How hard is it to build orbital data centers, actually?

2026-07-16 21:32 UTC

Editor’s note: … In this article, we discuss the technical challenges of building an orbital data center constellation: launching all of it, dissipating heat in space, dealing with radiation, and addressing latency issues in orbit. Read part one here. I find the napkin math interesting, especially putting into light that given expected longevity of such satellites, 5 to 7 years, they will have to do 10 to 42 launches per day. SpaceX will need $1.5 to $10 trillions to make it happen. All of that so the slop machine doesn’t have to run into obstacles like democracy ? So it can destroy communities and the environment freely? What are we doing?

Replies (6)

@skvlp@lemmy.wtf 2026-07-16 21:43

His AI is already loosing money, and this looks to be massively expensive. Might a tired soul hope that this will put a serious dent in his hoardings?

Open ##4054305
@wjrii@lemmy.world 2026-07-17 03:22

So you need SpaceX to increase its launch capacity to somewhere between 20 to 80 times its current rate, completely reimagine the economics of space-based radiators and solar panels, accept that all that shiny new power and cooling capX is just as disposable as the GPUs, and you have to adjust the expected use cases and SLAs to allow for nothing being repairable and latency making them unsuitable for many AI tasks. Yes. “Possible.” I mean, I guess, but we’ve got some powerful Hyperloop energy here. I cannot imagine it ever being more economical than bullying and bribing rural areas with access to a power grid.

Open ##4054761
@BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2026-07-16 22:47

I always wondered how we planned for dissipating heat in space to be comparable to dissipating heat on earth. Feels like whatever they’re using to handle that heat is going to have to be huge and heavy. Has to be great for avoiding any legal obligations on how you might handle the data though. Can do whatever you want as long as it stays in space.

Open ##4068459
@beliquititious@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2026-07-17 06:19

Wouldn’t it still be cheaper to build megastructures on earth in remote and uninhabited places? Like I get you have to build your own power and run your own fiber if you say build a data center the size of Rhode Island in the Yukon or something, but that has to be more cost effective than orbital. Taking it to orbit creates far more problems than it solves.

Open ##4070432
@fubarx@lemmy.world 2026-07-17 06:43

Google and Microsoft already tried underwater data centers to better handle heat dissipation. It wasn’t worth it. Hardware can fail and you need somebody to go in and swap boards and faulty cables. The wrong board could shut down the whole container. It was so much pain trying to maintain it under water. How are they going to deal with it cost effectively up in orbit? Little nanosat modules? Be a lot cheaper (and faster) sending, a tech out in a little cargo van and a toolbox to Memphis, Phoenix, or Bakersfield.

Open ##4072968
@LodeMike@lemmy.today 2026-07-17 07:44

Depends on what you arbitairally define as data center. Try doing it while disqualifying the GPS constellation.

Open ##4077073