Space Debris Threat to Earth’s Defenses

 

As the number of satellites in Earth’s orbit continues to grow at an unprecedented rate, experts are raising concerns about the potential impact of space debris on the planet’s magnetic field and atmosphere.

The Growing Problem of Space Debris

• Current estimates suggest that there are nearly 10,000 active satellites in orbit, with companies working to deploy tens of thousands more in the coming decades.
• Jonathan McDowell from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics projects that the number of satellites could reach 100,000 within the next 10 to 15 years.
• The rapid increase in satellite launches is resulting in a significant amount of space debris, including defunct rockets and satellites that are no longer operational.

Potential Impact on Earth’s Magnetic Field and Ionosphere

• The influx of metallic debris from defunct rockets and satellites could disrupt the ionosphere and magnetosphere, which are essential systems that protect Earth’s atmosphere and sustain life on the planet.
• The ionosphere, located roughly 48 to 965 kilometers above the Earth’s surface, is a region where atoms and molecules become ionized by solar radiation, creating a layer of charged particles that reflects radio waves and enables long-distance communication.
• The ionosphere also helps protect life on Earth by absorbing harmful ultraviolet radiation from the Sun.
• The magnetosphere is a plasma cocoon that surrounds the Earth, interacting with the solar wind and cosmic radiation to create a shield against harmful particles and radiation from space.

The Scale of the Problem

• Current estimates suggest that the amount of metallic ash being dumped into the ionosphere annually is equivalent to multiple Eiffel Towers’ worth of debris.
• Unlike meteorites, which are small and contain only trace amounts of aluminum, the wrecked spacecraft are large and consist entirely of aluminum and other highly conductive materials.
• The accumulation of conductive materials in the magnetosphere could potentially trap or deflect parts of the Earth’s magnetic field, leading to regional perturbations and holes above the ozone layer.

Lack of Comprehensive Studies

• Despite the potential risks posed by space pollution, there is a lack of comprehensive studies on its impact on the magnetosphere and ionosphere.
• Plasma physicist Sierra Solter, who has been studying the issue, emphasizes the need for more research to understand the potential consequences of satellite debris on Earth’s plasma environment.

The rapid expansion of satellite constellations, driven by companies competing for dominance in the satellite internet market, is leading to an alarming accumulation of metallic debris that could disrupt the delicate balance of the magnetosphere and ionosphere, which play crucial roles in protecting life on Earth.

Is growing space tourism posing a risk to the climate?

 

A segment of space travel, space tourism allows lay people to travel to space for recreational, leisure or business purposes. The aim is to make space more accessible to those people who are not astronauts and want to travel to space for non-scientific reasons.

Rocket launches amid a growing space tourism race among commercial players like Virgin Galactic, SpaceX and Blue Origin can negatively impact the climate and the ozone layer, a new study has found.

In an article published in the journal, Earth’s Future on June 9, researchers from University College London (UCL), the University of Cambridge and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) found that the soot emissions from rocket launches are far more effective at warming the atmosphere compared to other sources.

The researchers state that routine launches by the rapidly growing space tourism industry “may undermine progress made by the Montreal Protocol in reversing ozone depletion.” They argue that there is an urgent need for environmental regulation to reduce the climatic damage from this fast growing industry.Space tourism industry

In the 20th century, the Soviet Union and United States were engaged in an intense competition to attain complete domination of spaceflight technologies. Today, it is private companies that are taking part in their very own commercial space race, initiated with Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson’s journeys to space in July 2021.

A segment of space travel, space tourism allows lay people to travel to space for recreational, leisure or business purposes. The aim is to make space more accessible to those people who are not astronauts and want to travel to space for non-scientific reasons.

Less than a year after Bezos and Branson’s escapades, The New York Times reports that global space tourism has been thriving, with various companies offering bookings for zero-pressure balloon trips for short flights, astronaut boot camps and simulated zero-gravity flights.

According to the authors of the recent study published in Earth’s Future, “The space industry is one of the world’s fastest growing sectors”.

From $350 million in 2019, the industry is forecasted to grow to more than $1 trillion by 2040. With companies like Virgin Galactic, SpaceX and Blue Origin launching commercial space flights, space tourism has become, at least theoretically, a possibility for enthusiasts. Tickets remain tremendously expensive however, with tickets for Richard Branson’s Virgin Galactic beginning from a whopping $450,000.

What is the new study?

Researchers from University College London (UCL), the University of Cambridge and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in their new study, claim that the burgeoning space tourism industry can have a far bigger cost on the environment.

They calculated their findings by compiling an inventory of the chemicals from all the 109 rocket launches and re-entries into the Earth’s atmosphere in 2019.

They also projected the growth of space tourism by corporations like Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin and SpaceX. These were then incorporated into a 3D model to examine the possible impact on the climate and the protective stratospheric ozone layer.

The number of rocket flights today is rather small when compared to the sheer size of the aircraft industry.

While in 2020, there were only 114 orbital launches in the world, more than 100,000 flights travel each day, as reported by The Guardian.

What are the study’s findings?

Unlike other sources of pollution, the study finds that environmental damage caused by rockets is far greater, as they emit gaseous and solid chemicals directly into the upper atmosphere.

The space tourism’s current growth trends also indicate a potential for the depletion of the ozone layer above the Arctic. This is because the pollutants from rocket fuel and heating caused by spacecraft returning to Earth, along with the debris caused by the flights are especially harmful to the ozone layer, University College London (UCL) stated in a press release.

What is of great concern is the black carbon (BC) soot that is emitted by rockets directly into the atmosphere. These soot particles have a far larger impact on the climate than all other sources of soot combined, as BC particles are almost 500 times more efficient at retaining heat.

The low figure of rocket launches, compared to the large scale air pollutant emissions caused by the massive aircraft industry, is at times invoked to downplay the environmental damage caused by rockets. Dr Eloise Marais, the co-author of the study argues that this comparison is incorrect.

“Soot particles from rocket launches have a much larger climate effect than aircraft and other Earth-bound sources, so there doesn’t need to be as many rocket launches as international flights to have a similar impact. What we really need now is a discussion amongst experts on the best strategy for regulating this rapidly growing industry.” she said in a press release.

The team of researchers showed that within only 3 years of additional space tourism launches, the rate of warming due to the released soot would more than double.

This is because of the use of kerosene by SpaceX launches and hybrid synthetic rubber fuels by Virgin Galactic.

Undermining Montreal Protocol

While the loss of ozone from current rocket launches is “small”, the researchers argue that in the likelihood of weekly or daily space tourism rocket launches, the recovery of the ozone layer caused by the Montreal Protocol could be undermined.

“The only part of the atmosphere showing strong ozone recovery post-Montreal Protocol is the upper stratosphere, and that is exactly where the impact of rocket emissions will hit hardest. We weren’t expecting to see ozone changes of this magnitude, threatening the progress of ozone recovery,” said the study’s co-author Dr Robert Ryan in a press release.

The Montreal Protocol is a landmark international treaty that was adopted in Montreal in 1987, and was aimed at protecting the Earth’s ozone layer by regulating the production and consumption of nearly 100 chemicals called ozone-depleting substances (ODS).

The treaty phases down the consumption and production of various ODS in a stepwise manner.

As per the Montreal Protocol, developing and developed countries have but equal and differentiated responsibilities, however all countries have to follow binding, time-targeted and measurable commitments.

Considered to be one of the most successful environmental interventions on the global scale, it is the first treaty to achieve universal ratification by all countries in the world.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) states that without this treaty, ozone depletion would have increased by more than ten times by 2050, as compared to current levels.

The recovery of ozone layer caused by the Montreal Protocol has been estimated to save around 2 million people each year from skin cancer. Between 1990-2010, the treaty led to a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by an approximate 135 gigatons of CO2.

Written by Raghu Malhotra

Source: Indian Express, 3/07/22

Time for a global ban on satellite destruction tests

 Russia is a top-rung space power. In terms of technological capabilities, it ranks alongside the US and even surpasses it in some areas. The Russian establishment has a highly sophisticated understanding of the space domain. Moscow’s intellectual horsepower in space science, economics and strategy is outstanding. The Soviet Union and its successor, the Russian Federation, have demonstrated no less responsibility towards the preservation and protection of space for human activities than any other power. That is what makes Moscow’s anti-satellite (ASAT) test surprising.

On 16 November, Russia destroyed one of its old satellites by causing a tail-on collision with an ASAT rocket it had fired, at an altitude slightly higher than that of the International and Chinese space stations. The thousands of pieces of debris that resulted now pose a risk to space-stationed astronauts, other spacecraft that occupy low-earth orbits and launch vehicles destined for higher orbits. Space debris move faster than bullets and even tiny bits have enough kinetic energy to severely damage spacecraft. The lower the elevation of the fragments from earth, the sooner the junk will fall back upon the planet and burn up in the atmosphere. Debris at higher altitudes can remain in space for years and decades before falling down.

Space is vast, but the probability of collision increases with the number of objects in orbit. Junk from the Russian test is expected to intersect with the International Space Station’s (ISS) orbit 31 times a day, before spreading out further.

Clearly, debris pose a risk for all spacefarers, including Russian cosmonauts and satellites. I find it difficult to understand why the otherwise space-smart Russians would do such a thing. First, Russia did not really need to test this direct-ascent ASAT, given that it has far more sophisticated missile interception capacity. Furthermore, in recent years, it has demonstrated advanced co- orbital ASAT capabilities, manoeuvring its spacecraft into close proximity to target satellites. Second, even if it wished to carry out a direct-ascent ASAT test for political signalling, it could have done so at lower, relatively safer altitudes. When India carried out its Mission Shakti ASAT test in 2019, the Indian Space Research Organisation launched the target satellite at an altitude of 274km (and much lower than that of the ISS) before destroying it a couple of months later. That test created fewer bits of trackable debris, and today only one of the few hundred objects remains detectable in orbit. All ASAT tests create debris, not all of which are trackable, but it is possible for responsible spacefaring nations to minimize negative externalities to the extent possible.

Russia’s behaviour is thus a puzzle. While it is possible that its defence establishment acted without consulting its space agency, it is hard to accept that such a test would have received political authorization without the country’s top space agency being in the loop. We must therefore assume that the Kremlin made a considered decision that knowingly hurts the interests of all spacefaring nations. Whatever Russia’s political and strategic objective, the poisoning of the pond harms everyone.

There is now an urgent case for a strict international ASAT non-proliferation and test-ban treaty. The norms that kept space clean for decades can no longer be relied upon. There are approximately two dozen countries that possess ballistic missiles or satellite launch capability that jeopardize human access to space. If a major space power like Russia could do it, what of desperado regimes that have nothing to lose in space?

Incidentally, just two weeks before the Russian test, the United Nations General Assembly’s First Committee, which deals with international security and disarmament, set up a new working group to develop principles and rules for the military use of space. Initiated by the UK, the institution of the working group was supported by a vast majority of nations. Russia and China voted against, but only because they are in favour of an alternative mechanism for preventing an arms race in space, and for hard treaty obligations against space weapons that the US is opposed to. India abstained. But as the working group begins its deliberations, New Delhi must weigh in strongly on the side of a strict ban on anti-satellite weapons.

As a country that already possesses ASAT capability, it is in India’s interest to deter other countries from acquiring it. To be clear: our successful 2019 test does not automatically mean India has operational ASAT weapons. There is still some way to go. Even so, it is inconceivable that we can easily carry out another destructive test without hurting our own interests in one way or another. At this stage, it is far better to push for a treaty that might prevent India’s adversaries from further developing space weapons. A treaty will not prevent anyone—including India—from developing more advanced ASAT weapons. But it will make it harder, and prohibit destructive testing.

Space offers Indian entrepreneurs and businesses an opportunity to create another engine of growth. It is in our interest not to allow garbage to come in the way of our success.

Nitin Pai is co-founder and director of The Takshashila Institution, an independent centre for research and education in public policy

Source: Mintepaper, 21/11/21