A crucial decision looms on the horizon, one that could impact our ability to monitor and understand the changing climate. At the upcoming World Radiocommunications Conference (WRC-25), governments will decide whether to allocate a portion of the X-band spectrum, currently used by Earth observation satellites, to 5G and 6G mobile networks. This proposal, pushed by major telecom operators, promises efficient spectrum usage and lucrative payments to countries. However, it raises concerns about our ability to observe and track environmental changes, especially as climate risks escalate and governments require clearer insights into the transformations affecting their territories.
The Remote Sensing Collective, comprising 11 satellite-focused companies, has formed to oppose this change. They emphasize that the X-band is essential for downloading high-resolution imagery, enabling critical tasks like natural disaster assessments, terrain mapping, crop surveillance, deforestation tracking, and ice sheet monitoring. Without a clear and dedicated X-band, Earth observation satellites will be unable to provide the data that governments, insurers, scientists, and security agencies rely on daily. This is a serious issue with far-reaching implications.
The stakes are indeed high, and the involvement of influential players like Elon Musk, who agreed to pay $19 billion for wireless communications frequencies, underscores the intensity of the battle for spectrum. Smaller Earth observation satellite companies risk being marginalized in this fight, lacking the financial muscle and influence of their larger counterparts. The question arises: Why are telecom operators so keen on the X-band?
Telecom operators argue that their systems can coexist with Earth observation systems and that they can pay governments significantly more for access. However, studies suggest otherwise, indicating that 5G towers operating in or near the X-band would interfere with ground stations, requiring vast exclusion zones around Earth observation downlink sites. This would effectively freeze the ground segment in place, hindering the expansion needed to support a growing satellite fleet.
Governments need this expansion to address climate change, geopolitical tensions, and extreme weather events, which are driving the demand for rapid, reliable imagery. Every moment counts when floods and fires strike, and the armed forces require timely, accurate intelligence. We cannot afford to hinder the systems that bolster societal resilience.
The international politics of spectrum allocation are complex. Europe and the United States seem opposed to opening up the X-band, while Brazil and Mexico have signaled support for allowing mobile networks access. Africa, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region remain undecided, and their stance will likely determine the outcome at WRC-27. Satellite operators are cautiously optimistic, but the financial might of the telecom sector could sway the balance.
This dispute represents a pivotal moment. Spectrum has become a commodity, a battleground for industries, a monetization opportunity for governments, and a target for investors willing to spend vast sums. As competition intensifies, the public interest functions of spectrum risk being overshadowed by private interests. Earth monitoring, a vital public good, could be sacrificed to allow a few massive companies to maximize profits. While these companies may benefit their customers, the long-term needs of society, such as disaster prediction and prevention, and effective defense against hostile nations, should not be overlooked.
Finding a perfect middle ground might be challenging, but there are alternatives. Laser communications, or lasercom, offers a way to transmit data via light, bypassing the congested radio bands and providing fiber optic-grade throughput between satellites and Earth. This technology has rapidly evolved and reached commercial maturity, offering a viable alternative to RF spectrum. By diversifying our communication methods, we can reduce risks and protect the X-band.
Smartphones are remarkable devices that connect and empower us, but in a warming world, satellites and their ability to provide critical data take precedence over increased connectivity. We cannot afford to miss crucial images of impending cyclones, creeping droughts, or collapsing glaciers. This spectrum choice is a climate choice, and regulators must recognize that some bands are simply too vital to compromise.
Jean-Francois Morizur, co-founder and CEO of Cailabs, a French startup developing optical communications systems, emphasizes the importance of this issue. SpaceNews welcomes diverse perspectives and encourages the community to share their arguments and viewpoints at opinion@spacenews.com for potential publication.
