Foresight Alliance | Space For All Our Stuff

I read this piece in the New York Times recently and it has stayed with me. I think the reason why it has bothered me is because it reads as uncritical boosterism for a project whose “gee whiz!” factor overshadows real issues and challenges it faces. (Read on!). And this has led it to be breathlessly covered by other media and blogs in an even less critical way since it was first reported in the Times.

For those that didn’t click the link, it’s story about Inversion Space, a young start-up (both in age of company and age of founders) that is exploring the idea of sending stuff into space for storage, and then recalling it back to earth when needed. (I don’t use the word ‘stuff’ pejoratively—the company is still trying to figure out what are the best items to shoot into space for later use.) Specifically:

Inversion aims to develop a four-foot-diameter capsule carrying a payload equivalent to the size of a few carry-on suitcases by 2025. Once in orbit, the capsule could, the company hopes, navigate itself to a private commercial space station or stay in orbit with solar panels until summoned back to earth. Come time to return, the capsule could drop out of orbit and re-enter the atmosphere.

And for more specifics and speculation, the story notes:

The company’s founders imagine the capsules could store artificial organs that are delivered to an operating room within a few hours or serve as mobile field hospitals floating in orbit that would be dispatched to remote areas of the planet. And one day, a shortcut through space could allow for unimaginably fast deliveries — like delivering a New York pizza to San Francisco in 45 minutes.

If you are not well-versed in rocketry and the space industry, you may be asking “How would that work?” and if you are aware of the industry, you are likely asking “How WOULD that work?” These are good questions!

Getting to space is expensive, and that expense is due to weight—the heavier the payload, the more it costs. But typically the cost of this weight is offset by the benefits of the thing—astronaut, satellite, telescope—being realized once it is in space. Inversion Space wants to shoot mass into space and then wait for it to be needed and have it return to earth.

If all of this sounds like the dorm room-musings of a couple of college kids, you will not be surprised to learn that the 23-year-old founders met their freshman year at Boston University and dreamed up the idea over the course of late-night conversations. They are not without some experience as they were members of the school’s rocket club and interned at SpaceX before dropping out of college to pursue this idea. I can’t fault the founders for their dreams, they have raised $10 million in funding, and VCs poured $7.7 billion into space technology in 2021 according to the Times article.

But still—I have questions!

My first is this: What can be launched into space cheaper than it could be stored and delivered on earth? (Friend of this blog and noted wit @changeist suggested ‘nuclear waste.’ Maybe?) Given the current costs of launch, there is very little cargo that makes economic sense right now. Even with costs eventually dropping, the small payloads Inversion Space envisions—“the size of two suitcases”—means that they won’t be launching a lot of stuff each time. Perhaps they are counting on launch costs low enough it could become a volume business?

Who needs this service? What products are out there that could benefit from being launched into and stored in space to (hopefully) be returned in a timely manner? Timely is the key word here as a cursory search for “how long does orbital reentry take?” returns answers ranging from 15 minutes to 90 minutes depending on orbit and targeted landing location. And speaking of landing …

Are you going to be able to drop the cargo anywhere on earth? Doubtful for any number of reasons—air traffic, national defense systems, general safety—you cannot just drop this payload back anywhere. Inversion states its goal is to have payloads land within a 10-mile radius of the delivery site. So, no deliveries to the heart of London, Tokyo, New York, Lagos, Mexico City. And likely ‘delivery’ would have to be well clear of most urban areas as the last thing anyone wants is a giant box of stuff plummeting from orbit and dropping on your house, obliterating your neighborhood.

The idea of time-saving is also questionable. Not only is there still the issue of time-costs of packing up and launching freight into space, but also time-costs of positioning your space cargo (what if your cargo is on the other side of the planet?) and scheduling a reentry time for the return, as I can’t see that it would be able to drop without confirming a clear reentry route first. And then the delivery from the landing site to the location. I live in Washington, DC and a as I write this at 10:15 am (not a rush hour period) Google Maps shows that a trip to my house from points 10 miles away is between 20 and 25 minutes.

While Inversion’s idea is intriguing and headline-grabbing (and funding-attractive) at this point it’s quite implausible and unnecessary.

BUT! Silicon Valley is populated with companies that have started with one idea and pivoted to something else when it becomes obvious the idea is not going to work. Buried at the end of the story is Inversion Space’s pivot:

On a recent visit, Inversion was preparing to test a new parachute design. Parachutes are tricky. They have to unfurl perfectly to make sure a capsule will slow down and not rock too much. Many factors, like fabric choice and seam design, can affect a parachute’s effectiveness.

While most rocket companies outsource parachute design and production, Inversion sees building their own as an advantage.” I have doubts about the idea of storing goods in space, but becoming the producer of industry-leading parachute technology? You might say that idea is golden.