Space Debris: Legal Challenges Toward a Sustainable Space Environment

For nearly fifty-nine years, State Governments and private actors have objects in orbit around Earth and other celestial bodies. The leftovers of dilapidated satellites, rockets, non functioning satellites and the junks ensuing from their collisions and explosions form a considerable portion of the debris in space. These non-functioning objects in actual fact threaten the space environment by their mere presence. Space junks on orbit around the earth poses the most severe modern risk to the use of space. For the long term sustainability and the continuous usages of the Outer space by State Governments and private actors, mitigation of debris in Outer Space is very essential. There are so many Guidelines that have been suggested to help in mitigating debris in space by major space faring countries, policy makers , United Nations and some space agencies to mention a few. These Guidelines and Code of Conducts are regarded as soft laws and they are expected to regulate the activities of humankind in the uses of Outer space. This paper will crucially analyse the various guidelines proposed for space debris mitigation. This paper is not an attempt to discuss every facet of the mitigation guidelines. It will rather look at the overview of the soft laws, its roles and some of the limitations of soft laws and projects the way forward.

Space debris is global mounting ultimatum to the enduring maintainability of the Outer Space activities and it ought to be deal in the very beginning. Otherwise, it will be too late. From the last couple of years, the rate at which the space activities have, resulted in the production of debris at very threshold position in a linear fashion. Ultimately, it has become the rendezvous of space debris general place. From couples of years ago, some incidents of collisions have enhanced the space debris accumulation, now crowded the corridor of earth orbit which constitutes the most serious pollutant of the near-earth space environment. Innovations in space applications have enhanced not only our awareness about universe but also daily lives world widely. Actually, the space treaties law neither explicitly forbids the production of space debris nor levies responsibility on the states to remove space debris. Because the absence of definition of space debris reveals the unending ambiguity between space debris and space object. There is no any legal procedure and mechanism available in existing space law regime to remove the space debris. Furthermore, who has the authority to take decision for the removal of space debris from the outer space? International space law does not permit interruption with space objects without the preceding approval from the launching State. This paper focuses on the legal and organizational challenges suggesting to revamp the fuzzy prevailing international space law regime to encounter incoming legal aspects.

Overview of the legal and policy challenges of orbital debris removal

Any man-made object in Earth's orbit that no longer serves a useful purpose is classified as orbital debris. Debris objects come from a variety of sources. The majority is related to satellite fragmentation. Other major sources of debris are propulsion systems, and fragmentation of spent upper stages, payload and mission related debris. Serious concern about orbital debris has been growing. Knowledge of the future debris environment is important to both satellite designers, and mission planners, who need to know what hazards a satellite might encounter during the course of its mission. Therefore, it is important to know how much debris is in orbit, where it is located, and when it will decay. The debris environment is complex and dynamically evolving. Objects of different shape and size behave differently in orbit. The geoeffectiveness space environments include solar flux at 10.7 cm, solar energetic particles flux or speed, solar wind flow pressure, electric field, and geomagnetic indices. We study the decaying orbital debris from Tracking and Impact Prediction (TIP) messages in conjuction with geoeffectiveness space environments through time epoch correlation. We found that the decaying and reentry orbital debris are triggered by space environment enhancement within at least one week before reentry. It is not necessary a transient or high energetic and severe solar storm events are needed in decaying processes. We propose that the gradual enhancement processes of space environment will cause satellite surface charging due to energetic electron and enhance drag force.

Space debris poses significant threats to spacecraft and human activities in space. Accurate modeling of space debris is crucial for understanding and mitigating these risks, ensuring the sustainability of the space environment. This paper discusses the importance of space debris modeling in the space environment, highlighting its critical role in safeguarding assets in orbit. Two primary methods of space debris modeling, namely the 1D and 3D approaches, are discussed in detail, and their respective strengths and limitations are elucidated. Furthermore, a comprehensive review of existing models, including the space debris evolutionary model (MOCAT, SOLEM, DAMAGE, LEODEEM & GEODEEM, DELTA, and LEGEND) and engineering models (MOCAT-MC, NEODEEM, MASTER, ORDEM), are presented. These models offer valuable insights into the dynamics and characteristics of space debris populations, aiding in formulating effective debris mitigation strategies and orbital capacity problems for reducing the possibilities of Kessler’s syndrome. Additionally, the paper provides insights into the ongoing development of the Korean space debris model, focusing on its methodology and space debris cataloging techniques for modeling space debris environments.

Fifty years of Space flight has left many objects in Outer Space. For a long time the Space community has debated the implementation of regulations concerning the increasing problem of the resulting Space debris. The reasons for this have been intensively analyzed, but the international community is yet to find an effective legal answer. The traditional Space Law treaties do not cover this question and in particular cannot offer a suitable solution for the most urgent need: the avoidance of Space debris through its removal from Outer Space back to earth. The legal outcome of this debate is rather disappointing. The UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space has released special Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines which are neither legally binding nor meet the real necessity. They can only be recognized as a first tentative step in the right direction. But their implementation could foresee the serious danger that the international community leaves the state of law as it is and fails to develop it further. Therefore it is necessary to negotiate a new provision and insert it into the Outer Space Treaty. This article offers a draft of such a legally binding obligation.

The growing number of actors pursuing sophisticated outer space programs gives rise to one of the more novel challenges of the global commons. Once the privileged domain of the United States and th...

Space station JEM design implementation and testing for orbital debris protection

Orbital debris ontology, terminology, and knowledge modeling

The increasing launch rate of spacecraft, particularly due to the deployment of large constellations and miniaturized satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), has led to a significant rise in space traffic and debris. This paper examines emerging technologies and strategies for future Space Traffic Management (STM) to ensure sustainable operations in space. Key focus areas include the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for enhanced Collision Avoidance (CA) systems, the development of advanced Space Surveillance and Tracking (SST) capabilities, and Active Debris Removal (ADR) techniques to mitigate the growing risks associated with space debris. Additionally, the paper explores the potential of in-orbit servicing, re-entry services, and the exploitation of Very Low Earth Orbits (VLEO) and cislunar space. The integration of these technologies and practices is essential to manage the anticipated growth in space activities while minimizing collision risks and ensuring the long-term sustainability of the space environment.

In contrast with the early years of space flight that were dominated by the political priorities and military concerns of the two superpowers, the USA and the then Soviet Union, a new space era has dawned where not only states are involved as serious actors in the space arena, but also private companies. Because of the significant increase in the number of space actors, outer space is becoming a congested and competitive environment. It is self-evident that the significant increase in private and state-sponsored space ventures has serious implications for the protection and sustainability of the outer space environment. Specifically, the proliferation of space debris and the current lack of protection of vulnerable scientific, historical, and cultural sites on celestial bodies are issues of concern. Several measures to balance the seemingly competing interests of space exploration and the sustainability of the space environment have been suggested. This article aims to discuss these measures and to assess to what extent they are in conformity with the current outer space governance regime. It is concluded that the measures suggested to actively address the space debris problem and to protect the cultural heritage in space may contravene the Outer Space Treaty, especially the rules and prohibitions regarding property rights in space. Moreover, whilst the removal of orbital debris is essential to ensure the sustainable use of the outer space environment, some space junk may have cultural significance and be worthy of protection. A balance should thus be struck between preserving cultural heritage and managing the risks posed by space debris. It is therefore recommended that the development of interim soft-law rules (and an eventual treaty) should be undertaken under the auspices of existing United Nations bodies, namely the UNCOPUOS and UNESCO.

Net deployment and contact dynamics of capturing space debris objects

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) defines regulations that ensure satellite communications systems seeking access to the U.S. market will properly implement post-mission disposal (PMD) plans to reduce the risk of creating orbital debris. In March 2020, the FCC initiated a processing round for additional applications and petitions for non-geostationary orbit (NGSO) fixed-satellite service (FSS) operations in the 10.7 - 12.7 GHz, 12.75 - 13.25 GHz, 13.8 - 14.5 GHz, 17.7 - 18.6 GHz, 18.8 - 20.2 GHz, and 27.5 - 30 GHz bands. Ten NGSO FSS communications systems operators (EOS Defense Systems, Kepler Communications, Kuiper, Mangata, New Spectrum Satellite, O3b, OneWeb, SpaceX, Telesat, and Viasat) submitted applications. In Part 25 of the Commission's rules, particularly 47 C.F.R. § 25.114(d)(14), the FCC defines key requirements to limit debris, including guidelines for post-mission disposal and the limitation of accidental explosions. Prior to approving an application for access to the U.S. market, the FCC assesses the compliance of each applicant's system with the Commission's Part 25.114(d)(14) rules. This paper analyzes and validates the PMD and orbital debris mitigation strategies of the ten NGSO FSS communication systems that filed applications in the FCC's March 2020 Processing Round in order to guarantee that adequate plans are in place to prevent the creation of orbital debris, and thus prevent harm to other spacecraft and humans. The methodology includes obtaining relevant information regarding the orbits and operational strategies of the systems from their submitted Technical Narratives and Schedule S reports, and performing PMD analysis validation using NASA's Debris Assessment Software (DAS) to confirm pertinent information such as deorbit duration and required delta-v (Δv) for deorbiting maneuvers. Nine of the ten systems provided statements on their orbital debris mitigation strategies, including identifying the agency or government's orbital debris guidelines with which their system will comply (NASA, UK, Canada, etc.), Several systems under the jurisdiction of foreign administrations, including One Web and 03b, did not provide orbital debris mitigation information as they stated they will follow their administration's orbital debris guidelines rather than the FCC's Part 25 rules pertaining to technical orbital debris showings. Three of the systems (EOS Defense Systems, O3b, Mangata) either stated that they will use a graveyard orbit or expect based on orbital altitude that they will not re-enter, whereas seven systems (Kepler, Kuiper, OneWeb, New Spectrum Satellites, SpaceX, Telesat and Viasat) either stated that they will perform deorbit and re-entry maneuvers or it is expected the spacecraft will naturally deorbit based on the low earth orbit (LEO) configuration. The analysis and validation of the PMD for each system is discussed in detail in this work, with the ultimate goal of aiding the FCC in evaluating the legitimacy of each applicant's approach and maintaining a sustainable space environment for the future.

A break-even analysis of orbital debris and space preservation through monetization

Space debris is a global mounting ultimatum to the enduring maintainability of outer space activities. It ought to be managed from the very beginning. For the last couple of years, collisions have enhanced space debris accumulation, and the rate at which space activities have resulted in the production of debris is at a threshold position in a linear fashion. Ultimately, space has become the rendezvous of space debris. Considering the growing accumulation of debris and the emerging apprehension regarding a horrible strike and collapse of whole space programs, this paper focuses on the legal and administrative challenges. Both developing and developed countries realize the value of a competent regime that could administer, supervise, finance, and promote the research, examination, and development of outer space. Thus, this research suggests an autonomous, competent international space authority be established by a treaty or international agreement following the model of the deep seabed authority because it has similar natural resources but a geographically different location.