Today’s class will be discussion-based. This prompt is meant to help guide your discussion. We will convene as a class after 20-30 minutes to discuss the issues raised.

Environmental protection in space

We’ve got a decent bit of reading here, so split these readings between your group members. Make sure you have people reading each piece, but you don’t all need to read both. Our goal is to develop a better understanding of arguments around environmental protection in space. Some of this builds on preior discussions we’ve had, some of this is new.

  1. The Hogan Lovell’s filing (in your email), specifically the introduction and parts II.B and III.C, III.D, III.E. \

  2. This piece about zombie oil wells in Texas: “How Texas’s zombie oil wells are creating an environmental disaster zone”.

Discussion questions

There probably isn’t enough time to answer all of the questions below, but try to discuss all at least a little bit and one or two in some depth.

  1. What are the orbit-use externalities that Gilbert and Vidaurri identify?


  1. Which of those could be addressed by a forfeiture assessment or performance bond? (That is, suppose you can design the instrument freely as long as it remains the same instrument, e.g. a forfeiture assessment can be levied udner any set of conditions but must require operators to forfeit their asset, while a performance bond can have any coupon/term structure but must have a positive face value.)


  1. Is the FCC the appropriate agency to regulate orbit use? Why or why not? (What is Rao’s argument in the Substack post? What is Gilbert and Vidaurri’s argument in the article? What is the Hogan Lovell’s argument in the filing?)


Try to think of additional questions which you may not be able to answer but think are important in thinking about these questions.