The Death Star is Dead; Long Live DE-("Life") Star!

[HUMOR]

Citizens for the Death Star, Take Heart: Recycle your plans!

Just last month, the Obama administration rejected calls from 34,435 of its citizens calling for the administration to "Secure resources and funding, and begin construction of a Death Star by 2016," stating that, by "focusing our defense resources into a space-superiority platform and weapon system such as a Death Star, the government can spur job creation in the fields of construction, engineering, space exploration, and more, and strengthen our national defense."

The administration rejected the proposal, partially on expense, but also based on a stated policy that the administration "does not support blowing up planets."

However, it is unclear if the administration pro-planetary rights position extends to asteroids and meteors that threaten Earth.

In light of the recent asteroid close pass, meteor strike over Russia, and Russian calls for a planetary defense system, perhaps these citizens should seek a compromise position.

Certainly, these  34,435 citizens could achieve most of their stated objectives of spurring job construction engineering and space exploration by pursuing Space-Based Solar Power (recommended by the Pentagon itself), building multi-kilometer across giant space stations which send power to Earth via Lasers or Microwaves.  Sure, the capability of lighting a planet through infinite green energy may not be as spectactular or perceived as "cool" as the capability to blow one up, but at least it is still perceived by Chinese space program pioneers such as Prof Wang Xiji as the key to global domination ("Whoever takes the lead in the development and utilization of clean and renewable energy and the space and aviation industry will be the world leader.")

Sure, you'd have to live with the fact that you are doing good instead of evil, but  at least you get the giant space station beaming gigawatts of energy.

Sure, you might not make as many enemies in the process, but at least you could join forces with most American citizens, who, when surveyed by and large favor constructing Space Solar Power Satellites to every other potential space mission (with asteroid defense being #2), and who have separately petitioned the administration to make SBSP part of our space program.

You'd have to scope your ambitions...instead of thousands of years to construct, you'd have to cope with the reality articulated by the International Academy of Astronautics IAA 2011 report that "As of 2010, the fundamental research to achieve technical feasibility for the SPS [solar-power satellites] was already accomplished. Whether it requires 5–10 years or 20–30 years to mature the technologies for economically viable SPS now depends more on the development of appropriate platform systems concepts and the availability of adequate budgets."

Sure, you'd have to bite a really big bullet, because an SBSP program is unfortunately NOT going to cost (errr..inject stimulus dollars) of $850,000 Trillion (Obama administration estimate)...since an individual multi-gigawatt Space Solar Power Satellite only cost in the tens of billions, but at least they would pay-back economically.  And of course it would only take about $10 billion and 10 years to get the first demonstration in operation, and the IAA estimated job creation in the multiple millions.

But if giant multi-gigawatt orbiting power monsters delivering infinite green energy to planet Earth is not a close enough compromise, consider this most recent proposal by the Scientists at UC Santa Barbara might just fit th

e bill! Philip M. Lubin, and Gary B. Hughes are proposing a spaced based laser system 10 kilometers in diameter (about 100 times the size of the ISS) that could deliver 1.4 megatons of energy per day to its target, taking care of a pesky little asteroid like

2012 DA14 in about an hour, or destroy asteroids 10 times larger in about a year, with evaporation starting at a distance as far away as the Sun. Sure, saving a planet isn't destroying one...but at least you get the giant space station and jobs!






From: http://www.ia.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=2943

NEWS RELEASE


California Scientists Propose System to Vaporize Asteroids That Threaten Earth




February 14, 2013

Click for downloadable image Full description below. †



Click for downloadable image Full description below. ††



Click for downloadable image Full description below. †††

(Santa Barbara, Calif.) –– As an asteroid roughly half as large as a football field –– and with energy equal to a large hydrogen bomb –– readies for a fly-by of Earth on Friday, two California scientists are unveiling their proposal for a system that could eliminate a threat of this size in an hour. The same system could destroy asteroids 10 times larger than the one known as 2012 DA14 in about a year, with evaporation starting at a distance as far away as the Sun.


UC Santa Barbara physicist and professor Philip M. Lubin, and Gary B. Hughes, a researcher and professor from California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, conceived DE-STAR, or Directed Energy Solar Targeting of Asteroids an exploRation, as a realistic means of mitigating potential threats posed to the Earth by asteroids and comets.


"We have to come to grips with discussing these issues in a logical and rational way," said Lubin, who began work on DE-STAR a year ago. "We need to be proactive rather than reactive in dealing with threats. Duck and cover is not an option. We can actually do something about it and it's credible to do something. So let's begin along this path. Let's start small and work our way up. There is no need to break the bank to start."


Described as a "directed energy orbital defense system," DE-STAR is designed to harness some of the power of the sun and convert it into a massive phased array of laser beams that can destroy, or evaporate, asteroids posing a potential threat to Earth. It is equally capable of changing an asteroid's orbit –– deflecting it away from Earth, or into the Sun –– and may also prove to be a valuable tool for assessing an asteroid's composition, enabling lucrative, rare-element mining. And it's entirely based on current essential technology.


"This system is not some far-out idea from Star Trek," Hughes said. "All the components of this system pretty much exist today. Maybe not quite at the scale that we'd need –– scaling up would be the challenge –– but the basic elements are all there and ready to go. We just need to put them into a larger system to be effective, and once the system is there, it can do so many things."


The same system has a number of other uses, including aiding in planetary exploration.


In developing the proposal, Lubin and Hughes calculated the requirements and possibilities for DE-STAR systems of several sizes, ranging from a desktop device to one measuring 10 kilometers, or six miles, in diameter. Larger systems were also considered. The larger the system, the greater its capabilities.


For instance, DE-STAR 2 –– at 100 meters in diameter, about the size of the International Space Station –– "could start nudging comets or asteroids out of their orbits," Hughes said. But DE-STAR 4 –– at 10 kilometers in diameter, about 100 times the size of the ISS –– could deliver 1.4 megatons of energy per day to its target, said Lubin, obliterating an asteroid 500 meters across in one year.


The speed of interplanetary travel –– far beyond what is possible with chemical propellant rockets used today –– could be increased with this sized system, according to Lubin. It could also power advanced ion drive systems for deep space travel, he said. Able to engage multiple targets and missions at once, DE-STAR 4 "could simultaneously evaporate an asteroid, determine the composition of another, and propel a spacecraft."


Larger still, DE-STAR 6 could enable interstellar travel by functioning as a massive, orbiting power source and propulsion system for spacecraft. It could propel a 10-ton spacecraft at near the speed of light, allowing interstellar exploration to become a reality without waiting for science fiction technology such as "warp drive" to come along, Lubin said.


"Our proposal assumes a combination of baseline technology –– where we are today –– and where we almost certainly will be in the future, without asking for any miracles," he explained. "We've really tried to temper this with a realistic view of what we can do, and we approached it from that point of view. It does require very careful attention to a number of details, and it does require a will to do so, but it does not require a miracle."


Recent and rapid developments in highly efficient conversion of electrical power to light allow such a scenario now, Lubin said, when just 20 years ago it would not have been realistic to consider.


"These are not just back-of-the-envelope numbers," Hughes concurred. "They are actually based on detailed analysis, through solid calculations, justifying what is possible. And it's all available under current theory and current technology.


"There are large asteroids and comets that cross the Earth's orbit, and some very dangerous ones going to hit the Earth eventually," he added. "Many have hit in the past and many will hit in the future. We should feel compelled to do something about the risk. Realistic solutions need to be considered, and this is definitely one of those."


Three UCSB undergraduate students are assisting Lubin and Hughes with the DE-STAR project: Johanna Bible and Jesse Bublitz, both from the College of Creative Studies, and chemistry major Joshua Arriola.


(172)








[RETURN TO TOP]



† Top image: Concept drawing of the DE-STAR system engaging both an asteroid for evaporation or composition analysis, and simultaneously propelling an interplanetary spacecraft.

Courtesy Philip M. Lubin



†† Middle image: This plot shows time to evaporate an Apophis-like asteroid versus diameter of the asteroid, versus several laser power levels. The baseline DE-STAR 4 system has approximately 100 gigawatts of laser power.

Courtesy Philip M. Lubin



††† Bottom image: This plot shows DE-STAR laser power and spot diameter versus DE-STAR array size. The DE-STAR system is modular and can be built up in sections each of which is immediately operational.

Courtesy Philip M. Lubin



###

So...the Improbable DOES happen!

What an amazing and unprecedented post-Valentine's day surprise!

In the same day that the close approach of 2012 DA14, a 50 meter "city killer" class asteroid, discovered less than one year ago, came zipping by within 27,700 km of the Earth, well inside the band of communications satellites in Geosynchronous orbit, and less than 1/13th the distance to the Moon, there Siberia Russia experienced its second major meteor strike in barely 100 years, and the first-ever meteor strike in the modern era to result in human injuries. Is it wishful thinking that such events might elevate Asteroids in the public discourse and lead to some proactive policymaking?

From: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/russian-city-hit-meteor-1200-people-hurt-18518828

1,200 People injured, 4,000 Buildings damaged, 1 million square feet of glass shattered

Meteor weighed more than Eiffel Tower

From: http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-wn-fg-chelyabinsk-meteor-lessons-20130216,0,4643856.story

"It is high time Russia should start heavily investing in building an advanced space danger monitoring and warning system and above that a system capable of destroying such super bombs falling on us from the skies."

The Chelyabinsk region has long been one of the most important military-industrial regions of Russia, where you "can’t drive a mile without passing a defense or a nuclear industry installation," the scientist said.

"We should be thankful to fate that this meteor in fact was a blessing in disguise and instead of destroying a significant part of Russia with quite dire consequences to the rest of the world, it sent us a clear warning signal by simply blowing up a bunch of windows and lightly injuring over 1,000 people," Lipunov said.

Bagrov spoke in favor of creating an early warning system of satellites monitoring space for signs of approaching danger instead of restoring a global land- and sea-based system. Lipunov argues that a space system would be more expensive and may take a decade to install -- and even then it would not be as reliable as an Earth-based system equipped with powerful telescopes.

Regional Gov. Mikhail Yurevich told reporters Saturday that the material damage to the region already exceeds $33 million. He said that 30% of about 100 square meters of broken windows had already been replaced.

The explosion damaged 3,000 residential houses, 34 hospitals and clinics and 360 schools and kindergartens, as well as several businesses. High school and university students received a day off Saturday. At least three hockey games were canceled because of damage to the local rink.

From: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/02/15/injuries-reported-after-meteorite-falls-in-russia-ural-mountains/

The meteor -- estimated to be about 10 tons and 49 feet wide -- entered the Earth's atmosphere at a hypersonic speed of at least 33,000 mph and shattered into pieces about 18-32 miles above the ground, the Russian Academy of Sciences said in a statement. But even small asteroids pack a tremendous punch, explained Andrew Cheng of the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory. 

"It doesn’t take a very large object. A 10-meter size object already packs the same energy as a nuclear bomb," Cheng, who led a 2000-2001 mission for NASA to orbit and land on an asteroid, told FoxNews.com. 

"There was panic. People had no idea what was happening," said Sergey Hametov, a resident of Chelyabinsk, a city of 1 million about 930 miles east of Moscow.

The meteor hit less than a day before Asteroid 2012 DA14 is to make the closest recorded pass of an asteroid to the Earth for a rock of its size -- about 17,150 miles. But the European Space Agency said its experts had determined there was no connection -- just cosmic coincidence.

The meteor released several kilotons of energy above the region, the Russian science academy said. According to NASA, it was about 15 meters or 49 feet wide before it hit the atmosphere, about one-third the size of the passing asteroid.

Lessons had just started at Chelyabinsk schools when the meteor exploded, and officials said 258 schoolchildren were among those injured. Amateur video footage showed a teacher speaking to her class as a powerful shockwave hit the room.

The site of Friday's spectacular show is about 3,000 miles west of Tunguska, which in 1908 was the site of the largest recorded explosion of a space object plunging to Earth. That blast, attributed to a comet or asteroid fragment, is generally estimated to have been about 10 megatons; it leveled some 80 million trees.

Scientists believe that a far larger meteorite strike on what today is Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula may have been responsible for the extinction of the dinosaurs about 66 million years ago. According to that theory, the impact would have thrown up vast amounts of dust that blanketed the sky for decades and altered the climate on Earth.

The meteor could have produced much more serious problems. Chelyabinsk is an industrial town long held to be one of the world's most polluted areas, and the area around it hosts nuclear and chemical weapons disposal facilities.

Vladimir Chuprov of Greenpeace Russia said the Russian government has underestimated potential risks of the region. He noted that the meteor struck only 60 miles from the Mayak nuclear storage and disposal facility, which holds dozens of tons of weapons-grade plutonium.

A chemical weapons disposal facility at Shchuchye also contains some 6,000 tons of nerve agents, including sarin and VX, about 14 percent of the chemical weapons that Russia is committed to destroy.

Jim Green, NASA's director of planetary science, called the back-to-back celestial events an amazing display.

"This is indeed very rare and it is historic," he said on NASA TV. "These fireballs happen about once a day or so, but we just don't see them because many of them fall over the ocean or in remote areas."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/02/15/injuries-reported-after-meteorite-falls-in-russia-ural-mountains/#ixzz2L5QFgH9U

5 Kt Meteor Blast over California

From: http://www.nationalufocenter.com/artman/publish/article_453.php

NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center and Astrophysical Journal,
 A sonic boom heard in California last week had an out-of-this world origin as ”a large meteoric event” according to NASA’s Meteoroid Environment Office. Scientists now estimate the blast measured in near 5 kilotons or roughly 1/3 the power of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan during World War II. Bill Cooke of the Meteoroid Environment Office at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, estimates the object was about the size of a minivan, and weighed in at around 154,300 pounds.

"Most meteors you see in the night’s sky are the size of tiny stones or even grains of sand and their trail lasts all of a second or two," said Don Yeomans of NASA’s Near-Earth Object Program Office at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. “Large meteors can be seen in the daytime and are many times that size – anywhere from a baseball-sized object to something as big as a minivan.”  The meteor appears to be much more valuable than scientists first thought. Meteorite hunters found fragments of the rock, identified by the "fusion crust" that forms when it burns in the atmosphere. NASA and the SETI Institute in Mountain View, California, also mobilized a search team of about 30 scientists to search for the small black rocks. The meteorite turned out to be a very rare type of rock called CM chondrite, which makes up less than 1 per cent of the meteorites that fall to Earth. According to Bill Cooke of NASA's Meteoroid Environment Office at the Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, it is not clear whether it is rare because it easily burns up in the atmosphere or there are just fewer of these rocks in space.

Japan Nuclear Disaster Provides Impetus for Space Based Solar power

http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-radical-alternative-to-nuclear-reactors

Very Interesting Russian Briefing on a Planetary Defense System

Check out this Russian Briefing:

"CONCEPTUAL, TECHNOLOGICAL AND LEGAL BASES OF CREATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL PLANETARY DEFENSE SYSTEM" called "CITADEL-1"

http://www.tsi.lv/space/SGS1020_221%20-%2005.07.10/Adushkin/IAA-RACT%20C2%20S3-03.pdf

Clearly a serious effort, considering who was involved:

 1-Institute of Geosphere Dynamics of RAS, Moscow, Russia
V. V. Adushkin (marina.idgran@gmail.com)
A. V. Vityazev

2-Russian Federal Space Agency, Moscow, Russia
D. V. Gorobets (gorobets@roscosmos.ru)

3-Planetary Defense Center, Khimki, Russia
A. V. Zaitsev (pdc@berc.rssi.ru)
A. A. Кlapovsky

4-Yuzhnoye SDO, Dniepropetrovsk, Ukraine
N. N. Slyunyayev (info@yuzhnoye.com)
S. N. Konyukhov

5-Russian Academy of Cosmonautics by K.E. Tsiolkovsky, Moscow, Russia
A. S. Koroteev (ruac@list.ru)
B. A. Liaschuk

6-Working group of the RAS “Risks and safety”, Moscow, Russia

N. A. Makhutov (kei51@mail.ru)

7-Maximov Space Systems Research Institute, Yubileiny city, Russia
V. A. Menshikov (niiks@khrunichev.com)

8-Russian Federal Nuclear Center (RFNC–VNIITF), Snezhinsk, Russia
D. V. Petrov
V. A. Simonenko (v.a.simonenko@vniitf.ru)
O. N. Shubin

9-The Ministry of Emergency Situations, Moscow, Russia
A. A. Taranov (aataranov@mail.ru)
V. A. Puchkov

10-4-th Central Scientific-Research Institute of Ministry of Defense of RF, Yubilejny, Russia.
B. I. Semyonov

11-Institute of Applied Astronomy RAS, St.Petersburg, Russia

V. A. Shor (shor@ipa.nw.ru )

Full NRC Report! Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies: Final Report

Above are the links for both the Interim and the Just-Released Final Report.  Here are the Findings and Recommendations of the Final Report:

• Finding: Congress has mandated that NASA discover 90 percent of all near-Earth objects 140 meters in diameter or greater by 2020. The administration has not requested and Congress has not appropriated new funds to meet this objective. Only limited facilities are currently involved in this survey/discovery effort, funded by NASA’s existing budget.
• Finding: The current near-Earth object surveys cannot meet the goals of the 2005 George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act directing NASA to discover 90 percent of all near-Earth objects 140 meters in diameter or greater by 2020.
• Finding: The selected approach to completing the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey will depend on nonscientific factors:
• If completion of the survey as close to the original 2020 deadline as possible is considered most important, a space mission conducted in concert with observations using a suitable ground-based telescope and selected by peer-reviewed competition is the best approach.
• This combination could complete the survey well before 2030, perhaps as early as 2022 if funding were appropriated quickly.
• If cost conservation is deemed most important, the use of a large ground-based telescope is the best approach. Under this option, the survey could not be completed by the original 2020 deadline, but could be completed before 2030. To achieve the intended cost effectiveness, the funding to construct the telescope must come largely on the basis of non-NEO programs.
• Recommendation: Because recent studies of meteor airbursts have suggested that near-Earth objects as small as 30 to 50 meters in diameter could be highly destructive, surveys should attempt to detect as many 30- to 50-meter objects as possible. This search for smaller-diameter objects should not be allowed to interfere with the survey for objects 140-meters in diameter or greater.
• Finding: The Arecibo and Goldstone radar systems play a unique role in the characterization of NEOs, providing unmatched accuracy in orbit determination, and insight into size, shape, surface structure, and other properties for objects within their latitude coverage and detection range.
• Recommendation: Immediate action is required to ensure the continued operation of the Arecibo Observatory at a level sufficient to maintain and staff the radar facility. Additionally, NASA and NSF should support a vigorous program of radar observations of NEOs at Arecibo and NASA should support such a program at Goldstone for orbit determination and characterization of physical properties.
• Recommendation: The United States should initiate a peer-reviewed, targeted research program in the area of impact hazard and mitigation of NEOs. Because this is a policy driven, applied program, it should not be in competition with basic scientific research programs or funded from them. This research program should encompass three principal task areas: surveys, characterization, and mitigation. The scope should include analysis, simulation, and laboratory experiments. This research program does not include mitigation space experiments or tests which are treated elsewhere in this report.
• Recommendation: The United States should take the lead in organizing and empowering a suitable international entity to participate in developing a detailed plan for dealing with the NEO hazard.
• Recommendation: Data from NEO airburst events observed by the U.S. Department of Defense satellites should be made available to the scientific community to allow it to improve understanding of the NEO hazards to Earth.
• -----------------
• Finding: The mandated survey to locate 90 percent of near-Earth objects 140-meters in diameter or greater has not yet been funded by the federal government. Because the survey requires several years to budget and build new equipment, and then to conduct the search, completion by 2020 is not realistic.
• Finding: The selected approach to completing the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey will depend on nonscientific factors:
• • If completion of the survey as close to the original 2020 deadline as possible is considered most important, a space mission conducted in concert with observations using a suitable ground-based telescope and selected by peer-reviewed competition is the best approach. This combination could complete the survey well before 2030, perhaps as early as 2022 if funding were appropriated quickly.
• • If cost conservation is deemed most important, the use of a large ground-based telescope is the best approach. Under this option, the survey could not be completed by the original 2020 deadline, but could be completed before 2030. To achieve the intended cost-effectiveness, the funding to construct the telescope must come largely on the basis of non-NEO programs.
• Finding: It is highly probable that the next destructive NEO event will be an airburst from a <50- meter object, not a crater-forming impact.
• Recommendation: Because recent studies of meteor airbursts have suggested that near-Earth objects as small as 30 to 50 meters in diameter could be highly destructive, surveys should attempt to detect as many 30- to 50-meter objects as possible. This search for smaller-diameter objects should not be allowed to interfere with the survey for objects 140-meters in diameter or greater.
• Finding: The best opportunities for physical characterization of most NEOs occur during close Earth approaches when these objects are optically bright. Existing programs of ground-based optical observations for characterization of NEOs are few in number, and are not coordinated among different observing teams. Many observable NEOs are not characterized.
• Finding: The capabilities of Arecibo and Goldstone are complementary and many observing campaigns have utilized their synergy. One of the primary advantages of having two radar facilities is that one can serve as a backup for the other.
• Finding: The number of NEOs observed by radar per year could be increased about fivefold by obtaining sufficient observing time.
• Finding: Radar cannot be used to discover NEOs, but is a powerful tool for rapidly improving our knowledge of the orbit of a newly found object, and thus characterizing its potential hazard to Earth.
• Finding: The Arecibo and Goldstone radar systems play a unique role in the characterization of NEOs, providing unmatched accuracy in orbit determination, and insight into size, shape, surface structure, and other properties for objects within their latitude coverage and detection range.
• Finding: Congress has directed NASA to ensure that Arecibo is available for radar observations, but has not appropriated funds for this work.
• Recommendation: Immediate action is required to ensure the continued operation of the Arecibo Observatory at a level sufficient to maintain and staff the radar facility. Additionally, NASA and NSF should support a vigorous program of radar observations of NEOs at Arecibo and NASA should support such a program at Goldstone for orbit determination and characterization of physical properties.
• Finding: U.S. Department of Defense satellites have detected and continue to detect high-altitude airburst events from NEOs entering Earth’s atmosphere. Such data are valuable to the NEO community for assessing NEO hazards.
• Recommendation: Data from NEO airburst events observed by the U.S. Department of Defense satellites should be made available to the scientific community to allow it to improve understanding of the NEO hazards to Earth.
• Finding: Preliminary theoretical studies on low-altitude atmospheric Tunguska-like airbursts from asteroids as small as 30 meters in diameter suggest significant risk exists from these NEOs.
• Finding: Current models for generation of tsunamis by impacts into, or airbursts above, the ocean are not yet sufficiently reliable to establish threat levels to coastal communities.
• Recommendation: Additional observations and modeling should be performed to establish the risk associated with airbursts and with potential tsunami generation.
• Finding: Dedicated flyby spacecraft missions to NEOs provide only limited information relevant for hazard mitigation issues.
• Finding: Rendezvous spacecraft missions can provide detailed characterization of NEOs that could aid in the design and development of hazard-mitigation techniques. Such in situ characterization also allows calibration of ground- and space-based remote sensing data and may permit increased confidence in the use of remote classification of NEOs to inform future mitigation decisions.
• Recommendation: If NASA conducts human missions to NEOs, these missions should maximize the data obtained for NEO characterization.
• Finding: No single approach to mitigation is appropriate and adequate to fully prevent the effects of the full range of potential impactors, although civil defense is an appropriate component of mitigation in all cases. With adequate warning, a suite of four types of mitigation is adequate to mitigate the threat from nearly all NEOs except the most energetic ones.
• Finding: Civil defense (evacuation, sheltering in place, providing emergency infrastructure) is a cost-effective mitigation measure for saving lives from the smallest NEO impact events and is a necessary part of mitigation for larger events. If an NEO is predicted to impact on a specific, inhabited location, there is likely to be strong pressure for more than the most cost-effective method for saving lives.
• Finding: Slow-push-pull techniques are the most accurately controllable and are adequate for changing the orbits of small NEOs (tens of meters to roughly 100 m in diameter) with decades of advance warning and for somewhat larger NEOs (hundreds of meters) in those few cases where it would pass through a keyhole that would put the NEO onto an impact trajectory. Of the slow push/pull techniques, the gravity tractor appears to be the most independent of variations in the properties of the NEO and by far the closest to technological readiness.
• Finding: Kinetic impactors are adequate to prevent impacts on Earth by moderately sized NEOs (many hundreds of meters to 1 kilometer) with decades of advance warning. The concept has been demonstrated in space, but the result is sensitive to the properties of the NEO and requires further study.
• Finding: Unless a large flotilla (100 or more) of massive spacecraft was sent as impactors, nuclear explosions are the only current, practical means for changing the orbit of large NEOs (diameters greater than about 1 km). They also remain as a backup strategy for somewhat smaller objects if other methods have failed. They may be the only method for dealing with smaller objects when warning time is short, but additional research is necessary for these cases.
• Finding: For a wide range of impact scenarios, launch capability exists to deliver an appropriate payload to mitigate an NEO. For some scenarios, particularly short warning scenarios, the capability is inadequate. Development of foreseen heavy-lift launch vehicles, such as the Ares cargo vehicle, should enable the use of a variety of methods for NEOs up to 2 times larger than is possible with current launch vehicles
• Finding: Mitigation of the threat from NEOs benefits dramatically from in-situ characterization of the NEO prior to mitigation, if there is time to do so.
• Finding: Changing the orbit of an NEO with our current understanding is sufficiently uncertain that, in most cases, it requires an accompanying verification. This is easy to implement with many slow-push techniques but requires considerable additional effort for other techniques.
• Recommendation: If Congress chooses to fund mitigation research at an appropriately high level, the first priority for a space mission in the mitigation area is an experimental test of a kinetic impactor along with a characterization, monitoring and verification system, such as the Don Quijote mission that was previously considered, but not funded, by ESA. This mission would produce the most significant advances in understanding and provide an ideal chance for international collaboration in a realistic mitigation scenario.
• Recommendation: The United States should initiate a peer-reviewed, targeted research program in the area of impact hazard and mitigation of NEOs. Because this is a policy driven, applied program, it should not be in competition with basic scientific research programs or funded from them. This research program should encompass three principal task areas: surveys, characterization, and mitigation. The scope should include analysis, simulation, and laboratory experiments. This research program does not include mitigation space experiments or tests which are treated elsewhere in this report.
• Recommendation: The United States should establish a standing committee with membership from each of the relevant agencies and departments, to develop a detailed plan for treating all aspects of the threat posed to Earth by NEOs, and apportioning among these agencies and departments authority and responsibility for carrying out this plan, in coordination and collaboration with other nations. The committee would be further charged with overseeing on a continuing basis the carrying out of each agency’s and department’s activities under this plan. The Administration should designate one agency or department as the lead; the chair of the committee should be the representative from this agency or department.
• Recommendation: The United States should take the lead in organizing and empowering a suitable international entity to participate in developing a detailed plan for dealing with the NEO hazard.
• Finding: A $10 million annual level of funding would be sufficient to continue existing surveys, maintain the radar capability at the Arecibo and Goldstone observatories, and support a modest level of research on the hazards posed by NEOs. This level would not allow achievement of the goals established in the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act on any timescale. A $50 million annual level of funding for several years would likely be sufficient to achieve the goals of the George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act. A $250 million annual level of funding if continued for somewhat under a decade, would be sufficient to accomplish the survey and research objectives, plus provide survey redundancy and support for a space mission to test in situ characterization and mitigation.

Planetary Defense: Interesting Discussion

For those readers interested in Mega engineering ideas and planetary defense, the following weblog entry by James M. Essig might be of interest.  The author discusses everything from deflection of large asteroids, to galaxy-sized thermonuclear devices to deliberately make a local section of the universe more friendly to life by seeding it with more heavy elements.  Includes a healthy dose of both Science (math formulas, but thankfully not obtuse), and theological speculation. 
http://jamesmessig.wordpress.com/2010/01/22/a-post-modern-era-physicists-reflection-on-the-continued-existence-and-development-of-nuclear-weapons-technology-how-i-learned-to-both-love-and-hate-the-bomb-and-a-warning-for-future-generations-re/


Just a few of the interesting tidbits:

The point to be made here is that, literally speaking, there is no upper limit to the mass of a thermonuclear device. Why would mankind choose to produce the extreme sized devices described above is anyone’s guess. However, it may be useful to point out that the cosmos over long time frames is a metaphorical shooting gallery. One has to merely recall the event that supposedly wiped out the dinosaurs and realize that over a long enough time period, most probably, even larger threats will present themselves. If we are going to plan for the survival of mankind for the next thousand years, why not plan for our survival essentially for eternity.

A much more practical 1,000 megatons to safety destroy a 1/4 mile wide or even a 1/3 mile wide asteroid might be doable providing at least one third of the bombs energy can be deposited within the asteroid’s material composition. 1,000 megatons of TNT releases the energy required to completely vaporize 2 cubic kilometers of water ice and because of the relatively lower specific heat and heat of vaporization of many solid minerals and metals,  roughly, an equal volume of rock and metal may be vaporized depending on the minerals and metals in question. Note that even though it is relatively easy to bring water from freezing to boiling, the heat of vaporization of water is about 1.85 megajoules/kilogram as opposed to the 0.420 megajoules/kilogram necessary to heat liquid water just above freezing to boiling temperature. The specific heat of water and its heat of vaporization is about as high as they come for ordinary materials.

Our first use of space based nuclear bombs might be our first self-saving act of deflecting a large rouge asteroid with our name on it. Afterward, Project Orion star ships that use low yield atomic bombs, perhaps even low yield pure fusion bombs, can probably get us to the stars within this century if a concerted global effort were to be undertaken to develop the flight hard ware, mission plans, and operational protocol.


I strongly feel that we definitely have the explosive means for dealing with large rouge asteroids given enough lead time and human ingenuity.

Russia May Send Spacecraft to Asteroid

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/air-space/ci.Russia+May+Send+Spacecraft+to+Asteroid.opinionPrint
- AP 
- December 30, 2009
Russia's space chief said Wednesday his agency will consider sending a spacecraft to a large asteroid to knock it off its path and prevent a possible collision with Earth.
MOSCOW — Russia is considering sending a spacecraft to a large asteroid to knock it off its path and prevent a possible collision with Earth, the head of the country's space agency said Wednesday.
Anatoly Perminov said the space agency will hold a meeting soon to assess a mission to Apophis, telling Golos Rossii radio that it would invite NASA, the European Space Agency, the Chinese space agency and others to join the project once it is finalized.
When the 885-foot asteroid was first discovered in 2004, astronomers estimated the chances of it smashing into Earth in its first flyby in 2029 were as high as 1-in-37, but have since lowered their estimate.
SLIDESHOW: How Could Scientists Prevent an Asteroid Impact?
Further studies ruled out the possibility of an impact in 2029, when the asteroid is expected to come no closer than 18,300 miles above Earth's surface, but they indicated a small possibility of a hit on subsequent encounters.
In October, NASA lowered the odds that Apophis could hit Earth in 2036 from a 1-in-45,000 as earlier thought to a 1-in-250,000 chance after researchers recalculated the asteroid's path. It said another close encounter in 2068 will involve a 1-in-330,000 chance of impact.
Without mentioning NASA findings, Perminov said that he heard from a scientist that Apophis is getting closer and may hit the planet. "I don't remember exactly, but it seems to me it could hit the Earth by 2032," Perminov said.
"People's lives are at stake. We should pay several hundred million dollars and build a system that would allow to prevent a collision, rather than sit and wait for it to happen and kill hundreds of thousands of people," Perminov said.
Scientists have long theorized about asteroid deflection strategies. Some have proposed sending a probe to circle around a dangerous asteroid to gradually change its trajectory. Others suggested sending a spacecraft to collide with the asteroid and alter its momentum, or using nuclear weapons to hit it.
Perminov wouldn't disclose any details of the project, saying they still need to be worked out. But he said the mission wouldn't require any nuclear explosions.
Hollywood action films "Deep Impact" and "Armageddon," have featured space missions scrambling to avoid catastrophic collisions. In both movies space crews use nuclear bombs in an attempt to prevent collisions.
"Calculations show that it's possible to create a special purpose spacecraft within the time we have, which would help avoid the collision without destroying it (the asteroid) and without detonating any nuclear charges," Perminov said. "The threat of collision can be averted."
Boris Shustov, the director of the Institute of Astronomy under the Russian Academy of Sciences, hailed Perminov's statement as a signal that officials had come to recognize the danger posed by asteroids.
"Apophis is just a symbolic example, there are many other dangerous objects we know little about," he said, according to RIA Novosti news agency.

Asteroids and Nukes in Space

http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/12/18/0516246/The-Social-Difficulty-of-Saving-Earth-From-an-Asteroid
"When it comes to stopping a cataclysmic Earth vs. asteroid event, social science and international political leaders have more difficult questions yet unanswered than physicists do, according to report delivered at this week's American Geophysical Union meeting. Wired has a discussion of an analysis authored by former astronaut Rusty Schweickart, who worries that the international community is nowhere near ready to begin the complex and inevitably controversial task of deflecting an asteroid on a collision course with Earth. Among the questions to be answered is whether to modify the Partial Test Ban Treaty to allow nuclear weapons in outer space. Another possibility to avoid the destruction of civilization would require the international community to choose an area on the globe where an asteroid might be 'aimed.' Who would decide which nations get placed in the asteroid's crosshairs?"

How to save the world from an asteroid impact

From: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20127015.600-how-to-save-the-world-from-an-asteroid-impact.html?full=true&print=true
25 March 2009 by David Shiga
IT IS 2036. A large asteroid is on a collision course with Earth. Unless it is stopped, it will crash into the Pacific Ocean, creating a devastating tsunami. What should we do?
[2036 would be way too late for any option w/respect to Apophis. Even the last ditch concept discussed below requires you to be in place about 3 years prior to impact, and mission duration to intercept or rendevous might exceed a year.]
We could blast the asteroid with a nuclear bomb, but that would risk shattering it into smaller pieces that could still threaten Earth. Or maybe we should try to force it off course by slamming into it with a heavy object - an unproven and therefore risky technique. Now there may be a third option: gently nudging the asteroid away from Earth without breaking it apart, either by exploding a nuclear device at a distance or zapping it with high-powered lasers.
Astronomers have found thousands of asteroids that pass near Earth's orbit, and a few of these are on trajectories that give them a small chance of hitting Earth. The most worrying is a 270-metre-wide asteroid named Apophis, which has a 1 in 45,000 chance of hitting us in 2036.
To investigate the best way to deflect this and other asteroids onto a harmless path, a team led by David Dearborn of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California has modelled the impact of a nuclear explosion on an object's trajectory. Their virtual asteroid was 1 kilometre in diameter and made of rocky rubble loosely bound together by gravity, which is considered by many planetary scientists to be the most likely composition for small asteroids.
Thirty years before the asteroid was set to collide with Earth, a nuclear blast, equivalent to 100 kilotonnes of TNT, was set off 250 metres behind it. The nudge from the explosion increased its velocity by 6.5 millimetres per second, a slight change but enough for it to miss us.
The technique also reduced the risk of a break-up - just 1 per cent of the asteroid's material was dislodged by the blast, and of that only about 1 part in a million remained on a collision course with Earth. Dearborn adds that the technology for this method is already established, unlike for the use of a heavy object to shove the asteroid onto a different path - the "kinetic impactor" strategy. "Should an emergency arise, we should know that [the technology] is available, and we should have some idea of how to properly use it," he says.
He has now begun simulating the effect of nudging an asteroid with a smaller nuclear explosion - less than 1 kilotonne - 1 metre below its surface. This would reduce the device's weight, making it easier and quicker to launch. He will discuss the work next month at the 1st IAA Planetary Defense Conference in Granada, Spain.
A less established and gentler approach would be to nudge the asteroid away from Earth using lasers. In this theory, being investigated by Massimiliano Vasile of the University of Glasgow in the UK and colleagues with funding from the European Space Agency, a fleet of eight or more spacecraft, each carrying a laser, would be sent to rendezvous with the asteroid. Hovering a few kilometres away, each craft would unfurl a 20-metre-wide mirror made of a flexible material such as Mylar. The mirror would focus the sun's rays onto the spacecraft's solar panels, powering the laser.
All eight lasers would then be simultaneously fired at a single spot on the asteroid's surface, vaporising that region and creating a plume of gas that should provide enough thrust to push the asteroid off course (see diagram). This relatively gentle nudging, over a period of months or years, would not break the asteroid up into any smaller pieces, the team say.
Vasile, who will also be presenting his idea at the conference, touts the flexibility and reliability of the approach. "You have a formation of satellites and if one breaks you have the others [for back-up]," he says. "And it's scalable, so if you have a bigger asteroid or you want to have a faster deflection then you add more spacecraft."
Whichever option is ultimately chosen, reliability will be essential for a task as critical as asteroid deflection, says Bill Ailor of the Aerospace Corporation in El Segundo, California, who is chairing next month's conference. "Launch vehicles fail at a rate of about 1 in 100, and new spacecraft might fail at the rate of 1 in 3, [which] has to be factored into the overall design of your deflection," he says. "We're in a sense betting the planet that we're going to make this work."
One big bang and the threat has gone
If we find an asteroid on a collision course with Earth, with no time to gently deflect it from its path, should we blow it up? It's a controversial idea as it would break the object into smaller pieces, many of which could still hit Earth. Yet there have been few studies looking into the risk that this would in fact happen.
Now a team led by David Dearborn of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California have carried out a computer simulation that shows the risk may not be as great as had been feared. In their simulation, a 1-kilometre-diameter asteroid was discovered with little warning time. A spacecraft carrying a 900-kilotonne nuclear device intercepted the asteroid 1000 days before impact, burrowed 10 metres into it and exploded. The blast turned the asteroid into a giant debris cloud, and although some of the debris still hit Earth, it amounted to only 1/100,000th of the asteroid's original mass of 1 billion tonnes.
However, Derek Richardson of the University of Maryland in College Park cautions that trying to disperse an asteroid in this way would be risky, since the effect of the explosion will depend on the object's internal structure. "It may be that you just blow out a big hole on the surface," he says.

New Company Looks to Produce Space Based Solar Power Within a Decade

From: http://www.universetoday.com/2009/02/18/new-company-looks-to-produce-space-based-solar-power-within-a-decade/
Is space-based solar power (SBSP) a technology whose time has come? The concept and even some of the hardware for harnessing energy from the sun with orbiting solar arrays has been around for some time. But the biggest challenge for making the concept a reality, says entrepreneur Peter Sage of Space Energy, Inc., is that SBSP has never been commercially viable. But that could be changing. Space Energy, Inc. has assembled an impressive team of scientists, engineers and business people, putting together what Sage calls "a rock-solid commercial platform" for their company. And given the current looming issues of growing energy needs and climate change, Space Energy, Inc. could be in the right place at the right time.
"Although it’s a very grandiose vision, it makes total sense," Sage told Universe Today. "This is an inevitable technology; it's going to happen. If we can put solar panels in space where the sun shines 24 hours a day, if we have a safe way of transmitting the energy to Earth and broadcasting it anywhere, that is a serious game changer." If everything falls into place for this company, they could be producing commercially available SBSP within a decade.The basic concept of SBSP is having solar cells in space collecting energy from sun, then converting the energy into a low intensity microwave beam, sending it down to Earth where it is collected on a rectenna, and then fed into the power grid to provide electricity. Almost 200 million gigawatts of solar energy is beamed towards the Earth every second, which is more energy than our civilization has used since the dawn of the electrical age. We only need a way to harness that energy and make it usable.
Space Energy, Inc.'s vision is to help create an energy-independent world, and improve the lives of millions of people by bringing a source of safe, clean energy to the planet from space. They are looking to become the world's leading, and perhaps the first, SBSP enterprise.
The biggest challenge for SBSP is making it work on a commercial level in terms of bottom line," said Sage, "i.e., putting together a business case that would allow the enormous infrastructure costs to be raised, the plan implemented, and then electricity sold at a price that is reasonable. I say 'reasonable' and not just 'competitive' because we're getting into a time where selling energy only on a price basis isn't going to be the criteria for purchase."
Currently, there are times in the US when electricity is sold wholesale for close to a dollar a kilowatt during peak usage or times of emergency when power needs to be shipped around the national grid. Sage said SBSP will never be cost comparable with the current going rate of 6 or 7 cents a kilowatt due to the enormous set-up costs.
"We believe we can get it to a reasonable price, a fair market price as the demand for energy increases," Sage said.
A huge energy gap is looming for our world, and that too, will change the energy game.
According to a white paper written by aerospace engineer James Michael Snead, "The End of Easy Energy and What Are We Going To Do About It," in order to meet the world’s projected increase in energy needs by 2100 which likely will be at least three times what is being produced today, today’s sustainable energy production must expand by a factor of over 25. Under that scenario, even if the US were to build 70 new nuclear plants, add the equivalent of 15 more Hoover Dams, expand the geothermal capacity by 50 times what it is today, install over a million large land or sea wind turbines covering 150,000 square miles, build 60,000 square miles of commercial solar voltaic farms, and on top of that convert 1.3 billion dry tons of food mass to bio fuels, still only 30% of the power needs would be filled by 2100, or perhaps even earlier.
"Looking at every single technology we can as a civilization to try and fill the energy gap in a clean and resourceful, sustainable way, technologies like SBSP have to be made to work," said Sage.
He says this is an important point. "We're not setting ourselves up to compete with coal, or nuclear, or ground based solar or wind. I don't want to pick a fight with any of those industries saying that we're trying to take a piece of their pie. What we're saying is that right now, from a responsible perspective in terms of being a good steward for the environment, we need to look at every single source of energy that we can get our hands on, primarily green, and develop it regardless, because we're going to need it. SBSP is one of the few forms of energy that has the ability to be base-load, i.e., 24-7, and it's the only form of energy that can be broadcast on demand."
The first phase of Space Energy, Inc.'s plan is to launch a small prototype satellite into low Earth orbit. "This will help validate the numbers we are speculating on at this point, but also validate several different aspects of what SBSP can do," said Sage. "From a successful demonstration, we are hoping to close power purchase agreements with one of several entities we are in discussions with at present. And on the strength of that we should be able to put the first commercial satellite in orbit."
With regards to the timetable, Sage was hesitant to commit to a schedule. "As timetables go, everything needs to be flexible, but we are looking to close the financing for the demonstrator during the first quarter of this year (2009). The demonstrator is a 24 to 36 month project and, from there, we will start the commercial build-out of the main satellite, which could take up to four years to be operational."
That's an aggressive schedule. But Sage said since their plan is being driven from a commercial basis, they can run their operation differently than government agencies who don't necessarily operate with the bottom line in mind. "Our board members and entrepreneurial group certainly have a lot of experience running commercial entities. We know what we're doing. We're in a market that we hope to pioneer, and everyone feels confident that we have what it takes. We certainly have the passion, vision and enthusiasm to make this happen."
What are the biggest hurdles to overcome in this project? "If you would have asked me that question a few months ago," Sage replied, "I would have said a combination of meeting the right people who could understand the vision and scope of what it is what we're doing, and raising the initial financing for the demonstrator. Those hurdles, at this point, really seem to be taken care of. The more we have our technical teams talk with investors, the more people understand that we're real and this isn't some sort of Star Trek giggle factor. Right now, with the level of due diligence that's been done not only on SBSP itself, but with ourselves as a commercially viable entity, we're on the forefront of many people's agenda in terms of how to move this forward. We see a straight path to making this a reality."
Sage said no new technology is needed for the demonstrator, which will be a working, small prototype, but challenges do remain to move forward beyond that. "Obviously, there are technical challenges because something of this scale has never been done before. We know we can do wireless power transmission, as NASA did some pretty significant tests on this in the 1970s. We know the physics of wireless power transmission, and how everything should work from geostationary orbit."
While the demonstrator won't be of any scale where energy could be sold commercially, it would be a proof of concept.
"Once we've demonstrated that we can wirelessly beam power accurately to the ground in a safe, controlled, effective manner, and in a way that can be metered and measured," said Sage, "we will have taken a massive step forward to prove that SBSP is a technology of the future that has the potential to really fill a gap in the world's energy needs."
Some have equated developing SBSP to what was accomplished with the Apollo program.
"There are so many positive spinoffs to SBSP as a game changing foundation of space commerce, that just by addressing a lot of the challenges that lay ahead, we will be blazing a trail for many other opportunities for a low earth orbit economy," Sage added.
Space Energy, Inc. recently attended the World Future Energy Summit and has been overwhelmed with the response.
"We've had discussions with many different entities, both governmental and private, in the Middle East; Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Dubai, many areas around Europe, and many of the world's top investment firms. I don't think we're going to be short of people that will want to support us." Sage added that in general, SBSP has strong support in Washington DC, and that SBSP recently was added to a list of technologies being studied by the Obama administration.
SBSP has ability to literally change the course of history, and impact the quality of life for people everywhere. Sage said this project is an entrepreneurs' dream.
"I speak for our entire team here, we're not just focused on how much money are we going to make," Sage said. "We're focused on the fact that this is an inevitable technology and someone is going to do it. Right now we're the best shot. We’re also focused on the fact that, according to every scenario we've analyzed, the world needs space based solar power, and it needs it soon, as well as the up-scaling of just about every other source of renewable energy that we can get our hands on."
"Space based solar power will happen whether we crack cold fusion, or whether we suddenly go to 80% efficiency on ground based solar power (currently its only at 50%)," Sage continued. "It has to happen based on the nature on what it is. With that in mind, I've been willing to put everything I have on the line to be able to make this work, and that was three years, ago. To see how far we've come in the past six to eight months has been amazing."
"This is going to happen."
For more information:Space Energy, Inc.Space Energy, Inc.'s interactive flash presentationVideo presentation on Space Based Solar Power by Mafic Studios
http://www.spaceenergy.com/s/Home.asp