Skip to main content

COOL! The spicy article I wrote about satellite pollution is FINALLY published! "Bright satellites are disrupting astronomy research worldwide" in Nature News & Views.

This article required weeks of back-and-forth with the editor, the editor-in-chief, and Nature's lawyers, so I hope that means it's a good one.

During this process, I learned that satellite companies are so powerful and litigious that even giant publishers like Nature are terrified of getting sued. Which is...rather worrying.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •

Paywalled article here, I'll share once I have a non-paywalled link (hopefully soon): https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03610-5

The summary: astronomers spent a lot of time asking SpaceX and other large satellite operators to pretty please make their satellites fainter and/or use fewer satellites. And then BlueWalker 3 was launched by some tiny company and is one of the brightest things in the sky. Asking nicely isn't working: international regulation and pollution penalties are needed.


Bright satellites are disrupting astronomy research worldwide

BlueWalker 3 satellite outshines most visible stars.
Lawler, Samantha

Adrianna Tan reshared this.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Frank Aylward
Frank Aylward
• •
I saw starlink for the first time a few weeks ago and I was amazed at how large and disruptive it looked
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Discovering BTS⁷ - 마리온
Discovering BTS⁷ - 마리온
• •
No one thinks ahead and that's the problem. While many are excited about satellites being launched, hardly a soul thinks about the long term consequences.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •
Free author link here! https://rdcu.be/drQOU
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Nonya Bidniss
Nonya Bidniss
• •
"I often wonder what kind of night sky my children will inherit. Will the stars be hidden behind a crawling grid of bright satellites, or a hazardous snow globe of post-Kessler debris? Or will government regulators set strong safety and light-pollution rules before the night sky is all but lost? The future sky will be chosen in the coming years by the actions of private satellite companies and the government agencies that should be regulating them."
👏 👏 👏
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

arpia49
arpia49
• •
Many thanks 🤓. In case you don't know you can edit your original post and use te new link there. Mastodon rocks!
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •

Just got an email from first Nature editor I talked to about writing this piece, and they thanked me for writing it and apologized for the fact that my rage got toned-down by Nature's lawyers. Interesting!

Ended by saying that they are glad they're retiring soon because they are scared that ground-based astronomy will be dead in 5 years and I should keep fighting.

That's high in the running for the most depressing conclusion to an email I've ever received. Wow.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Koen Hufkens, PhD
Koen Hufkens, PhD
• •
As an amateur astronomer and someone who generally enjoys the night sky, thank you for fighting the good fight. Despite the grim prospects.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
• •
There is a company that offers "orbital debris removal", and just in case anyone didn't get what that means they named themselves Privateer. It would take significant fund raising but this is a time tested solution to the problem.
in reply to Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •

@RichPuchalsky what do you mean by time tested? As far as I'm aware, no technology has ever even been successfully built to remove small pieces of space junk, let alone tested.

I want to be hopeful, but I'm really not on this one...

@Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
• •
Mostly but only partially a joke. There really is a company (web page privateer.com ), they really do claim to have some method for removing space junk, and the fact that they chose the name privateer seems like a reference to the historical privateers who would remove one entity's ships at the behest of another
in reply to Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •
@RichPuchalsky Yeah, I still don't know what to think about that company. I've interacted a bit with Moriba Jah at various sat conferences, and I know he's an incredibly smart dynamicist who does great work fighting for satellite regulation. But clearing out space junk? That's definitely beyond what anyone has currently demonstrated...
@Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •

@RichPuchalsky

Mostly I really love the real-time conjunction data put together by Moriba Jah and his research group:
http://astriacss03.tacc.utexas.edu/ui/min.html

it's completely terrifying. Anytime you look at it, there are conjunctions within 1-2 km happening in the next few minutes somewhere in orbit. Doesn't sound close, but remember that everything in orbit is travelling at several km per SECOND. So this is really freaking close.

Conjunction Streaming Service (Demo)

astriacss03.tacc.utexas.edu
@Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:

Prof. Sam Lawler reshared this.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

realityCzar
realityCzar
• •

@RichPuchalsky I will argue that a kilometer is still a kilometer. I did conjunction evaluation for years and a km wasn’t close enough to even trigger a review.

Now I work for a debris remediation company. Dr. Lawler is right that nobody’s demo’ed removal from orbit yet. That’s within a few years of changing. What remains a question: who will pay for it? Plus the biggest dangers are not only technically but also diplomatically challenging.

@Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Inlaing
Inlaing
• •
@RichPuchalsky depends what they're defining as space junk. Maybe they plan to get up there and sweep the sky of satellites 😝
@Rich Puchalsky :anarchism:
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Peter Gutsche
Peter Gutsche
• •
that is scary. Thanks for sharing the article, and for asking the question "what kind of night sky my children inherit".
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •

Hey cool, apparently when you write something for Nature they send you a free paper copy! Kinda neat to see my name in there.

I sincerely hope my article makes someone in power think a little harder about the lack of regulations in orbit (but I'm not holding my breath...I'll keep fighting)

The free link to read the article is a couple posts up-thread, if you are interested and haven't already read it.

A picture of the cover of the journal Nature, with a big picture of the starry sky and several bright satellite streaks, with the text "Outshining the stars. How artificial satellites could change the night sky and challenge astronomy"
A picture of my opinion article in the magazine: "Bright satellites are disrupting astronomy" with a photo of a galaxy that has many bright streaks cutting across the image.

Baron Woke of Carlsberg reshared this.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Brian Vastag
Brian Vastag
• •
Us lowly freelancer reporters never got paper copies but you got the cover, so it's well-earned.
in reply to Brian Vastag

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •
@brianvastag oh I should note that it's not me that's on the cover, it's the actual research piece! I just wrote an opinion in response to it
@Brian Vastag
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •

I should note that my piece in here is an opinion piece, I wasn't a co-author on the main research article that is featured on the cover. It was a huge effort by a lot of astronomers, at least a couple are on Mastodon.

Congrats to @astrokiwi and @JohnBarentine on really good work documenting to the world how stupidly bright BlueWalker3 is (and thanks to the Nature editor for inviting me to write the accompanying angry opinion piece!)

@Michele Bannister @Dr. John Barentine FRAS
This entry was edited (4 months ago)
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Christian Grobmeier
Christian Grobmeier
• •
@astrokiwi @JohnBarentine Thank you, Sam, for writing such a splendid article. I read it; your work is inspiring and, of course, educating.
@Michele Bannister @Dr. John Barentine FRAS
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

ShadSterling
ShadSterling
• •
“ground-based astronomy will be dead in 5 years” sounds like an example of “people tend to overestimate change in the short term and underestimate change in the long term”. Kinda makes me wonder what it’ll be like in 20 years tho. None of the options I can think of are good, unless we can get governments to regulate and cooperate
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Jay Cee
Jay Cee
• •

That was a great article! Very sobering. It sucks that the rage was toned down because that would've been a chef's kiss or the salt sprinkled fancily on top.

This is why I like the Fediverse. I'm regularly finding information like your article without needing to navigate a Kessler snowglobe of detritus on Instagram.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

FestplattenSchnitzel
FestplattenSchnitzel
• •

Thanks for sharing the link!

[Please ignore the previous statement, I should remember I'm in a university network …]

This entry was edited (4 months ago)
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

HistoPol (#HP)
HistoPol (#HP)
• •

@2ndStar

#Starlink

The summary:

"astronomers spent a lot of time asking SpaceX and other large satellite operators to pretty please make their satellites fainter and/or use fewer satellites..."

https://mastodon.social/@sundogplanets/111460548766931530

Prof. Sam Lawler

2023-11-23 15:23:22


Paywalled article here, I'll share once I have a non-paywalled link (hopefully soon): https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03610-5

The summary: astronomers spent a lot of time asking SpaceX and other large satellite operators to pretty please make their satellites fainter and/or use fewer satellites. And then BlueWalker 3 was launched by some tiny company and is one of the brightest things in the sky. Asking nicely isn't working: international regulation and pollution penalties are needed.



Bright satellites are disrupting astronomy research worldwide

BlueWalker 3 satellite outshines most visible stars.
Lawler, Samantha

#Starlink @Dark•:•Star :antifa:
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Bill Of Earth42
Bill Of Earth42
• •
how about crowd-funding a killer satellite to be put into polar orbit so it can shoot these fuckers down? I'd give a hundred bucks.
This entry was edited (5 months ago)
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Mina
Mina
• •

The night sky should be declared UNESCO natural heritage.

Light pollution in general is also bad for animals.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

StarkRG
StarkRG
• •
My suggestion is to tax companies based on the brightness of satellites and use the tax income to fund observatories on the far side of the moon. You'll get dimmer satellites *and* super-dark-sky observatories.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Alan Brookland
Alan Brookland
• •
This is just so depressing. There seem to be so many communal resources (like space!) which large organisations just seen to be able to claim without any wider discussion just because they can.
I have no idea how you can stop it, but we don't even seem to acknowledge it's an issue sometimes. Resources are just there to be exploited.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Joe
Joe
• •
Yes, the SpaceX owner just sued Media Matters for an entirely truthful article about the former Twitter, so the lawyers are probably expecting that he will sue over your article, so they will want to make sure that they can back up every assertion and win in court if it comes to that.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

John Q McDonald
John Q McDonald
• •
…and the space industry is crowded with companies planning or executing large satellite constellations, SpaceX is the worst but there are a dozen more. As with growing fossil fuel use in a climate crisis, capitalism fiddles while the planet burns
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

skua
skua
• •

" ... even giant publishers like Nature are terrified of getting sued."

The #ScientificMethod's new Run-It-By-The-Lawyers section.

Has some symmetry with the earlier Get-Funding section.

#scientificmethod
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

deadly lazer
deadly lazer
• •
fucking starlink has been overhead like 5 times recently. It was novel the first time i guess but now its just like "oh boy here we go again. And the stars were looking so pretty tonight"
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Nihl L'Amas
Nihl L'Amas
• •
With the power of AI, Skynet will be able to file lawsuits on its own.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Likely Jan Lukas
Likely Jan Lukas
• •

Despite a longtime interest in astonomy I know laughably little (I can find Polaris and identify Mars and that's about it), so I truly appreciate it when folks like you share critical news like this. Thank you! ❤️

And the Kessler Syndrome! Sounds like a horror movie in the making. 😱

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Doug Jayne
Doug Jayne
• •
it's bad enough that corporations use the executive and legislative branches as weapons against the smaller fish, but then they go and rig the system designed for justice against them as well.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Dr. jonny phd
Dr. jonny phd
• •
This is like a kindergarten level question, but im genuinely curious why they are so bright - is it because they are very reflective, or do they have lights on them? If they have lights, can they just... turn them off?
in reply to Dr. jonny phd

Prof. Sam Lawler
Prof. Sam Lawler
• •
@jonny The reflect sunlight - no lights on them. The new ones are really big and low altitude compared to most satellites before 2019, which is why it suddenly got worse. Starlink has done some things to retrofit their satellites to make them fainter. But they also keep increasing the size, so the changes mostly cancel out... but even the big Starlinks are way fainter than BlueWalker 3 which is what prompted me to write my Nature rant.
@Dr. jonny phd
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Dr. jonny phd
Dr. jonny phd
• •
Gotcha. Thank you. And I take it painting them with some nonreflective coating is either "too expensive" (vs. The $0 from no regulation) or doesnt actually resolve the problem
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

British Tech Guru
British Tech Guru
• •
I've heard of satellite light pollution before. In fact, so many years ago, that I wonder why nothing has been done to combat it. Only the side of the satellite facing the sun needs to be reflective. The other side can be jet black. I've known about this for literally 10 years which coincidentally is the lifespan of many satellites.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

millennial falcon
millennial falcon
• •
fun fact: satellite lobbiest bleed like you wouldn't believe and they fucking love it. help the little dogshit eaters every chance you get.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Ailuridae
Ailuridae
• •
Oh that's not good (the "scary even to Nature" part I mean)
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

David Bruchmann
David Bruchmann
• •
Rare northern bald ibises accidentally landed in Sweden instead of Tuscany. Ornithologists like Johannes Fritz are now puzzling over what confuses the birds. Fritz is a biologist and head of the company Waldrappteam Conservation and Research as well as manager of the European LIFE project to reintroduce the Northern Bald Ibis in Europe.
1/
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Rupert Clayton
Rupert Clayton
• •

"I saw two shooting stars last night
I wished on them, but they were only satellites
It’s wrong to wish on space hardware
I wish, I wish, I wish you’d care."

Billy Bragg, A New England, 1983.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Akhenatobi & Meritaten etc.
Akhenatobi & Meritaten etc.
• •

Humans evolve their intuition; that said, anyone that gets repulsed, appalled, “grossed out” about future stuff (because a certain man calls that HIS brand) can be excused entirely. It’s understandable.

I only recognize this because I’m an… I know an energy reader.

in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Naturfotograf Michael Estwik
Naturfotograf Michael Estwik
• •
thankfully, I live at the latitude 63° and I don't get to see those when I'm looking north in the night sky. But I feel sad for everyone else that has to be annoyed by this garbage. It would be one thing if it was only Starlink, but there are many others that want a piece of the sky.
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Clive Thompson
Clive Thompson
• •

Great piece!!

I’ve been low-key obsessed with the problem of space junk since I wrote this piece back in 2020 about the boom in private sector space activity: https://newrepublic.com/article/160303/monetizing-final-frontier


Monetizing the Final Frontier

The strange new push for space privatization
The New Republic
in reply to Prof. Sam Lawler

Clive Thompson
Clive Thompson
• •

🤘 🤖

I'm really glad you wrote that piece -- this issue needs a lot more attention

Absent good regulation, companies and governments are gonna turn LEO into escape-velocity scene from WALL-E

⇧