Space Debris Affirmative

Large Debris > Threat (1/2)

Download 394.08 Kb.

Page	31/31
Date	20.10.2016
Size	394.08 Kb.
	#5089

1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Large Debris > Threat (1/2)

Removing large space debris is key to solving space debris

Foust in 2009 (Bachelors in geophysics from CalTech, editor and publisher of The Space Review, The Space Review, Putting a bounty on orbital debris http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1427/1 , July 27, 09 AX).

The key for any remediation effort, explained Joe Carroll of Tether Applications, Inc., is to focus not on small objects but much larger ones—intact satellites and upper stages—that, if they collide with another large object, can create a thousands of objects, as the Iridium-Cosmos collision this year illustrated. “There are going to be nearly as many ‘large-large’ collisions—of objects between 25 kilograms and 8 tons—as there are ‘small-large’, and much more than there are ‘small-small’,” he said, explaining that this was because of the much greater collisional cross-section of larger objects.

Recent collisions show that reduction of trackable large objects is the best way to prevent all types of debris because trackable collisions happen every 3-6 years.

McKnight 10 (Darren, Technical Director of Integrity Applications, Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, Pay Me Now or Pay Me More Later: Start the Development of Active Orbital Debris Removal Now, September 2010, http://www.amostech.com/TechnicalPapers/2010/Posters/McKnight.pdf, SP)

Eventually, this increased collision rate will result in a series of collisions between large objects and the total debris population will start to increase rapidly. In fact, before the 2007 Chinese ASAT event, the average annual increase to the cataloged population was around 250 objects per year. The Chinese test contributed over 2,700 trackable objects (while more than 3,000 have actually been identified) so, this single event contributed over ten years’ worth of population number growth. While this event was a purposeful collision, rather than accidental, the debris creation issue is still relevant. The accidental collision in February 2009 of the operational Iridium and defunct Russian communications satellites created more than 1,600 trackable objects (while over 2,000 objects have been identified), which is still over six years of “typical” growth. With a single event producing many years of “typical” debris accumulation, it is easy to see how quickly previous predictions of collision rates will have to be updated with new population levels. Work done in the 1970s by Don Kessler and Burton Cour-Palais hinted at the situation that is now becoming a reality: collisions between trackable objects are occurring with sufficient frequency such that these events are the main driver for future debris growth across all size ranges. [7] This is simple to understand since two colliding large trackable objects will create hundreds of trackable objects plus tens of thousands of lethal projectiles and so act as an accelerant to the growth of lethal (>1cm) debris fragments. Recent analyses and empirical evidence in LEO shows that trackable objects are likely to collide with each other every three to six years. [1, 2, 8] The empirical evidence shows that trackable-on-trackable collisions have occurred in 1992, 1996, 2005, and 2009 – an average of every five years since 1990 though it can be argued that only one of these events was catastrophic. All of these occurred in the 670-885 km altitude range, with the most recent collision being the most severe. However, the first three events all occurred with about the same cataloged population of about 10,000 objects while the 2009 event took place when the cataloged population had grown to 13,000 (a 30% increase).

Large Debris > Threat (2/2)

Removing large, massive objects is the only way to solve – reducing small debris won’t work.

Wright no date (David, codirector and senior scientist with the global security program of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Physics Today, Space Debris, no full date, http://ptonline.aip.org/journals/doc/PHTOAD-ft/vol_60/iss_10/35_1.shtml#bio, SP)
If the debris density becomes large enough at some altitudes, those regions of space can become "supercritical," meaning that collisions between objects are frequent enough that they produce additional debris faster than atmospheric drag removes debris from the region. The additional particles further increase the collision probability in the region, which leads to a slow-motion chain reaction or cascade as the large objects in orbit are ground into smaller fragments. That situation is sometimes called the Kessler syndrome after Donald Kessler, who studied the possibility.11 A study released by NASA's Orbital Debris Program Office in 2006, before the Chinese test, showed that parts of space have already reached supercritical debris densities.12 In particular, the study shows that in the heavily used altitude band from 900 to 1000 km, the number of debris fragments larger than 10 cm is expected to more than triple over the next 200 years, even assuming no additional objects are launched into the band. The study estimates that the total population of large debris in LEO will increase by nearly 40% during that time, still under the assumption of no additional launches. The debris from the Chinese test will make matters worse. An important implication of the study is that while mitigation efforts are important for slowing the increases, only debris-remediation measures such as removing large, massive objects already in orbit can hope to prevent their consequences. Remediation efforts such as robotic missions to remove defunct satellites and rocket stages are very expensive, but are being studied.

Topicality Definitions (Aff)

Space development is research and technology activities related to space objects

SDPA 5(Space Development Promotion Act of the ROK, Journal of Space Law, May 31, 2005, http://www.spacelaw.olemiss.edu/library/space/Korea/Laws/33jsl175.pdf, NG)

(a) The term “space development” means one of the following: (i) Research and technology development activities related to design, production, launch, operation, etc. of space objects; (ii) Use and exploration of outer space and activities to facilitate them;

Development is a significant event – which cleaning space debris is

Random House Dictionary 2011 (Large American dictionary first published in 1966, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/development, NU)

2. a significant consequence or event: recent developments inthe field of science.

Development is a district that has been developed to serve some purpose

Farlex No date (The Free Dictionary, Farlex, Princeton University, 2003-2008, “Development”, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/development, NG)

6. development - a district that has been developed to serve some purpose; "such land is practical for small park developments"

Development is a significant change

American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 9 (Fourth Edition Houghton Mifflin Company, Updated 2009, “Development”, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/development, NG)

3. A significant event, occurrence, or change.

Development of space is synonymous to development of land

Collins English Dictionary 2003 (Complete and Unabridged, HarperCollins Publishers, 2003, “Development”, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/development, NG)

4. (Social Science / Human Geography) an area or tract of land that has been developed

Development is a concrete result of a process

Oxford English Dictionary No Date (Second Edition online version June 2011, “development”, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/51434?redirectedFrom=development#eid, NG)

I. The process or fact of developing; the concrete result of this process.

Development results in a fuller view. Space debris cleanup brings a fuller view of space

Oxford English Dictionary No Date (Second Edition online version June 2011, “development”, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/51434?redirectedFrom=development#eid, NG)

A gradual unfolding, a bringing into fuller view; a fuller disclosure or working out of the details of anything, as a plan, a scheme, the plot of a novel. Also quasi-concr. that in which the fuller unfolding is embodied or realized.

Development is evolution production a change from the latent condition

Oxford English Dictionary No Date (Second Edition online version June 2011, “development”, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/51434?redirectedFrom=development#eid, NG)

2. Evolution or bringing out from a latent or elementary condition; the production of a natural force, energy, or new form of matter.

A2: Perception/Militarization DA (1/2)

Openness and transparency can solve perception/militarization DAs

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)

Another major concern is the similarities between space debris removal systems and space weapons. Indeed, any system that can remove a useless object from orbit can also remove a useful one. There is an extensive and ongoing debate over space weapons, and in particular how to deﬁne them (Moltz 2008, 42-43). As the decades-long debate has failed to even produce a clear deﬁnition of the term, it will be nearly impossible to actively remove space debris without the use of devices that could be classiﬁed in some way as potential space weapons. Thus, openness and transparency will be an important element in the development, deployment, and operation of any space debris removal system so that it is not seen as a covert ASAT weapon.

No link to perception DAs: Normal means proves that the program will be transparent.

ORION laser cannot be perceived anti-satellite weapon, inadequate power.

Bekey 97 (Ivan, President of Bekey Designs, writer for Aerospace America, Space Future, Orions Laser: Hunting Space Debris, Aerospace America, Vol 35, No. 4, pg 38-44 , http://www.spacefuture.com/archive/orions_laser_hunting_space_debris.shtml, SP)

It is important to note that neither of these systems can even remotely be considered an anti-satellite weapon. In both cases the power is grossly inadequate for this purpose. If pointed at an average satellite , such a system would have to irradiate it continuously for many months before making major reductions in its perigee, and four years before damaging its structure. Optical sensors aboard some spacecraft could be damaged if they looked at the laser and the laser were simultaneously illuminating the spacecraft, but simple avoidance of such pointing by the spacecraft will ensure that this does not occur. An Orion system would also avoid irradiating satellites by simple inhibition of radiation when they are in its field of view. This is current doctrine and practice in laser operation and tests. Either of these Orion systems could protect the ISS and all other LEO satellites below their operating altitude from debris impacts in the 1-10-cm size range. In fact, if the intent were to protect only the ISS, a considerably cheaper system with a maximum altitude capability of only 500 km would probably suffice. In either case, periodic operation of the system would be needed to clear the debris objects continuing to rain down below Orion's design altitude from debris sources above. However, even if Orion were developed and operated, the ISS and other vulnerable spacecraft would still have to be designed and shielded against debris smaller than about 1 cm, since such objects are not reliably detected and are too numerous to engage with a ground laser..

A2: Perception/Militarization DA (2/2)

Perception misconception impossible; Orion clearly not a weapon

Hollopeter 09 (James E., Former head of the Orbital Debris Program Office, The X-Journals, Development of A Ballistic Orbital Debris Removal System, 5/29/09, http://x-journals.com/2009/development-of-a-ballistic-orbital-debris-removal-system/, M.S.)

It is important to note that neither of these systems can even remotely be considered an anti-satellite weapon. In both cases the power is grossly inadequate for this purpose. If pointed at an average satellite, such a system would have to irradiate it continuously for many months before making major reductions in its perigee, and four years before damaging its structure. Optical sensors aboard some spacecraft could be damaged if they looked at the laser and the laser were simultaneously illuminating the spacecraft, but simple avoidance of such pointing by the spacecraft will ensure that this does not occur. An Orion system would also avoid irradiating satellites by simple inhibition of radiation when they are in its field of view. This is current doctrine and practice in laser operation and tests. Either of these Orion systems could protect the ISS and all other LEO satellites below their operating altitude from debris impacts in the 1-10-cm size range. In fact, if the intent were to protect only the ISS, a considerably cheaper system with a maximum altitude capability of only 500 km would probably suffice. In either case, periodic operation of the system would be needed to clear the debris objects continuing to rain down below Orion's design altitude from debris sources above. However, even if Orion were developed and operated, the ISS and other vulnerable spacecraft would still have to be designed and shielded against debris smaller than about 1 cm, since such objects are not reliably detected and are too numerous to engage with a ground laser.

A2: Econ/Spending DA

We win a link turn to the spending disad – insurance costs radically grow up due to recent debris collisions, and more collisions are probable.

McKnight 10 (Darren, Technical Director of Integrity Applications, Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, Pay Me Now or Pay Me More Later: Start the Development of Active Orbital Debris Removal Now, September 2010, http://www.amostech.com/TechnicalPapers/2010/Posters/McKnight.pdf, SP)
Space insurance is one domain where there is a quantifiable threshold that will produce economic impacts. Nominally, the bulk of the 10-15% average premium for a space mission covers the launch vehicle flight and the initial (first year) satellite operations while only a small portion of the total premium (i.e. about 1.5% of the satellite value per year) is for on-orbit operations after startup. [15] When the collision risk reaches a value of 1.5% per year, insurance premiums will likely increase. However, once a collision with an insured satellite occurs, the urgency for starting active debris removal options will also likely accelerate. While the probability of a single spacecraft being destroyed, or even just rendered non-operational, by a collision with a large trackable piece of debris is small, the probability that any large object will collide with another is quite a bit higher. The probability of collision for a specific satellite is proportional to the number of objects posing a collision hazard with it while the collision rate between objects is a function of the square of the number of objects present, assuming that the ratio of the large fragments to intact spacecraft is constant with time. [7] In this way, while a hypothetical 20% increase in the population would only produce a 20% increase in collision probability for a single large object, the probability that any two large objects colliding goes up by over 40%. This collision rate is only an approximation since as collisions occur between large objects the ratio of large fragments to intact spacecraft will change. However, early in this process (i.e. for several decades) this approximation introduces very little error. Eventually, this increased collision rate will result in a series of collisions between large objects and the total debris population will start to increase rapidly. In fact, before the 2007 Chinese ASAT event, the average annual increase to the cataloged population was around 250 objects per year. The Chinese test contributed over 2,700 trackable objects (while more than 3,000 have actually been identified) so, this single event contributed over ten years’ worth of population number growth. While this event was a purposeful collision, rather than accidental, the debris creation issue is still relevant. The accidental collision in February 2009 of the operational Iridium and defunct Russian communications satellites created more than 1,600 trackable objects (while over 2,000 objects have been identified), which is still over six years of “typical” growth.

A2: Privatization CP

No solvency for the privatization counterplan – private profit motive is incompatible with reducing space debris.

Senechal 10 (Thierry, Policy Manager with the International Chamber of Commerce, Papers on International Environmental Treaty-Making, Space Debris Pollution: A Convention Proposal, 2010, http://www.pon.org/downloads/ien16.2.Senechal.pdf, SP)

The role of space corporations is seen as important because commercial activity in space is increasing and thus potentially creating more debris. Until recently, space debris was a subject fraught with uncertainties, usually shunned by aerospace corporations around the world and inadequately addressed by many space agencies. As the issue gained prominence in the mid1990s, the private sector has been seeking to find the most appropriate response to address the space debris problem. However, the space industry has been struggling to provide the required solutions. As competition has increased and profits have shrunk, many of the space corporations have adopted ―lean approaches, the ―better, faster, cheaper concept resting on the interconnection of decreased

Directory: files
files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2
files -> Integer programming and game theory
files -> 4 Integer Programming
files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective
files -> Pop Warner History
files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose
files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d
files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal
files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations

Download 394.08 Kb.

Share with your friends:

1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31