When Access to Space Comes at a Cost

This year’s World Space Week, celebrated from October 4 to 10, focused on the theme Rocket Revolution. The idea behind it is exciting: spaceflight is no longer limited to a handful of government agencies. Commercial launch providers, universities, startups and smaller nations are gaining access to space, opening the door to new discoveries and opportunities.

As an amateur astronomer, I find many of these developments fascinating. But as someone who spends time observing and photographing the night sky, I also see their consequences with growing concern. And I believe it’s time we talked more seriously about them.

Space debris: The growing cost of a crowded orbit

The numbers are remarkable: According to the ESA Space Environment Report 2026, more than 300 launches took place in 2025, placing over 4,000 new payloads into orbit. Not all of these objects are space debris, of course. Many are operational satellites providing important services. But the growing number of spacecraft also creates a long-term problem: What happens when their missions end?

Satellites that are no longer operational don’t simply disappear. Unless they are deliberately removed from orbit or eventually reenter Earth’s atmosphere, they can remain there for years, decades or even longer, depending on their altitude. Rocket components, defunct spacecraft and fragments from collisions or explosions add to the growing population of space debris. And these objects are far from harmless.

Travelling at orbital velocities, even relatively small fragments can severely damage functioning satellites or spacecraft. Collisions can generate thousands of additional pieces, creating an even more dangerous environment. This is where the Kessler syndrome comes into play: a potential chain reaction in which collisions produce new debris, which then causes further collisions.

ESA warns that the debris population could continue growing through such collisions even if no additional satellites were launched. In other words: we risk creating a problem that becomes increasingly difficult to control.

Earth’s orbit may seem almost limitless from down here. But the orbital regions most useful for space activities are a finite resource. And we are already putting them under enormous pressure.

When the stars compete with technology

The increasing number of satellites doesn’t just affect what happens in orbit. It also changes what we see from Earth. Anyone who regularly observes the night sky has probably noticed how many artificial objects now move among the stars.

For inexperienced observers, it can be increasingly difficult to distinguish natural celestial phenomena from human-made objects. A moving point of light might be a satellite rather than something astronomically unusual.

For astrophotographers, the problem becomes even more tangible. Satellites reflecting sunlight can leave bright streaks across long-exposure images. Depending on the type of observation, these trails can compromise valuable data or even make an individual exposure unusable. Yes, image stacking and processing techniques can often remove satellite trails. But not every observation can be saved and the underlying data may still be affected. The more satellites we launch, the harder it becomes to avoid these interruptions.

Professional observatories face the same challenges on a much larger scale. The Vera C. Rubin Observatory, for example, has highlighted how satellite trails can interfere with its highly sensitive astronomical observations. Radio astronomy is also affected by interference from satellite transmissions. And beyond the scientific consequences, there is something else we shouldn’t overlook: The natural night sky itself is changing.

We have spent decades trying to reduce light pollution from cities, roads and buildings. Dark skies are already becoming increasingly difficult to find. Now, artificial light reflected from satellites is adding another challenge above our atmosphere. And if that wasn’t enough, some companies are planning to take this development even further.

Selling sunlight from space

Imagine being able to purchase sunlight after dark. It sounds like something from a science fiction novel, but it’s the business idea behind the American startup Reflect Orbital. The company is developing satellites equipped with large mirrors designed to redirect sunlight onto selected areas of Earth at night. Its first planned demonstration satellite, Earendil-1, features an 18 × 18 metre reflector intended to illuminate an area roughly five kilometres across.

In July 2026, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) granted the company permission to deploy and operate this experimental satellite using specified radio frequencies. The demonstration mission has not yet established a working commercial service. But Reflect Orbital’s long-term vision goes much further: a constellation of tens of thousands of orbital mirrors providing sunlight on demand. The company presents potential applications for solar energy, infrastructure and other activities that could benefit from additional illumination.

But what about the consequences? The American Astronomical Society has raised serious concerns about the impact on astronomical research and the natural nighttime environment. It has also criticised the regulatory handling of the project. We are already struggling with excessive artificial lighting on Earth so this particular idea makes me deeply uncomfortable. Do we really need to start illuminating our planet from space as well? There are legitimate questions about the effects on wildlife, ecosystems, astronomical observations and people’s ability to experience a naturally dark night sky. These concerns deserve thorough investigation before such technologies are deployed on a large scale.

For me, this also raises a more fundamental question: Should private companies be able to turn the night sky into another commercial product, when the consequences affect everyone? I don’t believe that every technologically achievable idea automatically deserves to become reality. Especially when the potential benefits are commercial, while the environmental and scientific consequences may be shared by all of us.

Is sustainable space exploration still possible?

Fortunately, there are encouraging developments, too. ESA’s 2026 report shows that efforts to reduce space debris are making progress. More satellites are being removed from orbit at the end of their missions, shorter disposal timelines are gaining importance, and controlled reentries of rocket bodies are becoming more common.

ESA’s Zero Debris Approach aims to significantly limit the creation of new debris by 2030. But the report also makes one thing clear: current improvements aren’t keeping pace with the growing pressure on Earth’s orbital environment. Preventing new debris is essential, but removing existing debris will also be necessary.

There has been progress in protecting astronomical observations as well. In October 2026, ESA and the International Astronomical Union’s Centre for the Protection of the Dark and Quiet Sky agreed to collaborate on reducing the impact of satellites on astronomy. Their cooperation focuses on technical solutions that could help preserve dark and quiet skies while allowing space activities to continue. That’s an important step.

But technological solutions alone won’t answer every question. We also need responsible planning, effective regulation and a willingness to consider the long-term consequences of commercial space activities before they become irreversible.

A revolution worth celebrating and questioning

I don’t want space exploration to stop, quite the opposite. I want future generations to experience the same fascination with the universe that has accompanied me for most of my life. I want us to continue discovering new worlds, studying distant galaxies and developing technologies that genuinely benefit humanity.

But I also want future generations to be able to look up and see the stars. The Rocket Revolution has made access to space easier than ever before. That’s an extraordinary achievement. Yet I believe we need to ask whether we’re measuring progress by the right standards.

More launches, more satellites and more commercial opportunities are not automatically signs of a better future. The real challenge is to develop space technology without sacrificing the environment that makes space exploration possible – or the night sky that inspires us to explore it in the first place.

Space may be open for business. But the night sky belongs to all of us. And its future shouldn’t be decided by commercial interests alone.