The Tribune

IF you did not see the streak across the Bahamian sky, you may very well have heard the sonic boom that rattled windows and doors in its wake.

It was the Falcon 9 rocket launch by SpaceX, that resulted in the successful landing of its booster in the Exumas.

The mission was a success – though it was not without concerns, particularly environmental ones.

In the aftermath, Prime Minister Philip “Brave” Davis called it the “beginning of a new chapter” and said it would give people from around the world the chance to visit The Bahamas “for a front-row seat to space history”.

Deputy Prime Minister Chester Cooper, meanwhile, talked of a “tourism boost”, saying: “Space tourism is here. Innovation is here. The future is here.”

So why the disquiet?

Well, if everything is positive, as the government is saying, then why not be a bit more forthcoming on the details.

Activist Joe Darville previously raised concerns when the prospect of the landing was raised – concerns that had gone unanswered by the time of the announcement of the actual landing.

In The Tribune, marine mammal scientists blasted the lack of consultation over the rocket booster return, worried it might land in Exuma Sound’s whale habitat.

The Bahamas Marine Mammal Research Organisation said that the landing site was placed “in a whale habitat without any consultation with Bahamian whale researchers”.

Former Environment Minister Romauld Ferreira criticised the lack of a public environmental impact assessment for the launch, citing that as part of a larger issue of secrecy, lack of transparency and accountability.

He said: “There must be some environmental impact from the debris from the SpaceX rocket falling into our waters and from out of space.”

Mr Ferreira added: “We are known for having a beautiful archipelago, but we’re using our waters to receive essentially space debris or space garbage after their launch and we’re calling it space tourism. It’s kind of like accepting nuclear waste and saying that you’re in the nuclear energy business.”

Such concerns are not the only ones. A reader called up The Tribune asking if surely it should be a legal requirement to make the impact studies of such a landing publicly available – and why that had not been done. It has not been for the want of trying – those questions have been asked. They simply have not been answered.

So if there is reticence from some quarters to the successful landing, it may just be that those stubbornly unanswered questions remain.

Worries about whether there was a contrast between our public stance on global emissions with regard to climate change and welcoming a rocket bellowing fumes to our country were essentially dismissed without consideration.

Calls for details on the environmental impact of the landing itself were largely ignored.

Questions about what the country will make financially from permitting SpaceX to land here were given answers that were fuzzy around the edges, while the cost of the operation was also not detailed, despite the use of Royal Bahamas Defence Force ships to secure a safety perimeter of up to ten miles around the landing site.

The thing is, if all the news is good on those fronts, and there really is nothing to worry about with regard to costs, the environment and so on, there would be a great deal to cheer on.

The enthusiasm on social media that the launch received was remarkable, and that kind of energy, if harnessed, can be a good thing for the nation.

So, all the government has to do is remove the doubts. Publish the studies. Let us remove that doubt, if there really is no concern.

After all, there are a great many more of these landings to come – so let’s be clear and honest about what will come next.