They pollute. You pay.
Did you like this injustice for the preservation of the ocean and forests?
You'll love it for preserving our orbits.
To meet our satellite data needs (communication, observation, synchronisation, geolocation), we are sending more and more rockets into space to put more and more satellites into orbit.
And this comes at a cost.
The price we have to pay for the space programmes of the last century, and now for 'New Space', is a significant environmental cost on Earth, but also in orbit, with space debris clogging up our orbits.
This cost, which will notably take the form of an increase in the risk of collisions in orbit, will have an "astronomical" economic cost in the decades to come.
And all of us - citizens, consumers and businesses - will be asked to put our money where our mouths are.
Because, yes, at the moment, this cost is only borne by the international space agencies. In other words, the only economic model envisaged by the space industry for preserving orbits...
Is public procurement.
To give you an idea: according to the European Space Agency (ESA), there are at least 2,500 non-operational satellites in orbit. And tens of millions of pieces of debris. To programme the first removal of a single piece of space debris from orbit in 2026, the ESA has funded ClearSpace to the tune of ... 86 million euros!
We will all have to pay for this "orbital oil slick", either through taxation or through price increases passed on to consumers.
Admittedly, we all benefit from access to this data and it is legitimate to envisage this mutualisation of risk. But why should we agree to pay these costs if :
- The space industry is still not obliged at international level to drastically limit its space pollution on pain of financial penalties?
- Consumers and responsible companies cannot compare operators and favour those who play the game?
- Are citizens not consulted or involved in preserving the orbital environment?
In short, if we have no way of putting an end to this "they pollute - you pay" cycle, who is perpetuating the irresponsibility of operators?
Another economic model needs to be devised and proposed.
This is precisely the mission of Cosmos for Humanity and the study we have conducted with CNES.
To go further, we need your help now.
(Thanks again to RTS - Radio Télévision Suisse for giving Claire Elß the opportunity to present our commitment)