47 Comments
October 19, 2026 10:11 am
I read something about a year ago about the amount of “stuff” being put in orbit – it warned that space junk could hit satellites. Elon Musk alone has put many tonnes in orbit. An article about sun blockage should appear soon – global cooling due to so much in orbit blocking the sun.
October 19, 2026 10:13 am
They’re obviously trying to make Solar Panels productive at night. Which isn’t going to happen especially if the moon isn’t bright enough. Which it isn’t! To guarantee unending light on a solar farm at night the mirror would need to be geostationary. At that distance, to appear the same size as the sun it would need to be a million square feet. No-one will be able to afford to place a Million square foot mirror into geostationary orbit.
Yes indeed. From the Reflect-o-nuts’ website page just 5 paragraphs into it: “Reflect Orbital is exploring a new way to extend the utility of sunlight: reflecting sunlight from orbit to precise, targeted areas on Earth. Our goal is to deliver light and energy to help make existing solar infrastructure more useful beyond the hours when direct sunlight is available…”
This is what happens when the emotion-driven, anti-science / anti-intellectual mob is handed money and power to solve a non-existent CAGW problem.
Kind of—the Solyndra scheme was to deposit thin-film solar cell layers on the insides of glass tubes (Sol + cylinder = Solyndra), then arrange multiple cylinders in rows to mimic conventional flat-plate silicon PV modules. The round tubes would reduce reflection of non-normal light, including diffuse sky radiation.
There were a couple problems with the scheme from the get-go, beyond the low efficiency of the thin-film PV. The particular solar cell type they chose was the Cu-In-Ga-S compound semiconductor, one drawback of which was that no one could make this stuff work very well without a molybdenum contact, and Mo does not adhere to glass much at all. The second was that because of the high-temperatures needed to deposit the semiconductor layers, it was not possible to use tempered glass for the tubes, so they broke—a lot.
Solyndra got started with US Dept. of Energy cash (loans) through GW Bush’s Solar America Initiative, then a bit later the Obamanistas tried to keep it afloat with more loans.
October 19, 2026 12:04 pm
So, this absurd concept once again rears its ugly head, eh?
How about some simple math to shed some light on the topic, pardon the pun.
The solar irradiance power flux at TOA that is in the visible spectrum is about 43% of the total power flux (aka, the “solar constant”). So, that would represent about 0.43*1361 = 585 W/m^2. But with Earth’s average albedo being about 0.3, that amount of sunlight reaching Earth’s surface would correspondingly average to only (1-0.3)*585 = 410 W/m^2.
In comparison, powerful high-intensity carbon-arc spotlights (such as WWII 60-inch military searchlights or large cinema/stage spotlights) typically draw around 11.7 kW to 15 kW of electrical power to produce anywhere from 250,000 to 500,000+ lumens (or up to 800 million candela). At a typical conversion efficiency of 5 lumens per watt—because a large portion of its power draw is emitted as heat and ultraviolet (UV) radiation rather than visible light—such a large carbon-arc spotlight would produce the equivalent visible light flux of about 41,200 W/m^2 across the spotlight’s beam width. Therefore, that beamed light flux is about 100 times brighter than normal daytime sunlight flux reaching ground level, but it only exists WITHIN the beam width, which of course in gradually dispersing with distance from source.
So, the spotlight simulation mentioned in the above article was NOT AT ALL representative of the illumination that would achieved just by using orbiting mirrors to reflect solar irradiance onto nighttime surfaces of Earth.
I previously commented about the many physics and engineering factors that make the concept of using orbiting mirrors to reflect normal sunlight for illumination purposes just impractical . . . but the old adage still applies: a fool and his money are soon separated!
If the earth’s average temperature increases by 1°C, the earth’s outgoing heat radiation increases by 1.4%.
When Earth’s average surface temperature rises by 1°C, the amount of heat energy emitted by the planet’s surface increases by approximately 1.4%.
This relationship is determined by a fundamental law of physics known as the Stefan-Boltzmann Law. This law dictates that the thermal energy radiated by an object is proportional to the fourth power of its absolute temperature (T^4) measured in Kelvin.
The Physics Breakdown
1. Starting Baseline: Earth’s average surface temperature is roughly 15°C, which translates to 288.15 Kelvin.
2. New Temperature: A 1°C increase brings the average temperature to 16°C, or 289.15 Kelvin.
3. The Calculation: By calculating the ratio of the two temperatures raised to the fourth power (289.15^4 / 288.15^4), we see an increase of roughly 1.4%.
In terms of actual energy, this means every single square meter of Earth’s surface radiates about 5.4 Watts of additional energy (W/m^2) outward in the form of infrared heat.
Earth’s Natural Thermostat
In climate science, this rapid increase in outgoing heat is called the Planck feedback. It acts as the planet’s primary natural safety valve. The hotter Earth gets, the harder it pushes back by radiating more heat away to try and cool itself down.
Victor, you posted: “If the earth’s average temperature increases by 1°C, the earth’s outgoing heat radiation increases by 1.4%.”
This is only true assuming the average emissivity of Earth is unchanged over that 1°C increase, but there is no reason to believe this would be the case . . . just look at the “greening” of Earth that has occurred over just the last 20 years with rising global temperatures.
You also posted: “The hotter Earth gets, the harder it pushes back by radiating more heat away to try and cool itself down.”
If you want to anthropomorphize Earth, that’s OK with me, but you’ll have to explain what “pushing back” and “try and cool itself down” mean since those are not scientific terms.
If the earth’s outgoing heat radiation increases by 1.4%, the earth must receive 5.4 Watts per square meter (W/m^2) more of constant energy input to maintain 1°C higher average temperature.
If the Earth is emitting 1.4% more heat into the atmosphere, it cannot stay at that warmer level unless something keeps pushing energy back into the system to balance the loss. In physics, if an object radiates more energy than it receives, it will immediately cool back down.
To maintain a steady, warmer temperature of +1°C, one thing must happen:
Increased Energy Input
If the atmosphere were completely unchanged, the Sun would have to shine brighter. The Earth would need to receive an additional 5.4 Watts per square meter (W/m^2) of constant energy input to match the increased output.
What the Sun does, or does not do, is not dependent on anything that happens on Earth.
You need to be mindful of cause and effect.
BTW, what do either of your two responses to me have to do with my OP that discussed the concept of using orbiting mirrors to reflect sunlight onto nighttime surfaces on Earth?
October 19, 2026 12:31 pm
If lights are needed to illuminate an area during a rescue operation, then helicopters fitted with lights like the Leigh Lights used in WW2 anti submarine operations could fulfil the role at a much lower cost, and get over the problem of satellites only providing 5 minutes of coverage. The lights produced 7 million candelas, and no doubt modern LEDs could do much better with a lower wattage.
The modern LED headlights on cars are dazzling enough and make night driving uncomfortable especially if the on-coming driver forgets to dip his lights.
Modern police and S&R helicopters are equipped with modern “Night Sun” searchlights (e.g., https://www.spectrolab.com/searchlights/products/prod_sx16_ns.html) to illuminate ground targets.
Technology has progressed well beyond that available in WWII.
October 19, 2026 12:58 pm
If Ivanpah in the California desert was shutdown because it didn’t meet expectations by trying to do the exact same thing but during the day, why would anyone think this would work?
Sounds like a few million were slipped under the table during election season hoping to get a large grant from the Feds.
October 19, 2026 1:11 pm
Water vapor, clouds, ice, snow create 30% albedo which makes the Earth cooler not warmer. W/o GHE there is no water and Earth goes lunarific, a barren rock ball, 400 K lit side, 100 K dark refuting a warming GHE.
“TFK_bams09” GHE heat balance graphic and ubiquitous clones don’t balance plus violate LoT.
Kinetic heat transfer processes of contiguous atmospheric molecules render a surface black body and it’s “extra” upwelling GHE energy impossible.
GHE is bogus and CAGW a scam so alarmists must resort to fear mongering lies, lawsuits, censorship and violence.
Second lesson from the past. Just because some (in California) think a thing can be done doesn’t mean it actually can be. Ivanpah is a terrestrial concentrated solar example (of course, in California). Inertial confinement fusion is another despite billions wasted annually on NIF (of course, also in California). EEStor ‘capacitors’ were another. My ebook ‘The Arts of Truth’ contains many more real examples of the believed by some but actually ‘unreal’.
Or, to explain more simply to the non-physics minded. In biology, it is true that there are many animals that eat grass (e.g. cows). And it is true there are many animals that crawl (e.g. earthworms). BUT there are NO grass eating snakes—for good biological reasons.
October 19, 2026 1:19 pm
Reflect Orbital, “The Sunlight Company”. Thought this was a joke.
It is ‘real’, but still a joke.
About 20 employees, all starry eyed 20 something Californians.
Has raised $35.2 million over three rounds! (Dunno if all from California.)
That funding is a bit of a current problem for them, because a single Falcon 9 lunch to the proposed 625km orbit altitude costs $74 million. FCC approval to launch doesn’t cost nearly as much as actually buying a real launch from SpaceX.
You need to sent a lot of light down to get a return on investment for all those millions.
And while I do not have the skill to calculate how long it would take(multiple millenia calculations ain’t my best discipline) ;
there may be a tiny problem if we take into account that the average lifetime of a satellite is 10 and of solar panels.
How many years will this crap last and stay in Orbit???
And as we have seen times and times again:usually the renewable Megaprojects underperform on a climate prediction level.
How likely is it this crap won’t.
And we haven’t even started with maintenance problems or space junk that for sure won’t miss something that big for a very long time.
Reflect Orbital Demos Turning Night Into Day. What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Just when you think Silicon Valley has run out of ways to meddle with nature, along comes a company with a plan to shine sunlight onto the nighttime side of Earth using giant mirrors in orbit. Yes, you read that correctly. Apparently, the Moon, stars, and the natural cycle of day and night are no longer sufficient for our technologically ambitious friends.
According to a recent San Francisco Chronicle report, residents near Lone Pine, California, got an unexpected preview of this bright idea on Saturday, October 10th.
Shortly after sunset, two intensely bright beams of light appeared near Mt. Whitney, illuminating portions of the Eastern Sierra desert floor. The spectacle was sufficiently unusual to send some locals looking for answers.
Above: Ground-based spotlights used by Reflect Orbital to demonstrate its proposed satellite illumination concept near Lone Pine, California. Image: Reflect Orbital
Lone Pine resident Cayden Thompson described the lights to the Chronicle:
Thompson added that it was obvious the lights weren’t ordinary vehicle headlights.
Curious about the source, Thompson and a friend drove up Horseshoe Meadows Road, where they discovered two powerful spotlights positioned in a dirt turnout. A technician warned them to stay back because the equipment was hot enough to cause burns.
So, what was going on? The lights belonged to Reflect Orbital, a Los Angeles-based startup that describes itself as “the Sunlight Company.”
Its business concept is straightforward enough: launch large reflective mirrors into orbit and redirect sunlight toward selected locations on Earth’s nighttime surface. But, reading their PR, it’s just another twist on “climate change is bad.”
What sounds like something dreamed up for a science fiction movie is apparently moving toward reality. The FCC approved the company’s first satellite, Eärendil-1, in July, with a tentative launch planned for the second quarter of 2027.
And this is where things get interesting.
A Solution Looking for a Problem?
The October 10th demonstration was intended to show how artificial illumination might assist search-and-rescue teams operating after dark.
Rather than using an actual orbiting mirror, Reflect Orbital employed powerful ground-based lamps to simulate the proposed effect. Volunteers from the China Lake Mountain Rescue Group participated in the exercise.
Group leader Phillip Cash told the Chronicle:
He described the remarkable visibility produced when the lights suddenly illuminated the otherwise dark landscape, allowing rescuers to see for miles. According to Cash, the illumination was somewhat brighter than a full Moon. That sounds impressive, at least until you consider another observation from Cash: search-and-rescue teams are already pretty good at operating at night.
Imagine that.
Modern rescue teams have access to LED headlamps, portable floodlights, thermal imaging cameras, night-vision equipment, GPS receivers, and increasingly sophisticated communications systems. The familiar elastic-strap headlamp dates back to 1973, and portable lighting technology has improved enormously since then.
One might reasonably ask whether putting thousands of giant mirrors into orbit is a particularly sensible way to solve a problem that existing equipment already addresses.
There is another practical limitation that deserves attention. Reflect Orbital’s proposed Eärendil-1 satellite would operate at an altitude of approximately 625 kilometers. At that altitude, an individual satellite could illuminate a particular target for only about five minutes during a suitable pass.
Five minutes?
That’s barely enough time for a rescue team to organize equipment, much less conduct a complicated nighttime search across rugged mountain terrain. So, what’s the point?
Maintaining illumination over an extended period would require multiple satellites passing overhead in succession, assuming their orbital geometry and access to sunlight permitted it. And that brings us to the truly remarkable part of this proposal. Reflect Orbital reportedly wants a constellation of 50,000 satellites by 2035.
For perspective, that’s an enormous number of additional objects in low Earth orbit, all supporting a system designed to redirect sunlight onto places that would otherwise be dark.
The engineering questions alone are substantial. There are the costs of launching, positioning, controlling, and eventually disposing of thousands of spacecraft. There are orbital debris and collision risks. There are questions about beam targeting, atmospheric scattering, illumination intensity, and whether useful lighting can be provided reliably under varying weather conditions.
Then there is the potential impact on astronomical observations.
Astronomers already have serious concerns about growing satellite constellations interfering with observations of the night sky. Adding satellites specifically designed to reflect substantial quantities of sunlight toward Earth introduces another set of complications.
A report from Futurism describes astronomers’ concerns about the concept.
And let’s not forget wildlife. Many species depend on natural light-dark cycles for feeding, migration, reproduction, and navigation. The consequences of introducing concentrated artificial illumination into otherwise dark environments deserve careful study before anyone starts promising sunlight on demand.
The Questions Nobody Should Ignore
Reflect Orbital’s demonstration certainly attracted attention. Powerful lights suddenly illuminating a dark desert landscape will do that. But a dramatic demonstration is a long way from proving that a proposed technology is economically practical, environmentally acceptable, or genuinely useful at scale.
Among the questions worth asking are these:
Those are engineering, economic, and regulatory questions requiring quantitative answers.
The fact that a company can demonstrate something technically impressive doesn’t automatically establish that deploying it on a planetary scale makes sense. For now, the residents near Lone Pine have received a glimpse of Reflect Orbital’s ambitions, courtesy of a couple of extremely powerful spotlights parked along a mountain road.
Whether a constellation of 50,000 orbiting mirrors can deliver meaningful benefits without creating a host of new problems remains to be demonstrated.
One thing is certain: the night sky is becoming an increasingly crowded place. And apparently, somebody has decided it needs headlights.
Share this: