Options for Regulating Satellite and Other Space Debris in Cislunar Space

The coming human adventure of space exploration and settlement of our Solar System will be one of humanity’s most exciting eras. Yet, there are enormous challenges. In coming years, there will be a dramatically increased use of cislunar space between and around Earth and its Moon, including the Moon’s surface and stretching out to encompass the gravitationally stable and very useful Lagrange points. We focus on Low Earth Orbit (LEO), up to a distance of about 1,200 miles (1931km) from Earth, but not exclusively, because the issues of cislunar space debris will likely be repeated elsewhere in the Solar System, and perhaps around exoplanets when we reach them.

Governance issues regarding space debris are being defined now by, for example, the revised Artemis Accords managed by the US State Department [1]. As of this writing, there are 53 nation signatories. The Accords specify the dangers of space debris, and they set the stage for the emergence of a new structure of governance that could include some or all of the stages in Table 1, below.

Table 1: Space Debris Governance Development Stages.

The framing of principles for appropriate interaction of humans, space stations, spacecraft, and settlements has been underway since the 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies, by UNOOSA (United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs) [2]. However, with the use of space, particularly cislunar space, comes the debris from rocket boosters, satellites, and space stations that are no longer in service, and this leftover debris can be an enormous danger going forward.

There is a New Space Era dawning, especially in cislunar space around Earth and its Moon, but also potentially on Mars. With the decommissioning of the International Space Station around 2030, [3] there will be new orbital stations that assume some of the functions of the ISS. The commercial stations in development include (but are not limited to) Axiom Station, Orbital Reef, Starlab, Life Pathfinder, StarMax and Vast space station. These space stations will have a variety of functions including medical, observation, tourism, communications, and the monitoring of earthside environmental conditions. All of these functions will involve human space travelers, and therefore the potential for accidents to them. Any of the stations, any rockets taking off from Earth, and any craft to the Moon could encounter debris fragments of various sizes, perhaps in large quantity and at significant velocities. Collisions of these stations with existing space debris could give rise to further fragments of various sizes and velocities. The issues of space debris stretch the meanings of “international” and “interplanetary” because the parties responsible for stations are in some cases nation-states, and in other cases commercial businesses. Space debris emerges early as an interplanetary problem in need of a broad approach to governance and regulation.

Let us consider NASA’s Gateway station, which will orbit Earth’s Moon, around 240,000 miles (384,000 km) away from Earth. It will have a highly elliptical orbit around the Moon’s poles. At Gateway’s closest approach, it will come within 1,000 miles (1,500 km) of the Moon’s surface, and when farthest, it will be 43,500 miles (70,000 km) away from the Moon. This elliptical orbit will give it access to the entirety of the Moon’s surface and supply uninterrupted communications between the Moon and the Earth. This will allow Gateway space station, whether manned or not, to support crewed missions to the lunar surface or deep space missions for scientific research of that environment. Gateway’s orbit, which will take it around the Moon about every 6.5 days, will be very stable and therefore efficient in the use of energy. A lunar satellite in the Lagrange L3 position will also be highly efficient, and it, too, will be in continuous communication with any position on the lunar surface or on Earth, via Gateway. It is essential that all positions on the lunar surface be in uninterrupted communications with Earth, for safety of lunar crew and for the goal of mission success.

The importance of the Gateway station cannot be underestimated [4]. It has a variety of purposes, including: constant communications between the Moon and Earth; a way-stop for lunar landings so that spacecraft can more easily take an oblique, gliding path to land on the Moon’s airless surface; and facilitation of deep space research in a variety of ways, because of Gateway’s position at certain times in its orbit is outside the Earth’s magnetosphere. The mission-critical functions of Gateway underscore the need to get orbital debris – even as far out as the Moon – under control for the safety of spacecraft, and the protection of functions that could support life on Earth or in Near Earth space. If Gateway has a collision with space debris, there are both civilian and military activities that could be significantly affected, not to mention research on Gateway in space medicine and other fields. Spacecraft will use Gateway, as well as the lunar surface, to support construction projects of giant spacecraft at the Lagrange points. The spacecraft will take crew to the Outer Planets and eventually to other solar systems.

As we can see, the issue of space debris could come to impact life on Earth through communications, signal verification, encryption, and potentially in relation to rescue and recovery missions, and future spacefaring that supports civilian uses of space on new orbital stations. The heightened use of cislunar space will, itself, increase the dangers of both old and new space debris from rocket boosters, satellites, and space stations. This is not a problem for Gateway alone, but also for ESA (European Space Agency) and other nation-state space programs that support Chinese, Russian, and new Indian space stations. Coordination of space debris governance quickly becomes an international challenge, one that requires a new “cosmopolitanism” that overlooks international relations on Earth and seeks to achieve the safety of all people and all parties off the Earth, and early [5].

Governance of cislunar debris mitigation represents a difficult set of issues because of possible financial obligations, imposed standards, rules for handling waste, specified equipment to use, and protocols if there are accidents. For example, existing capacities for rescue and recovery are limited, and the inter-organizational protocols are not yet fully developed and coordinated, although the Artemis Accords have established their need.

A variety of organizations are stepping forward to conceptualize needed steps, such as the Space Generation Advisory Council [6]. SGAC is helping to outline economic, legal, and political challenges. Nation-state agencies are beginning to establish standards. For example, beginning in 2024, a US satellite that is launched into Earth orbit is required by the US Federal Communications Commission to be removed from orbit within five years of its mission end. It can be removed by being pushed down to burn up in the Earth’s atmosphere or pushed up into a “graveyard orbit”. Continuing innovation in technologies is essential to achieve the removal of spent or unused satellites. For example, removing the myriads of tiny fragments from cislunar space will be a difficult challenge. Once developed and tested, technologies then need to be vetted by the parties responsible for maintaining the cislunar space environment.

The year 2025 brings a particularly relevant study on the effects of global warming on satellite carrying capacity of the Earth. As reported in the MIT News, “climate change will reduce the number of satellites that can safely orbit in space” [7]. In research supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation, the U.S. Air Force, and the U.K. Natural Environment Research Council, researchers Parker, Brown, and Linares [8] found that as the Earth’s lower atmosphere warms, the outer atmosphere cools. The result is that satellites will less easily be dragged down by a thinner Earth’s atmosphere and so be burned up and cleared out of their orbital shells. These findings represent another challenge for efforts to manage satellite space debris.

Since 2023, the European Space Agency has provided a governance model with respect to debris mitigation, specifically for ESA space missions. In 2023, ESA published online, “New Space Debris Mitigation Policy and Requirements in effect” [9]. ESA’s updated Policy and Requirements will reduce the amount of space debris generated by ESA activities. The governance structure includes a Space Debris Mitigation Assessment Board that advises ESA’s Director General. These provisions represent the Agency’s first stage toward making the goal of a Zero Debris Charter a reality [10].

This set of policies, rules and regulations, mission statement, and a set of working procedures, as well as an administrative structure, together represent an early, workable Governance Structure to manage space debris, both existing and in the future. Can it be replicated more widely toward an effective program to remove space debris?

There is a growing recognition that coordination of commercial companies and space stations, nation-state space programs, and mitigation of a variety of debris sizes and types could well be quite complex. It may take a combined approach according to Georgetown University’s student, Jessica Wahl [11]: (1) evaporating small objects using laser radiation; (2) nudging objects into natural disposal orbits using electric propulsion, rocket propulsion, or solar sails; and (3) decelerating debris in near-Earth orbit using groundbased lasers, inflatable braking devices (IBDs), or maneuverable vehicles to propel objects into denser layers of the atmosphere where they burn up on re-entry to Earth’s atmosphere.

We ask: Who will take the lead internationally? What set of incentives and dis-incentives can bolster policies and be realistically administered for diverse spacecraft and space stations, and for commercial and nation-state programs? What types of technological innovations are most needed? How can a single evaluation capacity be administered to review new technologies as they come online? Will a new cosmopolitanism be available to moderate disgruntled sentiments about the imposition of membership dues, fees, or taxes? These are some of the challenges awaiting us in this New Space era.

11) Wahl, Jessica. n.d. Active Debris Removal: It’s Complicated. Georgetown University Space Initiative, see https://www.guspaceinitiative.org/contentmaster