Latest news with #DaveBarnhart
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Science
- Yahoo
Satellites are polluting Earth's atmosphere with heavy metals. Could refueling them in orbit help?
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The world at large is working to stop the fast-progressing degradation of Earth's environment. In the space sector, however, one-use-only products still reign supreme. The advent of megaconstellations has, in fact, accelerated the rate at which the space industry burns through resources, shifting from big satellites with decades-long lifespans to cheaper birds designed to expire within a few short years. The disposable approach worries some researchers, as too much aluminum is burning up in the atmosphere these days, threatening to cause a new kind of environmental disaster in the decades to come. But what can we do? Should we roll back the space revolution and put a cap on what we can do in space? Or could a circular economy, life extension, recycling and reuse be the solution to the space industry's dirty side effects? Proponents of in-orbit servicing and refueling laud the technology's potential. But most analysts remain cautious: Without strict environmental regulations, the expected cost of in-orbit servicing may not entice satellite operators to switch to reusable technology en masse. Dave Barnhart, chief executive officer of the California-based aerospace company Arkisys, first began developing concepts of recyclable satellite technology some 15 years ago as part of a project he oversaw at DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency). He and his colleagues investigated how to set up a satellite recycling facility in geostationary orbit — the region about 22,000 miles (36,000 kilometers) above Earth's surface where satellites appear fixed above one spot above the equator. "We wanted to know whether we can use parts from old geo satellites to recreate new ones, because the mass is already there," Barnhart told The geostationary ring is home to some of the largest and most expensive satellites. On top of that, the long distance between Earth and this orbit makes geo missions inherently costly, as they require the most powerful rockets with a lot of fuel to reach their destination. Yet, Arkisys, the company Barnhart cofounded in 2015, is focusing on low Earth orbit (LEO) — the buzzing region closest to Earth up to altitudes of about 1,200 miles (2,000 km). Arkisyshopes to set up an in-orbit servicing and refueling depot called the Port in LEO. The main goal is to spearhead a green revolution in this region, which gives rise to thousands of tons of dangerous space debris every year. "To date, everything we have ever designed to go into space has been one mission, one life," Barnhart told "It's sort of crazy. Every other domain on Earth, we maintain, we sustain, we grow. Not in space." In 2023, Arkisys secured a $1.6 million deal from the U.S. Space Force to test satellite assembly in orbit using the Port demo module — a basic building block of a scalable orbiting garage and gas station. The company wants to launch the first component of this orbital depot next year — a last-mile transportation device called the Cutter, which is designed to help satellites to dock with the garage. In 2027, the main Port module, a hexagonal structure about 9 feet (3 meters) wide, will join the Cutter in orbit to test how the mechanical interfaces of the two work together in space. The Port, in addition to serving as a fuel depot, will arrive with a supply of components and payloads that could be attached to worn-out satellites to give them a new lease on life. "Today, everything on a satellite is done on the ground, and the satellite is launched with an end date," Barnhart said. "We want to shift that to allow extensions of both — life and business — post-launch. We want to be able to add new revenue streams post-launch. You can do that if you can add something, change something in orbit, or even sell that satellite to somebody else who could make it part of a larger platform." Cameras or antennas could be replaced with more powerful ones once those get developed, worn-out batteries could be swapped for brand-new ones, and fuel tanks would get refilled. It all makes sense on paper, but Dafni Christodoulopoulou, space industry analyst at the consultancy company Analysis Mason, warns that whether satellite operators would be inclined to ditch their disposable ways will come down to the cost of the in-orbit maintenance services. LEO is currently dominated by small, relatively cheap satellites, she says, which can be replaced more cheaply than they can be serviced and maintained. "Right now, we expect in-orbit services to come at a cost that might be quite high for operators of small satellites," Christodoulopoulou told "The operators might not be interested in those services, because the price of building a new satellite might not be higher than that of a servicing mission." Barnhart agrees that the fledgling in-orbit servicing industry is likely to face resistance not just from operators but also from satellite manufacturers, who might feel threatened by the idea of reusability and life extension. "Every time you want to make a big shift like this, it's going to be a threat," Barnhart said. "Satellite manufacturers make money by building more satellites to throw away. It might take some time for them to see that by fitting satellites with interfaces that allow them to be serviced, they could actually add some cool functionality to them after launch." Related stories: — Kessler Syndrome and the space debris problem — Pollution from rocket launches and burning satellites could cause the next environmental emergency — 2 private satellites undock after pioneering life-extension mission Still, Christodoulopoulou thinks that in-orbit servicing will eventually make a difference to how things are done in space, and also to the state of the orbital environment. "The number of satellite launches is not expected to go down, so there will be a high need for constellation management, flexibility, disposal and life extension," she said. "I think in-orbit services can definitely help prevent the buildup of space debris and maintain long-term sustainability in orbit." The U.S. government certainly appears to think that life extension is the way forward. In addition to funding the Arkisys experiment, the Space Force also funds the Tetra-5 and Tetra-6 missions to test in-orbit refueling technologies in space. The two missions, designed to test hardware developed by Orbit Fab, Astroscale and Northrop Grumman, are set to launch in 2026 and 2027, respectively. In addition, intensifying geopolitical tensions are increasing the need for quick deployment of new systems in space, which, Barnhart says, could be more speedily addressed with servicing systems such as the Port, than by building new spacecraft from scratch on Earth. "If there is a new threat that has been identified, you might need a new type of sensor or a new payload to observe it," Barnhart said. "If we can augment the satellites that the government has already put up and provide them with a new capability, a new sensor, we can address those threats much faster." Christodoulopoulou thinks that new regulations designed to protect the environment and curb the air pollution related to satellite reentries could further help move the needle toward a less throwaway culture in space utilization. "There need to be a few changes," Christodoulopoulou said. "There needs to be more awareness among satellite operators to understand that in-orbit servicing offers a value in the long term. But also on the government side, there need to be more regulations to support the in-orbit servicing providers."
The Guardian
12-04-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
These Tennessee lawmakers love the unborn. After birth? Not so much
You've probably seen this quote from an Alabama pastor called Dave Barnhart. It goes viral all the time. But I'm resurfacing the quote because it is another day that ends with 'y' in America, which means it is relevant once again. 'The unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for,' Barnhart said back in 2018, remarking wryly on the movement's priorities. 'They never make demands of you … They don't need money, education or childcare … They allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn.' Over in Tennessee, there are a lot of lawmakers who are very proud of how much they advocate for unborn children. In 2022, as soon as Roe was overturned, the state passed one of the nation's strictest abortion bans – one without explicit exceptions to save the life of a pregnant person. The ban also made performing or attempting to perform an abortion a class C felony – akin to aggravated assault – which means aiding in an abortion can land you prison time and a hefty fine. That ban has been continuously challenged in court but the bottom line is that getting an abortion in Tennessee is almost impossible. Those Tennessee lawmakers who love unborn children? Surprise, surprise, they're not so keen on the born ones. Particularly if those kids are immigrants. On Thursday, the GOP-dominated state senate approved a bill that lets public schools check the citizenship or legal immigration status of every student. Undocumented children can be denied enrollment at these public schools or forced to pay tuition. In other words: Tennessee wants to make it legal to deny undocumented kids an education. By requiring school systems to check legal immigrant status, they're also turning what should be safe spaces into immigration enforcement centers. All of which, to be clear, is blatantly unconstitutional. In 1982, the supreme court decision in Plyler v Doe found states cannot deny students a free public education over their immigration status. The Tennessee bill is not law yet, and if the Tennessee governor does sign it, it will almost certainly face legal challenges. But even if it eventually gets struck down, there is a chance it will stay on the books as a 'zombie law' – ready to rise again when circumstances allow. Perhaps you are wondering why all these fierce advocates for the rights of unborn children are so keen on denying kids an education? According to lawmakers who voted for the measure, it's not because they're hateful racists who want to punish kids, it's because they are being fiscally responsible. Their argument is that the state simply doesn't have enough money for education for undocumented kids, particularly since some will require English language learner classes. There's a small possibility – just throwing it out there – that one of the reasons Tennessee is finding it hard to find money for education is because its regressive tax policies are heavily weighted towards extracting money from the poor rather than making the rich pay their fair share. Tennessee is one of the nine states in the US that doesn't have an income tax. It also doesn't have inheritance tax and has very low business tax. Residents (including undocumented immigrants) pay sales tax, property tax and a grocery tax. Undocumented immigrants are putting money into the system and getting very little out of it. Pretending that this attack on undocumented children is about money is disingenuous. Deep down, I'm sure even the people voting for the bill know that investing in children pays dividends to society. Still, while it is disheartening that a bill like this got as far as it did, it's also important to note that it faced a lot of opposition. Nearly half of the senate's members spoke on the bill – many of them, including some Republicans, in passionate disagreement. There were tears and a lot of Bible verses quoted about compassion for children. As the US becomes increasingly dystopian, it's important that we don't lose sight of just how much opposition there is to the extremist policies and legislation a hate-filled minority are pushing through. Donald Trump likes to say that winning the popular vote gave him and his cronies a mandate to do whatever they like; that all the policies getting passed have the support of the people. This simply isn't true. Only around 32% of eligible voters actually voted for Trump. While we must not minimize the amount of misogyny and racism there is in the US (and there is a lot!), we should also take heart from the fact that a sizable number of Americans do not want to live in an authoritarian dystopia where women have no rights and undocumented kids get no education. Sixty-three percent of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases according to Pew research from 2024. Most Americans say undocumented immigrants should have a way to stay in the country legally if certain requirements are met. Increasingly, the actions of the American government don't reflect the views of the American people. Which, of course, is why the Trump administration is so obsessed with undermining education as a whole. From trying to stop undocumented immigrants from going to school, to tightly controlling how Ivy League universities operate, to attempting to eliminate the US Department of Education, Republicans are waging a war on critical thinking. On Thursday the US House approved the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (Save) Act, which requires people to prove they are citizens when they vote. If you changed your birth name – as around 80% of women in opposite-sex marriages in the US have – you will have to show a lot more paperwork to vote. I had to look up who Rourke is because he hasn't been relevant for a while. Now, however, he is making headlines for being misogynistic and homophobic on Celebrity Big Brother UK. Rourke, 72, recently told JoJo Siwa (a gay singer and social media personality) that he'd turn her straight. 'If I stay [in the Big Brother house] longer than four days, you won't be gay any more,' Rourke said to Siwa in a clip from Wednesday. 'I'll tie you up,' he added. Rourke got a warning from producers for his language but his comments were not censored. This is in stark contrast to a Big Brother 'controversy' last year, when ITV, the broadcaster, edited an episode of the show to remove shots of a T-shirt worn by one of the contestants featuring a watermelon, which is a symbol of Palestinian solidarity. Sign up to The Week in Patriarchy Get Arwa Mahdawi's weekly recap of the most important stories on feminism and sexism and those fighting for equality after newsletter promotion The amount of time these people spend obsessing over pronouns boggles the mind. Get a hobby! Get therapy! Try thinking about literally anything else! A criminal court in Leuven, Belgium, recently found a 24-year-old medical student, who was training as a gynaecologist, guilty of rape but suspended his sentence because of his lack of prior offences and his 'promising future'. This has sparked a lot of anger in Belgium and many commentators have drawn parallels to the Brock Turner case in the US. Fox News's Jesse Watters, who sits behind a screen all day, seems to think so. This profundity comes after he declared public soup consumption unmanly and said that real men 'don't wave simultaneously with two hands'. Remember those tariffs Trump imposed on Heard Island and McDonald Islands, inhabited only by penguins? Those penguins now have their own social media account, @PenguinsAgainstTrump. 'What are you going to do, deport us?' one post reads. 'We've been dealing with ICE for centuries.'
