FCC Approves Reflect Orbital's Space Mirror Satellite That Astronomers Hate

FCC Grants Licensing for Reflect Orbital's Eärendil-1 Demonstration

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has authorized the California-based startup Reflect Orbital to operate the radio equipment for its Eärendil-1 demonstration satellite. The decision, handed down on July 9, 2026, greenlights a test mission for a spacecraft designed to reflect sunlight back to Earth, a concept the company intends to scale into a constellation for "sunlight-on-demand" services.

Eärendil-1 features an 18-by-18-meter aluminized Mylar reflector. The craft is expected to orbit at an altitude of approximately 600 to 650 kilometers. According to company projections, the mirror will deliver a light spot 5 kilometers in diameter with a brightness of roughly 0.1 lux, a level described as comparable to full-moon illumination. Reflect Orbital plans to launch the demonstration satellite via a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket later this year.

Regulatory Scope and Jurisdictional Limits

The FCC’s approval specifically concerns the spacecraft’s radio frequency operations. In its memorandum opinion and order, the commission declined to address broader objections regarding environmental or astronomical impacts, noting that its authority is limited to the regulation of communications spectrum. The agency cited the Communications Act, stating its policy is to "encourage the provision of new technologies and services to the public." Consequently, the commission ruled that health and environmental concerns were "unrelated to the Commission's role in authorizing use of radiofrequency spectrum."

This decision arrived after the FCC received over 1,800 public comments, many of which came from scientific and environmental organizations. Opponents urged the commission to pause licensing until a formal environmental review could be conducted, citing potential threats to nocturnal wildlife, human sleep patterns, and astronomical research. Critics argued that the current licensing framework is ill-equipped to address the implications of a private entity altering the natural cycle of day and night.

Opposition from the Scientific Community

The American Astronomical Society (AAS) has been a vocal opponent of the project. In filings to the FCC, the AAS stated:

"AAS opposes the granting of a license to Reflect Orbital, because this application is fundamentally different from those for telecommunications satellites. The proposed satellite would be intentionally reflecting sunlight on Earth and is designed to be as bright as possible, making impacts on astronomical research extremely challenging to mitigate."

The European Southern Observatory and other researchers have warned that Reflect Orbital’s satellites could become the brightest artificial objects in orbit, potentially leaving streaks across long-exposure images and obscuring faint celestial targets. Furthermore, concerns have been raised regarding safety, including the risk of temporary flash-blinding for pilots and drivers, as well as the risk of eye damage "if someone were to view Earendil-1 through a telescope with an aperture larger than 12 inches," according to the AAS.

Future Ambitions and Mitigation Claims

While the current approval is restricted to a single demonstration satellite, Reflect Orbital has discussed future objectives including a constellation of thousands of mirrors. Projections cited by critics suggest the company could eventually scale to 50,000 satellites. Reflect Orbital asserts that its service is highly localized, intending to focus beams on specific sites like solar farms to boost energy production after sunset or to assist in emergency response operations.

To mitigate negative outcomes, the company maintains that mirrors will be tilted away from Earth when not in use and that it will coordinate with researchers to avoid illuminating protected areas or active observatories. Reflect Orbital’s chief executive, Ben Nowack, described the license as a positive step toward testing the efficacy and safety features of the technology. As the industry looks toward future launches, the regulatory gap highlighted by this decision continues to draw criticism from groups questioning who, if not the FCC, possesses the mandate to evaluate the environmental costs of modifying the night sky.