There’s a New Space Race. Governments and Big Tech Are Desperate to Win

By this point, you’ve surely read about the race to develop AI technology. Well, there’s another consequential tech race that has attracted lots of attention in recent months — and that’s the race to develop low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellite “constellations.” The competitors in this Space Race Redux include some of the world’s biggest companies, like SpaceX, the current leader, which has more than 5,000 satellites in orbit as part of its Starlink network. Amazon, in a bid to catch up, recently announced plans to create its own 3,200-satellite network, while Canada’s Telesat intends to launch a couple of hundred satellites. The stakes are high! Whoever controls LEO constellations could control the internet of the future. Which helps explain why governments are taking part too. China wants to send up 26,000 satellites, and U.S. military and spy agencies have forged close ties with SpaceX. 

We called up Ewan Wright, who follows LEO tech for the University of British Columbia’s Outer Space Institute, to help us understand the growing political and economic importance of satellite constellations. And, yes, we asked about the Russian space nuke.

First, what’s the difference between an LEO constellation and a regular ole satellite? Traditionally, we sent up massive six-tonne satellites into “geostationary orbit,” which is about 35,700 kilometres above Earth. For a long time, this was the most cost-effective way to provide communication services to a large area. The trouble was that data took a relatively long time to go back and forth. Over the past decade, though, SpaceX and a few other companies started providing faster coverage using a large number of smaller, cheaper satellites that are only about 550 kilometres from Earth. 

When did governments realize LEO constellations were vital to national security? In 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine and crippled the Ukrainian military’s communications by hacking geostationary satellite terminals. After that, [SpaceX CEO] Elon Musk sent Starlink terminals to Ukraine, which its military used to restore communications and carry out attacks. 

OK, but Russia might try to disrupt Starlink with a nuke, right? That seems bad. The U.S. tested a space nuke in 1962, and it damaged about a third of the satellites in orbit. If the Russians tried something similar, it would be catastrophic for traditional satellites and for constellations like Starlink, even though its satellites are kind of everywhere. But Russia currently has about 220 satellites and three cosmonauts in orbit, and I doubt it wants the collateral damage. Also, there’s little good information about this new threat. It may be more benign than an actual weapon, like a nuclear power source on a spy satellite.

So why are companies like Amazon building constellations? It must be lucrative. That’s a bit of a problem, actually. According to one estimate, satellite broadband could generate US$500 billion annually by 2040. But right now, satellite internet services can’t compete with traditional cable providers. If you live in a city, there’s no point in paying US$120 a month for Starlink and US$600 in equipment when you can get good internet for much cheaper elsewhere. [Starlink hoped to have 20 million subscribers by the end of 2022; instead, it had about a million.] 

Outside the military, who’s actually paying for satellite internet, then? Right now, it’s mostly folks who live in vans in Yosemite or in remote Canada. That could change. Something like 4 billion people worldwide don’t have reliable internet. But right now, in many cases, these people can’t afford expensive Starlink terminals or subscriptions, or they live in places like Iran, where the government will seize your equipment if they find it. Moving forward, Starlink and its competitors will likely continue to target rural people, plus cruise lines and airlines. Still, I think there will be too many constellations for future demand and that some will fail. 

This interview, conducted by Ben Mathis-Lilley, was edited for length and clarity. 

Picture credits: Warner Bros.

Want more news, more smart money takes, and jokes that we can’t promise will be funny? Subscribe here