1

Space Debris 1AC 8 Introduction- Space debris are damaging to US satellites and pose a potential threat to anything in earths lower orbit. Significance: Our first argument is that space debris is at a tipping point! We turn to Elizabeth Motalbano of Information Week Magazine for proof of this, she says The amount of space debris clanging around in orbit around the Earth has reached a "tipping point," putting into jeopardy the safety of operational satellites and spacecraft from NASA and other space agencies, according to a new report. Stat- According to ESA's resident space debris expert, Walter Flury, the 10,000 pieces of space litter catalogued at the end of 2003 break into the following categories: 41% -- miscellaneous fragments 22% -- old spacecraft 13% -- mission related objects 7% -- operational spacecraft 7% -- rocket bodies

Doing the math, that is 93% pure junk and only 7% useful satellites orbiting the earth. More disturbing, 50,000 uncatalogued objects larger than 1 cm (the largest size which modern shielding can likely deflect) are estimated to be spinning through space at hypervelocities.

Harm: 1. Space debris is a significant threat to space exploration and development Space debris has become a growing concern in recent years, since collisions at orbital velocities can be highly damaging to functioning satellites and can also produce even more space debris in the process (this cascading effect is known as the Kessler Syndrome).

Inherency- No programs funded to eliminate space debris now.

Dan Williams, a writer at Reuters, Red Ice Creations, Reuters.com2010http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=9652; rn)

World powers must find ways to reduce the amount of debris in orbit, as the collision risk it poses to spacecraft is increasing,
, a former astronaut, told an Israeli audience that the United States has catalogued more than 15,000 items such as jettisoned rockets, shuttle detritus, and bits of destroyed satellites currently floating in space. "The

Air Force General Kevin Chilton

said, adding that this could make low-earth orbit "uninhabitable to man or machine". The amount of debris has increased exponentially, according to Chilton, due to events like China's 2007 shooting down of a defunct satellite, and last year's collision of an old Russian military satellite and a telecoms satellite owned by
estimation is that these numbers could grow upward of 50,000 in total numbers in the not-too-distant future," he Iridium. In what was widely seen as an effort to achieve parity with China, the United States in 2008 blew up a target satellite using the Aegis

Chilton said the increasing clutter raised the spectre of a "cascade" whereby debris causes collisions, which in turn creates more debris. Chilton said major powers should
missile interceptor. The Aegis is now the backbone of a planned U.S. ballistic shield for Eastern Europe. agree on a "responsible space operation", improve their spacecraft to keep debris to a minimum, and share data on possible risks. "The U.S. has quite an extensive array of sensors ... but even that is not enough," he said in his address to the Fisher Institute for Air & Space Strategic Studies, near Tel Aviv. "We need to improve our space surveillance capabilities." But Chilton made clear that, for now, containment was the only option, in the absence of a means of elimination. "Today, the way we eliminate space debris is we wait for it to come down" and burn up on reentry through the atmosphere, he said. Chilton, whose responsibilities include ballistic missile defence and cyber warfare as well as space operations, spent three days in Israel, an aide said. As well as visiting academic forums, he held talks with researchers at Israel's Defence Ministry, an official involved in the visit said, without giving details.

Only way to prevent Kessler syndrome is through removing debris nowstalling would increases risks to active satellites. Kessler 09 (Donald J. Kessler, Donald J. Kessler is an American astrophysicist and former NASA scientist known for his studies regarding space debris. Kessler worked at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, as part of
NASA's Environmental Effects Project Office. Kessler first published his ideas in 1978, in an academic paper titled "Collision Frequency of Artificial Satellites: The Creation of a Debris Belt."[2] The paper established Kessler's reputation, and NASA subsequently made him the head of the newly-created Orbital Debris Program Office to study the issue and issue guidelines to slow the accumulation of space debris.[1] , The Kessler Syndrome, March 8, 2009 http://webpages.charter.net/dkessler/files/KesSym.html, rn)

We are entering a new era of debris control.an era that will be dominated by a slowly increasing number of random catastrophic collisions. These collisions will continue in the 800 km to 1000 km altitude regions, but will eventually spread to other regions. The control of future debris requires, at a minimum, that we not leave future payloads and rocket bodies in orbit after their useful life and might require that we plan launches to return some objects already in orbit. These control measures will significantly increase the cost of debris control measures; but if we do not do them, we will increase the cost of future space activities even more. We might be tempted to put increasing amounts of shielding on all spacecraft to protect them and increase their life, or we might just accept shorter lifetimes for all spacecraft. However, neither option is acceptable: More shielding not only increases
cost, but it also increases both the frequency of catastrophic collisions and the amount of debris generated when such a collision occurs. Accepting a shorter lifetime also increases cost, because it means that satellites must be replaced more often.with the failed satellites again increasing the catastrophic collision rate and producing larger amounts of debris.

Aggressive space activities without adequate safeguards could significantly shorten the time between collisions and produce an intolerable hazard to future spacecraft. Some of the most environmentally dangerous activities in space include large constellations such as those initially proposed by the Strategic Defense Initiative in the mid-1980s, large structures such as those considered in the late-1970s for building solar power stations in Earth orbit, and antisatellite warfare using systems tested by the USSR, the U.S., and China over the past 30 years. Such aggressive activities could set up a situation where a single satellite failure could lead to cascading failures

of many satellites in a period of time much shorter than years. As is true for many environmental problems, the control of the orbital debris environment may initially be expensive, but failure to control leads to disaster in the long-term. Catastrophic collisions between catalogued objects in low Earth orbit are now an important environmental issue that will dominate the debris hazard to future spacecraft. Observation One - There is a significant amount of space debris orbiting the earth. The risk of space debris increasing now no mechanism exists for preventing a cascade effect Bradley and Wein 2009 [Andrew M. Bradley, Institute for Computational and Mathematical Engineering, Stanford University and Lawrence M. Wein, Graduate School of Business, Stanford University, February 2009, Advances in Space Research, Science Direct] Orbital debris generated by 50 years of space activities poses a risk for operational spacecraft, which can collide in a catastrophic manner with either another large object (e.g., an upper stage rocket body) or with a smaller fragment generated by a previous collision or by a previous explosion of a large object (Liou and Johnson, 2008). A high-fidelity three-dimensional simulation model of low Earth orbit (LEO, which is the region between 200 and 2000 km altitude) predicts that even with no future launches the growth rate of collisional debris would exceed the natural decay rate in 50 years (Liou and Johnson, 2008). Moreover, the analysis in (Liou and Johnson, 2008) did not account for the Chinese anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) test that destroyed the FengYun 1C spacecraft in January 2007, which created the largest manmade orbital debris cloud in history (Liou and Portman, 2007). NASAs safety guidelines recommend limiting the postmission lifetime of spacecraft or upper stages in LEO to 25 years (NASA Safety Standard 1740.14, 1995). Because this measure will not prevent a positive growth-rate of debris (Liou and Johnson, 2005), it has been suggested that the removal

of large intact satellites from space is also necessary (Liou and Johnson, 2006). Although the impact of satellite removal has been assessed (Liou and Johnson, 2007), currently there are no technologies that are technically feasible and economically viable (Liou and Johnson, 2006). Space debris represents a textbook example of environmental economics (Perman et al., 2003): space is a public good (i.e., despite the 1976 Bogota Declaration, in which eight equatorial countries claimed sovereignty over the portion of geosynchronous Earth orbit lying above their territory (Soroos, 1982), there are no well-defined and enforceable property rights and no countries are excluded from launching satellites) and debris is a pollutant. More specifically, LEO is a renewable stock resource (much like air or water), in that debris eventually dissipates, albeit on an extremely slow time scale.

Plan 1. The United States Federal government will create a program to decrease the amount of space debris in earths orbit. 2. NASA will make this program its top priority. 3. Funding for current programs will be shifted to our program. And the department of defense will contribute funds. This is because it is a danger to our countries security and needs to be fixed. 4. This plan will be enacted by any and all legal means necessary. Advantage One The affirmative plan will increase the development and exploration of space. A. Space debris threatens all space vehicles. There are currently hundreds of millions of space debris fragments orbiting the Earth at speeds of up to several kilometers per second. Although the majority of these fragments result from the space activities of only three countriesChina, Russia, and the United Statesthe indiscriminate nature of orbital mechanics

means that they pose a continuous threat to all assets in Earths orbit. There are now roughly 300,000 pieces of space debris large enough to completely destroy operating satellites upon impact (Wright 2007, 36; Johnson 2009a, 1). It is likely that space debris will become a signicant problem within the next several decades. Predictive studies show that if humans do not take action to control the space debris population, an increasing number of unintentional collisions between orbiting objects will lead to the runaway growth of space debris in Earths orbit (Liou and Johnson 2006). This uncontrolled growth of space debris threatens the ability of satellites to deliver the services humanity has come to rely on in its day-to-day activities. For example, Global Positioning System (GPS) precision timing and navigation signals are a signicant component of the modern global economy; a GPS failure could disrupt emergency response services, cripple global banking systems, and interrupt electric power grids (Logsdon 2001). Furthermore, satellite-enabled military capabilities such as GPS precision-guided munitions are critical enablers of current U.S. military strategies and tactics. They allow the United States to not only remain a globally dominant military power, but also wage war in accordance with its political and ethical values by enabling faster, less costly warghting with minimal collateral damage (Sheldon 2005; Dolman 2006, 163-165). Given the U.S. militarys increasing reliance on satellite-enabled capabilities in recent conicts, in particular Operation Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom, some have argued that losing access to space would seriously impede the ability of the United States to be successful in future conicts B. The problem gets worse everyday. Space debris problem will only get worst in the coming decade, threatening access to space and the swift destruction of every orbital satellite, and theres no status quo initiative or

technology coming down the pipeline to remove debris currently in orbit David, 5-10-11 (Leonard, Ugly truth of space junk: No feasible solutions, accessed 5-13-11, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42975224/ns/technology_and_sc ience-space/) Dealing with the decades of detritus from using outer space human-made orbital debris is a global concern, but some experts are now questioning the feasibility of the wide range of "solutions" sketched out to grapple with high-speed space litter. What may be shaping up is an "abandon in place" posture for certain orbital altitudes an outlook that flags the messy message resulting from countless bits of orbital refuse. In a recent conference here, Gen. William Shelton, commander of the U.S. Air Force Space Command, relayed his worries about rising amounts of human-made space junk. "The traffic is increasing. We've now got over 50 nations that are participants in the space environment," Shelton said last month during the Space Foundations 27th National Space Symposium. Given existing space situational awareness capabilities, over 20,000 objects are now tracked. "We catalog those routinely and keep track of them. That number is projected to triple by 2030, and much of that is improved sensors, but some of that is increased traffic," Shelton said. "Then if you think about it, there are probably 10 times more objects in space than we're able to track with our sensor capability today. Those objects are untrackable yet they are lethal to our space systems to military space systems, civil space systems, commercial no ones immune from the threats that are on orbit today, just due to the traffic in space." Tough neighborhood From a probability point of view, Shelton added, smaller satellites, more debris, more debris is going to run into more debris, creating more debris. "It may be a pretty tough

neighborhood," Shelton continued, in low-Earth orbit and geosynchronous Earth orbit "in the not too distant future." When asked if the U.S. Air Force plans on funding space debris mitigation capability, Shelton responded: "We havent found a way yet that is affordable and gives us any hope for mitigating space debris. The best we can do, we believe, is to minimize debris as we go forward with our operations. As we think about how we launch things, as we deploy satellites, minimizing debris is absolutely essential and were trying to convince other nations of that imperative as well." Shelton said that, unfortunately, with the duration of most things on orbit, "you get to live with the debris problem for many, many years and in some cases decades. So minimizing debris is important to us and it should be to other nations as well." Point of no return The concern over orbital debris has been building for several reasons, said Marshall Kaplan, an orbital debris expert within the Space Department at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory in Laurel, Md. In Kaplan's view, spacefaring nations have passed the point of "no return," with the accumulation of debris objects in low-Earth orbits steadily building over the past 50 years. Add to the clutter, the leftovers of Chinas anti-satellite (ASAT) test in 2007. "The fact that this single event increased the number of debris objects by roughly 25 percent was not as important as the location of the intercept. The event took place at an altitude of 865 kilometers, right in the middle of the most congested region of low-orbiting satellites," Kaplan pointed out. Toss into the brew the collision of an Iridium satellite with an expired Russian Cosmos spacecraft in February 2009 at an altitude similar to that of Chinas ASAT test. As a result of 50 years of launching satellites and these two events, the altitude band from about 435 miles to a little over 800 miles has accumulated possibly millions of debris objects ranging from a few millimeters to a few meters, Kaplan said. Complex and very

expensive "The buildup of debris is not a naturally reversible process. If we are to clean up space, it will certainly be complex and very expensive. If we continue, as we have, to use these very popular orbits in near-Earth space, the density of debris and collision events will surely increase," Kaplan told Space.com. The good news is that no immediate action is necessary in terms of removing debris objects, Kaplan advised, as experts estimate that the situation will not go unstable anytime soon. "But, when it does, operational satellites will be destroyed at an alarming rate, and they cannot be replaced. We must prepare for this seemingly inevitable event," Kaplan said. While there are many options for debris removal that have been proposed, he feels that none are sensible. "Barring the discovery of a disruptive technology within the next decade or so, there will be no practical removal solution," Kaplan added. "We simply lack the technology to economically clean up space." For Kaplan, the issue of dealing with orbital debris will become dire. "The proliferation is irreversible. Any cleanup would be too expensive. Given this insight, it is unlikely spacefaring nations are going to do anything significant about cleaning up space," Kaplan said. "The fact is that we really can't do anything. We can't afford it. We don't have the technology. We don't have the cooperation. Nobody wants to pay for it. Space debris cleanup is a 'growth industry,' but there are no customers. In addition, it is politically untenable." Not a pretty space picture All that being said, can anything be done? Kaplan says he can imagine the future and things don't look pretty. "There is a good chance that we may have to eventually abandon all active satellites in currently used orbits," Kaplan said. "One possible scenario for the future is that we may phase out this generation of spacecraft while replacing them with a brand-new infrastructure of low-orbiting constellations of small satellites, each of which partially contributes to collecting desired data or making communications links."

10

C. The affirmative plan allows for increased space exploration. D. Space development is key to our future.

Harms/Advantages-Space junk can destroy satellites Potentially fatal Fall to earth harms Cascade possibility Possibley wont be able to go into earths lower orbit

There is no program to decrease space junk. Significance- Cascade could ruin space forever. Potential harms Weather satellites destroyed, Cell phones not useable without satellites, Military GPS satellites being destroyed would put our country in danger.

11

New Policy-Gets rid of Space Junk Tell me how your team wants to get rid of space junk. DONT READ THIS DURING 1AC CROSS X ANSWERS and FACTS!!

The U.S is 14.7 trillion dollars in debt Solvency our program will substancially REDUCE space debris Electrodynamic debris eliminator. EDDE has alternative purposesrecycles, monitors weather, fixes and transports satellites Jerome Pearson, STAR president, DoD and NASA tech developer, once researcher for NASA and the Air Force Research Laboratory, 10. Active Debris Removal: EDDE, the Electrodynamic Debris Eliminator, prepared for the International Astronautical Congress, http://www.star-tech-inc.com/papers/EDDE_IAC_Final_Paper.pdf EDDE can be used for a variety of useful purposes other than debris removal. To limit the dangers from re-entry, EDDE can deliver debris objects to a space processing facility that uses the aluminum in large upper stages as raw material for space processing and space manufacturing. EDDE can deliver payloads to custom orbits, deliver fuel to operational satellites, deliver service modules to satellites, move satellites to new orbits, inspect failed satellites, and monitor space weather all over LEO. Multiple EDDE vehicles in different orbits could provide real-time maps of the ionosphere, keeping track of space weather, which affects satellite communication, and could also record the effects of solar flares and proton events on the Sun, which are dangerous to satellites and crew. Perhaps more importantly, after there is enough confidence in EDDE operations including capture, EDDE can deliver aged or failed satellites to ISS for repair, even from sun-synch

12

orbit. This will want to use capture without nets, probably using the two-stage capture concept shown on page 23 of ref. 13. After capture, EDDE needs to torque the orbit plane to bring the satellite to ISS and release it. During the transfer, replacement parts can be sent to ISS. After delivery and repair, EDDE can take the satellite back to its original orbit or a new one, for continued operation. There have been billiondollar satellites that failed soon after launch. Such on-orbit repair operations could be a very valuable part of full-scale ISS operations.

Harms Some harms include a piece of space debris colliding with a working satellite and not only disabling it, but causing the Kessler syndrome to come into effect, in other words, creating more space debris. Another terrible outcome from space debris is the problem becoming so bad, that we cant explore space because we are literally completely surrounded by our own junk. This would seriously affect some of the great spinoffs we could discover by continuing the exploration of space. Inherency Inherency is a serious issue! Space debris will not go away on its own! It is locked in orbit, and it will NOT break that orbit unless we do something about it. It will not only affect space exploration for our generation, but also affect future generations, unless we do something NOW, while you might say we dont have the substancial funds to pull this off..all though this might be true, it doesnt mean that it has to stop us. Just like the debt isnt stopping the economy, or the new health care plan, it doesnt need to stop space debris clean up! Our priority needs to be on space debris clean up! The reason being, not only will it not get better without human interference, but it will get

13

worse as days go by. Like we said before space debris is expected to TRIPLE by the year 2030! Topicality The resolution for this debate is that The United States federal government should substantially expand space exploration beyond the earths mesosphere. This debate is valid because we have to develop a program to decrease space debris in order to further explore space. Significance Space debris is at the tipping point. Although we may have been able to explore space in the past with space debris present, it is now a way bigger problem, with space debris expected to triple by 2030, it is obviously a significant problem.

Random Facts- The U.S is 14.7 trillion dollars in debt. The Earths mesosphere is 50 miles above sea level. If the negative says something that we dont have a specific money amount then we say the harms outweigh the costs therefore it is important that the federal government funds this with any means necessary in order to protect our ability to explore space and keep our assets in space safe.