Starlink satellites create light pollution and disrupt radio frequencies. And it's getting worse
Thousands of satellites in low-Earth orbit are still lighting up the sky, frustrating astronomers
Look up at the night sky from a city — where most people live — and you'll see just a smattering of stars. Perhaps even an airplane or two.
But drive further out, past the glare of lights from houses, cars, office buildings and street lamps, and the stars reveal themselves in a way that few have truly seen.
Now, it seems the night sky is under attack not only from below, but from above, thanks to the rapid proliferation of satellites, mainly megaconstellations, which can contain hundreds or thousands of satellites. And leading the charge is SpaceX.
The company launched its first batch of 60 Starlink satellites in 2019. Soon, they were showing up in data from professional astronomical institutions.
Knowing that SpaceX was proposing thousands more, the International Astronomical Union created the Centre for the Protection of the Dark and Quiet Sky from Satellite Constellation Interference.
SpaceX immediately agreed to work with the astronomical community. But despite reassurances from SpaceX COO Gwynne Shotwell in 2020 that they "are going to get it done" and fix the problem, it's still an ongoing issue threatening astronomical research.
The problem for astronomers is two-fold: passing Starlink satellites create long lines through images taken with optical telescopes and create "noise" for radio telescopes, which rely on specific radio frequencies.
In
this screenshot taken from the live megaconstellation site
www.satellitemap.space, all the white dots represent Starlink satellites
currently in orbit. (www.satellitemap.space)
"I want to be very clear that satellite infrastructure is incredibly important, and we all recognize that. So that's not the argument," said Aaron Boley, an associate professor and Canada research chair in planetary astronomy at the University of British Columbia.
"The argument is, ultimately, how much infrastructure in orbit do we need? How much can we put up there safely?" he said. "How much can we put up there without having very long-term impacts on the environment?"
'Wild West'
One might say that since space is vast, we shouldn't be so concerned. But the fact is, there are specific orbits where satellites need to be, and it's getting crowded.
There's a fear that it's getting so crowded that it could produce the Kessler effect, where one satellite is destroyed, which in turn destroys another and another (just think of the movie Gravity). And that would most certainly affect us here on Earth, given our reliance on satellites for weather information, GPS and more.
Starlinks have a lifespan of just five years, so when they've reached their end of life, they fall back down to Earth, burning up in our atmosphere, leaving behind metals, and it's unclear what those long-term effects will be.
We've had satellites ever since Sputnik 1 launched in 1957. But today, the numbers are mind-boggling.
In 1958, eight satellites were launched. By 1967, that number rose to 159. After that, roughly 40 to 150 satellites were launched annually. Fast forward to 2023, and more than 2,600 satellites were launched.
Of all the satellites now in orbit, SpaceX owns more than half. And they plan to have a megaconstellation of roughly 42,000 satellites.
Meredith Rawls, a research scientist in the University of Washington's department of astronomy, explains what it's like trying to do research with so many satellites crossing the sky.
"[It's like] trying to look through like a dirty windshield to do your science, and there's just all this stuff everywhere," she said.
"I think that we're just on an unsustainable path right now.... International co-ordination is not a priority on anyone's radar right now, and it's more like a kind of a Wild West-based race situation," Rawls said.
SpaceX did not immediately respond to a CBC request for comment.
Little progress
To be fair, the company has worked with the International Astronomical Union to try to mitigate the effects on astronomical research, but so far, it doesn't seem like any real progress has been made.
SpaceX tried a different coating on its satellites early on in order to reduce optical brightness and even a type of shield. Neither truly worked.
A
long-exposure image of the Orion Nebula with a total exposure time of
208 minutes shows satellite trails in mid-December 2019, when only
roughly 180 Starlink satellites had been launched. (A. H. Abolfath/NOIRLab/NSF/AURA)
This summer, there was some promising news for radio astronomers.
On Aug. 9, SpaceX announced new techniques they developed along with the National Science Foundation and the National Radio Astronomy Observatory that would help radio astronomers by steering the radio emission beams away from radio telescopes.
The good news didn't last very long. That same day, a new paper published in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics found Starlink satellites are unintentionally leaking electromagnetic radiation in low frequencies.
"Even without the direct transmission, these satellites produce electromagnetic radiation in radio wavelengths just from their electronics. And it's actually quite radio loud, and so the telescopes are able to pick it up pretty easily," Boley said.
From seeing red to seeing blue
There's another new problem: While initially Starlink satellites appeared red, their new V2 satellites appear blue.
"This is a consequence, we think, of the coating that's been put on the new Starlink satellites, and overall it is to help reduce their visibility, which is a good thing," Boley said.
However, these satellites are bigger. What would have been a reduction for the earlier satellites is now scattering more blue light, making them appear somewhat brighter.
WATCH | Why are Starlinks appearing blue?
To most people, the night sky is likely not a priority when it comes to pollution, be it in the form of light or radio waves. But it has played an important role not only in terms of applicable scientific research, but in our evolution: the night sky influenced the earliest humans, helping produce scientific curiosity about the world around us and providing inspiration in art, culture and almost every aspect of our development.
But now, the Milky Way is hidden from more than one-third of humanity, and from more than 80 per cent of North Americans.
The question is, if SpaceX is trying to work with the astronomical community and making little progress, what are other players going to do? SpaceX isn't the only one launching these constellations — China plans to launch 40,000 of its own, and there are other companies, such as OneWeb, that propose hundreds.
What happens to astronomy — and our night sky — if satellite operators don't even want to try to fix the problem of light and radio pollution?
"I feel a little pessimistic in that it's billion-dollar industry versus science," said Victoria Kaspi, an astrophysicist at McGill University in Montreal who works with the Canadian Hydrogen Intensity Mapping Experiment (CHIME) radio telescope in British Columbia.
"To me, it feels like, really, the only way to manage this would be through public opinion, if there was a groundswell of appreciation for this light pollution."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
And I am grateful every day to Mr Musk for Starlink and his efforts within Social Media
Reply to David Amos
Grateful for misinformation?
Stan Johnson
Reply to David Amos
What did you do before social media?
David Amos
Reply to Stan Johnson
Sued lawyers
James McCaffrey
Reply to David Amos
Billionaire worship is gross.
Stan Johnson
Reply to David Amos
Was there a lot of work?
David Amos
Reply to Mike Hayley
Nope
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Mike Hayley
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-royal-riding-profile-1.3274276
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to James McCaffrey
Voting for crooks is far worse
Mike Hayley
Reply to David Amos
That is his only contribution to social media.
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Stan Johnson
I filed a very important one while running in the election of the 42nd Parliament
Stan Johnson
Reply to David Amos
Against who?
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Mike Hayley
Twitter disabled my original Twitter account years ago However my latest one is still going strong thanks to Mr Musk
Julia LeBeau
Reply to Mike Hayley
There was a lot of misinformation before he bought it. He cleaned it up and got rid of individuals that were working with the government to restrict speech.
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Stan Johnson
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
Federal Court File No T-1557-15
Mike Hayley
Reply to Julia LeBeau
No there wasn't, and now there is far more. Like the pet eating thing Musk shared. That never happened.
Julia LeBeau
Reply to Mike Hayley
Or 'mostly peaceful protests'? Or was that just a slogan?
David Amos
Reply to Julia LeBeau
Oh so true
Stan Johnson
Reply to David Amos
So how is that case coming along?
Mike Hayley
Reply to Julia LeBeau
Jan 6th?
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Stan Johnson
Ask yourself why I am blogging and twitting right now
Fred Emmersen Turner
this is sad to read. i hope the issue will be fixed. all about profit for elon, by the way
Joan Malonie
Content Deactivated
He gives the starlink service free to any country or area that needs it.
Ted Wach
So here we have another article that insinuates that we have something else to fear. MSMs love to suggest to the population that another menace is just around the corner.
Stan Johnson
Reply to Ted Wach
Comprehension isn’t your strong suit , I take it?
Mike Hayley
Reply to Ted Wach
Fear? Are you ok?
David Amos
Reply to Ted Wach
Amen
russ bowland
Seems pretty clear when you get away from any city or town.
Gregory Wulf
Reply to russ bowland
It's the hobbyists who want to take pictures of the stars that get disturbed by the satellites. As shown in the photo's above. Long exposure times catch the satellite's track.
Stan Johnson
Reply to Gregory Wulf
So you didn’t read the article?
Mike Hayley
Reply to russ bowland
It isn't though, not like it used to be. I attending a conference where we astronomers were lamenting the loss of dark skies. You can find several dark sky maps online that have historical data, showing we are seeing less and less, even in remote areas.
Lynette Browne
Reply to Gregory Wulf
As per the article: "Meredith Rawls, a research scientist in the University of Washington's department of astronomy, explains what it's like trying to do research with so many satellites crossing the sky. "[It's like] trying to look through like a dirty windshield to do your science, and there's just all this stuff everywhere," she said. "I think that we're just on an unsustainable path right now.... International co-ordination is not a priority on anyone's radar right now, and it's more like a kind of a Wild West-based race situation," Rawls said.
Gregory Wulf
Reply to Lynette Browne
Universities have access to the space telescopes.
Eileen Kinley
Reply to Gregory Wulf
Apparently it is also the actual astronomers too.
Gregory Wulf
Reply to Eileen Kinley
I've certainly worked Mike up.
David Amos
Content Deactivated
Reply to Gregory Wulf
That was kinda special
Stan Johnson
Reply to John Duncan
It definitely has its place.
Bob Baxter
Reply to John Duncan
Is there a special receiver designed for the harsh cold temperatures of the arctic? The specs on my receiver say it's only rated to -30c.
Joan Malonie
Reply to John Duncan
As soon as my contract is up with my ISP, I am going to Starlink.
David Amos
Reply to Joan Malonie
I hope everybody does
No comments:
Post a Comment