FCC Opens Musk's 1M-Satellite DC Plan for Public Comment

The Federal Communications Commission has opened SpaceX's audacious proposal for a one million satellite orbital datacenter constellation to public comment, marking a critical juncture in what could become one of the most consequential decisions about Earth's orbital environment in history.

SpaceX filed its application with the FCC's Space Bureau on January 30, and within just five days the agency accepted it for public comment. The unusually rapid processing suggests the FCC recognizes the gravity of what's being proposed: a satellite constellation that would increase the number of active satellites in Earth orbit by nearly 6,800 percent.

As of January's end, Harvard astrophysicist Jonathan McDowell's catalog shows only 14,518 active payloads circling Earth, with Starlink accounting for 9,555 of those. SpaceX's proposal would add one million more, creating an orbital infrastructure unprecedented in human history.

The technical and environmental challenges are staggering. McDowell, who tracks space objects professionally, warns that such a massive constellation would pose severe risks to ground-based and space-based astronomical observations. "One million satellites are going to be a big challenge for astronomy, especially as they are in higher orbits which is worse for us," he told The Register.

Perhaps more concerning is the Kessler Syndrome risk. This cascading scenario, where collisions create debris that causes more collisions, could render portions of Earth orbit unusable. With current orbital traffic already causing interference, multiplying active satellites by nearly 70 times pushes this risk from theoretical to imminent.

SpaceX's application outlines satellites in multiple orbital shells between 500 km and 2,000 km altitude. McDowell suggests that managing such a constellation would absolutely require "a fleet of tow-truck satellites to remove failed ones to avoid Kessler" syndrome. Companies like Astroscale are developing these debris removal capabilities, and China has demonstrated similar technologies.

The environmental impact extends beyond orbital debris. Starlink is already deorbiting and burning up roughly one to two satellites daily, a practice McDowell has previously identified as potentially problematic for planetary health. With a million satellites, the scale of atmospheric deposition from burning spacecraft could become significant.

SpaceX's technical claims strain credibility. The company asserts the constellation could deliver "on the order of 100 kW of power per metric ton allocated to computing" and would rely on "high-bandwidth optical links." The satellites would route traffic through Starlink's network to ground stations. These claims are presented without the detailed technical specifications that would normally accompany such an ambitious proposal.

The Starship connection adds another layer of uncertainty. SpaceX describes its still-troubled super rocket as bringing "inherent efficiencies" to launching the constellation and scaling it as demand requires. Yet Starship has yet to demonstrate reliable orbital capability, with test flights alternating between success and mishap.

Musk's vision extends far beyond practical datacenter infrastructure. In his FCC filing, SpaceX invokes Kardashev Type II civilization theory, suggesting that launching a million satellite datacenter constellation is "a first step towards becoming a Kardashev II-level civilization" capable of harnessing a star's full power. This cosmic ambition, while inspiring to some, raises questions about whether the proposal is grounded in engineering reality or science fiction.

The FCC has set March 6 as the deadline for public comments, creating a narrow window for concerned citizens, scientists, industry stakeholders, and policymakers to weigh in. This is a rare opportunity for the public to influence a decision that could fundamentally alter humanity's relationship with space.

SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment on the proposal's feasibility or environmental impact. The company's silence on these critical questions speaks volumes about the speculative nature of the undertaking.

The stakes couldn't be higher. If approved and successfully implemented, this constellation would represent an unprecedented expansion of human infrastructure into space. If it fails or creates unforeseen problems, the consequences could affect satellite communications, Earth observation, space exploration, and astronomical science for generations.

The public comment period represents democracy's last line of defense against a decision that could permanently alter Earth's orbital environment. Whether this proposal represents visionary thinking or dangerous overreach will be determined not just by technical feasibility, but by whether society chooses to accept the risks of crowding Earth's orbit with a million artificial objects.

The question before us is simple but profound: Should we allow one company to transform Earth's orbit into a massive datacenter, potentially compromising its use for all other purposes? The FCC is asking for your answer.