In the past, when talking about space and we'd think about the countries’ flags and their power. Now we live in a different type of space race, not only the nations, such as the USA, European countries, Russia, China, or India, are going to space. Private companies also entered this race and are fighting for a space in the crowed low Earth orbit (LEO) with their satellite constellations.  

What is Mega-constellation, and how it impacts sustainability? 

Satellite constellation is a network of small satellites working towards the same goal. Working together, they can cover a more substantial portion of Earth. Also, they are cheaper and easier to manufacture and to send to space, compared with their larger counterparts.   

One player who deserves attention is SpaceX. The company has the authorization to launch 12.000 satellites and has already launched 180 in three batches of 60, the Starlink mega-constellation. Besides, they plan to launch 30.000 more satellites. Blue Origin also is going for the race announcing its constellation with more than 3.000 satellites, according to Slate.com. Additionally, OneWeb has already launched 6 of its 900 satellites.  

The mentioned reduction in the costs allows failure, resulting in nonfunctional satellites and space debris. Starlink Satellites’ failure rate is 5%, which could represent 600 more dead satellites in orbit. One of the problems of space trash or debris is the Kessler Syndrome, a series of crashes caused by space debris can cascade generating even more waste.  

One way to handle space trash is to place them in lower orbit to have gravity pulling them back down, where they will burn up. That is the most popular plan among companies, but it is still unknown the environmental impacts of having thousands of satellites burning up in our atmosphere.   

Regulamentation and Space Laws 

Regulamentation currently happens at the national level, with governments being responsible for space activities of companies that operate and launch from within their borders. That does not cover what private companies do in orbit; there are no specific regulations for space debris or constellations, leaving companies free to do what they want. Changes are necessary, but the topic is delicate and involves politics. The general international legal regimes existents are the Outer Space Treaty and the Liability Convention, and they are unclear about liability and the mechanism to govern space activity.  

 Another problem is when having a contract signed by an in-orbit company in one country with a satellite operator in another country. One example of how complicated the situation can get is the fact that the Russian government has denied OneWeb, U.S. satellite communication start-up, to have their mega-constellation providing broadband internet in Russia. The reason was national security and risk to have open internet access that is not controlled by Moscow, without being sure if it would be used for intelligence gathering. Moreover, the possibility to give a monopoly over Internet service of rural and remotes area to an international provider, making part of Russia dependent on a foreign satellite service.  

This matter can be a conflict of interest, and even a threat, in a moment when Russia is strengthening internet control in the country to reinforce national sovereignty in cyberspace within Russia borders and nearby areas.  

According to the Outer Space Treaty, the activities of a commercial operator must be regulated, authorized, and supervised by the state where the satellite is launched, which has jurisdiction and control over this spacecraft. Furthermore, the government of a country in which the satellite company is based must have the consent of the country’s government where the satellite will provide the services. But there are no laws or policies to control that process. 

Mega-constellations and technical advances have removed the full sovereign power of a state to regulate activities, forcing states to react to actions of commercial companies in their jurisdiction. One example happened when Starlink 44, a SpaceX satellite, entered a route where a potential collision with ESA’s Aeolus was high. There is no law saying who needs to act in such cases, and SpaceX decided not to act, forcing ESA to move its satellite to avoid a collision. 

Regulatory international clarity is essential for solving problems such as collisions, debris, responsibility, liability, control of activities, surveillance, security and risk mitigation, qualification, and the process for gaining other states’ consent. It is necessary before the sustainable use of space be jeopardize. 

Follows us on Facebook, Twitter, or LinkedIn to get more news like that.

Article written by Juliane Verissímo - Marketing Department of VisionSpace.