“If
Apollo Fusion uses mercury in its satellite propulsion systems, the
toxic chemical could do harm to the environment back on Earth”
This
Silicon Valley Space Startup Could Lace the Atmosphere With Mercury
Apollo
Fusion plans to use mercury in its propulsion systems, according to
industry insiders.
19
November, 2018
Underneath
its Silicon Valley sheen, Apollo Fusion Inc. may be keeping a toxic
secret. In Mountain View, Calif., a mile from the Google headquarters
where its co-founder and several of its scientists used to work, the
space startup is trying to develop better, cheaper propulsion systems
for a new generation of satellites. Investors led by LinkedIn Corp.
co-founder Reid Hoffman handed the two-year-old company $10 million
in venture funding earlier this year, on the promise of breakthrough
technology that Hoffman has said will “enable the second space
race.” But if Apollo sticks with a plan it has shared with some
potential customers, the losers may include everyone on Earth.
Apollo
Fusion has designed its propulsion systems to use mercury as a fuel,
according to four industry insiders with direct knowledge of its
technology. NASA began moving away from mercury in the 1970s, owing
to concerns about contamination on the ground. Even tiny doses of
mercury, a powerful neurotoxin, can impair a person’s cognitive
functions, leading to lower IQ, damaged motor skills, and decreased
memory. Apollo pitched the toxic element as part of its technology to
potential customers as recently as this summer, three of the insiders
say. All four spoke on condition of anonymity, because they’d
signed nondisclosure agreements. Propulsion experts say mercury is a
tempting choice, despite the safety hazards, because its performance
is better than that of alternatives like xenon or krypton.
Apollo
says it has a contract with one customer and is in discussions with
at least two others, but it declined to name them or discuss its
designs or environmental concerns. “We don’t comment on our
proprietary technology due to competitive risks, either on
innovations that we’ve built or things that we’re testing,”
co-founder and Chief Executive Officer Michael Cassidy said in an
email. “We are also committed to maintaining a low impact on the
environment.” Hoffman, who sits on Apollo’s board, said the
company is evaluating a number of different technologies. “No
decisions have been made,” he said in an email.
U.S.
government agencies have sought to reduce national mercury emissions
for more than two decades through various rules. The feds limited the
chemical’s use in batteries, for example, and require most
coal-fired power plants to install scrubbers that remove it from
their exhaust. The U.S. is one of 128 countries to sign the Minamata
Convention, a treaty aimed at reducing mercury emissions that took
effect last year.
So
far, though, existing rules don’t do much to cover spacecraft at
the outer reaches of the planet’s atmosphere. The U.S. Federal
Aviation Administration requires space companies to disclose
hazardous materials in their payloads, but its oversight doesn’t
extend to communications satellites, including the many being
proposed for high-speed internet access. Those are regulated by the
Federal Communications Commission, which does little to monitor the
substances shot into space. “It’s a regulatory blind spot big
enough to launch a satellite through,” says Kevin Bell, staff
counsel at Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a
nonprofit advocacy group.
In
the 61 years since Sputnik’s launch, more than 8,000 satellites
have flown in orbit, most launched by governments. About 2,000 remain
operational. Today, private companies promise a surge in relatively
tiny models that will fly at lower altitudes and dwarf the total for
the first six decades. OneWeb, for instance, plans to send 1,980
satellites into orbit to provide global high-speed internet access,
while Elon Musk’s SpaceX plans to launch 4,425 for its own low-cost
internet service. All told, companies have filed federal applications
to send up more than 20,000 satellites in the next decade, though
analysts expect only a fraction to make it to orbit.
If
Apollo’s purportedly mercury-driven technology were widely used—by,
say, a constellation of 1,000 satellites—the environmental impact
could be significant. The amount of propellant in each would depend
on various factors, including the satellite’s size, mission, life
span, and altitude. A case study on Apollo’s website that the
company calls a “representative configuration” ideal for a
low-orbit satellite would carry 20 kilograms of an unnamed
propellant. Multiply that by 1,000, and the constellation of
satellites could use 20,000kg, or 20 metric tons, of mercury, which
would be released over the satellites’ estimated five to seven
years in orbit. By comparison, the entire U.S. emits about 50 metric
tons of mercury each year; the entire population of the world
generates about 2,000 metric tons.
Many
of the proposed satellites would orbit 300 kilometers to 1,200km
above the Earth. Mercury emitted at those altitudes would mostly
remain in the atmosphere and migrate down over several years,
eventually returning to the oceans and soil, says Steve Brooks, an
associate professor of aerospace engineering at the University of
Tennessee at Knoxville. “It’s a very heavy element that is not
going to easily escape the Earth’s gravity,” Brooks says. “Almost
all of the mercury that you put up there will find its way back
down.”
Apollo
was created in 2016 by Cassidy, then a Google vice president, and
Benjamin Longmier, a professor of aerospace engineering who
previously sold a space-tech company to Apple Inc. The duo initially
hoped to make a new breed of safe, cheap nuclear power plants that
could be shipped anywhere on Earth. The following year, the company
switched gears and began developing its thruster system for
satellites. Last December it said its technology could deliver three
times more force in the same time as existing technologies, saving
companies as much as $250,000 per satellite.
It’s
not clear who’s signed a contract with Apollo, but the four
industry insiders say the company’s planned use of mercury has been
made known in extensive discussions with potential customers,
including OneWeb and Planet Labs Inc., which operates about 130
satellites that provide high-resolution Earth images to commercial
and government clients. (OneWeb and Planet Labs say they aren’t
doing business with Apollo.)
Environmental
scientists who’ve been working for years to curtail mercury
pollution are frustrated by the potential emergence of a market for
mercury propulsion, says Dan Jaffe, a professor of environmental
chemistry at the University of Washington at Bothell. “Using a
toxic chemical that we’re spending billions of dollars to clean
up,” he says, “is probably a dumb idea.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.