“No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to… fry!” If you’ve ever watched Diamonds Are Forever, Die Another Day, or any of the other James Bond films featuring megalomaniacs with space-based superweapons, you probably assumed giant orbiting mirrors capable of directing sunlight at Earth would remain safely in the realm of Hollywood fantasy.
Apparently, no one told the Federal Communications Commission. In a decision that would make Ernst Stavro Blofeld nod approvingly while stroking his cat, regulators have approved the first step toward a commercial constellation of orbital mirrors designed to beam sunlight onto the Earth’s surface. What could possibly go wrong? -Anthony
Via Spaceweather.com:
Since SpaceX began launching Starlink satellites in 2019, astronomers have grown increasingly concerned. It’s almost impossible now to take a deep-sky image without satellite streaks in the background. The mega-constellation numbers nearly 11,000 functioning satellites, and SpaceX launched another 1,589 during the first half of 2026 alone.
Soon, Starlink may be the least of their worries.
An artist’s concept of sunlight beamed down from orbit. Bats, fireflies, and other creatures of the night could find their darkness interrupted by roving spots of artificial sunlight
Last week, the FCC authorized Reflect Orbital Inc. to launch a huge space mirror named “Eärendil-1.” From an orbit about 625 km high, it will cast a moving, 5-km-wide patch of light onto the Earth about as bright as a full Moon. Later, the company could combine beams from multiple satellites to create much brighter spotlights. Reflect Orbital wants to launch 50,000 more by 2035, selling sunlight-on-demand to solar farms, construction sites and search-and-rescue teams.
If Reflect Orbital’s plan is realized, it could be calamitous not only for astronomy but also for the natural world as a whole. Nocturnal animals and night-blooming plants, tuned by evolution to the rhythm of day and night, would suddenly find their darkness interrupted by moving pools of redirected sunlight. Small favors? Reflect Orbital says the light will not be bright enough to start fires.
The FCC itself acknowledged some of these concerns, but noted in its order that optical astronomy and the environment lie largely outside its jurisdiction. They can only regulate the project’s use of radio signals. For now, no US agency regulates how bright a satellite may shine.
The company’s FCC application attracted more than 1,800 public comments, most of them sharply critical. Nevertheless, the launch of Eärendil-1 is now expected before the end of the year.
Insanity !
More space junk in orbit.
An array of mylar low pressure inflatable panels could work.
don’t be a tech-hating greenie
this could make Alaskan/Canadian cities signficantly more habitable
when it’s 40 degrees below with only a few hours of sun, some extra moons could go a long way
nocturnal species will be fine, we’re not sending light to random wildlife spaces
I’m sure this will be less than installing and powering some street lights.
Everywhere.
Sure, sure … Everone knows in cold winter that it’s warmer when the moon is shining … /sarc
Such space mirrors are not geosynchronous. To be so, they would be very far out and also huge. As mentioned in the article, these would be roving spots of light. The expense and complications would be enormous, plus the maintenance in space, damage from meteors and such, regularly pushing them to higher orbit, needing more fuel, maneuvering, etc. These are far from passive systems and literally pie in the sky PBIs (partially baked ideas).
Umm, people could move if they don’t like the cold.
Quite some time ago there was an “environmental concern” about too much surface light. Another urban problem. Another solution collusion.
“Yes, Mister Bond…I expect you to die..!”
Sean, we need you – but – R.I.P.
It was a pun, not a misquote.
Mr I-Bold-All-My-Comments just needed an excuse.
Not sure this crazy thing will ever see the light of day—or night. To date, the company has raised a total of $35.2 million, not enough to buy even a single first experimental launch. A dedicated commercial SpaceX Falcon 9 launch costs $74 million to a LEO orbit of about 480km. Given the company’s significantly higher orbital requirements, a shared launch is unlikely.
Just include a lens to focus the light and a targeting system. Some country’s military will pay for it. Hasn’t anyone ever watched Real Genius? 😎
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Genius
If you really want to stop it, just tie it to ICE or CDC or climate change. Oh, don’t forget baby powder, and Roundup.
Oh? Do they use talc to polish the mirrors?
All it takes is a claim…
I live where I live because of the lack of light pollution. I like my dark sky, and want it to stay that way. If this thing ever does get off the ground, if I had the means, I would shoot it down.
Why do you believe that the operators of such a mirror would use it to target your house?
It’s not just my house–it is several square miles with no light pollution to speak of. Not a single neighbor sports a power pole merc/vapor nightlight, and the only dim glow on the horizon is from the county seat some 25 miles away. The moon cycle is the only night light my critters and I need, and a sweeping spotlight from space is just total nonsense.
Once again, why do you expect them to shine this light on yours or your neighbors places. These are small mirrors, they are only going to light an area a few miles across. Were expecting them to light up the entire night side or something? beyond that, they will only work for an hour or two after sunset and before sunrise.
Read the article, LOW EARTH ORBIT.
Once gain, it does not have an on/off switch. It has to sweep a lot of area to shine where it’s supposed to shine.
Of course, that low earth orbit could be a polar orbit, synchronised to the day/night terminator.
LEO does not have to guarantee only one or two hours of extra daylight.
Do you believe that there has been no consideration of how such a platform could be used as a weapon?
As far as my house? As long as I keep a low profile and do not offend someone in power, the worst I could expect is to be collateral damage.
Just tell big city mayors it’s tracking illegal aliens and their visits to party headquarters.
But but but what about the increased temperatures these mirrors are going to direct down on the planet – we’re already too hot down here according to every delusional green-beany
At night, lacking sunlight, the planet cools.
So let’s beam sunlight and limit the cooling.
If anything anthropogenic contributes to global warming this is it and at the top of the list.
No environmental impact? Bull. Anthony pointed out some.
And, when the time comes, that big mirror falls to the earth and whether land or sea will cause a significant environmental impact.
What could go wrong?
FAFO.
Seems odd, doesn’t it…
Most of the warming this century has been caused by increases in solar radiation reaching the Earth’ surface.
And the alarmists want to increase it further.
I can see the FCC granting authorization to operate, specifically identifying frequencies, but I have to wonder if the FCC has the authority to grant the launch.
It will be interesting to see if this ever gets off the ground.
Yes, indeed, the FCC has approval for light reaching the earth? Huh?
A mirror will reflect all frequencies.
Mirrors can be tuned by materials to select frequency bands.
Agreed, they can. But there is nothing in this article that suggests this is what they are going for.
Agreed.
I can see festival organizers being willing to pay for a couple extra hours of sunlight. Whether that would enough to justify the cost is not something I am able to calculate.
Just keep daylight savings time the same all year.
Just what owls and other nocturnal critters need, more light!
Why do you expect them to shine this light in the deep woods.
They are only going to shine it someplace when people pay them to.
Probably cheaper to use a hand cranked flashlight. Just another scheme to transfer money from the ignorant and gullible to those possessed of more rat cunning.
also be handy weapons note they stated search n rescues? well it could be used for other purposes. and its not a few its a LOT
“They are only going to shine it someplace when people pay them to.”
The question is, which people?
Obviously someone is going to pay millions to shine it on jvstone’s house.
Someone’s got to pick the nits.
Those satellite streaks would be in the foreground, I believe.
Not to a flat Earther.
/s of course, you can’t orbit a flat plane….. still /s
I noted that but it comes from the SpaceWeather site, not A. Watts.
I assume A. Watts has a sense of humor.
The Space Mirror must be a covert program for a top secret energy weapon. The enemy does not want this energy weapon aimed at them.
Mirrors in orbit can create intense heat towards the target they are aimed at.
https://interestingengineering.com/energy/worlds-largest-hybrid-solar-plant
How’d that work out for California and Google…..Why the US’s biggest solar megaproject is shutting down after a decade
At least the Chinese only lose half a billion dollars if the project fails!
Ivanpah was doomed to failure – trying to “store” or “accumulate” heat economically is nonsense.
Once the sun goes down, the “molten salt” does its best to cool, and become “un-molten”. Extracting heat to boil water to create steam to power a turbine just accelerates the rate of cooling.
All fairly pointless, if you have to use lots of morning sun to heat the cooled solid salts to 1000 C or so again. Or in the case of Ivanpah, use lots of natural gas to heat the salt in lieu of sunlight to heat the water to spin a turbine!
Maybe the Chinese “best and brightest” are similar to the US “best and brightest”?
Time will tell.
Ivanpah had no thermal storage.
You’re right. My bad. Confused Ivanpah with Crescent Dunes, which did use molten salt. It failed too, although the taxpayers have only lost around half a billion dollars so far, give or take.
Whether the plant uses water or molten salt or sand to “store” heat, the result is the same – a waste of time, effort, and money.
Even a nit-picker like me would only be talking differences of time scale between “storing” heat from the Sun in molten salt or something else overnight – if you get my drift.
From an engineering publication in 2014 –
The design intent is clear – the “boiler mass” would “store” heat. I suppose 4200 tons of presumably well insulated boilers could be considered “thermal mass”, or “heat storage”.
Just not enough, as the operators discovered.
Once again, apologies, and thanks for the correction. Memory is a wonderful thing, but mine let me down on this occasion.
yeah tell that to SA govt cos they were all gungho about molten salt setup after they blew the reliable coal plant in Pt Augusta up then it was to be there…then a while later elsewhere..then? mysteriously no talk;-))
The Sun (source) is 1/2 degree wide – 0.009 radians angular subtense. At orbital distances the projected spot will be distance times 0.009 radians or say 20-40 miles wide. Just to reach one sun intensity in the very middle of the spot the mirror, or array of mirrors, would need to be about 20-40 miles wide.
The ants under the magnifying glass beg to differ with your analysis.
The mirror could be slightly concave, bringing the whole reflected energy to a point, (noting of course that scattering and lens laws still apply to derive the minimum size of that point but it will be smaller than the mirror and hence brighter than the Sun).
A concave mirror or lens will form an image of the sun, not a point. The size of the image will be the focal length of the mirror times the radian subtense of the object (Sun). In an ideal case.
In the case of the magnifying glass which has a short focal length, say 5″ and is 2″ in diameter. The sun image will be about 1/20″ wide by calculation but a bit wider in reality because the lens has a lot of spherical aberration over its 2″ diameter – (your eye only uses the eye pupil diameter, that’s why it looks sharp in use as a magnifier). So, with aberrations say 0.1″. The concentration ratio is 2″^2/0.1″^2 or 400 suns. That will quickly if not instantly sizzle an ant.
In the case of a large very ideal space mirror not being used obliquely (impossible but let’s go with it). Assume it does have a nice parabolic concave shape. The place you want to zap is say 300 miles away. The mirror needs a focal length of 300 miles, the vertex radius (at the axis of the parabola) is 600 miles. The geometric image size is 300 miles times 0.009 =2.7 miles – oops, I was off a factor of ten in the post above. But there you go. The geometric image size is independent of the size of the mirror; it is simply a result of similar triangles. What does change is how sharp will the image be. With a large well corrected optic the sun image will be sharp, like a telescope image. With a small optic, say a mirror a couple meters wide, the image will very soft and blurry, like the image formed by a pinhole camera. BTW, at a few meters diameter and 1000 kilometer radius of curvature, the mirror is by any measure, flat. Now take a whole bunch of those flat mirrors and make an array. Say the array is 3 miles in diameter and forming an image 300 miles away. It is still a pinhole camera with a F-number of 100. The image is geometrically 3 miles in diameter, but in reality, the energy is spread somewhat more. The intensity is about one sun. Double the diameter to 6 miles and the intensity of the image increases to 4 suns. Not comfortable but not a super weapon by any stretch. BTW, my career was in high energy laser weapons. Lethality of soft targets starts at about 50 W/cm^2, that is 500 suns.
BTW, “brighter” is a tricky term. In the case of the magnifier and the sidewalk, the image of the sun is brighter than the raw sun illumination – that is what you mean, and it’s the concentration ratio calculated above. The brightness of the spot is not brighter than the surface of the sun. Think about that.
There is a whole lot more I could go on about. Like the array will be some odd toroidal segment because of the oblique geometry, and always changing, and fill factor and so on. But you can look up image formation yourself
I still wonder if ants are using base 6.
Also birds.
This plant was “streaming” before Netflix.
You would have to focus that beam to an area only a few feet across to get those types of temperature and that’s from 480 miles out in space.
Remember also, orbits are not circular, so unless your mirror is adjustable, your “weapon” will only be dangerous during that portion of the orbit when the satellite is at the right height.
As I stated above, it’s the angular size of the sun that is the problem. Conservation of energy, Lagrange invariant, Etendue. You can’t put one hundred pounds of sunlight in a one pound box.
The space mirrors are the start of the space wars. The purpose of the space mirrors must be disguised as a civilian project.
https://www.jpost.com/defense-and-tech/article-900854
Anybody keep an eye on the diamond market?
i heard debeers is Dropping their prices today
The increasing competition in the space market is forcing space companies to lower prices, which is destroying profit margins.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/spacex-selloff-an-ominous-sign-lockup-expiry-looms-2026-07-16/
Orbital wants to launch 50,000 more by 2035,
Maybe 3 would prove the concept and generate interesting technology. Still, I’m wondering why.
However, I do recall that Ken Olsen, co-founder of Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC), is quoted as saying there is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home. Now a list of where they are not would be shorter than where they are.
DEC was mostly purchased by Compaq, in turn gobbled up by Hewlett Packard, in turn split into two companies.
Who knows what 2035 will bring?
I predict a lot of lawsuits if something like this actually gets off the ground.
Why?
Someone could make a case of privacy invasion.
There are plenty of lawyers who could see the profit possibilities of such a suit.
Cuz lawyers.
From the above article:
“From an orbit about 625 km high, it will cast a moving, 5-km-wide patch of light onto the Earth about as bright as a full Moon.”
Well, some more details are in order.
This plan very likely calls for a near-circular orbit around Earth, in which case the solar reflector sat (SRS) will have an orbital period of just 97 minutes. LEO satellites at around this altitude generally experience about 60 to 70 minutes of sunlight and 20 to 30 minutes of darkness (Earth eclipse) during every revolution, depending on the season (i.e., the tilt of the plane of the satellite’s orbit with respect to the plane of ecliptic). This is basically because, from the viewpoint of the SRS at 625 km orbital altitude, the Earth subtends a total angle in the sky of 131 degrees!
Now here’s the real issue: at this relatively low altitude, the satellite will take no more than about 3.5 minutes to cross the sky from one horizon to the other for a single stationary ground observer.
So, at nighttime for any geographical point being illuminated by a single SRS, it will seem like 3.5 minutes of light every 97 minutes under the best of conditions. Anyone think that won’t get boring quickly?
But it gets worse. That ground illumination won’t be a nice circular patch, it will be oval . . . in fact, highly oval.
As for its apparent diameter in the sky, an (asserted) 5 km diameter circular reflector seen from 625 km distance subtends an angle of 0.46 degrees in the sky (slightly less that the 0.5 degrees angle subtended by the full Moon), but that is only when the reflector is normal to the line of sight. . . but this can never be the case because the Sun simply cannot shine through the Earth.
Therefore the SRS reflector will always be tilted (creating an oval illumination spot)—and at a relatively large angle with respect to any point on the ground close to its nadir if it will be reflecting sunlight onto a nighttime surface. The angle of incidence-versus-angle of reflection could be reduced if the reflector angled toward the limb of the Earth instead of satellite nadir, but only if the Sun is elevated above that horizon, and it would then suffer from atmospheric slant range absorption and scattering, degrading its usefulness.
If this wasn’t enough, consider the technical challenges of:
— controlling the mirror surface to be planar over 5 km diameter,
— the amount of propulsion hardware and propellant to be expended to precisely steer the large mirror with respect to the always-changing Sun and ground illumination target vectors (remember, the Sun is only subtending 0.53 degrees in the sky, so pointing control will need to be rather “tight”,
— the amount of GN&C electronics required to deploy and maintain the reflector in a smoothly moving condition and to control the whole SRS with stable, predictable orbital ephemeris (requiring both ACS plus delta-V propulsion), given Earth-Moon-Sun tidal forces, Earth’s gravity gradient disturbances, and solar wind and solar photon “pressure” forces acting on such a large “sail” area (about 20 km^2), and
— how to place this sure-to-be-massive satellite into orbit (especially considering the payload shroud volume needed contain 20 km^2 of deployable reflector area.
Of course, the cost vs. benefits of this boondoggle will eventually have to be at least mentioned. /sarc
My bottom line: it will be a cold day in hell before this idea sees the light (pardon the pun) of reality.
See comment above about a polar orbit, synced to the Sun.
You mean this:
???
Well, in a circular polar orbit of 625 km altitude, whether synched to the Sun or not, the reflector satellite will still travel horizon-to-horizon in about 13.5 minutes under the best case of traveling directly overhead to its targeting spot. And to stay aligned to the Sun over the seasons, the reflecting mirror will still have to track the Sun through +/- 23.4 degrees of declination shift. Furthermore, in a polar orbit at 625 km flying along the path of the day/night terminator, such satellite will not be able to illuminate any Earth nightside surface offset by more that 25 degrees rotation away from the terminator.
At best, with 13.5 minutes maximum illumination per orbit and an orbital period of 97 minutes, even a Sun-synched polar orbit cannot provide more than 3.3 hours of illumination per 24-hour day to any fixed spot within its field-of-view.
Finally, as stated in the above article, the (asserted) 5 km diametere solar reflector will only provide ground surface illumination equivalent to a full moon, not equivalent to another Sun in the sky.
But it can illuminate the ground continuously. That was my point. It doesn’t have to go into the shade.
Well, to be clear, a single sun-synched polar SRS can only continuously illuminate a nighttime path (not a “spot”) within no more than 25 degrees angular offset from the terminator, which itself is constantly rotating around Earth pole to pole. It just physically CANNOT provide continuous illumination to any fixed geographic 5-km “wide” spot for more than 13.5 minutes during its single, daily, directly-overhead pass.
Personally, I don’t see any usefulness to such a single satellite doing this intermittent “moonlight” illumination, but putting 50,000 such SRS into LEO by 2035—specifically mentioned in the above article—may be the dreams of those that have providing funding for this incredibly stupid idea.
Get this: If all 50,000 SRS were crammed into a polar sun-synchronous orbit at 625 km altitude at equal spacing, then satellite-to-satellite spacing would be about 0.9 km . . . that just might be a problem for each satellite having a deployed solar reflector that is 5 km in diameter. Look out below! /sarc
Ooops . . . my typos in the fifth and sixth paragraphs of my above post, corrected here:
“Now here’s the real issue: at this relatively low altitude, the satellite will take no more than about
3.513.5 minutes to cross the sky from one horizon to the other for a single stationary ground observer where it passes directly overhead.…
it will seem like
3.513.5 minutes of light every 97 minutes under the best of conditions.”Bottom line remains unchanged.
oh but but that cant be true;-) theyre planning to do a “spain” and charge PV setups at night at what cost even if they could?
What use will the almost light of a full moon be? It won’t provide any solar power worth mentioning. Search and Rescue teams already bring their own much brighter lights. This seems like a solution without a problem.
Agree . . . but I would prefer to say it is a problem without a need.
Also this from the above article:
“Last week, the FCC authorized Reflect Orbital Inc. to launch a huge space mirror named Eärendil-1 . . . The FCC itself acknowledged some of these concerns, but noted in its order that optical astronomy and the environment lie largely outside its jurisdiction.”
The FCC does not authorize the US launching objects into space, that the responsibility of the FAA (for civilian launches).
Reflect Orbital Inc., may have been granted some frequencies to use for satellite data transmission, but that’s it from the FCC.
Absolutely not. Solar can’t sustain the grid in addition it is far too expensive and that is using free energy from the sun. How much more expensive will it be when they have to start paying for reflected concentrated sun light? Stop wasting our time, money and resources on stuff that doesn’t work. Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators, build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators. You know the things that actually work and are affordable.
Rube Goldberg is grinning.
Seems that US taxpayers’ $$$$s slushes around a bit from “handlers” bank account to bank account, but some of it eventually reaches a mark.
The Small Business Innovation Research (or SBIR) program is a U.S. government funding program, coordinated by the Small Business Administration, intended to help certain small businesses conduct research and development (R&D).
Funding is provided through contracts or grants.
Reflect Orbital Inc.
In May 2025, the company announced that it raised another US$20 million from Lux Capital, Sequoia Capital, and Starship Ventures.
In June 2025, the Air Force Research Laboratory and AFWERX awarded the company a US$1.25 million Phase II Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) contract to develop reflector technology.
Those California kooks sure know how to work the system.
Would Rube Goldberg’s inventions have been a gynormous success if only he got a few government grants & contracts?
What’s the saying: “A fool and his money are soon separated.”
It’s true here, with the major problem that the money coming from all the governmental fools that you mentioned is taxpayer money.
And in this specific case one would think we already know how to build solar reflectors based on the $10–15 billion USD already invested in Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plants in the US . . . but alas.
— H L Mencken 1926
I assume that US politicians reflect the intelligence of the masses who elect them.
Good comments. And there is this associated question: “Do you ever wonder what became of the bottom half of your graduating class?”
Well, if you were IN the bottom half, you have some idea.
Thanks. I assume the bottom half became climate scientists <g>
Climate Change without CO2. A tax on sunlight will be next.
A mirror like that will be impossible to miss by an anti-satellite weapon.
What would happens if a satellite in LEO directed a laser or maser at the centre of the mirror?
It might burn a hole if its beam can be stabilized on one specific spot for a couple of tenths of a second or so (highly doubtful) . . . remember, it is a reflector . . . but the satellite will go on functioning undisturbed, assuming its major spacecraft core body (its “bus”) is offset from the center of the “mirror”.
That is, to deploy a 5 km diameter reflector in space using a rocket launch from Earth’s surface, the reflector (“mirror”) will most certainly have to be ultra-light, aluminized Mylar or Kapton film, tensioned to become generally planar across its diameter . . . there is just no way it could be glass or ceramic, which might be susceptible to cracking from a ground laser induced hot spot, no matter the output power of such laser.
If you really meant to refer to the power of a satellite-based laser (weapon), get outta here!
Well, that should turbo-charge the failing AGW meme!
Is it cheaper to use some spotlights to illuminate the area that needs lighting?
No area on Earth needs the equivalent of a temporary spot of moonlight, for any practical reason.