Author: admin

          In recent posts I talked about asteroids in the context of exploratory probes, mineral resources and international property rights. Today, I want to talk about the threat to Earth of asteroid strikes and some possible ways of diverting approaching asteroids. The Earth was originally formed from many collisions of smaller bodies in the primordial solar disk. The lunar surface displays the many asteroid impacts that is has suffered. There are also impact craters on the Earth but geological, meteorological and biological processes have eroded most of the craters on land. There is strong evidence that a huge asteroid hit the Earth and wiped out the dinosaurs six hundred and sixty millions of years ago. There have been many novels, movies, TV shows about an asteroid strike.
        It is estimated that there are around one thousand Near Earth Objects or asteroids more than a kilometer across whose orbits cross the orbit of the Earth. NASA has been working on tracking as many of these asteroids as possible. Even an asteroid smaller than a kilometer could cause enormous damage depending on where it fell. Huge explosions, earthquakes, tidal waves, massive forest fires, titanic storms, volcanoes and atmospheric shock waves are some of the damage that an asteroid strike could cause. A big enough asteroid could extinguish most of the life on Earth. It is not just a question of whether we will be hit but a matter of when. So the big question is whether or not we could do anything about it if we discovered that an asteroid was on a collision course with the Earth.
        One possible way of changing the trajectory of an asteroid would be to paint part of the surface white or black. Changing the light reflecting properties of an asteroid would trigger the Yarkovsky Effect. This effect has to do with how uneven thermal distribution could change the force vectors on a rotating body. If this was done early enough, even a minute Yarkovsky Effect could slowly change the path of an asteroid enough so that it would miss the Earth.
       If a nuclear device of sufficient size could be sent to intercept an incoming asteroid, its detonation on the surface could alter the course of the asteroid. One possible problem with this technique is the fact that some asteroids are more like a pile of rocks and gravel than one big rock. In that case, the nuclear device would have to be detonated in front of the asteroid.
      If a massive object impacted an asteroid at the proper angle, it might be able to change the path of the asteroid. The object could be a huge spacecraft or even another asteroid that had its trajectory altered to impact the asteroid bound for Earth.
       If a huge spacecraft could be sent to rendezvous with an incoming asteroid, the two objects would gravitationally attract each other. If the spacecraft engine acted against the gravitational attraction of the asteroid, the asteroid would slowly change its trajectory.
Artist’s concept of an asteroid impact:

Impact_event.jpg

          My last post dealt with India’s homebuilt Mangalyaan Mars satellite. The United States recently launched a Mars probe. Today I am going to discuss the U.S. satellite. The U.S. Mars probe is called MAVEN. This stands for Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution Mission. The satellite was launched on an Atlas V launch vehicle in November of 2013. On September 11, 2014, MAVEN achieved an areocentric elliptical orbit  about four thousand miles at its furthest from Mars and about a hundred miles at it closest approach. It will orbit Mars for at least a year gathering and sending back information about the Martian atmosphere.
         MAVEN was constructed as part of NASA’s Mars Scout Program which was discontinued in 2010. In October of 2013, only seven weeks before the intended launch date, work on the program was suspended for two days because of the shutdown of the federal government in the battle over the budget. The launch could have been delayed for over two years but NASA deemed the project to be too important to be delayed and managed to find emergency funding that enabled the launch to take place as scheduled.
        MAVEN was built by Lockheed Martin Space Systems. It is a cube roughly two yards on a side and follows the design of the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter and Mars Odyssey Mars probes. Maven weights one thousand seven hundred and eighty four pounds with one hundred and forty three pounds of scientific instrumentation as payload. It has two solar panels and is about eleven yards long including the satellite and the panels.
        Goals of the MAVEN mission include:
1)  Finding out how the Martian atmosphere lost volatile elements such as nitrogen, water, carbon dioxide, ammonia, hydrogen, methane and sulfur dioxide to space.
2) Determining the current state of the upper Martian atmosphere, the Martian ionosphere and the interactions of the upper atmosphere with the solar wind.
3) Measuring the rate at which neutral gases and ions are escaping from the Martian atmosphere and investigating the processes controlling the loss.
4) Determining the ratios of the different stable isotopes that currently exist in the Martial atmosphere.
         The scientific instrumentation on MAVEN include:
Solar Wind Electron Analyzer – measures solar wind and ionosphere electrons
Solar Wind Ion Analyzer – measures solar wind and magnetosheath ion density and velocity
SupraThermal And Thermal Ion Composition – measures thermal ions to moderate-energy escaping ions
Solar Energetic Particle – determines the impact of SEPs on the upper atmosphere
Langmuir Probe and Waves – determines ionosphere properties and wave heating of escaping ions and solar extreme ultraviolet input to atmosphere
Magnetometer – measures interplanetary solar wind and ionosphere magnetic fields
·        Imaging Ultraviolet Spectrometer – measures global characteristics of the upper atmosphere and ionosphere
Measures the composition and isotopes of neutral gases and ions
          The MAVEN mission cost six hundred seventy one million dollars. The Indian Mars probe that arrived in Mars orbit about the same time as MAVEN cost only seventy four millions dollars. Although MAVEN is much more sophisticated and carries more scientific instrumentation, there will be a market for less expensive satellites such as the Indian Mangalyaan spacecraft.

MAVEN_Mission_Logo.png

          In my last post, I talked about the recent Indian mission to Mars called the Mangalyaan which is Mars in the Hindi language. The first Mars probe from India achieved Mars orbit on September 24th of 2014. In the previous post, I mentioned that the Indian probe with much less expensive than the recent MAVEN probe that was launched to Mars by the United States. Today, I am going to go into more detail about how the Indians were able to build such an inexpensive interplanetary probe.
         The Mangalyaan was built entirely in India with all components being manufactured there. No money was spent on outsourcing work or purchase of foreign components. The Mangalyaan is very light at around one thousand one hundred pounds. Only one physical model of the Mangalyaan design was built which helped to keep costs down. The Mangalyaan design was refined by extensive computer modelling before the single physical model was built. The cost of the Mangalyaan probe was sixty nine million dollars. This is about one tenths of the cost of the U.S. MAVEN Mars probe.
         The Mangalyaan probe took over ten months to travel the four hundred and fourteen million mile journey. The probe carries five scientific instruments. It will orbit Mars and study methane in the Martian atmosphere. It will also study the Martian terrain and search for valuable minerals.
         Because Mangalyaan will not land a module on the surface of Mars, it could be lighter and less expensive than some of the recent landers that have been sent to Mars. On the other hand, just because it is lighter and smaller than other probes, it is not able to carry as many scientific instruments that some other Mars probes carries.
        There is currently a thriving business in building and/or launching satellites for other countries. Russia has been especially active in the space services business. They currently have the most robust space programs on the planet. The U.S. has had to go to Russia to ferry U.S. astronauts up to the International Space Station. After Russia went into Crimea and relations with the U.S. chilled, there were concerns that U.S. astronauts would not be able to get up to the I.S.S. and get back because the Russians were talking about cutting off access. This situation must have registered with other countries that have used Russian space services. If India can build and successfully launch small satellites, they may become a vendor of choice for other countries that are nervous about Russia intertwining commercial and political cooperation as they have with the U.S. access to the I.S.S.
         India is a huge country with a lot of highly capable engineers. They have managed to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and create a growing space program that could contribute to future international trade.
Launch of India’s Mangalyaan Mars probe:

Mangalyaan_PSLV_launch_630new.jpg

          I have covered the Indian space program in previous posts. While not as sophisticated or extensive as some other national space programs, India reached an important milestone with its first interplanetary mission. India’s Mars probe entered orbit around Mars on September 24, 2014. The Mars Orbital Mission or was launched in November of 2013 from the Satish Dhawa Space Center on a Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle.
          The probe weights about a thousand pounds with only thirty three pound of payload. It is a cube that is about five feet on a side. India has categorized the mission as a “technology demonstrator project to develop the technologies for design, planning, management, and operations of an interplanetary mission.” MOM is intended to orbit Mars for at least six months, radioing back information about Mars.
        The MOM mission started with a feasibility study in 2010 and was approved in August of 2012 by the Indian government. The total project cost is estimated at seventy four million dollars. This cost is actually quite low for an interplanetary mission. The Indians used a modular system and limited the number of ground tests. Labor costs were lower than they would have been in the United States. Incorporation of technologies developed in India also helped to keep the costs down. MOM design was much simpler and the payload less complicated than the recent NASA MAVEM mission to Mars. Where MOM cost is seventy six million dollars, the U.S. MAVEN mission to Mars cost six hundred and seventy million dollars, nearly ten times as much.
       The scientific equipment on MOM includes:
1) A Lyman-Alpha Photometer will measure the relative abundance of deuterium and hydrogen in the upper atmosphere of Mars which will help clarify water loss from the Martian atmosphere.
2) Methane Sensor for Mars will measure the methane in the Martian atmosphere and sources on the Martian surface.
3) Mars Exospheric Neutral Composition Analyzer is a mass analyzer to measure the neutral composition of particles in the exosphere.
4) Thermal Infrared Imaging Spectrometer will capture the temperature and emissivity of the Martian surface which will assist in locating minerals on Mars.
5) Mars Color Camera to capture images of the Martian surface in the visible spectrum.
        The Indian people are very excited about sending a mission to Mars. Other countries are praising the achievement. For the past twenty years, India has been focused on developing a space industry because it was seen to be a stimulus for high tech industries such as communications. The low cost of the mission might attract other nations as customers for Indian space services. European countries and the U.S. are already buying space components from India. On the other hand, there are private companies entering the space services industry such as SpaceX which recently won an award from NASA to ferry astronauts and supplies into space.
Artist’s rendering of the Indian MOM spacecraft:

mangalyaan-probe.jpg

          My last post was an introduction to asteroid mining. I had intended to continue with that subject but there has been a bunch of space related stories in the last week so I thought I would explore some of those before returning to asteroid mining.
          The United States space shuttle program ran from 1981 to 2011 with a total of one hundred and thirty one flights. The Shuttle was a partly reusable spacecraft that could launch manned space missions that could deploy satellites. It was also used to ferry astronauts and supplies to and from the International Space Station. The Shuttle was attached to boosters and launched vertically. The Shuttles landed on runways in either California or Florida at the end of their missions. There were five Shuttles in all. Two of them were destroyed in accidents, the Challenger in 1986 and the Columbia in 2003. The last flight of a U.S. Shuttle took place on July 21, 2011.
         Since the end of the U.S. Shuttle program, the U.S. has had to rely on Russian launch vehicles to ferry U.S. astronauts to and from the International Space Station. The U.S. government has been working on developing another reusable spacecraft since the Shuttle program ended. A number of major aerospace companies have been competing for federal funding for their spacecraft projects. Since the Russians seized the Crimea, there has been building tension between the U.S. and Russia which might interfere with U.S. access to the International Space Station.
         It has just been announced that Boeing and SpaceX have been awarded the coveted Commercial Crew Transportation Capability contract to provide NASA with the capability to send up to seven astronauts and supplies to the International Space Station as well as for other missions. Although these two companies will provide shuttle services for NASA, other companies are still working on systems that could also be used ferry astronauts.
        Boeing will receive four billion two hundred million dollars to develop the CST-100 spacecraft. The CST-100 is about fifteen feet in diameter and sixteen feet in length. It will be able to say in orbit for up to seven months and each CST-100 will be able to fly up to ten missions. The CST-100 will be launched on Atlas 5 rockets. The Atlas 5 rockets will be built and operated by the United Launch Alliance which is a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed.
       SpaceX will receive two billion six hundred million dollars for the development of its Dragon V2 spacecraft. The Dragon V2 is about twelve feet in diameter and twenty feet in length. It will be able to say in orbit for up to seven months and each CST-100 will be able to fly up to ten missions. The Dragon V1 flew its first orbital mission in December of 2010. It was the first commercially launched spacecraft that achieved orbit and was successfully brought back to Earth. Dragon V1 spacecraft have already ferried supplied to the International Space Station. Dragon spacecraft are carried into orbit by the SpaceX Falcon rocket.
       It is hoped that the U.S. will again have the ability to launch astronauts and supplies into space on a reusable spacecraft within two years.
Boeing CST-100:

Boeing CST-100.png

SpaceX Dragon V2:

SpaceX Dragon V2.png

         I have stated in previous blogs that when you consider all the different factors such as economic, political, social, technological, public health and environmental, it is obvious that nuclear energy is not a good way to produce electricity.  I have often said that the only reason nuclear power is still being discussed as a viable power source is because there is so much money involved in their construction and operation. The nuclear industry has been very successful at offloading liabilities and pocketing profits with the help of a bought and paid for Congress and an industry friendly Nuclear Regulatory Agency.
       In South Carolina, the state regulatory agency has allowed the company constructing two new nuclear reactors to pass the cost overruns along to the utility customers even though the unfinished plants have generated no electricity. Some states such as Florida have or had laws on the books that would allow nuclear power companies to charge their customers for the construction costs of nuclear power plants that were never completed and never generated electricity.
       If the company building new reactors in Georgia happens to go bankrupt, Congress has given them generous loan guarantees which means that the construction costs of the abandon reactor projects will be passed along to the U.S. taxpayers.
       If there should happen to be a major nuclear accident in the U.S. as serious as the March 11, 2013 disaster at Fukushima, the companies responsible are insulated from responsibility for the billions of dollars that the accident will ultimately cost. The Price-Anderson Act requires that each operating nuclear power plant purchase the maximum insurance that is available which is three hundred and seventy five million dollars. Beyond that, if an accident occurs at nuclear plant and the costs exceed the insurance, power plant owners  are obligated to pay one hundred and twenty one million dollars into a national fund that will be used to pay for additional costs of the accident. If the cost of an accident exceeds the four hundred and ninety million dollars from the insurance coverage and the extra money from the nuclear power operator, then the Congress can require additional money from the nuclear power operator. If the cost of an accident exceeds the ability of a company to pay, then the U.S. taxpayer will pay the additional cost.
       In 2013, four out of the one hundred and four U.S. power reactors were shut down for a variety of reasons including being too expensive to repair or being uncompetitive in the energy market. Activists are calling for the last nuclear power plant in California to be shut down. Most of the remaining nuclear power reactors in the U.S. are reaching the end of their licensed life spans. More will be shut down because they will be too expensive to repair or uncompetitive.
        Russia, China, France and Japan are moving aggressively to make nuclear technology exports a major component of their international trade. Russia and China are committed to building dozens of new reactors in the near future. Fortunately, for all the problems that the U.S. has with nuclear power, embarking on a major building and exporting program for nuclear reactors is not one of them. The electricity supplied by nuclear reactors in the U.S. can and should be replaced by renewables and conservation as soon as possible. In any case, I am sure that the U.S. taxpayer will still wind up paying dearly for our use of nuclear power.
Asteroid Belt:

Asteroid belt-en.png

          I have been blogging about the United Nations and the body of international space law. The United Nations created the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs in 1958 to serve as a group of experts to provide advice to the new ad hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. It became an agency within the Department of Political and Security Council Affairs in 1962 when the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space became a permanent U.N. committee. In 1968, the Office became the Outer Space Affairs Division of the DPSCA. In 1992, it turned into the Office for  Outer Space Affairs in the DPSCA.
         The duties of the UNOOSA include: “performs functions of the Secretariat of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and its Scientific and Technical and Legal Subcommittees; coordinates the inter-agency cooperation within the United Nations on the use of space technology; implements the United Nations Program on Space Applications; maintains coordination and cooperation with space agencies and intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations involved in space-related activities. The Office maintains, on behalf of the United Nations Secretary-General, the Register of Objects Launched into Outer Space.”
         An important program under the control of UNOOSA is called the UN-SPIDER program which stands for United Nations Platform for Space-based Information for Disaster Management and Emergency Response. It is projected that climate change will bring increases in natural disasters such as hurricanes and tornados.  “Earthquakes, floods, storms, and other natural hazards cause massive disruption to societies and overburden national economic systems.” Better information about risks and actual occurring disasters could reduce loss of life and destruction of property. In 2006, the U.N. passed a resolution that “acknowledged that use of existing space technology, such as earth observation and meteorological satellites, communication and navigation satellites can play a major role in supporting disaster management by providing accurate and timely information for decision making.”
      The UNOOSA has a mandate to monitor legal, scientific and technical developments with respect to space activities, technology and applications so it can provide technical information and advice to member states, international organizations and other United Nations offices. In pursuit of these goals, the UNOOSA created the International Space Information Service to annually publish directories, documents and other types of publications for distribution. A web-site was put in place in 1996 to disseminate information.
     The UNOOSA has responded to the movement from scientific exploration of space to the use of space technology for economic and social development. It is specifically charged with assisting developing countries in using space technology to assist in their development. This includes helping developing countries to create their own indigenous space launch capabilities.
     With the accelerating evolution of space technology and launches of satellites, it is beneficial to the citizens of the world for the United Nations to have programs in place to encourage space faring nations to share the fruits of space exploration and exploitation.

UNOOSA logo.png

          My last blog was about the question of private ownership of celestial bodies by firms that mine asteroids. Current United Nation international space law prohibits any such ownership. There is a new bill named the ASTEROIDS Act pending in the U.S. Congress that would at least allow asteroid mining companies to own what they mine and return to Earth. This appears to be prohibited by internal space law.
          One of the problems with current international space law is that the definition of “celestial body” is considered to be too vague by some critics. A review of international space law by the International Institute of Space Law decided that a celestial body under current space law was a “natural object in outer space…which cannot be artificially moved from its natural orbit.” If this is actually the meaning of the term “celestial body” in space law, then if an asteroid is moved from its “natural orbit” it would cease to be covered by current space law. Although we currently are not able to move asteroids from their natural orbits, there has been a great deal of research on the subject.
          NASA has announced the Asteroid Redirection Mission which would move an asteroid. If and when this occurs, the question of legal status of the asteroid will have to be settled. Moving one asteroid could result in the reclassification of other asteroids of similar size as not being covered under existing space law.
          The second big question is the legal status and ownership of the resources recovered from asteroids by private organizations. According to space law, any materials brought back from celestial bodies must be shared among signatory nations. On the other hand, the lunar samples brought back by the United States and Soviet Union were bought and sold as private property. A British court ruled that the sale was legal and there was no challenge on the basis of space law.
          Space law says that “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all states…” The meaning of the word “use” is definitely open to debate. It could mean mining but none of this is explicitly spelled out. Treaties, which form the basis for international space law, must be interpreted by the Vienna Convention but the Convention says nothing about mine or resulting materials that are brought back to Earth. The meaning of the work “use” will have to be determined by the intent of the whole body of space law and not just one section. Although the proposed ASTEROIDS Act being considered by Congress claims that it is in accord with international space law, that simple declaration does not make it so. Even if the sale of a few lunar samples did not raise concerns in the international space community, when there are potentially trillions of dollars of minerals to be recovered from asteroids, there will definitely be majors debates about the legality of private ownership of minerals obtained by asteroid mining.

Asteroid mining 2.png

          My last few blogs have been about the framework of international law under the United Nations that is supposed to govern how space faring nations conduct the exploration and exploitation of space for the benefit of all nations. I felt that this was topical because of increasing discussion of mining asteroids. Now that we have private companies seriously planning for asteroid capture and mining, it is time to take a look at how such mining would fit within the framework of international space law.
        Currently, companies are reluctant to commit major resources until the vague status of private property rights in space is clarified. The United Nation treaties in space say that no member nation or any organization within a member nation can claim ownership of any celestial body or zone of outer space. The laws also say that if something is collected by a nation or private company on a celestial body and brought back to Earth, portions of it should be made available to other nations. This is obviously a problem for a company that wants to go to an asteroid, mine valuable ore and return that ore to Earth to make a profit. Without some sort of ability to stake a claim that is recognized by other parties, there would be nothing to stop another company from following the first to an asteroid with valuable minerals and starting their own mining operation. Without some sort of international agreement, there could be violent confrontations between private space mining operations.
        This summer members of the United States Congress introduced a bill called the American Space Technology for Exploring Resource Opportunities in Deep Space that would protect property rights for commercial asteroid mining. With private companies in the U.S. launching spacecraft and planning to mine asteroids, property right in space are very important. Of course, critics point out that this violates treaties that the U.S. has sign with respect to space exploitation. The authors of the bill respond by saying that they are not suggesting that the U.S. or U.S. company claim sovereignty over asteroids but merely that a company which manages to mine an asteroid will own what they have extracted. Proponents of the ASTEROIDS bill chose asteroids in the hope that the resulting blowback would not be as bad as if the discussion were about the Moon or Mars.
       One big problem about passing laws or signing treaties about the exploitation of outer space has to do with enforcement. There are a few signatories of space treaties that have active space programs with massive investment in infrastructure. If the few nations that can launch their own spacecraft agree on a disposition of resources, how on Earth could the other nations do anything about it? As they so often like to say, space is a “frontier” and just like any frontier, the law may be difficult to enforce.

Asteroid mining 1.png

          Last week I blogged about four additional International treaties that deal with the exploration of space by member of the United Nations. In light of the five international space treaties, the UN adopted five “International principles and declarations to encourage exercising the international laws as well as unified communication between countries.” These five principles are listed below.
The Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Uses of Outer Space. This declaration states that space exploration is open to all members willing to comply with international law. No nation can claim ownership of any celestial body or of space itself. Activities in space must abide by international law and each nation will be responsible for any space activities by any government agency or non-government agency. Member nations own any object they launch into space and any such object which lands shall be returned to launcher. Any damage caused by a launched object is the responsibility of the launching nation.
The Principles Governing the Use by States of Artificial Earth Satellites for International Direct Television Broadcasting Said activities should “promote the free dissemination and mutual exchange of information and knowledge in cultural and scientific fields, assist in educational, social and economic development, particularly in the developing countries, enhance the qualities of life of all peoples and provide recreation with due respect to the political and cultural integrity of States.” This principle states that all members are free to carry out this activity but must respect the rights of other member nations. When planning such activities, nations must contact the UN Secretary General with details of the planned activities.
The Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space Fifteen principles are detailed in this section. They follow from the basic understanding of descriptions given by the UN Office of Outer Space Affairs. Here are some of the most important. The term “remote sensing” refers to using electromagnetic waves which are emitted, reflected or diffracted by the objects being scanned for improving natural resource management, use of land and/or protecting the environment. “Primary data” refers to the raw data that is collected by remote sensors on an object launched into space and delivered to ground installations by film, magnetic tape, electromagnetic signal or any other type of data transmission. “Processed data” refers to the useful data that is created when the raw data from is processed. “Analyzed information” refers to information that is created when the processed data from is interpreted and combined with data from other sources. “Remote sensing activities” refers to the operation of remote sensors in space, primary data collection from such objects, and activities in processing, interpreting and distributing processed data.
The Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space When a member nation launches an object into space that incorporates a nuclear power source, that nation shall design the probe to protect individuals, civilian populations and the environment against radioactive contamination.
The Declaration on International Cooperation in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space for the Benefit and in the Interest of All States, Taking into Particular Account the Needs of Developing Countries This principle states that member nations are free to decide exactly how they want to participate in international space exploration efforts  and that member nations who possess space capabilities should contribute to promoting international cooperation in space exploration. There should be an emphasis on countries with mature space programs helping developing nations to acquire their own space capabilities. There should be effective and appropriate international cooperation by governmental and non-governmental entities, commercial and non-commercial entities, from the global level down to bilateral level and between countries at all levels of development.
United Nations Flag:

United-Nations Flag.jpg