Why Environmental Groups Are Suing After Starship’s First Launch
SpaceX’s Starship recently lifted off for the first time in Boca Chica Texas. While the company was happy with the results of the test, many others were not. The initial engine ignition was so powerful that it destroyed the concert below before shooting debris in every direction. After a few minutes of flight, the test ended with the activation of the flight termination system and an eventual explosion of both stages.
Just days ago, multiple environmental groups filed a lawsuit against the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), saying that the agency didn’t fully analyze the significant environmental and community impacts of the SpaceX launch program. The official document is quoted saying that the launch caused the “destruction of some of the most vital migratory bird habitat in North America, and without required mitigation sufficient to offset those impacts.
Right now, SpaceX is working to repair the pad and get ready for the next launch attempt, however, the results of this suit will likely need to be determined first. Here I will go more in-depth into the reason for these lawsuits, the impact of Starship’s first launch, what to expect in the coming weeks, and more.
Lawsuit Overview
On June 13th, 2022, the FAA issued a Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment and Finding of no Significant Impact/Record of Decision (FONSI/ROD) for the SpaceX Starship/Super Heavy Launch Vehicle Program, which approved SpaceX’s plan to launch 20 Starship/Super Heavy rockets per year over the next 5 years, along with tank tests, static fire engine tests, and construction of additional launch related infrastructure. On April 14th, 2023, the FAA issued a Commerical Space Transportation License to SpaceX, which, relying on the FONSI/ROD, allowed the company to launch the first flight of the Starship Super Heavy vehicle, and to undertake pre-flight ground operations, such as tank testing and static fire tests, over the next 5 years. This is where the lawsuit comes into play.
One quote from the document states, “The launching of these rockets results in intense heat, noise, and light that adversely affects surrounding habitat areas and communities, which include designated critical habitat for federally protected species as well as National Wildlife Refuge and State Park lands.”
The goal of this lawsuit is to get SpaceX to stop launching Starship specifically in the Boca Chica area. In another quote they say, “In addition to harm from construction activities and increased vehicle traffic, the rocket launches and testing result in explosions which spread debris across surrounding habitat and cause brush/forest fires – including one that recently burned 68 acres of adjacent National Wildlife Refuge.”
In this case, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service commented that “a 3.5-acre fire started south of the pad site on Boca Chica State Park land”. They also said that “Impacts from the launch include numerous large concrete chunks, stainless steel sheets, metal and other objects hurled thousands of feet away along with a plume cloud of pulverized concrete that deposited material up to 6.5 miles northwest of the pad site.”
On the day of the launch, researchers from the Fish and Wildlife Service were standing by to conduct impact assessments after the launch. While no wildlife was found to be killed, a senior attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, Jared Margolis, said that post launch delays can impede biologists’ ability to conduct a thorough investigation. In a quote he said, “If there were any mortalities from the launch- particularly from concrete chunks and metal being hurled thousands of feet into National Wildlife Refuge lands that are a habitat for protected species, such as the piping plover, any carcasses would likely have been dragged off by scavengers, making it difficult to assess the full extent of impacts.”
One final statement from the official document sums up the lawsuit. Here they say, “the environmental impacts of the Starship/Super Heavy Launch Vehicle Program cannot be reduced through mitigation such that FAA can ensure that there will not be significant harm from the launch program, and FAA failed entirely to even address how the proposed mitigation could achieve that level of protection. Therefore, the FAA’s failure to fully consider and address the impacts of the Starship/Super Heavy Launch Vehicle Program through an EIS, and its failure to consider alternatives that would reduce the impacts of the launch program, was arbitrary and capricious, in violation of NEPA and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The Court should vacate the FONSI and accompanying Record of Decision, and remand with instructions that the FAA perform a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
What This Means
In order for them to overturn an agency rule, they must show that the rule is “arbitrary and capricious” or “contrary to law”, as mentioned in the document. In other words, the groups filing the suit would have to show that the FAA basically did not consider an issue at all, or looked over it in such a way as to cast doubt on the entire process. This is going to be very hard to do considering the amount of time and regulations that went into SpaceX securing this initial launch license.
Back in June of last year, the FAA issued a “Final Programmatic Environmental Assessment” for the Starship and Super Heavy vehicles, stating a number of corrective actions SpaceX must undertake to mitigate the effect of its launch activities. This included public outreach with many comments, air emissions, endangered species, and coastal zone management, just to name a few. In one relevant case the PEA Document states, “Anomalies would not result in a permanent incorporation of Section 4(f) properties.” Section 4(f) properties refer to publicly owned park and recreation areas that are open to the general public, publicly owned wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and public or privately owned historic sites. They continued by saying, “The FAA considered whether the potential for debris and debris‐response activities could result in a temporary occupancy of Section 4(f) properties. A Starship/Super Heavy anomaly could result in an explosion on the launch pad, which would spread debris. Debris is expected to be contained within the debris study area, which is a 700‐acre area within the “all hard checkpoint” area.
At the time of this documents completion, “SpaceX’s SN11 anomaly created the largest debris field of all launch anomalies to‐date and although debris spread outside the launch pad, it was contained to the debris study area. SpaceX has entered into a memorandum of agreement (MOA) with multiple nearby areas and Texas Park and Wildlife Department land (TPWD). The MOA provides a protocol for responding to events, recovering debris, and implementing, monitoring, and adapting restoration efforts to restore impacts. By implementing, monitoring, and adapting restoration efforts, it is expected that any affected land can be restored and long‐term impacts to the natural, cultural, and recreational values of TPWD lands and habitat would be avoided.
Importantly, the FAA allowed its formal launch licensing process to proceed without necessitating a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement, which could have taken years. The lawsuit says the FAA should be required to complete the Environmental Impact Statement process. As far as comments from SpaceX, Elon was quoted saying, “The debris is really just basically sand and rock, so it’s not toxic at all or anything,” he said. “It’s just like a sandstorm, essentially. Basically a human-made sandstorm. But we don’t want to do that again.”
Elon mentioned the company was taking measures to prevent similar occurrences from happening, including installing a large steel plate and a water deluge system beneath the rocket. This would be one of the biggest changes that would likely have a significant impact on the debris and projectiles from the launch. Currently, its thought that the initial ignition of the 30 Raptor engines may have compressed the sand underneath the concrete to such a degree that the concrete effectively bent and then cracked. From here the pressure was able to seep in from the Raptor exhaust and create a large trench below the Orbital Launch Mount. Once this was compromised the engines then shot this destroyed concrete in every direction which was far from ideal. The new pad changes should stop any projectile with the exception of some dust. This is because the company plans to expand the water cooled steel plate under the entire mount with connections to each of the legs. In regard to this, just a few days ago Elon said, “We are going to extend the steel just out beyond the rocket to make sure we don’t dig up concrete elsewhere. We will also connect the load of the massive steel sandwich underneath the launchpad into the launch mount legs so it can take that load tension as well as compression.”
In terms of the future Starship timeline and program, we will have to see how it progresses in the coming weeks. Elon is confident the company will be ready to launch in right around two months. This includes all of the pad repairs, changes, and Starship vehicle preparation. In all likelihood, this process will take at least two months but maybe more. In relation to the lawsuit, it’s hard to say if it will become a future delay if a decision cannot be made in a relatively short period of time. This being said, it will be months anyway before SpaceX will be ready so it could have very little impact in some instances.
Conclusion
SpaceX just launched Starship for the first time and environmental groups were not happy with the results. A lawsuit was formed against the FAA citing that the agency didn’t consider or properly account for the damage and impact a Starship launch would have. We will have to wait and see how it progresses and the impact it has on the space industry.