The new moon landing program, (called Artemis) currently has a working space capsule (called Orion) and a rocket that can launch it to lunar orbit (called SLS), so can send humans to lunar orbit on Artemis II.

The lander (called Starship HLS) and suits (called AxEMU) are not scheduled to be ready until Artemis III because they did not receive contracts and funding until very recently.

It's literally called starship. That's the name of the rocket as given to it by it's creators

I'll add to his comparison. It's like taking widely scattered of wood chips from your expensive garden to the south pole, where you plan to build your own reprocessing facility to turn the chips into chipboard to build your Antarctic base.

It's such a huge amount of effort for so little gain

The recovery craft haven't even been constructed yet. It will consist of an orbiting return craft, a lander with a rocket and two fetch helicopters similar to Ingenuity

The article literally says that they're launching in October with a CLPS Lander as a ride-share.

Worth noting that firefly have contracts with Northrop Grumman and Astra for supplying engines, plus a CLPS contract, so aren't entirely dependent on their launches for revenue

Probably by just using the satellites onboard propulsion. Although given that this is just a test mission, just capturing the debris would be progress enough

Sounds good, but unless they have a way of landing the satellites gently I doubt many existing satellites are built sturdy enough to stay in a good condition for reflight.

> Collect energy in the sunny side, send it to the dark side and from there to the earth.

This part isn't necessary, the satellite simply has to be placed in a higher orbit so that it spends very little time in the shade. Of course, now you need to transmit the energy over a greater distance, but you probably want to keep your power satellites in a geostationary orbit anyway so you don't need to keep switching between multiple power satellites

A negligible about. Particulates in the atmosphere can block more noticeable amounts of sunlight, but you'd have to put some real effort into blocking sunlight from space

The quantities of fuel used in space launches are tiny compared to any other industry.

As a far future concept, it's viable. If you had a kilometres long ship on an interstellar voyage, with access to large amounts of power and traveling at a good fraction of lightspeed then this is a fairly good system to use. But for near term spaceflight it's simply unnecessary. Debris is widely scattered and nothing that a good Whipple sheild can't deal with

It's a lot of effort Vs just building nuclear or renewables with more storage, but also promises a lot of benefits too