Evidence of meeting #102 for National Defence in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was satellites.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Is there still work that needs to be done to further that in order to help industry, but also to ensure the safety of residents?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Maritime Launch Services Inc.
It's on the execution side now. We have the permission. They looked at every worst-case scenario for a launcher that can carry five tonnes to low-earth orbit. They “worst-cased” it, even using propellants that we're trying to move away from as a global industry.
Nonetheless, we got that qualified and found that we can do it safely, and we had both federal and provincial participation in that.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
In terms of what we've learned from the States, you talked about SpaceX and its domination of the private sector. What should we be worried about here in Canada on that end, with the government and regulations versus that monopoly over the launch industry?
President and Chief Executive Officer, Maritime Launch Services Inc.
We're behind the other Five Eyes countries, for sure. We started ahead, and the U.K.'s leapt ahead of us. It has a technology safeguard agreement. It has the regulatory framework. It's been making investments in the infrastructure for space for development, even though it's on the wrong side of the pond for launching a satellite.
We really have a huge advantage by being where we are and with the timing of it matching what the industry has in place right now.
Transport Canada is working to model after the U.S. part 450 regulations—that's great; that's the world I come from—and part 420 of those licensing regimes. I'm comfortable with those, and I think I can help bring and deliver there.
The agreement through the Minister of Transport is that we'll use existing CARs to be able to do the case-by-case launch, while we're maturing the rest of that regulatory framework over the years ahead.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Mr. Bain, in the discussions around the nuclear detonation tests, I believe you were talking about what you saw through the American tests. That was only on other satellites and equipment up in space.
Is that correct?
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
Let me back up on the details.
The question was on a nuclear explosion in space and how would we detect that. I said in the same way we would have done it during the SACT drill that we were part of in 2021, when the Russians performed an anti-satellite test, ASAT, but they did it with a conventional weapon on their own satellite. They destroyed their own satellite.
Several countries have done this. NorthStar and many other companies around the world have signed anti-satellite treaties.
The experience we have was gained by them doing it with a domestic rocket, a traditional weapon, on their own domestic satellite.
NDP
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
There's no known understanding, then, of what a non-traditional weapon—
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
If you're going to use a nuclear weapon, it would be much more expansive in terms of the damage.
First of all, like anywhere else, a nuclear explosion in space is absolutely unacceptable at any level. It's the same with an ASAT test.
I'm an environmentalist. You don't want to put any explosives up in space, because the debris stays for decades. It goes up and it goes out, because you're shooting from the ground, and it tends to go up further. The further it goes up, the longer it takes to come down, based on gravity.
It's not acceptable. There are various orbits in space that are prime real estate. SpaceX occupies the most prime real estate. That's a chain they call the Starlink orbit. It's very heavily populated. Causing a chain reaction in that orbit would be devastating to communications.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
In the same vein, how much existing debris currently inhibits potential low-earth orbits?
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
There are 130 million pieces of debris flying around in space uncontrolled. Each one poses a threat to operating satellites. I'll come back to the question, but our system is designed to help people navigate around that debris.
To put it in different terms, it's like Highway 401. Imagine every car that's ever had an accident on the 401 is still there, and you have to drive around it. That's the way space is operating right now.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
The obviously exponentially larger space for potential satellite orbits is a factor.
I'm asking if there are prime pathways or prime orbits that are threatened by this debris. Are there areas where an operator would say, “I can't launch this satellite because of the debris hazard”?
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
It's already happened.
Our launch was delayed, other launches get delayed, because there was a debris cloud flying overhead. We never used to deal with that before, and I'm talking not so long ago.
Conservative
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
It's man-made things that have expired in space or collisions in space, which are not as many. It's leftover pieces of equipment all the way back to Apollo.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
In Ms. Mathyssen's question, she talked about weapons in space and about the potential of a catastrophe. We've had testimony about a nuclear explosion in space.
We've crossed over a lot of unthinkable events in fairly recent years, so we have to no longer accept that something is unthinkable.
You would have thought the war in Ukraine would be unthinkable, but it happened, so let's not be restrained by what we think is unthinkable.
How best can Canadian policy-makers deal with the threat? Is there a way to secure or to mitigate the risk of unthinkable events in the weaponization of space?
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
I like the way you're thinking. The answer is you can't move fast enough. Objects in space move at 16 kilometres a second. You don't have time to react; you have to predict in advance.
During the French part of my presentation, when I talked about what NorthStar does, we do what nothing else in the world can do. We'll look at space, and then we'll use artificial intelligence and algorithms to predict where objects are going to be in 48, 96 or more hours, giving people enough time to move out of the way.
This capability needs to be embraced generally. I'm obviously biased by saying buy NorthStar's capability, but you can't go buy it anywhere else. Canada is actually a world leader in this technology and this capability.
That is the type of system that must be adopted. My meetings with the Pentagon, again, we're non-classified. I can have as many discussions as I like about what the general problem is. I'm trying to monitor 300 trillion cubic kilometres of space.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
We heard in the previous panel though that industry is being limited by the lack of getting classified briefings. In other words, industry doesn't know what the threat analysis of the government actually is because it's classified.
Do you see a loss of business opportunity for lack of the correct information from policy-makers about their actual defence needs?
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
I was in the Pentagon two weeks ago. I have no lack of information to know what my system needs to do to be able to deliver.
Conservative
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
I don't have those types of meetings with the Canadian government.
Conservative
Chief Executive Officer and Co-Founder , NorthStar Earth and Space
To me, they would.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
But they're not happening.
You do understand this is not to be a platform to sell the business. For any defence contractor to be able to supply the Canadian military the services that it needs, do they get the information they need to be able to tailor products or create products?
