The Sky is Falling — Deficiencies in Space Debris Regulations
By Denny Han
Introduction
Gravity is a 2013 film that follows two astronauts escaping a cloud of space debris cascading through Earth’s orbit. Although it is categorized as a science fiction thriller[1], space debris is a very real and continuous threat to space activity. The dire lack of regulations surrounding space objects, combined with the comparatively obtuse nature of the problem have resulted in a neglected problem that has only grown in severity over the past decades.
Space Debris
Space debris are defunct man-made objects in space. Most space debris lie approximately 1200km — 800km above Earth, and are fragments of broken satellites or ejecta from defunct satellites or rocket launches. Currently, estimates suggest that there are 34 thousand objects greater than 10cm, 900 thousand objects between 1cm-10cm and 128 million objects between 1mm-1cm. Due to the lack of atmosphere to slow the objects down, debris can retain speeds of several kilometers per second for up to 2000 years. Due to the sheer velocity of these objects, even debris 1cm large can impact objects at the force of a grenade blast[2].
The worst of these issues, however, is that the debris multiplies. Like dominos, when space debris crashes into a satellite or other orbiting objects, the impact generates more debris that in turn may cause more collisions. If severe enough, this knock-on effect can result in entire levels of Earth’s orbit becoming hostile to human activity and render satellite networks impossible. This is called the Kessler syndrome, and according to the most recent report by the Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (IADC) suggests that without active efforts to remove debris from orbit, the population of debris can multiply tenfold in the next 200 years. In other words, the dominos have begun to fall, and without action humanity may very well trap itself upon the surface of the earth and bring down satellite networks.
The challenges faced by any regulatory body overseeing space debris is enormously complex, with quite dire consequences. Imagine a hundred-piece jigsaw puzzle, but you can only track about three quarters of them, people periodically hand you extra pieces without warning, and making a mistake may result in one of the pieces shooting off to smash up the toaster. Now imagine that it is instead a 34-thousand-piece puzzle with a time limit until the puzzle pieces drown your house and lock you permanently indoors.
Space Liability Convention
Space is regulated by the Outer Space Treaty (OST), and the many conventions that have spawned out of its recognized deficiencies. The OST spawned out of a Cold War anxiety that the tension between the Soviet Union and United States of America would escalate into space. Although considered a foundational document on space governance, it in of itself is mostly concerned with ensuring that outer space is free of claims to sovereignty and weapons of mass destruction. Indeed, orbital space debris is almost entirely out of reach of the current legal framework, although the Space Liability Convention (SLC) has been often referred to as the closest one can get to regulations over space debris.
The SLC, however, has only been used once by Canada to bring charges against the Soviet Union for the crash of a nuclear-powered satellite in 1977. Of its $6 billion damages request, Canada was only successful in claiming half of it from the USSR. There are several problems plaguing the SLC that suggest why its application in addressing the space debris problem is so limited.
The first problem is that the process of bringing a claim against an offending state assumes good faith negotiations.[3] The two states must negotiate the claim and settle within a year. If the offending state still has not paid the damages after the year is up, the two states must then enter a four-month arbitration process overseen by the United Nations. The results of the arbitration process are only binding if both states consent to be bound by the results of the process. If the offending state simply refuses to be bound and refuses to pay, there is simply no recourse for the payment to be enforced.
The second problem is the impossibly high standard of fault-based liability. Any action brought against a state for damages outside the Earth’s surface (such as damages in orbit) requires proof of fault — in practice, the complaint requires a registry of ownership and management of each satellite or debris involved. Ownership of satellites and objects launched into orbit, although ostensibly required by signatories of the Registration Convention 1974[4], is difficult to track. As of writing, there are no universal tracking systems for satellites, let alone debris. This is partially because satellites are often considered a part of a nation’s security assets, and most states have been reluctant to disclose their ownership. Proving whose satellite belonged to whom and which decisions led to the collisions without the full cooperation of the offending state would be extremely difficult.[5]
Finally, the critical deficiency of the SLC is its aim: it is only ever concerned about what happens when there is an offending incident between states. None of the terms of this Convention or any of the conventions that sprung from the OST compels states to take positive action and remove the debris that is already present. Any effort to actively remove debris would be confined to private and domestic state action only.
The glaring force that has driven this legal frigidity is plain to see: a combination of being entirely immaterial to the short-term challenges faced by many states while also producing a gradual incline toward a long-term catastrophe. It is much more intuitive to tie in the material changes of local pollution to observable harms such as acid rain or algae blooms. Orbital pollution does not enjoy the same familiarity. As such, deterrence and regulation has proved difficult to pass through, and in comparison to the accelerating commercial space development, the SLC and robust legal frameworks on private space governance have lagged behind.
Conclusion
The state of affairs regarding space debris is a rather pessimistic one, and although reassurance of any progress would be nice, there’s simply been no viable global solution. The United Nations have recently revitalized talks of updating the OST, but they have skewed focus heavily toward the original intentions of the treaty, focusing on disarmament and demilitarization of space[6]. The IADC reports note that the debris field in the lower orbit has remained unstable, with an upwards trend in collisions. Any solutions to the existing debris problem have mostly been kept within the bounds of domestic and private efforts rather than any action from an international regulatory body, and the current forerunners have remained in conceptual phases that are far beyond any physical implementation. Although academia has indeed shifted to highlight this gap in space governance, it is unclear if law will catch up before long term space projects simply become unviable.
[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454468/
[2] https://videos.space.com/m/KnCPWAw6/space-debris-problem-needs-global-response-video?list=9wzCTV4g
[4]
[5] https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-13264-3_11
