\n They will be left to sink to the seabed where, it argues, they could become \u201cartificial reefs\u201d and benefit marine wildlife. The firm also claims there will be no \u201cjustified demand from the public\u201d to remove them.\n<\/p>\n
\n But this has prompted \u201cserious \u00adconcerns\u201d from the Shetland fishing industry, which says that dumped rocket sections could endanger crews and damage fishing gear. It is \u00addemanding that debris be recovered, and fishing boats compensated for any problems.\n<\/p>\n
\n Environmental campaigners, who are about to publish a detailed report on the environmental impact of the international space industry, say that branding dumped rockets as wildlife-friendly reefs is a bid to \u201cgaslight\u201d people. They condemn \u00adbillionaire-owned space companies as \u201clitter louts\u201d and claim they do not want to clean up the mess they make.\n<\/p>\n
\n SaxaVord\u2019s application for a sea dumping licence is currently being considered by the Scottish Government<\/a>. Correspondence released to The Ferret under Freedom of Information law discloses that the spaceport has been privately lobbying ministers, including First Minister John Swinney<\/a>, to speed up the application.\n<\/p>\n \n The industry has also been \u00adpressing ministers to keep details of the \u00adapplication secret \u2013 and to make SaxaVord a \u201cfreeport\u201d so it could benefit from tax breaks and less red tape.\n<\/p>\n \n Neither SaxaVord nor Rocket Factory Augsburg have responded to \u00adrepeated requests to comment. But their websites stress their \u00adcommitments to protecting the \u00adenvironment and safeguarding \u201cour precious planet\u201d.\n<\/p>\n \n SaxaVord Spaceport is being built on the Lamba Ness peninsula on Unst, the northernmost inhabited \u00adisland in the Shetland archipelago.\n<\/p>\n \n \n The company is majority-owned by the Danish billionaire \u00adbusinessman, Anders Holch Povlsen, who is \u00adScotland\u2019s biggest private landowner.\n<\/p>\n \n According to a briefing for a visit to SaxaVord by Swinney, in \u00adFebruary 2026, the spaceport was given \u00a310 million by the UK Government<\/a> and \u00a3473,000 by the Scottish \u00adGovernment\u2019s Highlands and Islands<\/a> Enterprise. The company made a loss of \u00a35.4m in 2024.\n<\/p>\n \n The first launch by Rocket Factory Augsburg has been repeatedly postponed following the explosion of a test rocket on its launch pad at SaxaVord in August 2024. It is currently expected in the next few months.\n<\/p>\n \n SaxaVord applied to the Scottish Government in March for a licence to dispose of debris from the launch in the sea between July 1, 2026 and June 30, 2027. The application says that the rocket\u2019s nose cone and first stage will be jettisoned into a \u00ad\u201cdesignated hazard area\u201d in the sea north of Shetland. The nose cone is eight metres long and weighs 250 kilograms, while the first stage rocket is 21m and weighs 4.5 tonnes. \u00adAccording to an email to the Scottish \u00adGovernment, a second German company, \u00adHyImpulse, is also planning to launch a rocket from SaxaVord in September 2026.\n<\/p>\n \n A \u201cnavigational risk assessment\u201d by expert consultants, NLA International, for the licence application says that SaxaVord has been negotiating with a total of five companies to make nine launches in the next few years. Altogether, the rockets weigh more than 550 tonnes, and sections of all of them are due to be dumped in the sea.\n<\/p>\n \n THE assessment, dated September 2025, concludes that the \u201chighest risk\u201d from the launches is \u00adundetected recreational and fishing boats \u00adbeing \u201cstruck by rocket debris\u201d. This is \u00ad\u201csignificant\u201d, it says, and poses a \u201crisk to life\u201d.\n<\/p>\n \n The risk is rated as \u201ctolerable\u201d, but only if six measures are taken by \u00adSaxaVord to alert mariners to the dangers up to three months in advance, and to intensively monitor shipping.\n<\/p>\n \n The assessment highlights two \u00adother risks that are only \u201c\u00adtolerable with modifications\u201d. One is \u201ca \u00adrocket fails or is terminated soon after launch and debris lands on a vessel at sea\u201d. The other is from a rocket \u00adfailing \u00adbefore it reaches orbit \u00addumping debris that stays afloat and is hit by a boat.\n<\/p>\n \n The assessment says that the risk of rocket debris damaging fishing gear is \u201ctolerable with additional controls\u201d. Six other risks, including collisions with offshore oil or wind installations or damaging wildlife areas, are rated as \u201ctolerable with monitoring\u201d.\n<\/p>\n \n \n SaxaVord plans a \u201claunch \u00adexclusion zone\u201d stretching more than 17 miles north of Unst in which shipping would be banned. According to the risk assessment, the area was used by 332 boats of all kinds in 2024.\n<\/p>\n \n But the total area potentially \u00adimpacted by initial launches is much bigger. It\u2019s a huge cone \u00adcovering more than 400,000 square miles of the seas \u00adbetween Shetland, Greenland, \u00adIceland, and Norway.\n<\/p>\n \n According to the assessment, more than 3000 cargo, fishing and other boats used the area in 2024. The area is fished all year round by \u00adhundreds of vessels, primarily for \u00adherring and mackerel, with Shetland having up to 300 commercial boats.\n<\/p>\n \n Fishing peaks every August as Norwegian and Russian fleets \u00adfollow shoals of herring and \u00admackerel. This \u201cmay increase the risk to \u00adexceed what is tolerable to \u00adundertake launch operations without \u00adappropriate control measures,\u201d the assessment warns.\n<\/p>\n \n The SaxaVord assessment also \u00adhighlights that future launches could impact a second large expanse of sea, further away on the other side of Greenland. This includes the \u00adBeaufort Sea and part of the Arctic Ocean off the north coasts of Canada and Alaska.\n<\/p>\n \n Another report examining the \u201cbest practicable environmental \u00adoptions\u201d for the sea dumping licence \u00adapplication was prepared by Rocket Factory Augsburg in February 2026. Recovery of the dumped nose cone and rocket is not planned because it is \u201can expensive and hazardous \u00adoperation\u201d, the report says.\n<\/p>\n \n The rocket parts, which are mainly made out of steel, are designed to sink to the bottom of the sea. There they \u201cmay start an artificial reef and serve as a habitat for marine life,\u201d the \u00adreport claims.\n<\/p>\n \n \u201cIt is therefore very unlikely that there will be a justified demand from the public to remove the \u00addebris once the environmental \u00adbenefits<\/a> of such artificial reefs have been \u00adcommunicated.\u201d\n<\/p>\n \n The Shetland Tourism<\/a> Association greeted the space companies\u2019 dumping plans with an \u201cabsolute no\u201d, demanding they be halted. \u201cI was horrified to see that there could be a risk to tourists,\u201d the association\u2019s chair, Amanda Hawick<\/a>, told The Ferret.\n<\/p>\n \n \u201cNo-one should be at any risk at all. It\u2019s absolutely shocking what they are planning.\u201d\n<\/p>\n \n The impact could be \u00ad\u201cdevastating\u201d for some tourist businesses, she warned. She accused SaxaVord of \u201ctrying to railroad this through\u201d \u00adwithout proper consultations.\n<\/p>\n \n The Shetland Fishermen\u2019s \u00adAssociation expressed \u201cserious \u00adconcerns\u201d about the proposal not to recover jettisoned rock components.\n<\/p>\n \n \u201cDebris must not be left on the seabed where it can damage gear or endanger crews, and any proposal to deposit rocket parts in productive fishing waters requires robust mitigation and compensation \u00admeasures,\u201d said the association\u2019s executive \u00adofficer, Sheila Keith.\n<\/p>\n \n She complained about a \u201clack of \u00addetail\u201d on the proposed \u00adexclusion zones. \u201cFishermen cannot be \u00adexpected to work around hazards they are not allowed to see,\u201d she argued. \u201cThey need full transparency about any \u00adactivity that affects their safety or \u00adaccess to traditional grounds.\u201d\n<\/p>\n \n The campaign group Space Watch UK pointed out that the public and marine industries were working hard to avoid dumping rubbish at sea. It \u00adaccused the space industry of \u00adwanting a \u201cget-out-of-jail-free card\u201d to \u201cditch launch junk in the ocean\u201d.\n<\/p>\n \n \u201cLaunch companies then have the cheek to try to gaslight us by saying that dumping space junk in the sea forms artificial reefs which are good for the environment, even though there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim,\u201d said the group\u2019s Peter Burt.\n<\/p>\n \n He is the author of a report \u00adentitled Waste Of Space: The \u00adEnvironmental Cost Of Human Activities In Space, which is due to be launched at an \u00adonline meeting on July 1. \u201cThe \u00adScottish Government should not be acting as lackeys for super-rich litter-louts who think they use the ocean as a dustbin,\u201d he told The Ferret.\n<\/p>\n \n The Marine Conservation Society warned the sea must not be used as a \u201cdumping ground\u201d, and dismissed suggested artificial reefs as unproven. \u201cAs proposed, this is simply \u00adpollution,\u201d said the society\u2019s Calum Duncan.\n<\/p>\nSaxaVord Spaceport on Unst aims to begin test launches this summer (SaxaVord\/PA)\n<\/p>\n
Launches from SaxaVord spaceport on Shetland are expected to begin in 2026 (SaxaVord\/PA)\n<\/p>\n