US Leadership Not Key- North Korea and Iran will purposely pollute space regardless of US action
Baiocchi 10 (Engineer and defense analyst at the RAND Corporation, Ph.D. in optical sciences from the University of Arizona, B.S. in physics from DePaul University, Senior member of the technical staff at Sandia National Laboratories) Dave Baiocchi, National Defense Research Institute 2010 “Confronting Space Debris” http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2010/RAND_MG1042.pdf
Most problems, of course, cannot be categorized at either extreme and instead fall somewhere in the middle, as orbital debris does today. Since the 1960s, many countries—as well as private industry—have developed space capabilities, and that has significantly complicated the task of addressing orbital debris. Not all space-faring nations necessar- ily share the desire to keep the space environment risk-free. Countries such as Iran or North Korea could be developing abilities to access space with the sole intent of polluting it because this would allow them to counter perceived space-based threats from the United States or another country. If Iran were to purposely create a debris cloud, it would be the blameworthy party, but it would remain relatively unaf- fected because its society does not have a heavy dependence on space.
Can’t remove all space debris –cleaning up non-US debris all debris violates international law.
Ansdell 10 (Megan Ansdell graduate student with a master in international science and technology at the George Washington space society a graduate student group of the space policy institute she focuses in space policy http://www.princeton.edu/jpia/past-issues-1/2010/Space-Debris-Removal.pdf
For instance, Article VIII of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty states that nations retain jurisdiction and control over their space objects and that “ownership of objects launched into outer space…and of their component parts…is not affected by their presence in outer space or on a celestial body or by their return to Earth.” This provision becomes significant when combined with the 1972 Liability Convention, which states that nations are internationally liable for damages caused by their space objects both in space and on Earth. Accordingly, before any debris is removed from orbit, consent from the appropriate country will need to be obtained. Using commercial companies to operate debris removal systems would not get around this problem of liability, as Article VI of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty makes countries responsible for the outer space activities of both their governmental and non-governmental entities
Space Debris Inevitable
Space Debris Inevitable
Fuller 11 (John, “How Space Junk Works,” 7/26/11, http://science.howstuffworks.com/space-junk2.htm)
The U.S. Space Surveillance Network, a department that tracks debris floating through space and reports to NASA, observes over 13,000 man-made objects orbiting Earth larger than 4 inches in diameter [source: National Geographic News]. That number has only been increasing, up from 9,000 objects in 2000. The organization estimates there are also millions of much smaller objects floating around, and all of it combined weighs about 5,500 tons. Does all this space junk create any problems for space stations -- or even people on the ground? Although it's hard to believe, many of these objects travel around the Earth at speeds more than 22,000 miles an hour. Anything traveling at a velocity this high would cause a considerable amount of damage to a spacecraft if a direct hit occurred. Even a tiny fleck of paint traveling at such a speed is capable of boring a quarter-inch hole into the window of a space station. Because there are so many objects flying around up there, there's concern that collisions between debris will only produce more fragments. Even if we stopped launching spacecraft right now and didn't send a single object into orbit, the amount of debris in space would remain constant until 2055 [source: National Geographic News]. After that, things would actually get worse, because the amount of material already up there would inevitably collide and create even more space junk. Experts are worried this is already happening. The most recent case of such a collision, for instance, happened on Jan. 17, 2005, when a piece of debris from an exploded Chinese rocket smashed into a 31-year-old American rocket that had been left alone. The collision only produced four pieces of debris, but observers fear it's only a matter of time before such pieces create an unstoppable chain reaction. The good news for astronauts is that most space junk is located between 550 and 625 miles above the Earth -- the International Space Station flies in orbit at 250 miles high, while space shuttles usually only reach 375 miles above Earth. Space programs are also working on rocket designs that limit the amount of debris created during a launch. For those of us on Earth, is there a possibility space junk could fall back to the ground? Everything in orbit will eventually be pulled back down by Earth's gravity -- when that happens depends on how high the object is and how fast it's going. The higher the altitude, the longer the object will take to fall, and it'll take even longer the faster it's speeding around the Earth. These objects could stay in orbit for thousands of years. And the risks of getting hit on the head? Fortunately, most debris burns up during reentry, and no one has ever been killed by space junk -- UK bookmakers note the chances of space junk landing on a person are at least 20 billion to one [source: The Scotsman].
Water Cannons pushing space debris out of orbit
Hollopeter 9 James, Director of Technology Development GIT Satellite Communications 5/29/2009, “Development of A Ballistic Orbital Debris Removal System” http://x-journals.com/2009/development-of-a-ballistic-orbital-debris-removal-system/
But, he says, the space-junk problem needs more attention. “It’s like any environmental problem,” he said. “It’s growing. If you don’t tackle it now, it will only become worse, and the remedies in the future are going to be even more costly than if you tackle it today.” Potential solution: As previously stated, many scenarios have been put forward to remove unwanted and potentially dangerous space debris from orbit. All of these techniques are, on the surface, unfeasible, beyond the scope of present technology, prohibitively expensive and in some cases would present their own hazard to legitimate orbital objects. GIT’s proposal is to attack the problem using a sub-orbital approach that cannot add to the orbital junk problem. Based on studies done under the Space Defense Initiative in the ‘80’s and on previous anti-satellite studies, GIT proposes a sub-orbital payload lofted to the appropriate altitude that could clear or reduce existing debris from selected areas of low earth orbit. By using a ballistic launch profile, there is no chance of adding to the existing debris problem. The payload would re-enter at the end of its mission, as well as all of its lower propulsive stages. There have been many suggestions to orbit a vehicle to collect debris and then de-orbit the debris using onboard propulsion systems. This is a very expensive approach. It would require all the associated ground control systems that are needed for any orbital missions today. By using a sub-orbital launch profile and existing sounding rockets in use today, a small ground based infrastructure, which presently exists could easily handle the launch load. There are many launch sites all over the world to support this type of mission. Since this debris problem exists for all space faring nations, the task could be shared among all users. Payload: Many payloads have been suggested to de-orbit the space debris. Most collect the debris and then de-orbit, while others such as tethers, would slowly lower the orbits until atmospheric drag takes over to de-orbit the debris. GIT’s approach is to use water, H2O, as the passive payload. It has the highest volumetric efficiency in the payload space. It can easily and predictably be deployed and has significant mass that will be used to reduce the debris orbital momentum. The payload would be launched retrograde to the target debris orbits. The resulting collisions would easily reduce the velocity of the smaller debris. The dispersion pattern of the water in space could be easily adjusted to accommodate the required velocity reduction for the target debris. Widely dispersed for very small objects of interest or narrowly dispersed for a focused collision of larger objects. All of these dispersion techniques could easily be tested here on earth in many test areas or chambers available today.
Share with your friends: |