LETTER | In an effort to explore new economic opportunities, the Science, Technology and Innovation Ministry through the Malaysia Space Agency (MYSA) will be looking at developing a study guideline on the feasibility of building a spacecraft launch site in Malaysia.

The strategic location close to the equatorial line with the belief of more competitive operating costs gives birth to this initiative. If viable, Malaysia will join an elite group of nations and it would be the 16th such facility in the world.

The current eight countries to have a spacecraft launch site are China, India, Israel, New Zealand, Russia, France, Japan, and the US.

News reports said the development of the space industry could be worth an estimated RM10 billion by the end of the decade, along with the growth of 500 space-tech startups and the creation of 5,000 job opportunities.

Currently, the cost to build a spacecraft launcher varies significantly depending on the type, size, and capabilities of the launcher. The development and construction costs for a large, heavy-lift launcher can reach several billion US dollars. The SLS currently under development by NASA exceeds US$10 billion.

Additionally, operational costs such as propellant, launch pads, and personnel also need to be considered.

SpaceX founder Elon Musk has said a Starship launch could eventually cost just US$10 million or less but the company’s Falcon 9 costs about US$62 million today and has far less carrying capacity.

If the environment is a priority, what should we do now?

Malaysia increased its mitigation ambition with an unconditional target to cut carbon intensity against GDP by 45 percent by 2030 compared to 2005 levels.

When it comes to environmental impacts, not all rocket fuels are equal. There are industry’s “dirty secrets”. Experts caution that not enough data has been gathered to precisely assess the impacts of various types of rocket propellants and rocket engines.

Unsymmetrical Dimethylhydrazine, a fuel dubbed “Devil’s venom” by Soviet scientists, is responsible for turning a vast area of the Kazakh steppe into an ecological disaster zone as reported by the United Nations Development Programme published in the Journal of Cleaner Production.

Massive clouds generated during space shuttle launches contained rather reactive chemicals and spread in the surrounding environment, affecting soil and water quality, and damaging vegetation.

I do not want to sound negative but addressing our present concerns may be preferable than focusing on future opportunities that may or may not be viable. We are still dealing with food shortages, poverty, inflation, and structural weaknesses at home.

The handful of benefits such as money spent on space research will spur economic expansion by bringing new job opportunities and technological advancements can wait for another day.

Another point is, will it include building and operating satellites?

I appreciate the ministry’s vision of making Malaysia a high-tech nation through science, technology, innovation, and economy. But now, there is a scarcity of valuable and usable resources that need to be well-planned and allocated.

We need sustainable development and a just transition. The budget could run into millions, necessitating foreign expert involvement.

It makes more sense for the ministry to embark on developing a study guideline through a scientific approach and advanced technology to assist in environmental sustainability and societal wellbeing.

In today’s context, as per Maslow’s pyramid of needs, we urgently need to tackle the bottom part of the hierarchy, i.e. physiological (food and clothing), safety (job security), and love and belonging needs (friendship). Esteem and especially self-actualisation can wait.

By the way, will we be a party to the “weaponisation of space” which will be fundamentally destabilising.

What say you?

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.