---
type: source
title: "SpaceX FCC Filing for 1 Million ODC Satellites — Public Comment Response"
author: "Multiple (FCC record, AAS, Futurism, The Register, Space.com)"
url: https://www.theregister.com/2026/02/05/spacex_1m_satellite_datacenter/
date: 2026-03-06
domain: space-development
secondary_domains: []
format: article
status: processed
priority: medium
tags: [spacex, orbital-data-centers, FCC, governance, astronomy, megaconstellation, commons-tragedy]
---

## Content

Summary of SpaceX's FCC filing and the public comment response:

**SpaceX filing (January 30, 2026):**
- Application for up to 1,000,000 orbital data center satellites
- Solar-powered, 500-2,000 km altitude, optimized for AI inference
- SpaceX characterized the filing as "the first step towards becoming a Kardashev II-level civilization – one that can harness the Sun's full power"
- FCC public comment deadline: March 6, 2026

**Public comment response:**
- Nearly 1,500 comments filed
- "Vast majority begged the FCC not to proceed" (CBC)
- American Astronomical Society issued action alert for astronomers to file
- Consortium of astronomers (including Barentine) filed formal challenge

**Astronomy objections:**
- Constellation would be in high-inclination orbits, fully illuminated even at midnight
- University of Regina / University of British Columbia simulation: at midnight summer solstice from latitude 50°N, more visible satellites than stars across the world
- SpaceX has spent years negotiating with astronomers on Starlink; this is 200x the scale of Starlink

**Governance context:**
- FCC has no explicit regulatory framework for "compute in orbit" — only spectrum allocation
- Pattern: astronomy objections filed before commercial operations exist (same pattern as early Starlink)

## Agent Notes

**Why this matters:** The governance gap is activating faster than any prior space sector — before the ODC sector commercially exists, ~1,500 public comments and formal AAS challenge have already been filed. The technology-governance lag that took years to materialize in debris and spectrum allocation is appearing in weeks for ODC. This is an acceleration of Pattern 3 (governance gap expanding) that deserves documentation.

**What surprised me:** SpaceX explicitly invoking "Kardashev II civilization" in an FCC filing. This is not typical regulatory language. It signals either strategic framing (large vision to justify broad spectrum allocation) or genuine belief that this is civilizational infrastructure. The Starlink precedent matters: SpaceX navigated the astronomy controversy, FCC granted approval, Starlink is operational. The ODC application will likely follow the same pattern unless regulators develop new frameworks.

**What I expected but didn't find:** FCC's formal response or any indication of how they'll handle a 1M-satellite application. FCC has approved megaconstellations before (Starlink Gen2 at 29,988 satellites) but nothing near 1 million. The regulatory capacity to evaluate this application may not exist.

**KB connections:**
- [[orbital debris is a classic commons tragedy where individual launch incentives are private but collision risk is externalized to all operators]] — 1M satellites exacerbates the commons problem dramatically
- [[space governance gaps are widening not narrowing because technology advances exponentially while institutional design advances linearly]] — the fastest-ever governance gap manifestation; pattern confirms the claim
- [[the Artemis Accords replace multilateral treaty-making with bilateral norm-setting to create governance through coalition practice rather than universal consensus]] — FCC unilateral spectrum allocation for ODC follows the same pattern; no international framework exists for orbital compute

**Extraction hints:**
1. "SpaceX's January 2026 FCC application for 1 million ODC satellites generated nearly 1,500 public comments by the March 6 deadline, with the vast majority opposed — the governance gap is activating in the ODC sector faster than in any prior space domain, before any commercial operations exist"
2. "The astronomy vs. megaconstellation conflict that took years to emerge for Starlink appeared in weeks for SpaceX's ODC proposal — the technology-governance lag in orbital data centers is compressing as both technology and advocacy capacity have matured since the Starlink controversy"
3. Note: This is governance evidence, not economics. Keep separate from the Gate 2 economic evidence.

**Context:** The FCC is the US federal agency responsible for spectrum allocation and satellite licensing. SpaceX already has precedent with Starlink approval. The 1M-satellite application is 200x larger than Starlink's licensed constellation.

## Curator Notes

PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[space governance gaps are widening not narrowing because technology advances exponentially while institutional design advances linearly]] — fastest-ever manifestation of governance gap in a new space sector

WHY ARCHIVED: Documents the regulatory record for the largest satellite constellation ever proposed; the public comment response (~1,500 opposed) is evidence of governance gap accelerating; also tracks the astronomy-satellite conflict extending to a new sector

EXTRACTION HINT: Extract as governance gap evidence, not ODC economic evidence. The claim should be about governance lag compressing and accelerating — the ODC governance crisis emerged faster than Starlink's.
