Living space in a Kalpana orbital space settlement. Credits: Bryan Versteeg
Kasper Kubica presents an optimistic business case for space tenants moving in (er, up) to deluxe condominiums orbiting the Earth within 10 years. Initially for the ultra rich, the price tag is comparable to high end real estate currently on the market. Of course the devil is in the details, so lets dive in.
In a post on Medium, Kubica uses the rotating habitat Kalpana as an illustrative example of his “Spacelife Direct” approach for an orbital settlement spinning to create 1G of artificial gravity and hosting north of 400 condominiums in LEO. Such a facility would be shielded from radiation by Earth’s magnetosphere if it were located in low equatorial orbit and therefore could be constructed with less shielding. This results in a significant reduction of mass driving costs way down. Running the numbers on this scenario opens up exciting possibilities with the amazing capabilities of Elon Musk’s Starship currently under development by SpaceX.
Using the scaled down Kalpana Two version as discussed in Tom Marotta and Al Globus’ book, The High Frontier, an Easier Way, the cylindrical habitat is sized at just over 100 meters in diameter and the same in length, weighing in at 16, 800 metric tons. Kubica estimates that it would take 140 launches to loft the required mass to LEO. Assuming costs keep coming down as Starship launch cadence increases (a safe bet), at $10M/launch the cost of just the materials to LEO would be $1.4B. Of course there are many more expenses associated with design, development and fabrication, not to mention insurance of such an orbital condo complex. For the sake of argument Kubica triples that figure arriving at a total price tag of $4.2B.
But would there be a market for real estate in LEO? Kubica provides comparable examples of skyscrapers with similar costs and over 200 condominiums recently selling for over $10M in Manhattan.
“The clamor for earthside luxury condos is massive and growing. Orbital condos — representing an exclusive experience far beyond that available to anyone on earth — could generate astronomical demand.”
With the economics of Starship opening up limitless possibilities, Kubica lays out a roadmap over the next 10 years to realize the Spacelife Direct opportunity. First would come financing the venture though a team of visionary entrepreneurs and investors (are you listening Dylan Taylor?). Design and development would come next including the robotic systems that would be required for assembly in space. Laying the groundwork for this infrastructure may be completed soon by Orbital Assembly Corporation which could potentially be leveraged as a Spacelife Direct supplier. To keep labor costs down much of the facility would be fabricated on Earth in launchable modules that would be assembled in orbit. The final stages would activate life support systems and finish out the interiors for the occupants to begin moving in.
So what about the rest of us? As history has shown in the aerospace industry at the beginning of the last century and we see unfolding in the space tourism market today, the rich help pave the way so that mass production and economies of scale will drive down costs eventually making space settlement affordable for the masses.
“We don’t want to live in space because it’s an economic necessity, we want to live in space because we are explorers and adventurers, and space is humanity’s next frontier!”
Diagram depicting the market sectors of the nascent in-space economy. Credits: Erik Kulu / Factories in Space
Erik Kulu, a Senior Systems Engineer in the satellite industry, has a passion for emerging technologies…especially those in the in-space manufacturing field. He’s created the largest public database of companies active in the emerging in-space economy. Called Factories in Space, it tracks companies engaged in microgravity services, space resources, in-space transport services, the economies of LEO, cislunar space, the Moon and much more.
Kulu provides an overview of commercial microgravity applications for both terrestrial and in-space use. His listing and analysis of potential business ventures provides a comprehensive summary of unique profitable commodities manufactured in microgravity, including fiber optics, medical products, exotic materials and many more.
Breakdown of the in-space manufacturing sector of the space economy. Credits: Erik Kulu / Factories in Space
“This is the missing piece to speed up development for the exciting Star Trek-like future. I believe in-space manufacturing will be the kickstarter and foundation.”
In a recent industry survey examining the commercial landscape of space resources in 2021, Kulu renders a statistical breakdown of the currently evolving development stages of in-space manufacturing companies, levels of funding by market sector, timing of company founding and geographical location of the main players. His analysis shows a marked increase in the formation of companies from 2016 – 2018 dropping off over the last 3 years.
Prominent founding peak of space resource companies in 2018 with drop at end of the last decade. Credits: Erik Kulu / Factories in Space
I asked Kulu about what he thought caused the downward taper because it seemed to have started before the COVID-19 pandemic, and so was probably unrelated. He agreed, and offers this explanation:
“Primarily, I think the decline is a mix of following:
There was a boom of some sorts, which has slowed down in terms of very new startups. Similar graphs [indicate the same trend] for nanosatellite, constellation and launcher companies. Funding boom is continuing though.
As many of those space fields do not have obvious markets, some potential new actors might be in wait mode, because they want to see what happens financially and technically to existing companies.
Startups could be in stealth mode or very early stage and as such I have not become aware of them yet. They will likely partially backfill.”
“While there was a decline, I forecast Starship and return to the Moon will kick off another wave in about 2-3 years.”
Kulu also tracks NewSpace commercial satellite constellations, small satellite rocket launchers and NewSpace funding options through his sister site NewSpace Index. But he doesn’t stop there. The world’s largest catalog of nanosatellites containing over 3200 nanosats and CubeSats can be found in his Nanosats database.
Learn more about how Erik Kulu got started tracking the in-space economy in this interview from earlier this year over on Filling Space. And be sure and tune in live to The Space Show next month when I cohost with David Livingston for his debut appearance, exact date to be determined. You can call the show and ask Erik questions directly. Check TSS Newsletter, updated weekly, for the show date once its set. This post will be updated when the schedule is finalized, so readers can check back here as well.
One kilometer long spinning space station producing 1G of artificial gravity deployed from a single Falcon Heavy launch vehicle. Credits: Zachary Manchester, graphic by Tzipora Thompson
This year’s NASA Innovative Advance Concepts (NIAC) award winners presented their ideas in a virtual poster session last week. Zachary Manchester of Carnegie Mellon University and Jeffrey Lipton at the University of Washington have come up with a rotating habitat to produce artificial gravity. But to do this without causing severe disorientation that would result from a short radius habitat, their novel facility is one kilometer long spinning to produce 1G at both ends. Manchester and Lipton’s innovation is a deployment mechanism that leverages advances in “mechanical metamaterials” to reduce mass while increasing expansion ratios such that the structure can be squeezed into a single Falcon Heavy payload envelope but when deployed, expands to 150 times its stored configuration size. The structure can be erected autonomously and without any assembly in space.
The key enabling technologies are a combination of “handed shearing auxetics” (HSA) and branched scissor mechanisms. HSA is described in a 2018 paper in Science by Lipton and other researchers where they “…produce both compliant structures that expand while twisting and deployable structures that can rigidly lock.”
“The station can…be spun at 1-2 RPM to generate 1g artificial gravity at its ends while still maintaining a microgravity environment at its center near the spin axis, providing the crew with the flexibility of living in a 1g environment while performing some work in microgravity.”
Rendering of a toroidal space habitat with 12 centrifuges containing gardening units and four composing modules providing an environmental control life support system for a crew of 6. Credits: Thomas Lagarde / International Astronautical Federation
Fully closed environmental control life support systems for long term human space missions are difficult to achieve. But its possible to get closer using a novel approach proposed by Thomas Lagarde in a paper presented at the 69th International Astronautical Congress in Bremen, Germany which took place in October 2018. Using a combination of rotating greenhouses and worm composting units, the system would significantly reduce resupply while producing air and food with equipment that accelerates plant growth while efficiently recycling waste.
Lagarde starts with the inputs and outputs of a crew of six and determines what the surface area required for greenhouses to produce nutritious crops for sustenance and life support. He assumes that inflatable modules like Bigelow Aerospace’s B330 design could be a starting point for the enclosures and then extends the concept to a torus combining the advantages of a solid shell module with that of an inflatable. The greenhouses utilize a rotating garden concept called an “omega garden unit” (OGU) based on an Omega Garden, Inc’s rotary hydroponics system which maximizes crop yield while minimizing space requirements. Growing plants under these conditions, i.e. with artificial gravity, has been shown to activate plant hormones called auxin, thereby increasing their growth rate. The use of an organic light-emitting diode source at the axis of the centrifuge provides a commercially available solution for optimal light exposure while saving space, energy and generating less heat.
To make significant progress toward closure of the life support system recycling loop, human waste and non-edible plant parts become worm food in composting units. This natural process can be accelerated under the right conditions, achieving exponential growth of the worm population but can be self-regulated as described in detail in the paper.
Lagarde sums up the research by saying: “After studying all the different aspects of plant growth and composting, we can conclude that the combination of a rotating garden and processing of organic products by worms will provide enough food and fresh air for a crew of 6 in a minimal space.”
If humanity is to ever move off Earth, clearly we will need to be able to have children wherever we establish long term settlements. But, as humans have evolved over millions of years in Earth’s gravitational field, normal gestation may not be possible on the Moon or Mars. This is probably the most important physiological question to be answered before outposts are permanently occupied on these worlds. We can shield people from radiation, we can recycle wastes and use ISRU to replenish consumables for life support. But we may find that artificial gravity either in free space rotating habitats or on planetary surface settlements is required for settlers to have healthy children. In fact, when I asked Dr. Shawna Pandya, a physician and expert in space medicine about it on The Space Show, she said “…that is the million dollar question”.
Numerous studies have shown the deleterious effects of long term microgravity on human health. So we know that humans will need some level of gravity for sustainable occupation. But what level is enough to stave off the effects of lower gravity on human health and what about reproduction under these conditions? Plus, there is the problem of how to run ethical clinical studies to answer these questions? The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) has started research in this area by studying mice under variable gravity conditions aboard their Kibo module on the International Space Station using a Multiple Artificial-gravity Research System (MARS). Results of this first ever long term space based mouse habitation study with artificial gravity were published in a paper called Development of new experimental platform ‘MARS’—Multiple Artificial-gravity Research System—to elucidate the impacts of micro/partial gravity on mice in Nature back in 2017. The authors* of the paper found that significant decreases in bone density and muscle mass of the mice reared under microgravity conditions were evident when compared to a cohort raised under 1G indicating that artificial gravity simulating the surface of the Earth may prevent negative health effects of microgravity in space. The next obvious step was to test the mice in 1/6 G simulating conditions on the Moon. This experiment was ran in 2019 but the results have not yet been published. SSP has reached out to JAXA with an inquiry on when we can expect a report. This post will be amended with an update if and when an answer is received.
Reproduction of mice or other mammals has not been studied in space under variable gravity conditions. The problem screams out for a dedicated space based artificial gravity facility such as the Space Studies Institute’s G-Lab and others (e.g. Joe Carroll’s Partial Gravity Test Facility ). Even if such a laboratory existed, how would ethical clinical studies on higher mammal animal models to simulate human physiology during pregnancy be carried out? Answering this question will come first before the million dollar one.
June 2, 2023 Update: JAXA finally released the results of their 2019 study on mice subjected to 1/6 G partial gravity in a paper in Nature in April. There is good news and not-so-good news. The good news is that 1/6 G partial gravity prevents muscle atrophy in mice. The downside is that this level of artificial gravity cannot prevent changes in muscle fiber (myofiber) and gene modification induced by microgravity. There appears to be a threshold between 1/6G and Earth-normal gravity, yet to be determined, for skeletal muscle adaptation.
______________________________
* Authors of Development of new experimental platform ‘MARS’—Multiple Artificial-gravity Research System—to elucidate the impacts of micro/partial gravity on mice: Dai Shiba, Hiroyasu Mizuno, Akane Yumoto, Michihiko Shimomura, Hiroe Kobayashi, Hironobu Morita1, Miki Shimbo, Michito Hamada, Takashi Kudo, Masahiro Shinohara, Hiroshi Asahara, Masaki Shirakawa and Satoru Takahash
Artist concept of a free space settlement. Credits: Don Davis / NASA
Al Globus has just published a set of cogent responses to objections made by those who question why space settlement should be considered as a goal for humanity. A link to the piece is on his website Free Space Settlement. His analysis first defines what space settlement is, then why it should be pursued and finally refutes point by point, arguments against the endeavor.
Globus positions the case for space settlement around surviving and thriving. Surviving centers on dispersing humanity’s eggs outside of Earth’s basket as a hedge against the risk of catastrophic threats such as “…climate change, major asteroid hits, supervolcano eruptions, nuclear war, pandemic, nearby supernova, and technology run amok.” Even if humanity does survive these potential hazards, in about 5 billion years our sun will transition to a red giant making life on Earth uninhabitable. Clearly our future on the home planet is not assured forever. At current population growth rates, we will have exhausted Earths resources long before then.
Thriving recognizes that expanding into space is the next step in human evolution. Globus reminds us that “…living things want to grow and expand, to thrive, not simply exist.” By settling space “…resource wars are unlikely and unnecessary because our Sun provides billions of times the energy used on Earth and the asteroids provide enough material to make new orbital land hundreds of times greater than the surface area of the Earth.”
To the objection that space is too expensive and that funds would be better spent on Earth, there are two talking points. First, it is always prudent to allocate a small percentage of outlays on planning for the future. NASA’s funding in 2020 was less then 1/2 of a percent (0.48%) of total US expenditures. The US spends quite a bit more on social programs so this argument is very weak. Second, the benefits we receive from space activities in our economy pay significant dividends. SSP has covered the return on space investments and the value of space infrastructure previously.
The next general category of objections falls under “It Can’t Be Done” such as farming in space is not feasible, radiation levels are too high and weightless conditions are intolerable for humans. Globus easily addresses each concern with technological solutions well represented on SSP’s ancillary pages.
An interesting set of protestations are described as “Power Plays” raising the specter of space wars, settlements attacking Earth or cult factions taking over space settlements. And there is the ominous possibility of “Deudney threats” as described in Daniel Deudney’s negative prediction of our space future in his book Dark Skies: Space Expansionism, Planetary Geopolitics, and the Ends of Humanity”. Globus handled these objections quite well and links to his critique of the book in the The Space Review.
Other miscellaneous complaints by doubters are addressed easily by Globus. His talking points are valuable tools to be used in persuasive dialogs with those who may be uninformed on the promise of space development. They should help in building consensus toward moving peacefully out into the solar system and establishing prosperous settlements throughout the galaxy.
Orbiting Modular Artificial-Gravity Spacecraft (OMAGS) concept for testing ecosystems in space – Exterior and cutaway views. Credits: Gregory Dorais / NASA
One of the most important technologies to realize permanent space settlements is the development of self-sustaining controlled ecological life support systems (CELSS). This will require replication of independent self-contained subsets of Earth’s biosphere containing select flora and fauna under controlled conditions for eventual human life support. But are 100% closed ecosystems (with the exception of the exchange of radiation and information) beyond Earth possible? Could a series of controlled evolutionary experiments using machine learning be carried out on controlled ecosystems in space under variable gravity conditions to rapidly optimize the key variables needed to identify the smallest possible CELSS for long term human survival? Gregory Dorais, a research scientist at NASA Ames Research Center, thinks so and describes the strategy in a paper called An Evolutionary Computation System Design Concept for Developing Controlled Closed Ecosystems.
Dorais introduces his concept with a brief description of Closed EcoSystems (CESs) and early efforts by NASA to develop a CELSS for space settlement. Of particular concern are the challenges of putting humans in the equation. There are consequences related to the ratio between human biomass and non-human biomass in ecosystems. On Earth this ratio is low so the ecosystem can self-regulate compensating for imbalances. But in a space biosphere, this ratio in the life support system is comparatively huge leading to significant challenges in maintaining equilibrium. For example, the ISS needs frequent resupply of consumables by spacecraft to replenish losses in the life support system. Wastes that cannot be recycled are either incinerated in the Earth’s atmosphere or exhausted into space. A completely closed system that is self-sustaining has not yet been developed.
Dorais’ design concept for an experimental testbed can be used to explore the viability of different biomass ratios of various combinations of larger animal species and eventually humans. The system consists of a collection of independent CESs controlled and interconnected to generate data for machine learning toward optimizing long term viability. Gradually, the size of the animals in the CES can be increased evolving over time with the ultimate goal of human life support. To kick things off, an Orbiting Modular Artificial-Gravity Spacecraft (OMAGS) is proposed, with room for 24 CESs housed in a 150cm radius centrifuge with appropriate radiation shielding capable of testing the ecosystems under different fractional gravity conditions. The spacecraft is envisioned to be placed in an elliptical orbit in cis-lunar space.
To scale illustration of the OMAGS proposed mission orbit in cislunar space. Credits: Gregory Dorais / NASA
The OMAGS spacecraft has been sized to fit in a SpaceX Falcon Heavy payload fairing.
Illustration of a OMAGS payload sized for a SpaceX Falcon Heavy launch vehicle. Credits: Gregory Dorais / NASA
A NASA patent and tech transfer fact sheet entitled Closed Ecological System Network Data Collection, Analysis, Control, and Optimization System has been issued for this innovation under the NASA Technology Transfer Program.
In a related presentation delivered in November 2018, Dorais says “Once CESs are demonstrated to reliably persist in space, within specified gravity and radiation limits, it is a small step for similar CESs to persist just about anywhere in space (Earth orbit, Moon, Mars, Earth-Mars cycler orbit, asteroids, …) enabling life to permanently extend beyond Earth and grow exponentially.”
Diagram depicting the three main areas of in-situ resource utilization and their connections to surface systems. Credits: ISECG
The International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG), a forum of 14 space agencies which aims to implement a global space exploration strategy through coordination of their mutual efforts, established a Gap Assessment Team (GAT) in 2019 to examine the technology readiness of in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). The purpose of the ISRU GAT effort was to evaluate and identify technology needs and inform the ISECG on gaps that must be closed to realize future missions. The assessment was intended to initiate an international dialogue among experts and drive policy decisions on investment in exploration technologies, while identifying potential areas for stakeholder collaboration. A report has just been released summarizing these efforts.
ISRU systems that can collect and utilize resources available at the site of exploration, instead of transporting them from Earth with considerable expense, cover three broad areas depicted in the diagram above; In-Situ Propellant & Consumable Production, In-Situ Construction, and In-Space Manufacturing with ISRU-Derived Feedstock.
To help understand how each function interacts and influences other areas of ISRU and how they integrate with life support systems, a functional flow diagram shown below was created to help visualize the flow of resources step by step to final product realization.
Integrated ISRU functional flow diagram (Including ties to life support). Credits: ISECG
The GAT reached consensus on key findings and recommendations (listed below) to stakeholders and decision-makers for implementing ISRU capabilities deemed essential for future human space exploration and settlement activities.
Key Findings * ISRU is a disruptive capability and requires an architecture-level integrated system design approach from the start. * The most significant impact ISRU has on missions and architectures is the ability to reduce launch mass, thereby reducing the size and/or number of the launch vehicles needed, or use the mass savings to allow other science and exploration hardware to be flown on the same launch vehicle. The next significant impact is the ability to extend the life of assets or reuse assets multiple times. * The highest impact ISRU products that can be used early in human lunar operations are mission consumables including propellants, fuel cell reactants, life support commodities (such as water, oxygen, and buffer gases) from polar resources (highland regolith and water/volatiles in PSRs). * While not in the original scope, evaluation of human Mars architecture studies suggest that there is synergy between Moon and Mars ISRU with respect to water and mineral resources of interest, products and usage, and phasing into mission architectures. * A significant amount of work is underway or planned for ISRU development across all the countries/agencies involved in the study, particularly in the areas of resource assessment, robotics/mobility, and oxygen extraction from regolith. * While it appears each country/space agency has access to research and component/subsystem size facilities that can accommodate regolith/dust and lunar vacuum/temperatures, there are a limited number of large system-level facilities that exist or are planned. * The assessment performed on the type and availability of lunar and Mars simulants for development and flight testing shows that 1) while simulants are available for development and testing, greater quantities and higher fidelity simulants will be needed soon, especially for polar/highland-type regolith, and 2) selection and use of proper simulants is critical for minimizing risks in development and flight operations. * Examination of resource assessment development and activities identified new efforts in refocusing technologies and instrumentation for lunar and Mars operations, and several missions to begin surface and deep assessment of resources are in development, especially to obtain maps of minerals on the lunar surface, surface topography, and terrain features, or to understand the depth profile of water and volatiles. * While there is significant interest in terrestrial additive manufacturing/construction development, development for space applications has been limited and primarily under Earth-ambient conditions. * Further research, analysis, and engagement are required to identify synergies between terrestrial mining and in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). Throughout the mining cycle and ISRU architecture, key areas for investigation include; dependence on remote, autonomous, and robotic operations; position, navigation, and timing systems; and energy technologies (e.g., small modular reactors and hydrogen technology). * Stakeholder engagement is required between the terrestrial mining and space sectors to drive collaboration to identify and benefit from lessons learned from terrestrial innovations for harsh or remote operations. * Long-term (months/years) radiation exposure limits for crew currently do not exist to properly evaluate radiation shielding requirements. These are needed to properly evaluate Earth-based and ISRU-based shielding options.
Recommendations * To help advance ISRU development and use in future human exploration, it is recommended that countries/agencies focus on the defined Strategic Knowledge Gaps (SKGs) that have been identified as high priority for each of the 3 human lunar exploration phases described. Early emphasis should be placed on geotechnical properties and resource prospecting for regolith near and inside permanently shadowed regions. * Since the access and use of in-situ resources is a major objective for human lunar and Mars exploration and the commercialization of space, locating, characterizing, and mapping potential resources are critical to achieving this objective. While work on resource assessment physical, mineral, and water/volatile measurement instruments are underway, and new orbital and lunar surface missions are in development or planned, a focused and coordinated lunar resource assessment effort is needed. It is recommended that Science, ISRU, Human Exploration, and Commercial Space coordinate and work closely on Geodetic Grid and Navigation, Surface Trafficability, and Dust and Blast Ejecta to ensure surface activities and data collection are performed efficiently and safely. * While short-duration lunar surface crewed missions can be completed with acceptable radiation exposure risk, it is recommended that long-term exposure limits be established and radiation shielding options (Earth and ISRU-based) be analyzed as soon as possible to mitigate risks for sustained operations by the end of the decade. * Long-term sustained operations will require a continuous flow of missions to the same location. While distance and placing of landers can be initially used to mitigate damage to already delivered equipment and infrastructure, an approach for sustained landing/ascent (in particular for reusable vehicles and hoppers) is needed. Dedicated plume-surface interaction analysis and mitigation technique development are recommended. It is also recommended that development of capabilities and establishment of landing/ascent pads be incorporated into human lunar architectures early to support sustained operations * Experience from Apollo missions indicates that wear, sealing, and thermal issues associated with lunar regolith/dust may be a significant risk to long-term surface operations. Coordination and collaboration on dust properties/fundamentals, and mitigation techniques and lessons learned are highly recommended. This effort should also involve coordination and collaboration on the development, characterization, and use of appropriate lunar regolith simulants and thermal-vacuum facility test capabilities and operations for ground development and flight certification. * To maximize the use of limited financial resources, it is recommended that the ISECG space agencies leverage the information presented in the report, in particular, the content of the “Technology Capture by WBS and Country/Space Agency portfolio” as a starting basis for further discussions on collaborations and partnerships related to resource assessment and ISRU development/operations. * Collaboration and public-private partnerships with terrestrial industry, especially mining, resource processing, and robotics/autonomy are recommended to reduce the cost/risk of ISRU development and use. * This includes establishment of an international regulatory framework for resource assessment, extraction, and operations, which are necessary to promote private capital investment and commercial space activities. * The sustainable development aspects of the ISRU activity are recommended to be taken into account from the start of activity planning for the surface exploration of Moon and Mars. * Aspects of reusing and recycling hardware are recommended to be taken into account from the design and architecture phase of mission planning. This will contribute to minimizing the exploration footprint (e.g. abandoned hardware) and therefore is key towards sustainability. * To accelerate the development of key technologies, close knowledge gaps, and expedite testing/readiness, it has been seen that the use of unconventional models, such as government-sponsored prize challenges can be effective innovation catalysts operationalizing the above recommendations, and ultimately, bringing ISRU to the Moon and onwards to Mars.
Artist impression of a sustainable settlement on the Moon. Credits: ESA – CC BY-SA IGO 3.0
Dylan Taylor of Voyager Space Holdings recently wrote an article in The Space Review on sustainable space manufacturing. He makes a convincing case that long-duration space missions and eventual human expansion throughout the solar system will require radical changes in the way we design, manufacture, repair and maintain space assets to ensure longevity. In addition, the cost of lifting materials out of Earth’s deep gravity well will drive sustainable technologies such as additive manufacturing in space and in situ resource utilization to reduce the mass of materials needed to be launched off our planet to support space infrastructure. In-space recycling and reuse technologies will also be needed along with robotic manufacturing, self-reparability and eventually, self-replicating machines.
But there is more to the philosophy of sustainability and its impact on the future of space activities. According to the Secure World Foundation (SWF), sustainability is essential for “Ensuring that all humanity can continue to use outer space for peaceful purposes and socioeconomic benefit now and in the long term. This will require international cooperation, discussion, and agreements designed to ensure that outer space is safe, secure and peaceful.” Much of the discussion centers around the problem of orbital debris, radio frequency interference, and accidental or irresponsible actions by space actors. SWF is active in facilitating dialog among stakeholders and international cooperation.
The National Science and Technology Council released a report in January called the National Orbital Debris Research and Development Plan. To address the issue, there are several companies about to start operations in LEO to deal with the orbital debris or in-orbit servicing. Japan based Astroscale just launched a demonstration mission of their End-of-Life Services by Astroscale (ELSA) platform to prove the technology of capturing and deorbiting satellites that have reached their end of life or other inert orbital debris.
Image of the Astroscales ELSA-d mission showing the larger servicer spacecraft releasing and preparing to dock with a “client” in a series of technical demonstrations, proving the capability to find and dock with defunct satellites and other debris. Credits Astroscale.
Even financial services and investment houses like Morgan Stanley are pushing for sustainability to reduce the risks to potential benefits emerging from the Newspace economy such as remote sensing to support food security, greenhouse gas monitoring, and renewable energy not to mention internet access for billions of people.
Sustainable operations on the Moon are being studied by several groups as the impact of exploration and development of Earth’s natural satellite is considered. Lunar dust when kicked up by rocket exhaust plumes could create hazards to space actor’s assets as well as Apollo heritage sites. SWF, along with For All Moonkind, the Open Lunar Foundation, the MIT Space Exploration Initiative and Arizona State University have teamed up on a project called the Moon Dialogs to advance interdisciplinary lunar policy directions on the mitigation of the lunar dust problem and to shape governance and coordination mechanisms among stakeholders on the lunar surface. SSP’s take on lunar dust mitigation was covered last July.
These few examples just scratch the surface. NASA, ESA and the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs have initiatives to foster sustainability in space. Humanity will need a collaborative approach where public and private stakeholders work together to ensure that the infrastructure to support near term commercial activities in space and eventual space settlement is both durable and self-sustaining.
The long-term sustainability of space. Credits: ESA / UNOOSA
A new YouTube channel has just been launched called Space Matters. Hosted by Rhonda Stevenson, President/CEO of the Tau Zero Foundation, the show is a weekly digest covering a wide array of current space activities, challenges and accomplishments which aims to show how our success in space will improve life on Earth. This could become an influential forum for discussion among industry leaders on how to steer humanities course toward becoming a spacefaring civilization. The first episode, a panel discussion with pillars of the space industry, aired on March 20th and featured Jeff Greason of Tau Zero and Electric Sky, Justin Kugler of Redwire Space, Grant Anderson of Paragon Space Development Corporation, Andy Aldrin of the ISU Center for Space Entrepreneurship, at FIT and Rod Pyle, editor of Ad Astra and author of Space 2.0. The group had a lively discussion on each of their contributions to space development as well as current trends in the New Space economy. Subscribe to get an update every week on why Space Matters.
