Inherency (4/8)
No programs funded to eliminate space debris now.
Williams 10 (Dan, writer at Reuters, Red Ice Creations, Reuters.com. US general urges world war on space debris, 1/28/10; http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=9652; rn)
World powers must find ways to reduce the amount of debris in orbit, as the collision risk it poses to spacecraft is increasing, the head of the U.S. Strategic Command said on Wednesday. Air Force General Kevin Chilton, a former astronaut, told an Israeli audience that the United States has catalogued more than 15,000 items such as jettisoned rockets, shuttle detritus, and bits of destroyed satellites currently floating in space. "The estimation is that these numbers could grow upward of 50,000 in total numbers in the not-too-distant future," he said, adding that this could make low-earth orbit "uninhabitable to man or machine". The amount of debris has increased exponentially, according to Chilton, due to events like China's 2007 shooting down of a defunct satellite, and last year's collision of an old Russian military satellite and a telecoms satellite owned by Iridium. In what was widely seen as an effort to achieve parity with China, the United States in 2008 blew up a target satellite using the Aegis missile interceptor. The Aegis is now the backbone of a planned U.S. ballistic shield for Eastern Europe. Chilton said the increasing clutter raised the spectre of a "cascade" whereby debris causes collisions, which in turn creates more debris. Chilton said major powers should agree on a "responsible space operation", improve their spacecraft to keep debris to a minimum, and share data on possible risks. "The U.S. has quite an extensive array of sensors ... but even that is not enough," he said in his address to the Fisher Institute for Air & Space Strategic Studies, near Tel Aviv. "We need to improve our space surveillance capabilities." But Chilton made clear that, for now, containment was the only option, in the absence of a means of elimination. "Today, the way we eliminate space debris is we wait for it to come down" and burn up on reentry through the atmosphere, he said. Chilton, whose responsibilities include ballistic missile defence and cyber warfare as well as space operations, spent three days in Israel, an aide said. As well as visiting academic forums, he held talks with researchers at Israel's Defence Ministry, an official involved in the visit said, without giving details.
Inherency (5/8)
There have been no national or international policies regarding space debris.
Ansdell in 10 (Master in international Science and Technology Policy at the University’s Elliott school of International Affairs with a focus on space policy, Princeton Journal of Public and International Affairs, Space Debris Removal, http://www.princeton.edu/jpia/past-issues-1/2010/Space-Debris-Removal.pdf, AX)
There is also a lack of clear policy on both national and international levels. Space-faring countries and the United Nations have only adopted mitigation guidelines and have not cited the development of active debris removal systems as part of their space policies. Moreover, there has been a lack of discussion about what entity is responsible for financing and operating these systems. This is a complicated issue as some nations have created more debris than others, yet all space-faring nations and users of satellites services would benefit from space debris clean up.
In the status quo, all space debris options have failed.
Ansdell in 10 (Master in international Science and Technology Policy at the University’s Elliott school of International Affairs with a focus on space policy, Princeton Journal of Public and International Affairs, Space Debris Removal, http://www.princeton.edu/jpia/past-issues-1/2010/Space-Debris-Removal.pdf, AX)
There is currently no man-made space debris removal system in operation, nor have there been any serious attempts to develop one. However, common concepts include electrodynamic tethers, solar sails, drag augmentation devices, orbital transfer vehicles, and space-based lasers. All of these have their own benefits and drawbacks, making it difficult to find a single system that fulfills all of the above requirements. For example, twelve electrodynamic tethers weighing only one hundred kilograms each could be launched as secondary payloads to stabilize the space debris population in low-Earth’s orbit within five years (Foust 2009). However, tethers only work on objects greater than ten centimeters and attaching them to debris using conventional robotics would “incur excessive costs for the benefit gained” (Liou and Johnson 2006, 340-341). In contrast, a constellation of space-based lasers using photoablation to guide debris out of critical orbits could reach further than low-Earth’s orbit, but would only work on debris smaller than ten centimeters. Moreover, the required laser technology is currently unavailable and launching a satellite constellation costs up to billions of dollars, making the development and deployment of such a system extremely expensive.
Inherency (6/8)
NASA scientist wants to use lasers to move space junk
Bates March 2011 “DANIEL BATES journalist for dailymail.co.uk. “Nasa to shoot lasers at space junk around Earth to prevent collisions with satellites” http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1366838/Nasa-use-lasers-shoot-space-junk-Earth.html SH)
Nasa fears ‘Kessler Syndrome’, where there is too much space junk for it to be safe to fly out, leaving us trapped on Earth Nasa is considering using lasers to deflect space junk around Earth and stop it colliding with satellites. Lasers similar to those used for welding in car factories would be fired through telescopes to ‘nudge’ piles of rubbish left in orbit. The gentle movement would stop them from taking out communications satellites or hitting the International Space Station. Now a team led by Nasa space scientist James Mason have claimed that gently moving junk off course could be the answer. The theory is that the photons in laser beams carry a tiny amount of momentum in them which, under the right circumstances, could nudge an object in space and slow it down by 0.04 inches per second. By firing a laser at a piece of junk for a few hours it should be possible to alter it’s course by 650ft per day.? Since the first object, Sputnik One, was launched into space 53 years ago, mankind has created a swarm of perhaps tens of millions of items of debris. The rubbish circling the planet comes from old rockets, abandoned satellites and missile shrapnel. It is estimated that there are 370,000 pieces of space junk floating in Earth's orbit. The picture above shows a ball of twisted metal, thought to be fallen space junk, on a farm in Queensland, Australia, in 2008. While that won’t be enough to knock it out of orbit, it could be sufficient to avoid a collision with a space station or satellite. The theory marks a change in approach from previous research which looked into using expensive military Star Wars-style lasers to destroy space junk. The new project uses equipment that is available for just $800,000 (£500,000) with the final bill coming to just tens of millions of dollars. Existing telescopes could even be modified, bringing the cost down further. Nudging would also be more accurate and it is thought the process could divert up to half of all space junk. Some 20,000 pieces of rubbish are currently being monitored in low-Earth orbit, the majority of which are discarded bits of spacecraft or debris from collisions. Serious accidents in recent years included the 2009 smash between the Iridium 33 satellite and the Kosmos 2251 satellite. The communications vessels collided at more than 3,000m per second - the first major smash between two operational satellites in Earth orbit. Nasa engineer Creon Levit said it was imperative that something was done about space junk. ‘There’s not a lot of argument that this is going to screw us if we don’t do something’ he told Wired. ‘Right now it’s at the tipping point … and it just keeps getting worse.’ The new paper was submitted to the journal Advances in Space Research.
SQUO monitoring not sufficient - Iridium accident proves that debris monitoring is insufficient for avoiding accidents.
Wolf in 9 (News Reporter and Analyst, Reuters, Iridium says in dark before orbital crash, http://www.reuters.com/article/newsMaps/idUSN1244243120090212?sp=true February 12,2009, AX)
"Iridium didn't have information prior to the collision to know that the collision would occur," said Liz DeCastro, a company spokeswoman. "If the organizations that monitor space had that information available, we are confident they would have shared it with us." She was responding to questions about an 18-month-old presentation by retired U.S. Air Force General John Campbell, Iridium's executive vice president for government programs. Iridium had been receiving a weekly average of 400 conjunction reports from the U.S. Strategic Command's Joint Space Operations Center that tracks debris in space, Campbell told a June 2007 forum hosted by the George C. Marshall Institute, a Washington research group. "So the ability actually to do anything with all the information is pretty limited," he said, describing a kind of data overload. The conjunction reports were issued every time a potential threat object was to pass within five kilometers (3 miles) of a commercial satellite, he said. "Even if we had a report of an impending direct collision, the error would be such that we might maneuver into a collision as well as move away from one," he told the panel.
Share with your friends: |