4 ms·

I agree: space is a SHARED place... why should some US corp. be able to pollute it ????? And why should US citizen ONLY have something to say about it ???? I ca

I agree: space is a SHARED place... why should some US corp. be able to pollute it ????? And why should US citizen ONLY have something to say about it ???? I can understand that the US may decide what is above its territory, but I surely dont want to MY french nights with Musk or Bezos satellites... and moreover without my consent !

manquer 5y ago
While there are some rudimentary frameworks for collaboration in space. It is still free for all. Sovereignty in space above 50 km is complex and not really well established, countries have differing claims like bogota declaration etc. Most countries launch satellites they don't necessarily tell each other. There is nothing stopping a French company from doing the same as spaceX. Infact OneWeb is owned by UK government partially and a Indian teleco Bharti Airtel. They manufacturer satellites in UK (a lot of satellites are manufactured in UK) and launch in Russia. France or any other country does regulate and operators do respect who can transmit/use radio frequencies within their geographic areas.
- olivierduval 5y ago
  That's the point: it looks like space is the new "Far West"... Can't we learn from history and - for once - try to talk and agree on common rules and management together BEFORE doing something to a world shared resource ?
  - manquer 5y ago
    The resource needs to have real value before serious regulations effort is made . Potential value is never enough, for example there is no regulations for asteroid mining today, it would be waste of time to do it now, unless we could actually do it . Satellites before starlink OneWeb were much lesser problem in terms of resources utilization . Starlink growth is unprecedeted in part because there is little regulations stopping them , so the current model has its advantages
    - olivierduval 5y ago
      I agree: before now and the "cheap" satellites launch era, there were no need for regulation. But now the situation has changed so maybe it's time to slow down a bit and take the time to think ? Moreover, there's more and more incidents in space, and it will only grow in the near future In a way, maybe the "request for comments" should be lead by a worldwide org (ONU based) and not only a US one ?
vayeate 5y ago
Satellites aren't pollution. They have a 10 year service life then fall back down to Earth. Do you also complain about buildings ruining your french nights? Or billboards? Or traffic noise? Should we ban all automobiles and buildings and outdoor lighting? Should we ban all combustion engines to ensure there's no amount of smog in the air as well? Satellites are extremely far down on the list of public nuisances and don't serve any threat to our health unlike smog and carbon emissions.
- olivierduval 5y ago
  Actually, a significant part of french people (and growing) are against traffic noise and visual pollution... they're called ecologist ! And combustion engine will be ban in Europe after 2035 IIRC. So I guess that maybe it could mean something on what "people" want in Europe... And even more: some are against "renewal energy" like wind fields because of both! Satellites are down on public nuisance BECAUSE there's not a lot of it ! But how will it rate when there will be 100 times more ? And then, we will have to live with it for 10 years maybe... and surely more (because you know: once it's done, it's hard to lose the investment) Just to be clear: maybe it's not the worst idea... but we should ALL talk about it, and not only the US people

manquer 5y ago

While there are some rudimentary frameworks for collaboration in space. It is still free for all. Sovereignty in space above 50 km is complex and not really well established, countries have differing claims like bogota declaration etc. Most countries launch satellites they don't necessarily tell each other. There is nothing stopping a French company from doing the same as spaceX. Infact OneWeb is owned by UK government partially and a Indian teleco Bharti Airtel. They manufacturer satellites in UK (a lot of satellites are manufactured in UK) and launch in Russia. France or any other country does regulate and operators do respect who can transmit/use radio frequencies within their geographic areas.

olivierduval 5y ago
That's the point: it looks like space is the new "Far West"... Can't we learn from history and - for once - try to talk and agree on common rules and management together BEFORE doing something to a world shared resource ?
- manquer 5y ago
  The resource needs to have real value before serious regulations effort is made . Potential value is never enough, for example there is no regulations for asteroid mining today, it would be waste of time to do it now, unless we could actually do it . Satellites before starlink OneWeb were much lesser problem in terms of resources utilization . Starlink growth is unprecedeted in part because there is little regulations stopping them , so the current model has its advantages
  - olivierduval 5y ago
    I agree: before now and the "cheap" satellites launch era, there were no need for regulation. But now the situation has changed so maybe it's time to slow down a bit and take the time to think ? Moreover, there's more and more incidents in space, and it will only grow in the near future In a way, maybe the "request for comments" should be lead by a worldwide org (ONU based) and not only a US one ?

vayeate 5y ago

Satellites aren't pollution. They have a 10 year service life then fall back down to Earth. Do you also complain about buildings ruining your french nights? Or billboards? Or traffic noise? Should we ban all automobiles and buildings and outdoor lighting? Should we ban all combustion engines to ensure there's no amount of smog in the air as well? Satellites are extremely far down on the list of public nuisances and don't serve any threat to our health unlike smog and carbon emissions.

olivierduval 5y ago
Actually, a significant part of french people (and growing) are against traffic noise and visual pollution... they're called ecologist ! And combustion engine will be ban in Europe after 2035 IIRC. So I guess that maybe it could mean something on what "people" want in Europe... And even more: some are against "renewal energy" like wind fields because of both! Satellites are down on public nuisance BECAUSE there's not a lot of it ! But how will it rate when there will be 100 times more ? And then, we will have to live with it for 10 years maybe... and surely more (because you know: once it's done, it's hard to lose the investment) Just to be clear: maybe it's not the worst idea... but we should ALL talk about it, and not only the US people