E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Electro Optic Systems / AFP - Getty Images
An image created by Australia's Electro Optic Systems (EOS) aerospace company shows a view of the Earth from geostationary height depicting swarms of space debris -- approximately 50,000 of the half-million or more debris objects greater than 1cm -- in Low Earth Orbit (LEO).
Japan's space agency is reportedly teaming up with a fishing net manufacturer to catch and remove debris from Earth orbit, where it poses a threat to spacecraft, astronauts and satellites.
The space fishing net would span several kilometers and be made of thin metal wires. As it scoops up space debris, it will be charged with electricity, allowing Earth's magnetic field to reel in the haul and eventually burn it up in Earth's atmosphere, The Telegraph reports.
"You've got a charged object moving in a magnetic field. By the laws of physics, you are going to have a force, which is going to change its orbit," Brian Weeden, a former U.S. Air Force orbital analyst who is now a technical advisor for the Secure World Foundation, explained to me today.
Though Weeden is not familiar with the specifics of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency's fishing net plan, the space debris expert said the concept fits in with a class of ideas under consideration to remove junk from space.
A key innovation of the JAXA concept, he noted, is that it "solves the fuel problem. You don't have to carry fuel onboard; you just have to have a way of generating electricity, which you can do at those altitudes with solar panels."
Space junk threat
The threat space debris poses to human operations in space is steadily increasing. Both the International Space Station and space shuttle have been forced to dodge space debris in the past. A collision between a Russian and U.S. satellite in 2009 underscored the need for effective ways to clean up space.
The Secure World Foundation's Space Security 2010 report made space debris a top concern. Currently, the U.S. military is tracking 21,000 known objects bigger than 10 centimeters in Earth orbit. Of those, only about 1,000 are working satellites. The rest are dead satellites, rocket parts and other pieces of junk.
This space junk is large enough to destroy whatever it hits, according to Weeden. Another 300,000 or so pieces between one and ten centimeters wide are known to exist, but aren't routinely tracked. Most of this stuff, big and small, is in orbit with functioning satellites and other spacecraft.
"It's where the activity is because it’s a result of all the activity. That's really the problem," Weeden said. The fishing net concept and other ideas are the first concerted efforts at removing this hazardous junk.
Removing space debris
To get the stuff, scientists and engineers need to figure out how to actually catch it. These pieces could be spinning out of control, and may be vulnerable to disintegration with a mere touch, due to years of radiation exposure. Some potentially could be filled with unused rocket fuel that could cause an explosion.
This makes grabbing it with a mechanical arm, for example, difficult if not impossible. "Let's say the piece of debris is spinning. Well then you've got to first de-spin it, otherwise it is just going to rip the arm right off," Weeden said.
The space fishing net that JAXA is developing with Nitto Seimo Co is one way to solve the problem of catching the debris, he added. Other concepts include spacecraft that attach themselves to debris and then de-orbit it into Earth's atmosphere with the aid, for example, of a solar sail.
Funding and legal questions
Most of the concepts, at this point, are early in the planning stage, noted Weeden. Nothing has yet been flown and flight tested. "The other big question is who pays for it," he said. "The economic question is a big issue and it is tied into some of the legal and policy questions."
For one, whoever launched the satellite owns it. It's essentially sovereign territory. So if, for example, a French cleanup mission scoops up a Russian-made piece of debris, there's a legal question concerning breach of national sovereignty.
Legal issues aside, policy experts are floating some ideas on paying the clean-up bill. One under consideration is an account along the lines of the Superfund, which is used to clean-up hazardous waste sites in the U.S. Another is a deposit program similar to that used in some states when consumers pick up a six-pack of soda or beer.
"You put your ten-cent deposit down — though it will likely be a lot bigger than that — when you launch the satellite, and you get it back when it is no longer in orbit," Weeden said.
Whatever technology is eventually used — and whoever ends up paying for it — clean-up needs to start by 2020 to "have a fairly significant impact in terms of making things safer in orbit," he added.
More stories on space debris:
- Space junk buzzes station as astronauts sleep
- Space shuttle moves to avoid space junk
- Solar sails could clean up space junk
- A close one for the space station
- Satellite collision could pose space threat
John Roach is a contributing writer for msnbc.com. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by hitting the "like" button on the Cosmic Log Facebook page or following msnbc.com's science editor, Alan Boyle, on Twitter (@b0yle).
Leave a Comment:
My question is: Wouldn't a spinning piece of space debris still need to be "de-spun" before it is caught in the Japanese space net? Otherwise wouldn't the net perhaps catch on the debris and spin up and reel in and therefore be very inefficient, unable to catch any other debris on that mission?
On the superfund note, I live in Washington state and Hanford Nuclear site is a recipient of superfund money. I can tell you right now that there just isn't enough money to clean up some of these things. Even as a superfund recipient Hanford will still be a mess until the latter half of this century. Some projects require (in my opinion) a "super superfund". Cleaning up the space debris will be a very difficult and very expensive undertaking. Frankly, I'm just glad that it's getting some attention.
Hey MB,
I've been wondering when this was going to happen... for years I've thought it is inevitable.... we'll be moving more and more into space, and especially going to the moon (reference discoveries of Helium3 on the moon and it's uses, etc...) and this would necessitate clear shipping lanes so to speak....
Looking at that picture above, and realizing it's probably much worse than that indicates, you have to figure that someone is going to have to clean the pool before we can go swimming in it...
I always envisioned more of a giant Hoover vacuum, or a large magnet like they have at scrap metal yards, just sucking everything up.... a net seems fragile to me... but better a REAL net, then a hypothetical magnet/vacuum... so...Domo Arigato Japan.
Hiya V, let us also not forget that in our rush to exploit the possible resources of the Moon we must also refine our current tech and even come up with all new methods for launching our "space shipping vehicles". Otherwise we will only add to the swarm of junk that is in orbit.
That kinda leads me to think that whoever stands to use the "shipping lanes" should be responsible for cleaning it up. That includes all of the current and future government space agencies as well as all current and future private companies. If you plan on putting a ship through there one can think of it as insurance to keep that area clean.
As human beings we are inherently messy folks. But I feel we can clean up our act with a little ingenuity and creative designs, much like your scrap yard magnet and vacuum idea. Although, if I recall a vacuum as it works on Earth relies on sucking air in and the mess comes with it. That wouldn't work in space so some other mechanism of "suction" would be needed.
"My question is: Wouldn't a spinning piece of space debris still need to be "de-spun" before it is caught in the Japanese space net?" Not necessarily. It would depend on the weave (distance between the fires or fibers in the web), strengthof the fibers and elasticity of same. In some cases, spinning could cause the debris to make a small cocoon, trapping it. The mass of the individual objects is more of a problem. A hammer for example was lost on a space walk years ago. That will not cause quite as big a problem as a burnt out booster. ======But your question is wrong. Let me explain and digress. Each and every item was put up by a sovereign nation, whether extant or defunct. In the case of a defunct nation, some entity will exist that will keep a claim on it {Example : USSR is defunct, but Russia will claim ownership}. A nonfunctional reconnaissance satellite would be an intelligence agencies wet dream. It would show extant technology, sophistication, metallurgy, encryption, limitations, optics, communications,..... Would the nation that sent up said object want it to be harvested, if you will? Or would it claim rights of ownership, for reasons of national security, sovereignty, diplomatic immunity, "fill in the blank"? I leave you with some web sites to peruse {that does not mean scan. Peruse : to read completely and thoroughly=======http://w3.thekgb.com/dante/military/mission.html===http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jennifer.htm==========http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_K-129_(1960)=======
I find this amusing since there are people starving all over world, oppression, ecosystem degradation, a global climate crisis... and they want to create a net.. to clean up space debris... talk about priorities.
Lets look at the facts,
I agree with your assessment of the space net. I think it would be effective as long as it is manufactured correctly.
Although I disagree with your concept of a nation laying claim on a defunct satellite. First, any non-functioning satellite is going to be at least a generation old technology. There won't be anything to reverse engineer, and there won't be any stored data that could be extracted for intelligence purposes. Every nation that puts a satellite into orbit knows full well they won't be retrieving it. Second, any nation that has the capability and funds to catch space junk is already too far advanced to worry about a 20 year old piece of technology.
V,
I think your magnetic idea could work as well. Although if the netting the Japanese might send up be electrically charged, it might also be magnetically charged.
On a side note, I think the countries that are responsible for filling the Earth's orbit with space junk should foot the bill. This is certainly something that will have to be dealt with eventually. After all, space is the final frontier.
300,000 or so pieces are known to exist? And were just now trying to figure out how to clean it up? This should have been done from day one! "Give a hoot, don't pollute" your mother Earth or the space that surrounds her.
A. Rose - People are starving all over this planet because our population here is growing too much. Therefore, space travel research (and clearing the debris so we can safely get into space) has to be made a priority so that we can, at some point, get to and colonize new planets.
Ryan2, First : "I think your magnetic idea could work as well. Although if the netting the Japanese might send up be electrically charged, it might also be magnetically charged."=====Electromagnetism is one of the Four Fundamental Forces of Nature {Along with the Strong Nuclear Force (Which holds subatomic particles together), the Weak Nuclear Force (Which is radiation and other effects to long for this column), and Gravity (Which is the longest range, and weakest of all of them)}. =====Second. A lot of those items might be 20 years old, but reread the history of when "lost items" have been discovered. A while back, an old Spanish galleonwas found with its cargo of gold. It started of a firestorm of who owned it, Spain (who made the ship), Peru (where the gold was mined), The country where the ship was found, which I can't remember [But they stuck a navy frigate on top of it], or the divers from the US who found it and got the job to salvage it. The salvage crew was to get 50% and they paid for the salvage equipment. They got less then 1%, and were stiffed for everything they paid for. They did almost all the work, put up most of the collateral, and lost everything. Now, look at what the Russians did when they found one of their "old " nuclear subs foundered and was going to be "rescued" by the US. Can you say "Depth Charged to Oblivion?"
IDK.....seems like I keep hearing about how scientists are trying to come up with ways of sending heavy metals, building supplies, etc. to the moon, but the costs of hauling anything heavy out of atmo is $$$$$.
I don't get why we don't "recycle" the debis.....on the moon. How much precious metal, gold, copper, etc...are invested in these old satellites? Maybe NASA should develop 2nd stage boosters to be reused as componants for storage or housing on the moon, for one example.
While I agree, we have so many problems here on earth...it does seem frivilous to invest in space exploration...however, NASA have developed more technology for the improvement of all, I would think it would be counter productive to hobble the one remaining scientific institution that actually produces results.
One a darker note:
The moon is a vantage point from which the whole world could be held hostage.....that's one of the reasons we busted out fannies to get there. SO if we are spending all that money to try to get building materials up there, why not start with what we have out there..in space.
The Japanese idea of netting the debris and having it burn up in the atmosphere leaves me with a chilling thought: the gas emisions resulting from that process (remember chemistry 101 - nothing is destroyed, it only alters its form) could possibly do more harm to our fragile ozone layer and result in huge holes where the sun's radiation could pour in unfiltered.
We have no idea what the composition of much of the debris is, so would have no idea what the possible interactive effects the resulting off-gassing will have on our atmosphere.
Unfortunately you cannot use a giant vacuum cleaner to suck this stuff up, V.. Suction requires a pressure imbalance between 2 points in order to force an object to move. Without liquid or gas in space it's not possible.
For those who think we should knock off all this nonsense in space and focus on wiping out poverty or fixing our ecosystem, don't hold your breath. Countries have been "working" on these issues for centuries, long before space exploration was available to be used as a scape goat on why they ain't fixed yet. Throw as many billions of dollars at these issues as you like and it will do absolutely no good till the politicians quit fighting over who has the right plan to solve it. Shall we instead give each person in the country that subsists below the poverty level a million dollars so they can get their lives back together? Do that and you will find within days that the price for a gallon of milk just rose to $500 and a carton of eggs to $1000.
Thanks, non-christian/ non-muslim. Miracles do still occur, I finally read an intelligent response to a very self-absorbed activity.
We know exactly what the composition is of the space debris. We put it there.
Also much the junk would probably burn up in the Mesosphere or Thermosphere. About 90% of our ozone is found in the Stratosphere which is below the previously mentioned.
Does anyone remember the TV show "Quark"?
It was a silly satire of Star Trek but their ship was an intergalactic garbage truck that retrieved giant space trash bags and carried them to nearby stars (suns) and propelled them into their gravitational pull to be burned up.
Funny how an idea that was silly humor in the 70s it starting to make sense today,
Why de-orbit it? I am sure there is so much precious metal used in these remnants that a salvage operation would be more suitable.
As to ownership, if they (the owner) cant control it, treat it under the same rules as the law of the sea, salvers rights, if the salvage company can bring it under control in any way then they own it (or get Lloyds to pay market value)
I agree it makes more sense to use what we can, but that would mean repurposing all of that material (after you catch it an corral it all somehow). so, once you've got a decent load then you have to either use what you can or melt it down (that's a new tech we need in space) and make new components. And on top of all that there is the effect of being exposed to radiation for so long. Lot's to take into consideration but I think it's worth looking into, definitely.
The cost and resources needed to recycle this junk would cost more than the value of the precious metals.
True, Robin. It would be expensive to start for sure. And I haven't done any cost evaluation of any such project. But one would have to take into consideration also the amount it would cost to build a new component here on Earth and launch it into orbit. The advantage with the space junk is that it is already in orbit. Clearly there will be prohibitive startup costs but as a means to cleaning up the junk I think it's a valid strategy for certain items.
Maybe the Japanese should try cleaning up their own country first... While Tokyo itself may look spotless, try visiting a beach sometime, or the new national garbage dump...Mt. Fuji. Drivers are always throwing stuff out their windows, especially smokers who seem to have special rights to dispose of their cigarettes and wrappers that way.
Skeptic, littering is a problem around the world. What you described, drivers throwing trash out the window and smokers never fielding their butts is common place. I know I see it all the time. When I was seventeen I got a job with the Ecology Youth Corps picking up litter along side state highways here in Washington State. It's a beautiful state with lots to see and if you ever pull over on the highway you'll notice something that may not jump out at you when you're going 70 mph. There are TONS upon TONS of trash out there, and even with adopt-a-highways, ecology groups, and work-release folks from the jails out there cleaning it up it barely makes a dent.
Cleaning up our own act is an important goal. But it is NOT an either/or kind of thing. You want to prioritize these things but they can be tackled simultaneously. And it's not like you are ever going to "clean up your own country first" as if you can clean it up and be done with it. It is an on-going thing that needs to be accompanied with raising awareness about the effects of litter, and making it easier to not litter (more garbage cans, more recycling bins, more butt trays, etc.) You need a multi-pronged attack to clean up your act. It not as simple as it may sound.
The problem is velocity - way too much velocity.
Imagine that you are in a truck that is designed to catch a car. (I'm supposing that the car is the stand-in for space junk, and that our truck is the cleanup machine.) Come to an intersection - your truck is traveling at about 65 mph (~100 kph), and your target "space junk" car is coming in at a right angle at the same velocity. Your mission is to grab the speeding car in such a way that there is ZERO debris, and such that your truck is not damaged (which would lead to further debris in orbit).
I find it difficult to imagine catching a speeding car with zero debris and zero collateral damage.
Now up the speeds to 18,000 mph / 30,000 kph: catch it if you can, without debris and with no damage to the catching device.
It's hard to exactly match something's orbit, so you may rendezvous and just grab on. It takes a full size rocket to get into a particular orbit; changing orbit after getting there takes a ton more fuel. We could be in a circumstance where we launch just one "sat catcher" per debris target. Ten thousand targets? That would take something on a order of magnitude of 10,000 launches. OUCH!
If the sat catcher is itself damaged in orbit, it's debris contributes to (and worsens) the problem.
Magnets, too, have their limitation - even an extremely powerful magnet is useful at only short range, and then only if in the same orbit.
We've gotten ourselves into a pickle. We are stuck drinking downstream from the herd.
Cheers! ~Michael (AFM*Radio / Astronomy.FM)
If all they need to de orbit the stuff is to charge the particles, I wonder if there is some way that you can use directed energy to polarize stuff so it gets sucked back into the magnetisphere. Dont even know if thats possible or what, seems more slick that a big net though...
I bet Nikola Tesla could come up with a doo dad that could do that. And then his idea could be stolen and profited off of by corporations... oh wait..
I heard of a funny idea once. It's not very economical but it would sure be fun to see happen. The idea is to somehow create a nerf ball about a mile across. That way you basically park a truck in the intersection that is designed to be hit by the car. Problem is it's hard to park in the intersection for a long time. (not to mention you need to make a nerf ball a mile across!)
"It's Nerf or nothin!"
We'd never do anything like this... the GOP wouldn't let us spend the money.... but let's let some Hedge Fund zillionair do it... and let them pay 15% taxes.... typical....
Politics is a joke. Let's not bog this conversation down with GOP vs. DNP.
Japan is coming up with ways to clean up space. This should be a major concern for America as well. There are people in America coming up with ways to alleviate the space junk problem, now lets just get this ball rolling anyway we can, we need to find funding. And if it comes from hedge fund gojillionaires then so be it. Someone stands to make money off the endeavor. Someone always does.
Look at how much this world has been polluted in just over 200 years. Scientist talk about earth in terms of millions of years. Amazing stuff.
I think blasting the stuff with a high powered Laser would be more effective than trying to grab 18000 mph junk without destroying your net. The smaller pieces (coin size) might be caught with a smaller mesh net moving in the same direction, but football size and up??
If you go to Johnson Space center, one of the unique items they bring out every now and then is an old space shuttle windshield with a big chunk right in the middle. It goes over half way through. It was caused by a piece of paint about 1mm across hitting the window. How would you feel if you were sitting in the chair when that happened? Would your life pass in front of you eyes? That glass is REALLY thick, about 1 3/4" front to back. Now imagine, hearing it crack some more, see a small hole form, hear air sucking out the hole, a load "POP" as the window cracks again. A "BANG" as it explodes, followed by silence as the air vanishes, the tempurature suddenly drops, your eyes freeze, you can't scream....
@Facts
Eeeeeesh!
Just out of curiosity, IF the net idea worked, could something similar be done with all the plastic and other junk floating around in the ocean in that one spot that's miles wide and long where the tides tend to deposit even more junk? And IF, it could be gathered up by a humungous net or whatever, could it be shot into space and allowed to fall back into the atomosphere and be destroyed? Inquiring minds and all that jazz...
PS: I know we're talking about a gazillion $$ here; however, IF something could be worked out to clean up space (and the Japanese are apparently working at it) could something similar be done with that place (or places?) in the ocean? Does anyone know if anyone is working on that now? As I said...inquiring minds...
about the ocean net idea, I think you'd kill to many animals in the process and that would cause an uproar with the save-the-whales folks (even though you are trying to clean up the ocean, they seem unwilling to accept any amount of collateral damage).
I think there are certainly better ideas of destroying that garbage than letting it burn up in the atmosphere. Heck if your spending that kind of coin why not just go for broke and send it to be burned in the Sun?
But I know there are people out there working on ways to clean up the oceans. Although it's not a subject I'm too familiar with.
Look out ET!!! You'll get scooped up! Imagine that trophy on the wall...
M B
I like your views on this subject, straight forward and clear thinking... I believe it would be possible to deal with spinning debris using a type of UMV to match rotation, attach, and control the final result ...
As for salvage, yes, radiation is and always the will be the problem, however post radiation in some components could be recycled for future projects ...
I recall about 30 years ago, the talk as to what to do with all the nuclear waste piling up ... Some thought it to be possible to fly into the sun ... Lets not go there !
Using a net should work. Think about it for a moment. If a piece of junk is flying at 18,000 MPH in a clockwise motion around the earth all you would need to do is travel at 18,001 mph clockwise also. You could increase or decrease your speed to match the object you want to capture. The net is to be made of metal and you can bet it will be stronger than steel.
There is a lot of pure gold and gold plated objects flying up there so the operation might pay for itself. If it is not profitable they would only make one trip. Some places make you re-cycle computers and cell-phones now for the gold, so who knows. Besides gold who knows what is also up there, it has to be a light weight metal and/or plastic.
Hi Dave!
And that is all true. One net from one rocket launch - cost about $200 million to capture one object. BUT, then what? Changing orbit is very hard. For example, when the Space Shuttle recently serviced the Hubble Space Telescope, the Shuttle could not change its orbit to go to the Space Station in case of emergency. The amount of energy required to make that orbital change is way beyond the fuel capacity of a Shuttle.
The net idea that is being bounced around currently could capture one object, but could it then capture any more? Changing orbits to grab a 2nd object is problematic. Even if each Space Net could capture two or three more items, that is hardly a dent in the size of the problem - 10,000 bits of trackable space junk. IF each Space Net can capture 10 items of space junk (which would be very difficult), and if we wish to reduce the population of debris by only 10%, we would need 100 rocket launches; wow. Huge cost for a 10% reduction.
I'm not saying that the problem of mitigating space trash is impossible - it's just really really hard to make headway (and it's really expensive). Given that the cost of one cleanup mission is roughly similar to the cost of just putting up a new satellite, I'm afraid that it will be cheaper to just send up a replacement, rather than to minimize the threat.
Someday there will be SO much junk up there that replacement won't be an option, but then cleanup will be a problem of unreal magnitude.
Cheers! ~Michael (AFM*Radio / Astronomy.FM)
Michael, I totally agree with you on the cost of the thing being done would be huge. But they are talking a net that is several Kilometers wide so they would not be picking up just one object at a time I would have to imagine.
There is so much junk up there now that they had to do maneuvers with the space station several months ago, if I remember correctly, to miss being hit. I have an idea that it will have to be done sooner not later.
But in any case I do wish them the best of luck on their endeavor, it will need to be done one way or the other.
Dave, I've given my earlier answer (and your comments) more thought. My concern has been orbital maneuverability, getting to target #2 after snagging item #1. I think that I've been too hung up on the orbital capabilities that we've had thus far. Catching space trash presents a whole different set of mission efficiencies; we've not in any particular hurry - it's OK to take pretty much as long as it takes.
So let's make your really big net into a solar sail, using sunlight to oh so slowly alter our orbit as we chase the next target. Or, let's power the sail with ion engines - very low thrust, a very long time to alter orbit, but extremely low propulsion requirements. Heck - perhaps it could even be economically refueled.
So I'm warming up to the idea. It's easy to see the magnitude of the problem. But until now I didn't see much hope for a solution.
Cheers! ~Michael (AFM*Radio / Astronomy.FM)
It's a wonder the ISS and HST avoid that. What is the average distance between objects? I know it looks
like a swarm but there must be 100's of miles between objects.
I worked at Johnson Space Center, at the HITF, Hypervelocity Impact Technology Facility..... Let me just say, that I have seen some of these impacts from MMOD Micrometeroid Orbital Debris.... I have to agree with Michael and yourself.....The velocities are to high..... I don't believe we have the material, nor the technology to clean this problem up.... But I just wanted to inform you of your Glass analogy... The windows are placed doubled up.... So the crack would of never made it to the pressure hub on that particular impact... But as well as there is no oxygen in space, so you could not hear a pop... Everything is in a vacuum... So its really dead silence.... Interesting huh.... Check out www.hitf.com or www.hvis.com... Great information on this subject is to be found!
The motto of NASA's Hypervelocity Impact Technology Facility should be, "HVIT - when a bullet is just too damn slow."
Big E - the web links you provide don't go anywhere. May I suggest:
http://ares.jsc.nasa.gov/ares/hvit/index.cfm
Thanks!
Big E-2633412, Remember who was on that mission, and what was on the after action report? Bet it was "interesting."
Think I found it.===http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/podcasting/nasa360/nasa360-0213.html=====
Karen: Well, you've got a more abundant amount of these small projectiles, and because you can't track it, if it impacts the astronaut's space suit or even a shuttle glass window, the damage varies, and so that's why we do a variety of testing. There's a paint fleck that once impacted the window on the shuttle, and it created some damage to it, and then the question being, of course, you've got a vacuum in space, and how does that compromise the material properties of that piece of glass once it's been impacted? =========http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19950019959_1995119959.pdf=====Orbital impacts and the Space Shuttle Windshield by Karen S. Edelstein.
If we are going to have a future in space, and I hope we do, this issue needs to be addressed, the sooner the better. The problems with velocity and spin seem to make physical contact with the debris impractical. I think something remotely controlled like an electromagnetic device or maybe laser blasting would be more effective. At least someone is taking steps to do something other than just talk about it. Had to laugh at the Tesla reference from the comments. I would put him above Einstein in the pantheon of scientific genius.
good idea, space debris is a serious hazard to space travel.
Instead of using a fishing net to catch debri, why not use some sort of high powered lasers, seems like one mistake with the net and it too will become debri floating around the Earth, need a different idea, that is not realistic to use a net and try and catch something moving at thousands of MPH.
Dangit this is supposed to be my retirement job in 30 years when space travel is common. Curse the Japanese and their vision and technology!!
Good, fish for space debris and leave the whales and sharks alone.
Good reading from the bloggers, I like the humorous ones too.
OK, the space capable countries should pay to clean-up their mess, mostly US and USSR, and thanks to the Japanese for starting the media introduction to the problem that will plague the future of any countries attempt to be a space nation. AS far as the big-stuff, each country with satellites (working or not) should label and inform the 'space bureau clean-up' comity which ones to leave alone, just to begin with; and remember, all countries were given sovereignty of their geosynchronous territory over their individual country's earth borders and some private corporations have purchased a lease(?) from those countries, so legally speaking do the corps. still pay the lease when the satellite is no longer functioning? Can the 'World Space Cleaning Enterprise' remove by any means the defunct satellite and debris over those non-space capable countries?
I agree we (humans) should collectively clean the ocean junk first, a simple method would involve carrying shrimp boats to the pacific with one or two (empty) oil tankers and bring the plastic back for re-cycling.
The charged net idea is a fine one, but it doesn't necessarily mean the collected junk would be sent back to earth. We could send it to the Van Allen Belt for future earthlings to study and marvel at how ingenious the 'primitive' space age began. Let's face it, even having to worry about a 'space junk' problem says much about the drive for knowledge and exploration we exhibit as a collective species.
"Profoundly Incredible Lunar Landing" et al.
http://www.voicesnet.org/displayonepoem.aspx?poemid=144306
The Japanese idea of netting the debris and having it burn up in the atmosphere leaves me with a chilling thought: the gas emisions resulting from that process (remember chemistry 101 - nothing is destroyed, it only alters its form) could possibly do more harm to our fragile ozone layer and result in huge holes where the sun's radiation could pour in unfiltered.
We have no idea what the composition of much of the debris is, so would have no idea what the possible interactive effects the resulting off-gassing will have on our atmosphere.
My thought is that the net's elasticity would in effect capture an object that is moving faster than the net. After capture then the net would flex at the impact site, slow the object down, hopefully wrap around the object so it would not bounce back in the other direction of the net. Much like a drop hitting water with a slow motion camera, the Japanese might actually be on to something.
My other thoughts are; that if said object(s) puncture the net, these would have slowed down based on their inertia-speed, mass and/or the strength/elasticity of the net. By slowing down these objects, they may be pulled into the Earth's gravity and then be consumed by the atmosphere. Perhaps placing several nets one behind the other all travelling together in the same direction would be able to sweep up & absorb these chunks of debris that are travelling at different speeds and or directions. After capture, then the nets would have to be pulled away from orbit with a hook, and perhaps be stored at the legrange point in space for future harvest? Maybe this Japanese net technology could also be used for the capture of near earth objects that pose a future danger to the Earth?
Hey I have a novel Idea? WHY PUT THE SH*& UP THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!! We the human race will self destruck shortly. Who needs the taliban to destroy us we can do it ourselves. We leave junk all over the place, the ocean, the air we breath, Mt everest, earth, now space and some suggestions are to colonize the moon!!!! WTF we will destroy that too!!!
I would be really pissed off if was the creator, hey maybe why all the nasty weather....
Wow and another thing if are so smart why didn't we think of space junk in the first place. Oh well we probably did but nobody gave a crap about that!!! Let's look at Mars we left junk there too, the rover is just sitting there now if serves no purpose it is just junk millions and millions of dollars worth of junk.
I am in love of space exploration but lets keep things neat, if we can't we shouldn't do it!!