
It's a test.
In your attempt to look smart, you didn't.
Re: (Score:2)
In your attempt to look smart you look incredibly flat out stupid. You don't need to spend much time on basic arethmitic to see how financially unfeasible this will be for any purpose anyone has suggested it can be used for.
Re: (Score:2)
In response to your question 'Did nobody do the math at FCC?", the summary says that FCC specifically pointed out that their authority was only over the RF communications of the satellite. They had no authority to analyze or critique reflected light or to calculate whether it's a useful investment. FCC is the communications commission.
Second, obviously the final product, if it were to be implemented, would not be a single 60 foot mirror. Pointing out that a single small mirror produces an amount of power t
Math? (Score:2)
A 60feet versus 60 feet mirror which illuminates a 3miles versus 3miles solar field: will produce zero electricity.
Sunlight on the dark side (Score:3)
Exactly what Global Warming needs.
Re: (Score:3)
Anything for a buck. The future? Who cares ...