U.S. approval of giant ‘space mirror’ satellite alarms astronomers | Scientific American
July 16, 2026<br>6 min read<br>Add Us On GoogleAdd SciAm<br>U.S. approval of giant ‘space mirror’ satellite alarms astronomers
A controversial new ruling from the Federal Communications Commission leaves no one responsible for regulating light pollution and other ill effects from skyrocketing numbers of satellites
By Mary Randolph edited by Lee Billings
Reflect Orbital’s Eärendil-1, a test satellite equipped with a large deployable mirror to demonstrate the company’s “sunlight on demand” business plan, could launch before the end of 2026.<br>Reflect Orbital
A “space mirror” test satellite meant to beam sunlight and turn night into day on targeted swaths of Earth just received approval to proceed—and astronomers are aghast. The satellite, called Eärendil-1 and built by the California-based startup Reflect Orbital, would be the first of some 50,000 similar spacecraft the company hopes to launch by 2035. Critics say such plans are wholly unacceptable because light pollution from so many large, bright satellites would radically degrade views of the night sky.<br>Eärendil-1’s formal approval to proceed came last week from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). That ruling addressed not only Reflect Orbital’s proposal but also more than 1,800 public comments expressing concerns about the project’s potential impact on the night sky and Earth’s orbital environment. To these objections, the FCC had one response: that’s not our problem.<br>Reflect Orbital’s sunny proposition is to provide “sunlight on demand” for solar power plants, emergency search and rescue operations, and round-the-clock construction projects. Once launched, Eärendil-1 would deploy an 18-meter-wide steerable mirror to demonstrate that technological feat; anyone or anything in the path of its beam would see the satellite as a glaring dot shining up to four times brighter than a full moon.<br>On supporting science journalism<br>If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.<br>The FCC’s decision “really scares me,” says Samantha Lawler, an associate professor of astronomy at the University of Regina in Saskatchewan, “because it shows what gigantic holes there are in the regulatory framework for outer space and lets Reflect Orbital just sail on through one of those holes. I’m really worried about the future of astronomy.”<br>Lawler and many other scientists are concerned about Reflect Orbital and Eärendil-1 for a few reasons. Whether for people, wildlife or astronomical observatories, the beam from this single test satellite is far from innocuous. Directly viewing it through a telescope, for example, could permanently damage eyes and sensors alike. And even outside the direct beam, the scattering of its photons through the atmosphere would create a still-bright smudge of light pollution in the surrounding night sky.<br>The FCC’s accompanying commentary for its decision pointedly notes the approval only applies to Eärendil-1 and that it had to consider “the small risk” of damage to individuals “against the benefits of permitting American companies to test innovative technology in space” via a single experimental satellite.<br>But 50,000 satellites is a different story. Olivier Hainaut, an astronomer at the European Southern Observatory, recently conducted a study on the potential light pollution from Reflect Orbital’s plans, based on computer simulations of the satellites and their operations in space. The full complement of satellites, he found, could collectively make the global night sky three to four times brighter than it is today, all around the world. Even the planet’s darkest skies could become about as bright as the heavens above a suburban town, he says.<br>For many animals, this brightening could disrupt circadian rhythms. For naked-eye stargazers, it could vastly limit what can be seen in the night sky. For astronomers, it could make much of their observational work effectively impossible.<br>“We astronomers are certainly not in favor of forbidding satellites,” Hainaut says. “And I would say that as citizens of planet Earth, it’s really in the interest of everybody to take this into account before it happens, not to slow progress but just not to do anything stupid.”<br>Hainaut’s study also looked at the broader implications of the rising overall numbers of satellites, with more than 14,500 now active and orbiting our planet. More than 10,000 of those are members of SpaceX’s Starlink megaconstellation for global broadband internet. And the surge is just beginning: proposals...