Public Should Weigh In On Elon Musk's SpaceX Plans To Splash Down Near Hawaiʻi
Federal authorities have not required a thorough review, or consultation with Hawaiian stakeholders, for Starshipʻs proposed landing zones.
January 10, 2025 · 6 min read
By Lynda Williams for Civil Beat
Since 2022, Elon Musk and SpaceX has requested larger and larger landing areas near Hawai‘i for their experimental rocket, Starship. Now, the aerospace company is seeking federal approval to launch more frequently and to land even closer to Hawaiʻi, with the current proposal being over 20 times the size of the initial request.
Hawaiʻi stakeholders have never been consulted in the environmental review process. That is not necessary, according to the Federal Aviation Administration, because “the Starship vehicle is planned to land outside of range for impacts to the residents of Hawai’i.”
That position by FAA glides past a range of potential impacts and concerns. The landing zones lie within waters used by the local fishing industry. They overlap with humpback whale migration routes, and encompass areas of cultural significance, such as Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument.
Critics argue that this proximity alone demands greater consultation and scrutiny, not less. Although no public meetings are planned in Hawai‘i, the general public can attend a virtual meeting Monday or submit comments to the FAA by Jan. 17.
Environmental Reviews
To review the potential impacts of SpaceX landings in the Pacific, the FAA has chosen to rely on a patchwork of assessments rather than conducting a full Environmental Impact Statement, which would provide a more thorough and comprehensive view — and would require a more robust opportunity for community input.
One of the patchwork of assessments was a 2022 look at Starship operations that included Pacific landing areas located 62 nautical miles north of Kaua‘i and west of Papahānaumokuākea, the largest contiguous marine reserve in the U.S. The upper stage of Starship is designed to crash into designated landing zones in the ocean, where it is intentionally exploded on impact to minimize retrieval risks and costs.
In 2023, SpaceX revised its Starship plans, and received FAA permission to add an additional area southwest of Hawai‘i for debris fields from launches that were not configured to survive atmospheric reentry. Despite no additional environmental review, the FAA granted SpaceX a launch license that year for up to five landings per year in the Pacific.
SpaceX is now seeking approval to expand its operations in the Pacific again. This plan would increase allowable Starship launches and landings from five to 25 a year, and would expand the hazardous landing zones across the Pacific, from Hawaiʻi to California, including waters surrounding the Pacific Islands Heritage National Marine Monument and Papahānaumokuākea.
The FAA confirmed that it started formal consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service on Nov. 27 to evaluate the potential impact to marine species and critical habitats in the expanded Pacific Ocean landing areas. A biological opinion is due within 135 days.
This current review builds upon the previous 2022 biological opinion that concluded Starship landings would cause no harm to marine mammals and critical habitats.
However, that assessment relied only on best-case scenarios, such as the assumption that Starship would completely disintegrate upon impact and detonation. Had FAA required a full environmental impact statement, potential errors or mishaps would need to be considered.
There was also no consultation with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, which is a co-trustee and manager of Papahānaumokuākea.
Accidents And Lawsuits
As of now, no Starship landings have taken place in the Pacific Ocean.
The first test flight on April 20, 2023, which aimed for a Pacific landing, ended in a catastrophic explosion shortly after liftoff over the launch pad at Boca Chica, Texas, scattering debris across sensitive wetlands and wildlife habitats. The blast also created a shockwave that shattered windows in nearby homes and launched a cloud of dust and particulate matter that blanketed the surrounding community.
The incident sparked significant outrage from local residents, environmental groups, and Indigenous communities, who criticized the FAA for insufficient oversight and what critics described as rushed approvals.
Several environmental organizations, including the Center for Biological Diversity, as well as the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, have sued FAA over its approval process, arguing that it failed to require a full EIS and account for worst-case scenarios. The lawsuit is pending.
Accountability And Public Input
Musk has repeatedly criticized the FAA’s regulatory requirements for SpaceX operations at Boca Chica, mocking the need to assess potential impacts on marine life and quipping that if Starship hit a whale, “the whale had it coming.”
Although the FAA has not required a full environmental impact statement at Boca Chica, the Defense Department does require one for Cape Canaveral — regulations Musk has never publicly criticized. His role in the incoming Trump administration’s government efficiency initiative, where he has pledged to put regulations “on the chopping block,” has raised concerns about possible conflicts of interest, especially as his companies have over $8 billion in government contracts.
A full environmental impact state would trigger what is known as a Section 106 consultation, requiring federal agencies to assess potential impacts on historic and cultural sites, and consultation with Hawaiʻi stakeholders like OHA.
That is why it’s crucial residents of Hawaiʻi speak up now and demand a full review be conducted by SpaceX to protect our waters, culture, and islands — because the Pacific Ocean is not a dumping ground for Elon Musk’s ego trip to Mars.
An online public meeting will be held at 1:30 p.m. Monday. Registration is required. Public comments are due by Jan. 17 and can be submitted at Regulations.gov. For meeting documents and additional information, visit the FAA SpaceX project website.
No comments:
Post a Comment