It’s time for a real policy on asteroidsby Peter A. Garretson
|
| In a little over a decade we are likely to be tracking as many as one million NEAs, of which 10,000 may have some probability of impacting Earth in the next 100 years, and 50 to 100 will appear threatening enough to monitor active monitoring and/or deflection. |
In 2008, some prescient members of Congress wrote HR 6063, which tasked the Director of the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop a policy for notifying federal agencies and relevant emergency response institutions of an impending near Earth object threat, if near-term public safety is at stake; and recommend a federal agency or agencies to be responsible for protecting the nation from a near Earth object that is anticipated to collide with Earth and implementing a deflection campaign, in consultation with international bodies, should one be required.
In the winter 2008 issue of Ad Astra, I argued that it would not be long before this issue was raised to Presidential-level attention, given that the Association of Space Explorer’s report to the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space had said that, as new telescopes come online, in a little over a decade we are likely to be tracking as many as one million near Earth asteroids (NEAs), of which 10,000 may have some probability of impacting Earth in the next 100 years, and 50 to 100 will appear threatening enough to monitor active monitoring and/or deflection.
In August 2009, in an article for The Space Review, I advised that the forthcoming National Space Policy should establish a lead agency, and supported/supporting relationships for the now fully established asteroid/comet hazard (see “Elements of a 21st century space policy”, The Space Review, August 3, 2009). I also gave my breakout of recommendations for who should be in charge of what, based upon my experience having conceived and executed the only official US Government multi-agency simulation (involving the US Air Force, NASA, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council, and the Department of Energy) of how we would attempt to either deflect or do emergency response for an asteroid threat.
In 2010, the Air Force sent me on a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) fellowship to India’s premier strategic think tank to explore big ideas that might advance the US-India strategic partnership. I floated both planetary defense and asteroid mining as two such “big ideas” and argued that they should be included as a topics for the Indo-US civil space dialog, as well as potential deliverables for the President’s visit in 2010 as responsive to the administrations stated national interests of engaging key centers of influence and shaping a rules-based global order. Later in 2010, I spoke to NASA on planetary defense considerations for a human mission to an asteroid, suggesting that this be a primary and not secondary objective for such a mission.
Just prior to the dramatic announcements of Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries, I argued in the Air & Space Policy Journal that space strategists and policymakers needed to be thinking actively about a future space environment where commercial space industries might have capabilities to mine and exploit asteroids. Most recently I argued for elevating the prominence of asteroid threats and opportunities in my OpEd on KurzweilAI and an interview for DoDLive.
| The timing is perfect for a second Obama administration to re-issue a revised national space policy that contains a real policy on asteroids. |
But look: meteors raining fire down on Russia injuring hundreds of people, and the closest pass of an asteroid ever forecast and recorded (2012 DA14), need to be a wakeup call. The longer we go without a proactive space policy on asteroids, the more we sacrifice international leadership, hold back our industry, and reduce our chances of being able to effectively deal with the threat.
The timing is perfect for a second Obama administration—an administration who sought a human mission to an asteroid, and which has continued and expanded the Bush legacy of being friendly toward commercial space—to re-issue a revised national space policy that contains a real policy on asteroids. Such a real policy, a proactive policy—a visionary and durable policy for the decades and centuries ahead—needs to include the following elements:
1) The United States intends to lead the world in the creation of a planetary defense architecture, and shape the accompanying global regime. It will proactively engage the key centers of influence on the subject and pursue active collaboration with the friendly space powers. It will introduce such discussions such as exploring necessary exceptions or modifications to the Limited Test Ban Treaty and Outer Space Treaty as may be required to protect planet Earth.
2) The United States intends to promote and incentivize asteroid mining and space industrialization. It will seek to create a global regime that is favorable to private industry generally, and that seeks to put American industry in a position to lead. The United States will broaden the discussions of the International Code of Conduct to ensure it reflects the equities of future space development and is private-industry friendly. The United States will welcoming discussion on a revised space regime that creates property-like incentives that encourage early market entry into a new market that could so dramatically advance prospects for long-term human survival and sustainable development.
As a nation, we need to be prepared to promote “space resource utilization” (aka asteroid and lunar mining) as a strategic industry using the same techniques we used in our westward expansion and railroad building, and the development of our aviation industry. We should set as a goal that it should be an American company to mine the first asteroid, and set the precedent for a responsible and open in-space commerce system.
3) Planetary defense will be established as a formal mandate to one or more of the appropriate organizations, with a single responsible agency for developing and executing an actual asteroid deflection mission (I have elsewhere argued that this should be US Strategic Command). This organization should be tasked with creating a roadmap to specific increments of capability, beginning with deflecting small “city-killer” 50-meter objects like 2012 DA14, and progressing to kilometer-class civilization ending threats in difficult to reach inclinations. The US government will have an encouraging policy to source asteroid-related space-situational awareness from private industry.
4) Pre-competitive research enabling private industry will be given as a formal mandate to an appropriate organization (such as NASA, the Department of Commerce’s Office of Space Commercialization, or FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation).
Without a lead agency who perceives itself to have a mandate, and clear policy stating where we desire to go, we leave both our government officials and researcher and our private industry disempowered to deal with the dangers of, and advance the opportunities that near Earth asteroids present.
