{"id":33532,"date":"2025-09-20T17:17:10","date_gmt":"2025-09-20T17:17:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/33532\/"},"modified":"2025-09-20T17:17:10","modified_gmt":"2025-09-20T17:17:10","slug":"is-starlink-bad-for-the-environment-fcc-doesnt-think-it-should-weigh-in","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/33532\/","title":{"rendered":"Is Starlink Bad for the Environment? FCC Doesn\u2019t Think It Should Weigh In"},"content":{"rendered":"

Don’t miss out on our latest stories. Add PCMag<\/a> as a preferred source on Google.<\/p>\n

A regulatory battle is starting to brew over whether a US agency should scrutinize the potential environmental impact of satellite constellations, including Starlink.<\/p>\n

Last month, the Federal Communications Commission voted<\/a> to consider modernizing its environmental regulations to cut the red tape that can slow down new infrastructure investments.<\/p>\n

As part of the review, the FCC is tackling a gray area. Should the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) apply to satellites, which orbit space but can also affect the Earth\u2019s atmosphere through rocket launches and the fiery re-entry<\/a> of decommissioned satellites?<\/p>\n

For decades, the FCC has exempted<\/a> satellites from required environmental reviews. But the topic has been raised in recent yeas as SpaceX and other companies fill Earth\u2019s orbit with satellites. On the flip side, any environmental review could become a drag on regulatory approvals for next-generation constellations.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"A<\/p>\n

\n A map tracking the current Starlink constellation, which spans over 8,000 satellites. (Credit: satellitemap.space)\n<\/p>\n

Under FCC Chair Brendan Carr, the commission is now officially proposing<\/a> \u201cthat space-based operations be excluded from NEPA because they are \u2018extraterritorial activities\u2019 with effects located entirely outside of the jurisdiction of the United States.\u201d <\/p>\n

This comes as Carr has been focused on helping the US compete against China<\/a> in the space industry, including for satellite communications.<\/p>\n

However, FCC procedure allows the public and industry stakeholders to weigh in. In no surprise, groups against light pollution are demanding that the commission include satellites in the environmental review process. This includes DarkSky International, which has been lobbying<\/a> its own supporters to submit comments.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cNear-Earth space is part of the human environment,\u201d adds<\/a> a letter that the Alliance to Reduce Light Pollution in Connecticut sent to the FCC. \u201cSatellite launches and operations affect us here on Earth through rocket emissions, orbital debris, interference with astronomy, and increasing levels of artificial light at night.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\"Newsletter<\/p>\n

\n Get Our Best Stories!\n <\/p>\n

Your Daily Dose of Our Top Tech News<\/p>\n

\"What's<\/p>\n

Sign up for our What’s New Now newsletter to receive the latest news, best new products, and expert advice from the editors of PCMag.<\/p>\n

Sign up for our What’s New Now newsletter to receive the latest news, best new products, and expert advice from the editors of PCMag.<\/p>\n

\n By clicking Sign Me Up, you confirm you are 16+ and agree to our Terms of Use<\/a> and Privacy Policy<\/a>.\n <\/p>\n

Thanks for signing up!<\/p>\n

Your subscription has been confirmed. Keep an eye on your inbox!<\/p>\n

The American Astronomical Society also told<\/a> the FCC that satellites and space-based communications should fall under its environmental regulations because of the impact to the atmosphere and night sky over the US. \u201cSatellite reentries can deposit metal vapor into the atmosphere above the US with potential<\/a> climate and air quality effects,\u201d the group said. \u201cUncontrolled reentries carry a non-zero risk of debris landing on US soil, with multiple such incidents<\/a> having taken place over the past few years.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, satellite players including SpaceX, Amazon, and AST SpaceMobile are pushing back in the FCC comments<\/a>, and calling on the agency to exempt satellites from environmental reviews.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cThe operations of satellites in orbit (including deorbit) are inarguably extraterritorial to the United States and have no meaningful effect on the human environment within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States,\u201d SpaceX said in its letter<\/a>, which also argues the NEPA rules can create administrative burdens with little environmental benefit.\u00a0(The company has also developed ways<\/a> to prevent Starlink satellites from reflecting light in the night sky.)<\/p>\n

Recommended by Our Editors<\/p>\n

A coalition of satellite providers, including AST SpaceMobile and Apple partner Globalstar, made<\/a> the same argument, adding: \u201cThere is no need to attempt to shoehorn the vastness of space within the confines of an Earth-focused US environmental law.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

But US satellite provider Viasat dissented<\/a>, saying large satellite constellations can \u201cadversely impact the environment in ways that could not have been imagined when the Commission first adopted its broad categorical exclusions under NEPA.\u201d It operates<\/a> a much smaller, geostationary constellation compared with Starlink, which spans over 8,000 satellites.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Commission should take steps to understand these potential impacts on a case-specific basis instead of simply assuming they can be safely ignored,\u201d Viasat added. \u201cThat said, the Commission should also explore potential mechanisms that would help to minimize the need for extensive evaluation.\u201d<\/p>\n

In an interesting twist, attorneys general from 15 US states sent a letter<\/a> to the FCC, telling the commission it needs to be clear in the changes it\u2019ll be making to its environmental regulation approach. This includes publishing the specific revisions, and allowing the public to comment again. As is, the FCC has merely floated \u201ca series of open-ended questions about various alternative ways the Commission could modify its NEPA regulations,\u201d the AGs wrote.\u00a0<\/p>\n

They also oppose excluding satellites from the FCC\u2019s environmental regulation, citing the commission\u2019s \u201ccursory determination of extraterritoriality.\u201d<\/p>\n

About Our Expert<\/p>\n

\"Michael<\/p>\n

Michael Kan<\/p>\n

Senior Reporter<\/p>\n

Experience<\/p>\n

I’ve been a journalist for over 15 years. I got my start as a schools and cities reporter in Kansas City and joined PCMag in 2017, where I cover satellite internet services, cybersecurity, PC hardware, and more. I’m currently based in San Francisco, but previously spent over five years in China, covering the country’s technology sector.<\/p>\n

Since 2020, I’ve covered the launch and explosive growth of SpaceX’s Starlink satellite internet service, writing 600+ stories on availability and feature launches, but also the regulatory battles over the expansion of satellite constellations, fights with rival providers like AST SpaceMobile and Amazon, and the effort to expand into satellite-based mobile service. I’ve combed through FCC filings for the latest news and driven to remote corners of California to test Starlink’s cellular service. <\/p>\n

I also cover cyber threats, from ransomware gangs to the emergence of AI-based malware. Earlier this year, the FTC forced Avast<\/a> to pay consumers $16.5 million for secretly harvesting and selling their personal information to third-party clients, as revealed in my joint investigation<\/a> with Motherboard.<\/p>\n

I also cover the PC graphics card market. Pandemic-era shortages led me to camp out<\/a> in front of a Best Buy to get an RTX 3000. I’m now following how President Trump’s tariffs will affect the industry. I’m always eager to learn more, so please jump in the comments with feedback and send me tips.<\/p>\n


\n Read Full Bio
\n <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Don’t miss out on our latest stories. Add PCMag as a preferred source on Google. A regulatory battle…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":33533,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[111,139,69,147,392],"class_list":["post-33532","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-space","tag-new-zealand","tag-newzealand","tag-nz","tag-science","tag-space"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33532","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33532"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33532\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/33533"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33532"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33532"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33532"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}