From: http://www.2002youngscientists.org/killer-asteroids-lessons-from-asteroid-tc3
Killer Asteroids – Lessons From Asteroid TC3
by admin
It seems like out of a science-fiction. A huge asteroid hurtles to Earth and threatens to destroy everything in its path. Well, in this case it was not a pulp novel, but a real asteroid heading for a direct collision with our planet. In this case, the asteroid in question “TC3″ does not strike the Earth’s surface to break, rather than in the atmosphere over Sudan on 7 October this year. The asteroid hit the atmosphere release energy equivalent to one kiloton bomb, quite an impressive sight when you pass the chance to see in the area. The rest of us can impact the online video clips, taken Clock earth orbiting satellites. It was followed closely by October 17, which is believed to concrete impacts in the vicinity of the remote community of Wallace Rock Hole west of Alice Springs in Australia in the NT. In such cases, residents reported the lights, the sound of an explosion and even feeling an earthquake. The Australian Government Department of Earth Sciences Geoscience Australia has confirmed that he was almost certainly a meteorite.
Although no one was hurt in these incidents, what would happen if an asteroid was much more important to strike the Earth’s surface? The damage could be devastating, especially if the asteroid to land in a populated area. As you can see, the asteroid / Earth collisions are a true true not only in science fiction, but it can and must be done. It is relatively rare that an asteroid large enough to make it through the Earth’s atmosphere without burning, it’s a certainty that it happen one day.
The prospect of a catastrophic event involving an asteroid collision with Earth not think any of us can at night, but the danger is real and the search is like the earth from such a disaster to protect performed. The chances of a collision with an asteroid or comet large enough in the near future are slim, but it supports only mention that according to the National Aeronautics and Space Association (NASA), there are currently almost a thousand different objects (two asteroids and comets) classified as a PHA (potentially hazardous asteroids).
The classification includes PHA objects, the very low probability that has already attracted striking the earth, but there are enough potential risks to the nearby planet called TC3 with Africa growing public interest in the topic of planetary defense. The first official conference on planetary defense took place last winter in Washington DC and served as a forum to discuss the astronomers, astrophysicists and other experts to approaches being explored in order to protect the earth, should a possible future asteroid impacts. Another conference (the first of the International Academy of Astronauts place) is to perform in the spring of 2009 and in a more extensive discussion of the issues, the planetary defense.
We already know that the impact can an event with an asteroid or comet have very devastating consequences. There were demonstrations spread to the whole of recorded human history, but you do not have more than 1908 search for the so-called Tunguska event. A large area near the Tunguska River, a remote region of Siberia, was largely beyond the air of a comet or asteroid flattened to disintegrate in the air over the area. True, the issue has never visited the area, but also the origin of this kind of devastation. Twenty years later, when Leonid Kulik Expedition photographed in the region, the damage was still clear – all the forests were flattened as if by a giant hand. And all of this is due probably caused by an object no larger 100-200 meters in diameter.
The need for a kind of planetary defense strategy is clear: if a relatively small and cause the destruction of the great in Tunguska, what would happen if something bigger object was for a collision with a densely populated position? Even a great Tunguska object would be enough to destroy most of a large metropolitan area. The result would be a tragedy may be unprecedented in human history.
During the development of a planetary defense system is still far from viable, probably many years, we now have the technology to monitor the sky, and well informed about all events of the impact. We know that the probability is low by any type of impact scale in the near future – we hope that humanity can not be complacent about the need to protect ourselves and protect our planet from those events. can help the great interest of the public at events like the recent collision taken by TC3 attention to the measures to be taken to protect against the risk of rare but devastating events asteroids and comets.
From: http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2009/10/scenario_a_large_asteroid_will_strike_earth_in_thr.html
19 August 2010
16 August 2010
Asteroid Heading Towards Earth?
From: http://www.foxnewsinsider.com/2010/07/30/asteroid-heading-towards-earth/
Former NASA astronaut and Fox News contributor Tom Jones joined Bill to discuss our interstellar dilemma.
Jones says an asteroid like this, which occasionally passes through Earth’s orbit, could cause devastation across an entire continent if it hit, wiping out the whole eastern seaboard of the United States for example.
Fortunately, Jones says this would not happen for another 170 years, so we have some time to figure out how to deal with it if perchance it decides to smack into our planet. If anyone would know, Jones would know. Tom is actually a co-chair on the NASA task force that deals with planetary defense.
So … if you knew it was your last day on earth, what would you do? How would you live up your last life moments?
Americas Newsroom
It could be the end of the world as we know it… Bill Hemmer just informed us about a massive asteroid on a possible collision course with Earth. Bill said scientists estimate the asteroid is about 2000 feet wide, making it larger than six football fields!Former NASA astronaut and Fox News contributor Tom Jones joined Bill to discuss our interstellar dilemma.
Jones says an asteroid like this, which occasionally passes through Earth’s orbit, could cause devastation across an entire continent if it hit, wiping out the whole eastern seaboard of the United States for example.
Fortunately, Jones says this would not happen for another 170 years, so we have some time to figure out how to deal with it if perchance it decides to smack into our planet. If anyone would know, Jones would know. Tom is actually a co-chair on the NASA task force that deals with planetary defense.
So … if you knew it was your last day on earth, what would you do? How would you live up your last life moments?
14 August 2010
The need for Planetary Defense
From: http://discoveryenterprise.blogspot.com/2010/08/need-for-planetary-defense.html
Friday, August 13, 2010
The need for Planetary Defense
graphic by Fredrik Fahlstad
Our sophisticated and advanced civilization is vulnerable to natural threats that would have had little or no impact in the past. A volcano goes off in Iceland and international travel is in chaos. Had that volcano gone of a century ago it would have only been a concern to the people of Iceland. The Space environment presents us with new threats that can damage or even destroy civilization.
One is the threat of solar storms. Our Sun is a seething ball of gas that can send huge eruptions of plasma towards Earth. The resulting solar wind shock wave can completely disturbs Earth's magnetic field. Such storms effect our communications and electricity generation. In 1989 a solar storm caused black outs throughout Quebec. But that was nothing compared to the solar storm of 1859. That was so severe that telegraph operators received electric shocks and fires were ignited. If the Earth was hit by a similar storm today without warning it could cause a world wide catastrophe. Power station transformers would be destroyed, communications systems would be useless. It would be an major threat to our civilisation.
Impact events are another threat. The threat of the Earth impacting with an asteroid, comet or meteorite is real and has happened in the past. There are craters like Barringer and Henbury to prove it. Although the larger impacts are more rare the smaller ones are more common. The Tunguska event in 1908 had a explosive force between 5-30 megaton. That impact occurred over Sibera. It couldn't do much damage to civilization in 1908, but a 5 megaton blast over Russia today could have serious international consequences.
As well as natural threats there is the man made danger of space debris. Our spent rockets, dead satellites, etc are polluting Earths orbit putting multi million satellites and the essential services they provide at risk. Although efforts are being made to mitigate the problem space junk is still accumulating and colliding satellites only increase the amount of debris. In fact there’s a possibility a chain reaction of collision, the “Kessler Syndrome” could ground all manned flight.
Good sense tells us we need Planetary Defense. Thats usually defined as “ that activity concerned with protecting the Earth and its inhabitants from destruction due to impact by a large piece of space debris such as an asteroid or a comet” I have a broader definition “protecting Earth from man made and natural threats from Space”.
Whats needed is to put the Solar System under perpetual, high level surveillance so that the earliest warning can be given. We can start with Earth orbit. Tracking debris smaller then 10 cm is difficult and most debris is unobserved. Earth and Space based systems need to be put into place to provide adequate situational awareness. There has been much discussion as to how to clean up space but action needs to be taken to develop proper strategies and to implement them.
To detect interplanetary dangers large observatories can be placed in two of the best places for astronomy , the Sun-Earth L1 and L2 Lagrange points. L1 permanently faces the Sun and would be an excellent spot for a solar observatory. L2 is in the opposite direction and would be the spot to place an observatory looking at the rest of the solar system. There are already astronomical satellites at these positions but if high level permanent surveillance is required we need better. I'm proposing Hubble class telescopes or better. The great thing about Hubble was that astronauts could service the telescope allowing it to be repaired and upgraded. Thats why its been in use for over 20 years.
Of course you need to get there. The Sun-Earth L1 L2 points are 1.5 million kilometers from Earth so a human beyond Earth orbit capability should be a high priority. That capability, interplanetary cruise, will also be need to protect us from asteroids. Its not much use simply to know an asteroid is going to hit you need to be able to divert it . Despite much study no one is sure how to do so but one thing is known, changing the orbit of an asteroid enough to miss the Earth requires far less energy when the asteroid is a long way away then when its close. So action needs to be taken when the asteroid is several million kilometers away. Now, if a solar sail has to be attached or an nuclear device positioned on a rotating asteroid you going to need someone there to make on the spot decisions not rely on robots who will suffer a radio time lag.
In my view planetary defense is one of the best reasons for having a human space program and frankly more urgently needed then Moon bases or Mars missions. An interplanetary cruise system does not require landers, planetary bases etc so would be much cheaper but could still be expanded to interplanetary missions if there was the need and funds.
Friday, August 13, 2010
The need for Planetary Defense
graphic by Fredrik Fahlstad
Our sophisticated and advanced civilization is vulnerable to natural threats that would have had little or no impact in the past. A volcano goes off in Iceland and international travel is in chaos. Had that volcano gone of a century ago it would have only been a concern to the people of Iceland. The Space environment presents us with new threats that can damage or even destroy civilization.
One is the threat of solar storms. Our Sun is a seething ball of gas that can send huge eruptions of plasma towards Earth. The resulting solar wind shock wave can completely disturbs Earth's magnetic field. Such storms effect our communications and electricity generation. In 1989 a solar storm caused black outs throughout Quebec. But that was nothing compared to the solar storm of 1859. That was so severe that telegraph operators received electric shocks and fires were ignited. If the Earth was hit by a similar storm today without warning it could cause a world wide catastrophe. Power station transformers would be destroyed, communications systems would be useless. It would be an major threat to our civilisation.
Impact events are another threat. The threat of the Earth impacting with an asteroid, comet or meteorite is real and has happened in the past. There are craters like Barringer and Henbury to prove it. Although the larger impacts are more rare the smaller ones are more common. The Tunguska event in 1908 had a explosive force between 5-30 megaton. That impact occurred over Sibera. It couldn't do much damage to civilization in 1908, but a 5 megaton blast over Russia today could have serious international consequences.
As well as natural threats there is the man made danger of space debris. Our spent rockets, dead satellites, etc are polluting Earths orbit putting multi million satellites and the essential services they provide at risk. Although efforts are being made to mitigate the problem space junk is still accumulating and colliding satellites only increase the amount of debris. In fact there’s a possibility a chain reaction of collision, the “Kessler Syndrome” could ground all manned flight.
Good sense tells us we need Planetary Defense. Thats usually defined as “ that activity concerned with protecting the Earth and its inhabitants from destruction due to impact by a large piece of space debris such as an asteroid or a comet” I have a broader definition “protecting Earth from man made and natural threats from Space”.
Whats needed is to put the Solar System under perpetual, high level surveillance so that the earliest warning can be given. We can start with Earth orbit. Tracking debris smaller then 10 cm is difficult and most debris is unobserved. Earth and Space based systems need to be put into place to provide adequate situational awareness. There has been much discussion as to how to clean up space but action needs to be taken to develop proper strategies and to implement them.
To detect interplanetary dangers large observatories can be placed in two of the best places for astronomy , the Sun-Earth L1 and L2 Lagrange points. L1 permanently faces the Sun and would be an excellent spot for a solar observatory. L2 is in the opposite direction and would be the spot to place an observatory looking at the rest of the solar system. There are already astronomical satellites at these positions but if high level permanent surveillance is required we need better. I'm proposing Hubble class telescopes or better. The great thing about Hubble was that astronauts could service the telescope allowing it to be repaired and upgraded. Thats why its been in use for over 20 years.
Of course you need to get there. The Sun-Earth L1 L2 points are 1.5 million kilometers from Earth so a human beyond Earth orbit capability should be a high priority. That capability, interplanetary cruise, will also be need to protect us from asteroids. Its not much use simply to know an asteroid is going to hit you need to be able to divert it . Despite much study no one is sure how to do so but one thing is known, changing the orbit of an asteroid enough to miss the Earth requires far less energy when the asteroid is a long way away then when its close. So action needs to be taken when the asteroid is several million kilometers away. Now, if a solar sail has to be attached or an nuclear device positioned on a rotating asteroid you going to need someone there to make on the spot decisions not rely on robots who will suffer a radio time lag.
In my view planetary defense is one of the best reasons for having a human space program and frankly more urgently needed then Moon bases or Mars missions. An interplanetary cruise system does not require landers, planetary bases etc so would be much cheaper but could still be expanded to interplanetary missions if there was the need and funds.
Experts Weigh in on Human Mission to an Asteroid
From: http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20100809/sc_space/expertswillweighinonhowtoputhumansonanasteroid
Experts Will Weigh In On How to Put Humans On an Asteroid
Jeremy Hsu
Space News Senior Writer
SPACE.com jeremy Hsu
space News Senior Writer
space.com – Mon Aug 9, 1:15 pm ET
A visit by humans to an asteroid may take a step closer to reality at a NASA workshop this week.
A spirit of excitement is bubbling over NASA's new aim, not unlike when the agency first aimed to land a man on the moon, NASA's Laurie Leshin said ahead of the two-day session, set for Tuesday and Wednesday in Washington, D.C.
Planetary defense against killer space rocks also has a place on the agenda.
The human exploration of a near-Earth object would rely upon the experiences of robotic expeditions like Japan's Hayabusa mission, which recently returned to Earth with particles that may be asteroid samples.
Experts and leaders from government, academia, industry and the international community are expected to weigh in on what would be required to stage a mission to a near-Earth object, according to Leshin, deputy associate administrator of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate.
"Between Kennedy's speech at Rice and Neil Armstrong's first steps, there were a lot of meetings like this," Leshin told SPACE.com. "We are excited to begin to bring together the range of ideas that exist for human exploration of NEOs and start to focus them on a plan forward."
In 1962, President John F. Kennedy gave his historic speech at Rice University discussing the goal of putting an American on the moon by the end of the decade. It came one year after he announced the goal to Congress. Armstrong commanded the first manned moon landing mission, in July 1969.
The new goal of sending astronauts to land on asteroids is part of President Barack Obama's plan for the future of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Obama announced the new direction for NASA in April, two months after proposing a 2011 NASA budget that included the cancellation of the agency's moon-oriented Constellation program.
The Congress is still discussing NASA's 2011 budget (the House is expected to revisit the issue next month), but that hasn't stopped scientists from taking a look at what a manned mission to an asteroid would entail.
That's where this week's workshop comes in.
Goals for the meeting include boosting the collective understanding of NEOs and laying out NASA's plans for the human mission. NASA also hopes to collect outside input on any proposed mission objectives and identify any gaps in technology or know-how.
Regarding planetary defense, experts would consider questions such as what remains unknown about NEOs and what technologies could be used to stop objects that pose a threat to Earth. A NASA panel recently called for the creation of a Planetary Defense Coordination Office and suggested making planetary defense a top-level NASA strategic goal.
The meeting also will consider whether a human mission to an NEO could work in tandem with a mission to the moon or Mars. Obama's current plan for NASA would focus on ambitious heavy-lift rockets to carry astronauts beyond low-Earth orbit to an asteroid and Mars.
* Images — Asteroids Up Close, Astronauts on Asteroids
* NASA's New Asteroid Mission Could Save the Planet
* Will an Asteroid Hit Earth? Are We All Doomed?
This story has been corrected to reflect that President Kennedy first announced the intent to send astronauts to the moon in May 1961, then discussed the plans at Rice University in September 1962.
Find the actual workshop schedule and presentations here:
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/new_space_enterprise/home/neoschedule.html
Here is the NASA statement:
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/new_space_enterprise/home/neoworkshop.html
Exploration of Near Earth Objects (NEO) Objectives Workshop [Explore NOW]
August 10-11, 2010
Washington, DC
NASA hosted an interactive, two-day workshop to identify objectives for exploration missions to Near Earth Objects (NEOs). The meeting was conducted August 10-11 at The Mayflower Renaissance Hotel in Washington, D.C.
The primary goals for the workshop were: to increase the collective understanding of NEOs, communicate NASA's plans for a human mission to a NEO, and capture external input on proposed mission objectives.
Explore NOW brought together experts and key leaders within NASA, industry, academia, other government agencies, and international communities.
Download presentations and reference materials:
+ View the workshop schedule and download presentations.
+ View a list of workshop reference materials available for download.
Send comments:
+ Submit your comments and questions on the breakout session topics now.
A Planetary Society participant blogger Bruce Betts recorded his observations of:
Day 1: http://planetary.org/blog/article/00002617/
Day 2: http://planetary.org/blog/article/00002619/
As did a Quantum G blogger: http://quantumg.blogspot.com/2010/08/asteroid-menace.html
(This blogger gets a few things wrong. Humans can be additive, but most planetary defense thinkers do not think human beings are essential to the task, and the primary means of deflection or Kinetic Impactors, Nuclear Standoff Explosives, and the Gravity Tractor)
Day one of the Exploration of Near Earth Objects Objectives Workshop saw the presentation of three key reasons to send humans to visit asteroids: science, mining and planetary protection. Of these, the last has has been shown to be an issue that attracts mainstream support, no doubt we have Bruce Willis to thank for this.
The workshop began with presentations of the robotic missions that have been flown to asteroids and comets. The recently returned sample return mission Hayabusa, taking pride of place. All the presenters had war stories of the operational difficulty of flying to these objects, and some expressed surprise that their missions succeeded at all. They also talked about the high cost of these missions in terms of remote sensing equipment and the lack of good ground truth information to calibrate these instruments.
Unsurprisingly then, they all support a human mission to an asteroid or a comet near Earth to more efficiently gain scientific results. However, when asked about planetary defense, the consensus opinion wasn't just that a human mission would be nice: it is absolutely necessary.
An asteroid is heading to Earth that will kill every one of us, someday. Hopefully we will discover it and track it for long enough to have 5 or 10 years prior notice. Now what? We'd love to send a robotic probe to get some idea of what the object looks like, what it is made of, how fast it is rotating, etc. Unfortunately, a robotic mission will take at least 5 years to go from concept to launch and it has a very low chance of success at even this precursor mission. Sending a robotic mission to deflect or otherwise mitigate the threat is simply unthinkable at this time....
That means we need to send humans, and it means we need to send them to meet the threat with no robotic precursor. The astronauts will do the scientific investigation to determine the composition of the object. This will most likely include planting seismic detectors, and launching one or more kinetic impactors into the surface. Relaying this data back to Earth, the astronauts would wait for ground control, probably with the support of the national laboratories, to decide on a mitigation plan. Obviously the plan will be limited by what the astronauts have with them, so they will need to carry an array of tools for the various types of threats that may be expected.
For example, the best strategy may be to install large motors which provide constant thrust for a period of years diverting the asteroid off course just enough to miss the Earth. Such a strategy would only be possible on objects where in-situ resource utilization could produce sufficient propellant. Another strategy may just be the placement of a station keeping spacecraft with a lot of mass, possibly removed from the surface of the object, to act as a "gravity tractor", again diverting the course away from Earth. More exotic strategies may include converting rotational energy into propulsive energy using long tethers or in the drastic use of nuclear bombs.
The workshop continues today and is being webcast. Ultimately, failure to send astronauts to visit near-Earth objects within the next few decades will be fatal to humanity, so tune in and participate.
Experts Will Weigh In On How to Put Humans On an Asteroid
Jeremy Hsu
Space News Senior Writer
SPACE.com jeremy Hsu
space News Senior Writer
space.com – Mon Aug 9, 1:15 pm ET
A visit by humans to an asteroid may take a step closer to reality at a NASA workshop this week.
A spirit of excitement is bubbling over NASA's new aim, not unlike when the agency first aimed to land a man on the moon, NASA's Laurie Leshin said ahead of the two-day session, set for Tuesday and Wednesday in Washington, D.C.
Planetary defense against killer space rocks also has a place on the agenda.
The human exploration of a near-Earth object would rely upon the experiences of robotic expeditions like Japan's Hayabusa mission, which recently returned to Earth with particles that may be asteroid samples.
Experts and leaders from government, academia, industry and the international community are expected to weigh in on what would be required to stage a mission to a near-Earth object, according to Leshin, deputy associate administrator of NASA's Exploration Systems Mission Directorate.
"Between Kennedy's speech at Rice and Neil Armstrong's first steps, there were a lot of meetings like this," Leshin told SPACE.com. "We are excited to begin to bring together the range of ideas that exist for human exploration of NEOs and start to focus them on a plan forward."
In 1962, President John F. Kennedy gave his historic speech at Rice University discussing the goal of putting an American on the moon by the end of the decade. It came one year after he announced the goal to Congress. Armstrong commanded the first manned moon landing mission, in July 1969.
The new goal of sending astronauts to land on asteroids is part of President Barack Obama's plan for the future of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Obama announced the new direction for NASA in April, two months after proposing a 2011 NASA budget that included the cancellation of the agency's moon-oriented Constellation program.
The Congress is still discussing NASA's 2011 budget (the House is expected to revisit the issue next month), but that hasn't stopped scientists from taking a look at what a manned mission to an asteroid would entail.
That's where this week's workshop comes in.
Goals for the meeting include boosting the collective understanding of NEOs and laying out NASA's plans for the human mission. NASA also hopes to collect outside input on any proposed mission objectives and identify any gaps in technology or know-how.
Regarding planetary defense, experts would consider questions such as what remains unknown about NEOs and what technologies could be used to stop objects that pose a threat to Earth. A NASA panel recently called for the creation of a Planetary Defense Coordination Office and suggested making planetary defense a top-level NASA strategic goal.
The meeting also will consider whether a human mission to an NEO could work in tandem with a mission to the moon or Mars. Obama's current plan for NASA would focus on ambitious heavy-lift rockets to carry astronauts beyond low-Earth orbit to an asteroid and Mars.
* Images — Asteroids Up Close, Astronauts on Asteroids
* NASA's New Asteroid Mission Could Save the Planet
* Will an Asteroid Hit Earth? Are We All Doomed?
This story has been corrected to reflect that President Kennedy first announced the intent to send astronauts to the moon in May 1961, then discussed the plans at Rice University in September 1962.
Find the actual workshop schedule and presentations here:
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/new_space_enterprise/home/neoschedule.html
Here is the NASA statement:
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/new_space_enterprise/home/neoworkshop.html
Exploration of Near Earth Objects (NEO) Objectives Workshop [Explore NOW]
August 10-11, 2010
Washington, DC
NASA hosted an interactive, two-day workshop to identify objectives for exploration missions to Near Earth Objects (NEOs). The meeting was conducted August 10-11 at The Mayflower Renaissance Hotel in Washington, D.C.
The primary goals for the workshop were: to increase the collective understanding of NEOs, communicate NASA's plans for a human mission to a NEO, and capture external input on proposed mission objectives.
Explore NOW brought together experts and key leaders within NASA, industry, academia, other government agencies, and international communities.
Download presentations and reference materials:
+ View the workshop schedule and download presentations.
+ View a list of workshop reference materials available for download.
Send comments:
+ Submit your comments and questions on the breakout session topics now.
A Planetary Society participant blogger Bruce Betts recorded his observations of:
Day 1: http://planetary.org/blog/article/00002617/
Day 2: http://planetary.org/blog/article/00002619/
As did a Quantum G blogger: http://quantumg.blogspot.com/2010/08/asteroid-menace.html
(This blogger gets a few things wrong. Humans can be additive, but most planetary defense thinkers do not think human beings are essential to the task, and the primary means of deflection or Kinetic Impactors, Nuclear Standoff Explosives, and the Gravity Tractor)
Day one of the Exploration of Near Earth Objects Objectives Workshop saw the presentation of three key reasons to send humans to visit asteroids: science, mining and planetary protection. Of these, the last has has been shown to be an issue that attracts mainstream support, no doubt we have Bruce Willis to thank for this.
The workshop began with presentations of the robotic missions that have been flown to asteroids and comets. The recently returned sample return mission Hayabusa, taking pride of place. All the presenters had war stories of the operational difficulty of flying to these objects, and some expressed surprise that their missions succeeded at all. They also talked about the high cost of these missions in terms of remote sensing equipment and the lack of good ground truth information to calibrate these instruments.
Unsurprisingly then, they all support a human mission to an asteroid or a comet near Earth to more efficiently gain scientific results. However, when asked about planetary defense, the consensus opinion wasn't just that a human mission would be nice: it is absolutely necessary.
An asteroid is heading to Earth that will kill every one of us, someday. Hopefully we will discover it and track it for long enough to have 5 or 10 years prior notice. Now what? We'd love to send a robotic probe to get some idea of what the object looks like, what it is made of, how fast it is rotating, etc. Unfortunately, a robotic mission will take at least 5 years to go from concept to launch and it has a very low chance of success at even this precursor mission. Sending a robotic mission to deflect or otherwise mitigate the threat is simply unthinkable at this time....
That means we need to send humans, and it means we need to send them to meet the threat with no robotic precursor. The astronauts will do the scientific investigation to determine the composition of the object. This will most likely include planting seismic detectors, and launching one or more kinetic impactors into the surface. Relaying this data back to Earth, the astronauts would wait for ground control, probably with the support of the national laboratories, to decide on a mitigation plan. Obviously the plan will be limited by what the astronauts have with them, so they will need to carry an array of tools for the various types of threats that may be expected.
For example, the best strategy may be to install large motors which provide constant thrust for a period of years diverting the asteroid off course just enough to miss the Earth. Such a strategy would only be possible on objects where in-situ resource utilization could produce sufficient propellant. Another strategy may just be the placement of a station keeping spacecraft with a lot of mass, possibly removed from the surface of the object, to act as a "gravity tractor", again diverting the course away from Earth. More exotic strategies may include converting rotational energy into propulsive energy using long tethers or in the drastic use of nuclear bombs.
The workshop continues today and is being webcast. Ultimately, failure to send astronauts to visit near-Earth objects within the next few decades will be fatal to humanity, so tune in and participate.
Call for Papers 2011 Planetary Defense Conference
From: http://rescommunis.wordpress.com/2010/08/05/2011-iaa-planetary-defense-conference-call-for-papers/
The European Space Agency has issued a call for papers for the 2011 IAA Planetary Defense Conference on 09-12 May 2011 in Bucharest, Romania. The call covers numerous topics including Legal and Policy issues:
Call for papers
Papers are solicited for the 2011 IAA Planetary Defense Conference: Protecting Earth from Asteroids sponsored by the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA), the Romanian Space Agency (ROSA), the European Space Agency (ESA), and The Aerospace Corporation (information on sponsorships is available at http://www.pdc2011.org/).
The theme for the conference is “From Threat to Action.” Papers are solicited in the following areas:
Potentially hazardous Objects – Recent Progress
• Discovery statistics and projections (ground-based & space-based)
• Observational refinements including non-gravitational effects and keyholes
• Lessons learned from recent discoveries including Earth impacting 2008 TC3
Discovery and Tracking Resources and Plans
• Program plans (e.g., NASA’s NEO program, ESA’s SSA program)
• Survey completion estimates; ground-based and space-based surveys
• The status of next generation surveys (e.g., PanSTARRS and LSST)
• The discovery and tracking of 50-meter class PHOs
• Utilizing archival and historical data
Impacts, Consequences and Education
• Historical information
• Modeling ocean and land impacts
• Consequences, impact frequency vs. size of impactor
• Planning for a short or no warning time event
• Public/media education and notification
Mission Planning & Technologies
• Viable deflection concepts and technologies; technology readiness and constraints
• Launch windows and mission designs for chemical, nuclear thermal, and ion drive missions
• Minimum-time trajectories for NEO missions
• Current capabilities for NEO deflection missions
• Matching mitigation options with available technologies and action timeline
Campaign Planning
• Human and robotic campaigns that inform all three NEO issues: science, exploration and planetary defense
• Decision tree, timelines and decision-to-act criteria (e.g., Impact probability thresholds)
• Threat evolution with time – refining the threat
• What do we do if a threat is detected tomorrow?
Legal, Policy, Political Framework for Planetary Defense
• Current international agreements and coordination activities
• Organizing, coordinating, and managing an international effort
• Impact of public opinion on decision to act and choice of mitigation method
• Planning for and consequences of a false alarm
Moving Forward on Planetary Defense
• Funding levels and priority actions to build and maintain readiness
• Current national and international funded activities that support planetary defense
Participants will develop a set of actionable recommendations that will help to improve our ability to successfully defend Earth from possible impacts and prepare for unexpected NEO-related disasters. Throughout the conference asteroid Apophis will be considered as a reference scenario to focus the discussions (current information on Apophis is posted at http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/apophis/).
The conference will follow the model of the 1st IAA Planetary Defense Conference held in Granada, Spain in 2009–see http://www.congrex.nl/09c04/ for details on the 2009 conference.
ABSTRACT SUBMITTAL
Technical paper abstracts (250 to 500 words in length) in the areas described above or related to planetary defense will be accepted electronically through the official ESA conference website (http://www.pdc2011.org/) as of September 1, 2010. Please be sure to designate the topic area your paper addresses (see topics listed above).
The deadline for receipt of abstracts is January 14, 2011. Letters of official acceptance and instructions for paper submission will be mailed on or before 15 February 2011.
Accepted papers (including poster papers) will be published in the official conference Proceedings. Selected peer-reviewed papers will be published in Acta Astronautica. Authors of all poster papers will be invited to present two-minute overview presentations during the regular session. The format for papers will be that provided on the conference web site, http://www.pdc2011.org/.
STUDENT COMPETITION
Undergraduate students and graduate researchers are invited to submit abstracts in two major categories:
• MAKING THE WORLD AWARE. Participants are requested to develop and study creative ideas to help deepen the understanding of the public, decision makers and academia on the nature of threats posed by Near Earth Objects.
• FROM THREAT TO ACTION: Papers may also be submitted on any of the diverse areas covered by the conference, including celestial mechanics, space engineering, astrodynamics, political sciences, social sciences, etc., as they relate to planetary defense.
The best student paper in each category will be awarded a prize.
Note: The aim of the student competition is to help promote academic work and informed political debate by enhancing research and general understanding essential for sound decision making on NEO impact threats in years to come.
Undergrate students and graduate researchers submitting the abstract should tick the box “I will participate in the Student Competition”.
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. Đšlapovsky
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 )
"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. Đšlapovsky
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 )
Awesome New Sci-Fi Bill Proposes U.S. Planetary Defense Commission
From: http://www.asylum.com/2010/07/30/congressman-dana-rohrabacher-proposes-us-planetary-defense-commission-bill/
Then, we saw a new bill introduced by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) that proposes the establishment of a United States Commission on Planetary Defense to help protect Earth from the kind of catastrophic impact illustrated here by freakin' NASA.
Should we be worried? Is the sky falling? Will the commission include Bruce Willis and/or Morgan Freeman? Is it time to get an End Times condo?!?
Keep reading to find out what Congressman Rohrabacher told Asylum, which made our blood run cold.
NASA already spends $4 million a year to search for near-Earth objects (NEO), which the National Academy of Science defines thus: an asteroid or comet whose orbit approaches Earth's orbit to within about one-third the average distance of Earth from the Sun.
The Planetary Defense Commission will study ways to detect and neutralize deadly threats from above, and Rohrabacher says it's just the latest in his years-long quest to identify and protect humanity from NEOs. Previously, he introduced legislation to create the Pete Conrad Astronomy Awards, which honor amateur galaxy-gazers who've discovered NEOs.
Nuclear Explosives vs. Tractor Beams
"Films like 'Deep Impact' and 'Armageddon' are great entertainment," Rohrabacher says, "and they did cause many people, myself included, to start asking serious scientific questions about how real this threat is, and what we are doing to protect ourselves. Do we have the ability to protect ourselves from something that is known to have wiped out thousands, if not millions, of species before? If we're not smart enough to protect ourselves as a species from a potential known threat, then going to the moon or inventing rail guns is meaningless."
According to Rohrabacher, the scenarios laid out in science-fiction movies are surprisingly impractical:
"Right now, the only way to deal with an impending large-scale impact event is through the use of nuclear explosives. And we're not sure it would work. We don't have space shuttles that can refuel and blast around the moon to catch an asteroid, dropping oil-rig drillers to plant the explosives. And we don't really know how these asteroids would respond to the explosions."
In perhaps the most tragic aspect of this story, it doesn't even look like we'll get any awesome hardware out of this deal. "I hate to disappoint you and your readers," the congressman says, "but we don't have any rail guns or space lasers that can do the job, and we're not really looking to build any either."
No, apparently, our best shot is to detect an object decades ahead of time, and use a tractor beam or a small explosion to slightly alter the path of the killer asteroid. It's hard to say whether that would be more awful as a movie or a video game.
The Next Death Star?
Of course, one man's NEO Neutralization Station is another man's Death Star. How would Congressman Rohrabacher assuage critics who might see this as a step toward the weaponization of space?
"I am in favor of America doing whatever is necessary to protect our nation and our way of life," Rohrabacher says. "Besides, these aren't weapons -- they're defenses. We cannot let political correctness or fear of being provocative prevent us from using our knowledge to protect ourselves. Do you think China really cares about international concerns about weapons in space?"
That might be a little awkward, considering that President Obama has repeatedly promised not to weaponize space. While an American Death Ray has its appeal, leaky, commie rush-jobs littering our atmosphere do not.
This also seems like a golden opportunity to get us ready for any extraterrestrial hostiles who might rear their ugly, possibly space-Nazi heads. Unfortunately, Rohrabacher's commission won't be dealing with sentient threats, or fishing for secret UFO documents from Roswell. "The commission is designed to tackle the clear threats that asteroids and comets pose to the earth. Its scope would be limited to helping humanity prepare for this threat."
Great. He just lost Dennis Kucinich.
--------------------
Of course, just because the US is not ready to "deploy hardware" as stated above, does not mean others are not thinking of it:
- The Russian Citadel Nuclear System: http://www.tsi.lv/space/SGS1020_221%20-%2005.07.10/Adushkin/IAA-RACT%20C2%20S3-03.pdf
- Ideas for using Lasers: http://idisk.mac.com/crphipps-Public/Planetary_Defense.pdf
Jul 30th 2010 By Tommy Christopher
The approach of the year 2012, the latest in a series of predicted Ends of the World As We Know It, really didn't have us all that worried. After all, we've been burned before. (Y2K, anyone?)Then, we saw a new bill introduced by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) that proposes the establishment of a United States Commission on Planetary Defense to help protect Earth from the kind of catastrophic impact illustrated here by freakin' NASA.
Should we be worried? Is the sky falling? Will the commission include Bruce Willis and/or Morgan Freeman? Is it time to get an End Times condo?!?
Keep reading to find out what Congressman Rohrabacher told Asylum, which made our blood run cold.
NASA already spends $4 million a year to search for near-Earth objects (NEO), which the National Academy of Science defines thus: an asteroid or comet whose orbit approaches Earth's orbit to within about one-third the average distance of Earth from the Sun.
The Planetary Defense Commission will study ways to detect and neutralize deadly threats from above, and Rohrabacher says it's just the latest in his years-long quest to identify and protect humanity from NEOs. Previously, he introduced legislation to create the Pete Conrad Astronomy Awards, which honor amateur galaxy-gazers who've discovered NEOs.
Nuclear Explosives vs. Tractor Beams
"Films like 'Deep Impact' and 'Armageddon' are great entertainment," Rohrabacher says, "and they did cause many people, myself included, to start asking serious scientific questions about how real this threat is, and what we are doing to protect ourselves. Do we have the ability to protect ourselves from something that is known to have wiped out thousands, if not millions, of species before? If we're not smart enough to protect ourselves as a species from a potential known threat, then going to the moon or inventing rail guns is meaningless."
According to Rohrabacher, the scenarios laid out in science-fiction movies are surprisingly impractical:
"Right now, the only way to deal with an impending large-scale impact event is through the use of nuclear explosives. And we're not sure it would work. We don't have space shuttles that can refuel and blast around the moon to catch an asteroid, dropping oil-rig drillers to plant the explosives. And we don't really know how these asteroids would respond to the explosions."
In perhaps the most tragic aspect of this story, it doesn't even look like we'll get any awesome hardware out of this deal. "I hate to disappoint you and your readers," the congressman says, "but we don't have any rail guns or space lasers that can do the job, and we're not really looking to build any either."
No, apparently, our best shot is to detect an object decades ahead of time, and use a tractor beam or a small explosion to slightly alter the path of the killer asteroid. It's hard to say whether that would be more awful as a movie or a video game.
The Next Death Star?
Of course, one man's NEO Neutralization Station is another man's Death Star. How would Congressman Rohrabacher assuage critics who might see this as a step toward the weaponization of space?
"I am in favor of America doing whatever is necessary to protect our nation and our way of life," Rohrabacher says. "Besides, these aren't weapons -- they're defenses. We cannot let political correctness or fear of being provocative prevent us from using our knowledge to protect ourselves. Do you think China really cares about international concerns about weapons in space?"
That might be a little awkward, considering that President Obama has repeatedly promised not to weaponize space. While an American Death Ray has its appeal, leaky, commie rush-jobs littering our atmosphere do not.
This also seems like a golden opportunity to get us ready for any extraterrestrial hostiles who might rear their ugly, possibly space-Nazi heads. Unfortunately, Rohrabacher's commission won't be dealing with sentient threats, or fishing for secret UFO documents from Roswell. "The commission is designed to tackle the clear threats that asteroids and comets pose to the earth. Its scope would be limited to helping humanity prepare for this threat."
Great. He just lost Dennis Kucinich.
--------------------
Of course, just because the US is not ready to "deploy hardware" as stated above, does not mean others are not thinking of it:
- The Russian Citadel Nuclear System: http://www.tsi.lv/space/SGS1020_221%20-%2005.07.10/Adushkin/IAA-RACT%20C2%20S3-03.pdf
- Ideas for using Lasers: http://idisk.mac.com/crphipps-Public/Planetary_Defense.pdf
NASA Office Considered for Planetary Defense
From: http://spacecoalition.com/blog/nasa-office-considered-for-planetary-defense
The NASA Advisory Council’s Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense is grappling with a set of recommendations – one of which could have the space agency set up a coordination office to help protect Earth from Near Earth Objects (NEOs).
A special seven-person task force includes former astronauts, Russell Schweickart and Tom Jones. The two space travelers are co-chairs of the ad-hoc study group.
Among the topics the task force is reviewing as possible recommendations to NASA leadership:
– A Planetary Defense Coordination Office should be set up within the space agency.
– To help speed up observations of potentially menacing NEOs, a space-based infrared detector spacecraft, placed into a “Venus-like orbit” should be considered.
– Given a new coordination role in the NEO issue, NASA needs to initiate dialogue with emergency responders and disaster management agencies – including the Department of Homeland Security. Furthermore, NASA should outreach to other space agencies and other groups on an international basis to help shape detection and tracking efforts, as well as consider steps to mitigate any Earth- threatening NEOs.
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is apparently on track to meet an October 15 deadline of identifying an agency to be responsible for Near Earth Object (NEO) mitigation.
By Leonard David
From: http://www.space.com/news/nasa-asteroid-impact-near-earth-objects-planetary-defense-100726.html
NASA Panel Calls for Asteroid Defense Office
By Leonard David
SPACE.com’s Space Insider Columnistposted: 26 July 2010
01:33 pm ET
From: http://news.softpedia.com/news/NASA-Should-Focus-on-Planetary-Defense-149169.shtml
According to a panel of investigators from the American space agency, NASA should focus more on devising planetary defense strategies. The Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense, a division of the NASA Advisory Council, explains that safeguarding Earth from the effects of impacts with large space rocks should be the main priority of most – if not all – space agencies worldwide. The new report shows that the creation of a Planetary Defense Coordination Office would be a large step in the right direction. International collaboration in the field is also indicated, Space reports.
The task force that is now releasing its recommendations met between July -9 in Boulder, Colorado. Its seven members looked at existing and planned methods of detecting, intercepting, deflecting and destroying incoming space rocks, and then determined that a more unified, thorough approach is needed. One of the primary things the group considered essential for our planet's safety is the construction and launch of a sensitive infrared observatory, which should be placed in a Venus-like orbit.
This type of spacecraft would allow for a more accurate and early detection of dangerous near-Earth objects (NEO), which may be lurking in the inner solar system. The panel explains that the time of protecting our planet by conducting ground-based observations alone has passed, and that space-based studies are now required as well.
“At the end of our process, our recommendations will go to the NASA Administrator and for the first time will address the overall issue of protecting the planet from asteroid impacts. Those recommendations will include not only finding NEO that potentially pose a threat, but pro-active prevention of impacts […] and working with the international community in order to be prepared to take that kind of action,” explains former astronaut Russell Schweickart.
The new conclusions represent “the first time NASA will have that kind of serious, internal set of recommendations,” he adds. The spaceflight expert was the co-chair of the Ad-Hoc Task Force, together with former NASA astronaut Tom Jones. “It really is a turning point. For decades we were bumping along, barely aware that there were near-Earth objects. When NASA got involved in the mid-1990s... there's been a dramatic increase in the discovery rate. It was sort of an 'ah-ha' moment for the community in terms of science,” says Don Yeomans. He is the manager of the NASA NEO Program Office, which is based in Pasadena, California, at the Jet Propulstion Laboratory (JPL).
More on the upcoming meeting: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=34590
NASA Advisory Council Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense Meeting August 2010
STATUS REPORT
Date Released: Sunday, July 25, 2010
Source: NASA Advisory Council
[Federal Register: July 26, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 142)] [Notices] [Page 43565] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr26jy10-86]
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice: (10-084)]
NASA Advisory Council; Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense; Meeting
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announces a two-part meeting of the Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense of the NASA Advisory Council.
DATES: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 12 p.m.-3 p.m., and Friday, August 20, 2010, 12 p.m.-3 p.m. All times are Eastern Daylight Time.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via WebEx/Teleconference on both dates.
August 17, 12 p.m.-3 p.m.: To view briefings, log in to Web site at https://nasa.webex.com. Meeting Number: 993 545 318. Passcode: Tuesday817! Join teleconference by dialing toll-free 888-566- 1673. Passcode: 12080.
August 20, 12 p.m.-3 p.m.: To view briefings, log in to Web site at https://nasa.webex.com. Meeting Number: 995 328 530. Passcode: Friday820! Join teleconference by dialing toll-free 888-566- 1673. Passcode: 12080.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jane Parham, Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, 202-358-1715, jane.parham@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The agenda topic is: Drafting of the Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense Final Report to the NASA Advisory Council. The meeting will be open to the public up to the capacity of WebEx and teleconference lines. It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.
For questions, please call Jane Parham, 202-358-1815, jane.parham@nasa.gov.
Dated: July 19, 2010. P. Diane Rausch, Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. [FR Doc. 2010-18147 Filed 7-23-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
More info here: http://www.spacepolicyonline.com/pages/index.php?option=com_jcalpro&Itemid=109&extmode=view&extid=360&tmpl=component
The NASA Advisory Council’s Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense is grappling with a set of recommendations – one of which could have the space agency set up a coordination office to help protect Earth from Near Earth Objects (NEOs).
A special seven-person task force includes former astronauts, Russell Schweickart and Tom Jones. The two space travelers are co-chairs of the ad-hoc study group.
Among the topics the task force is reviewing as possible recommendations to NASA leadership:
– A Planetary Defense Coordination Office should be set up within the space agency.
– To help speed up observations of potentially menacing NEOs, a space-based infrared detector spacecraft, placed into a “Venus-like orbit” should be considered.
– Given a new coordination role in the NEO issue, NASA needs to initiate dialogue with emergency responders and disaster management agencies – including the Department of Homeland Security. Furthermore, NASA should outreach to other space agencies and other groups on an international basis to help shape detection and tracking efforts, as well as consider steps to mitigate any Earth- threatening NEOs.
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is apparently on track to meet an October 15 deadline of identifying an agency to be responsible for Near Earth Object (NEO) mitigation.
By Leonard David
From: http://www.space.com/news/nasa-asteroid-impact-near-earth-objects-planetary-defense-100726.html
NASA Panel Calls for Asteroid Defense Office
By Leonard David
SPACE.com’s Space Insider Columnistposted: 26 July 2010
01:33 pm ET
BOULDER, Colo. — Protecting Earth from menacing space rocks that could impact our planet should be designated a top-level NASA strategic goal, according to an agency task force. To achieve that goal, NASA should establish a Planetary Defense Coordination Office to oversee the effort, the task force said.
The seven-person NASA Advisory Council's Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense called for the new asteroid-watching office after reviewing ideas for detecting, characterizing and deflecting threatening near-Earth objects (NEOs), as well as discussing international coordination to deal with the issue.
The task force, which met here July 8-9, is reviewing its advocacy of launching an infrared detector spacecraft placed into a Venus-like orbit to provide a long-distance lookout for NEOs, which could speed up surveillance duties by decades compared to relying solely on ground-based observations.
Pro-active prevention
Former astronauts Russell Schweickart and Tom Jones are co-chairs of the Ad-Hoc Task Force, which is made up of members from academia and scientific institutions including NASA.
"At the end of our process, our recommendations will go to the NASA Administrator and for the first time will address the overall issue of protecting the planet from asteroid impacts," Schweickart told SPACE.com. "Those recommendations will include not only finding NEOs that potentially pose a threat, but pro-active prevention of impacts...and working with the international community in order to be prepared to take that kind of action," he said. [Gallery: Holes in the Earth]
The group's output "will be the first time NASA will have that kind of serious, internal set of recommendations," Schweickart added.
"It really is a turning point," said Don Yeomans, a task force member and Manager of NASA's Near-Earth Object Program Office at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.
"For decades we were bumping along, barely aware that there were near-Earth objects. When NASA got involved in the mid-1990s... there's been a dramatic increase in the discovery rate. It was sort of an 'ah-ha' moment for the community in terms of science," he told SPACE.com.
Emergency management issues
The task force members are investigating using off-the-shelf hardware to fabricate a ground-based short-term warning capability. Such gear could provide many days or hours of warning about smaller, incoming space rocks. Furthermore, using commercially-available equipment could help build a system that's inexpensive but powerful, and can be easily deployed around the globe.
The task force is also considering emergency management matters, such as what to do if Earth appears poised for a bruising impact.
Speaking to that topic via remote conferencing was Dennis Mileti, professor emeritus and former director of the Hazards Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder. He is an expert on societal aspects of hazards and disasters.
If NASA takes a lead role in planetary defense, the job of detecting threatening NEOs falls to the agency, Mileti advised. It is important, he said, to structure a highly reliable warning and messaging system, coupled with a public education campaign.
Blending NEO space scientists with emergency responders and disaster management agencies — including the Department of Homeland Security — is critical, Mileti said. "That's really mixed soup to weave together," he told the task force.
Mileti's message to NASA: "They'll need to provide the leadership to reach out to the emergency management community ... because it will not go the other way around."
- Images — Asteroids Up Close, Astronauts on Asteroids
- NASA's New Asteroid Mission Could Save the Planet
- Will an Asteroid Hit Earth? Are We All Doomed?
From: http://news.softpedia.com/news/NASA-Should-Focus-on-Planetary-Defense-149169.shtml
According to a panel of investigators from the American space agency, NASA should focus more on devising planetary defense strategies. The Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense, a division of the NASA Advisory Council, explains that safeguarding Earth from the effects of impacts with large space rocks should be the main priority of most – if not all – space agencies worldwide. The new report shows that the creation of a Planetary Defense Coordination Office would be a large step in the right direction. International collaboration in the field is also indicated, Space reports.
The task force that is now releasing its recommendations met between July -9 in Boulder, Colorado. Its seven members looked at existing and planned methods of detecting, intercepting, deflecting and destroying incoming space rocks, and then determined that a more unified, thorough approach is needed. One of the primary things the group considered essential for our planet's safety is the construction and launch of a sensitive infrared observatory, which should be placed in a Venus-like orbit.
This type of spacecraft would allow for a more accurate and early detection of dangerous near-Earth objects (NEO), which may be lurking in the inner solar system. The panel explains that the time of protecting our planet by conducting ground-based observations alone has passed, and that space-based studies are now required as well.
“At the end of our process, our recommendations will go to the NASA Administrator and for the first time will address the overall issue of protecting the planet from asteroid impacts. Those recommendations will include not only finding NEO that potentially pose a threat, but pro-active prevention of impacts […] and working with the international community in order to be prepared to take that kind of action,” explains former astronaut Russell Schweickart.
The new conclusions represent “the first time NASA will have that kind of serious, internal set of recommendations,” he adds. The spaceflight expert was the co-chair of the Ad-Hoc Task Force, together with former NASA astronaut Tom Jones. “It really is a turning point. For decades we were bumping along, barely aware that there were near-Earth objects. When NASA got involved in the mid-1990s... there's been a dramatic increase in the discovery rate. It was sort of an 'ah-ha' moment for the community in terms of science,” says Don Yeomans. He is the manager of the NASA NEO Program Office, which is based in Pasadena, California, at the Jet Propulstion Laboratory (JPL).
More on the upcoming meeting: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=34590
NASA Advisory Council Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense Meeting August 2010
STATUS REPORT
Date Released: Sunday, July 25, 2010
Source: NASA Advisory Council
| |
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice: (10-084)]
NASA Advisory Council; Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense; Meeting
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announces a two-part meeting of the Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense of the NASA Advisory Council.
DATES: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 12 p.m.-3 p.m., and Friday, August 20, 2010, 12 p.m.-3 p.m. All times are Eastern Daylight Time.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via WebEx/Teleconference on both dates.
August 17, 12 p.m.-3 p.m.: To view briefings, log in to Web site at https://nasa.webex.com. Meeting Number: 993 545 318. Passcode: Tuesday817! Join teleconference by dialing toll-free 888-566- 1673. Passcode: 12080.
August 20, 12 p.m.-3 p.m.: To view briefings, log in to Web site at https://nasa.webex.com. Meeting Number: 995 328 530. Passcode: Friday820! Join teleconference by dialing toll-free 888-566- 1673. Passcode: 12080.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jane Parham, Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Headquarters, Washington, DC 20546, 202-358-1715, jane.parham@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The agenda topic is: Drafting of the Ad-Hoc Task Force on Planetary Defense Final Report to the NASA Advisory Council. The meeting will be open to the public up to the capacity of WebEx and teleconference lines. It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.
For questions, please call Jane Parham, 202-358-1815, jane.parham@nasa.gov.
Dated: July 19, 2010. P. Diane Rausch, Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration. [FR Doc. 2010-18147 Filed 7-23-10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
19 July 2010
SBSP update
New video on converting a coal plant to a Space Solar Power Plant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWD99o5TRkU&feature=player_embedded#!
Open letter "Why not Space Solar Power"
http://spaceenergy.com/AnnouncementRetrieve.aspx?ID=51945
NASA Adhoc Planetary Defense Website:
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/about/planetarydefense_taskforce.html
How good is Europe at observing potential NEO Threats?
http://moso-technology.com/blog/2010/07/observing-objects-that-can-impact-the-earth-how-good-is-europe-in-observing-potential-threats-2/
If Mars attacks...do we have a contingency plan?
http://www.slate.com/id/2260628/
Non-linear statistical control for SPS transmission:
https://sites.google.com/a/temple.edu/statistical-control-of-space-solar-power-transmission-system/
Planetary Defense
http://www.space.com/news/earth-asteroid-impact-congress-commision-100719.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWD99o5TRkU&feature=player_embedded#!
Open letter "Why not Space Solar Power"
http://spaceenergy.com/AnnouncementRetrieve.aspx?ID=51945
NASA Adhoc Planetary Defense Website:
http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/about/planetarydefense_taskforce.html
How good is Europe at observing potential NEO Threats?
http://moso-technology.com/blog/2010/07/observing-objects-that-can-impact-the-earth-how-good-is-europe-in-observing-potential-threats-2/
If Mars attacks...do we have a contingency plan?
http://www.slate.com/id/2260628/
Non-linear statistical control for SPS transmission:
https://sites.google.com/a/temple.edu/statistical-control-of-space-solar-power-transmission-system/
Planetary Defense
http://www.space.com/news/earth-asteroid-impact-congress-commision-100719.html
25 June 2010
Orbital Debris, Planetary Defense, Space Sustainability Issues Detailed Before United Nations Committee
http://www.newswise.com/articles/orbital-debris-planetary-defense-space-sustainability-issues-detailed-before-united-nations-committee
Orbital Debris, Planetary Defense, Space Sustainability Issues Detailed Before United Nations Committee
Released: 6/25/2010 1:00 PM EDT
Source: Secure World Foundation
Newswise — Dealing with the troublesome trend in the growth of Earth-circling orbital debris is a major element to ensure the sustainability of space. Moreover, human and environmental security can be maximized by global cooperative use of space systems to benefit all of humanity.
These were among the topics highlighted by Secure World Foundation (SWF) during the Fifty-third session of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), held June 9-18 in Vienna, Austria.
“In all of our work, we actively promote the development of sound policies to support the long term sustainability of outer space activities and the peaceful use of space activities for the benefit of Earth and its peoples,” explained Dr. Ray Williamson, SWF’s Executive Director.
Secure World Foundation attended the Committee meeting as a permanent observer. Joining Williamson at the COPUOS session was Agnieszka Lukaszczyk, a space policy consultant for Secure World Foundation.
In Williamson’s “Exchange of Views Statement” to the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space on June 11, he detailed SWF’s multi-pronged interests in key areas:
-- Space Sustainability, ensuring that all humanity can continue to use outer space for peaceful purposes and socioeconomic benefit.
-- Space Policy and Space Law Development through assisting emerging space States develop effective space policies.
-- Support of Human and Environmental Security through maximizing the international cooperative use of space systems for the benefit of humanity.
-- Planetary Defense by promoting a unified international policy approach to protection of our planet from the threat of near Earth objects (NEOs).
World community has a unique opportunity
Secure World Foundation is dedicated to maintaining the secure and sustainable use of space for the benefit of Earth and all its peoples. It acts as a research body, convener and facilitator to advocate for key space sustainability and other space related topics, Williamson said, as well as examining their influence on governance and international development.
“The Foundation believes that the challenge of sustaining the space environment into the future must be dealt with in a truly international manner,” Williamson added, with SWF strongly supporting the work of COPUOS.
“As the benefits of space activities expand and improve, keeping outer space available for peaceful activities will become ever more important,” Williamson stated. “As we move into the last half of the first hundred years of the space age, the world community has a unique opportunity to safeguard the secure and sustainable use of the space environment.”
Reporters note: To access Dr. Ray Williamson’s entire “Exchange of Views Statement” to the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, please go to:
http://www.secureworldfoundation.org/siteadmin/images/files/SWF-StatementToCOPUOS-June2010.pdf
Contact:
Dr. Ray Williamson
Executive Director
Phone: (303) 554-1560
Cell Phone: (303) 501-0430
Email: rwilliamson@swfound.org
About Secure World Foundation
Secure World Foundation (SWF) is headquartered in Superior, Colorado, with offices in Washington, D.C. and Vienna, Austria. SWF is a private operating foundation dedicated to the secure and sustainable use of space for the benefit of Earth and all its peoples.
SWF engages with academics, policy makers, scientists and advocates in the space and international affairs communities to support steps that strengthen global space security. It promotes the development of cooperative and effective use of space for the protection of Earth’s environment and human security.
The Foundation acts as a research body, convener and facilitator to advocate for key space security and other space related topics and to examine their influence on governance and international development.
Orbital Debris, Planetary Defense, Space Sustainability Issues Detailed Before United Nations Committee
Released: 6/25/2010 1:00 PM EDT
Source: Secure World Foundation
Newswise — Dealing with the troublesome trend in the growth of Earth-circling orbital debris is a major element to ensure the sustainability of space. Moreover, human and environmental security can be maximized by global cooperative use of space systems to benefit all of humanity.
These were among the topics highlighted by Secure World Foundation (SWF) during the Fifty-third session of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), held June 9-18 in Vienna, Austria.
“In all of our work, we actively promote the development of sound policies to support the long term sustainability of outer space activities and the peaceful use of space activities for the benefit of Earth and its peoples,” explained Dr. Ray Williamson, SWF’s Executive Director.
Secure World Foundation attended the Committee meeting as a permanent observer. Joining Williamson at the COPUOS session was Agnieszka Lukaszczyk, a space policy consultant for Secure World Foundation.
In Williamson’s “Exchange of Views Statement” to the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space on June 11, he detailed SWF’s multi-pronged interests in key areas:
-- Space Sustainability, ensuring that all humanity can continue to use outer space for peaceful purposes and socioeconomic benefit.
-- Space Policy and Space Law Development through assisting emerging space States develop effective space policies.
-- Support of Human and Environmental Security through maximizing the international cooperative use of space systems for the benefit of humanity.
-- Planetary Defense by promoting a unified international policy approach to protection of our planet from the threat of near Earth objects (NEOs).
World community has a unique opportunity
Secure World Foundation is dedicated to maintaining the secure and sustainable use of space for the benefit of Earth and all its peoples. It acts as a research body, convener and facilitator to advocate for key space sustainability and other space related topics, Williamson said, as well as examining their influence on governance and international development.
“The Foundation believes that the challenge of sustaining the space environment into the future must be dealt with in a truly international manner,” Williamson added, with SWF strongly supporting the work of COPUOS.
“As the benefits of space activities expand and improve, keeping outer space available for peaceful activities will become ever more important,” Williamson stated. “As we move into the last half of the first hundred years of the space age, the world community has a unique opportunity to safeguard the secure and sustainable use of the space environment.”
Reporters note: To access Dr. Ray Williamson’s entire “Exchange of Views Statement” to the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, please go to:
http://www.secureworldfoundation.org/siteadmin/images/files/SWF-StatementToCOPUOS-June2010.pdf
Contact:
Dr. Ray Williamson
Executive Director
Phone: (303) 554-1560
Cell Phone: (303) 501-0430
Email: rwilliamson@swfound.org
About Secure World Foundation
Secure World Foundation (SWF) is headquartered in Superior, Colorado, with offices in Washington, D.C. and Vienna, Austria. SWF is a private operating foundation dedicated to the secure and sustainable use of space for the benefit of Earth and all its peoples.
SWF engages with academics, policy makers, scientists and advocates in the space and international affairs communities to support steps that strengthen global space security. It promotes the development of cooperative and effective use of space for the protection of Earth’s environment and human security.
The Foundation acts as a research body, convener and facilitator to advocate for key space security and other space related topics and to examine their influence on governance and international development.
24 June 2010
A Compelling Argument For Space Solar Power
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/space/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385&plckPostId=Blog%3a04ce340e-4b63-4d23-9695-d49ab661f385Post%3a3b311ee0-3142-487e-9709-8c59e6637b9d&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest
A Compelling Argument For Space Solar Power
Posted by Frank Morring, Jr. at 6/22/2010 10:03 AM CDT
A small band of visionary engineers, mostly in Japan and the U.S., has long argued that it would make a lot of sense to apply the space-faring skills gained over the past half century and tap the constant flow of solar energy washing over the planet.
Orbiting solar arrays could convert the Sun's power into electricity and beam it down to the surface as microwaves. Antenna farms could catch it, switch it back to electricity and plug it into the power grid. The technology exists, and has been tested at low power -- and cost -- with mountaintop-to-mountaintop transmissions between a couple of the Hawaiian Islands.
John Mankins, a former NASA technologist and longtime advocate for space solar power (SSP) who helped set up the test, says the next step toward a pilot SSP plant able to generate 5-10 megawatts would be an end-to-end systems study, with early lab work and low-cost flight tests -- perhaps at the International Space Station. The study would take about three years and cost about $100 million.
That's a lot of money, of course, and times are tight. Cost has long been the most effective argument against SSP, because the up-front cost of developing and deploying the technology is greater than the cost of energy from fossil fuel. But consider this:
NASA/MODIS Rapid Response Team
NASA's Terra satellite used its Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer June 19 to collect this image of the spreading oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico. British Petroleum, the company that owns the mess, has famously agreed to fund a $20 billion cleanup.
That sum, which likely won't be enough to clean up this oily mess, would be a very generous down payment on a space solar power constellation. Certainly it would more than cover the SSP power plant Mankins has suggested.
Maybe it's time to amortize the cost of fossil fuel. The disaster in the Gulf is dramatic evidence that it's more than the price of gasoline at the pump. But so are rising global temperatures, the world's fragile oil-based economy, and the dangerous military conflicts that hold it all together.
By comparison, space solar power is not too expensive. Like sunlight, it's free.
A Compelling Argument For Space Solar Power
Posted by Frank Morring, Jr. at 6/22/2010 10:03 AM CDT
A small band of visionary engineers, mostly in Japan and the U.S., has long argued that it would make a lot of sense to apply the space-faring skills gained over the past half century and tap the constant flow of solar energy washing over the planet.
Orbiting solar arrays could convert the Sun's power into electricity and beam it down to the surface as microwaves. Antenna farms could catch it, switch it back to electricity and plug it into the power grid. The technology exists, and has been tested at low power -- and cost -- with mountaintop-to-mountaintop transmissions between a couple of the Hawaiian Islands.
John Mankins, a former NASA technologist and longtime advocate for space solar power (SSP) who helped set up the test, says the next step toward a pilot SSP plant able to generate 5-10 megawatts would be an end-to-end systems study, with early lab work and low-cost flight tests -- perhaps at the International Space Station. The study would take about three years and cost about $100 million.
That's a lot of money, of course, and times are tight. Cost has long been the most effective argument against SSP, because the up-front cost of developing and deploying the technology is greater than the cost of energy from fossil fuel. But consider this:
NASA/MODIS Rapid Response Team
NASA's Terra satellite used its Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer June 19 to collect this image of the spreading oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico. British Petroleum, the company that owns the mess, has famously agreed to fund a $20 billion cleanup.
That sum, which likely won't be enough to clean up this oily mess, would be a very generous down payment on a space solar power constellation. Certainly it would more than cover the SSP power plant Mankins has suggested.
Maybe it's time to amortize the cost of fossil fuel. The disaster in the Gulf is dramatic evidence that it's more than the price of gasoline at the pump. But so are rising global temperatures, the world's fragile oil-based economy, and the dangerous military conflicts that hold it all together.
By comparison, space solar power is not too expensive. Like sunlight, it's free.
22 June 2010
21 June 2010
Making the case for Planetary Defense:
Making the case for Planetary Defense:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33362369/Making-the-Case-for-Planetary-Defense-Michael-K-Simpson-Ph-D
http://www.scribd.com/doc/33362369/Making-the-Case-for-Planetary-Defense-Michael-K-Simpson-Ph-D
19 June 2010
Space Solar Update
Outstanding Video of HLV Deploying Prototype Space Solar Power Satellite:
http://www.frassanito2.com/SPS/
New SpaceEnergy newsletter:
http://spaceenergy.com/AnnouncementRetrieve.aspx?ID=50293
First Solar Sail Spacecraft Photographed (Japanese Deepspace Probe Ikaros "kitecraft" propelled only by sunlight)
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/worlds-first-solar-sail-photo-japan-100618.html
Funny Episode of the Daily Show on Energy Independence:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-june-16-2010/an-energy-independent-future
http://www.frassanito2.com/SPS/
New SpaceEnergy newsletter:
http://spaceenergy.com/AnnouncementRetrieve.aspx?ID=50293
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/worlds-first-solar-sail-photo-japan-100618.html
Funny Episode of the Daily Show on Energy Independence:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-june-16-2010/an-energy-independent-future
16 June 2010
Various
Hayabusa returns with Asteroid Dust Sample!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100614/ts_nm/us_space_japan_australia
Excerpt: "NASA scientist Paul Abell, who monitored the return, said Hayabusa was significant from in terms planetary defense, bearing in mind an asteroid impact is thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs. Knowing the physical characteristics of near-Earth asteroids would be useful "in case we see something coming at us in the future," he said. As leftover matter from the building of the solar system, he added, asteroids could also tell us about its formation and possibly the origins of life."
Interesting Chronology of Space Solar Power and Solaren
http://allsaints-catholicchurch-lanchester.co.uk/img/gb.php?ax=solaren-space-solar-power
Upcoming July 8-9 Meeting of Adhoc Planetary Defense Group
http://cryptome.org/0001/nasa061510.htm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100614/ts_nm/us_space_japan_australia
Excerpt: "NASA scientist Paul Abell, who monitored the return, said Hayabusa was significant from in terms planetary defense, bearing in mind an asteroid impact is thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs. Knowing the physical characteristics of near-Earth asteroids would be useful "in case we see something coming at us in the future," he said. As leftover matter from the building of the solar system, he added, asteroids could also tell us about its formation and possibly the origins of life."
Interesting Chronology of Space Solar Power and Solaren
http://allsaints-catholicchurch-lanchester.co.uk/img/gb.php?ax=solaren-space-solar-power
Upcoming July 8-9 Meeting of Adhoc Planetary Defense Group
http://cryptome.org/0001/nasa061510.htm
15 June 2010
Life on Titan?
From: http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1995828,00.html
Thursday, Jun. 10, 2010
Life on Titan? Intriguing Findings on Saturn's Moon
By Michael D. Lemonick
Back in August of 1996, headlines around the world were ablaze with three remarkable words: "Life on Mars!" The evidence was circumstantial but compelling: a Martian meteorite recovered in the Antarctic contained what seemed to be fossilized bacteria. NASA's breathless press conference breaking the news, which pre-empted daytime programming, signaled that the discovery should be taken very seriously. But before long, scientists came to the general conclusion that it was probably all just a mistake. Never mind.
That embarrassing episode might help explain why NASA scientists were so quick to muzzle talk of another such "discovery" last week. This one concerned the possibility of life on Saturn's largest moon, Titan. Space agency scientists waved off reports — which had been popping up in science publications and bouncing around the Internet — that something might be stirring out there. Such official caution notwithstanding, the findings that led to all the buzz cannot be dismissed entirely. (See the top 50 space moments since Sputnik.)
The whispers began a few weeks ago, with reports coming from the team monitoring the Cassini spacecraft, which has been orbiting Saturn and barnstorming its moons since 2004. Titan was a major focus of the mission all along, since it's bigger than the planet Mercury and the only moon massive enough to have a significant atmosphere. That atmosphere is rich in organic compounds, including methane and other hydrocarbons, so while the moon's frigid temperatures preclude any sort of life as we know it, it has long been thought to offer hints about what a planet might look like before biology takes hold.
Investigators have, however, pondered one other remote possibility. If an alternate form of life could exist with liquid methane taking the place of water in cells and other biological parts — something that's theoretically conceivable — Titan is just the sort of place it might thrive.
About five years ago, NASA astrobiologist Chris McKay and others suggested that if such "methanogens" existed, their collective metabolism could lead to lower levels of ethane and acetylene in Titan's atmosphere than you'd normally expect, and a net migration of hydrogen down onto the surface, where the methanogens would theoretically be sucking it in as food. It's the same kind of clue that might pique the interest of aliens if they noticed the fluctuations of carbon dioxide in our own atmosphere as the changing seasons lead to more and less leaf coverage and greater or lesser CO2 uptake. (See pictures of Saturn.)
Scientists already knew there wasn't as much ethane in Titan's atmosphere as they'd expected. If there had been, the moon would have been covered with an ocean of the stuff several meters deep and Cassini saw nothing of the kind. Now, the spacecraft seems to have found that the other two conditions have been met as well.
So does that mean methanogenic life exists? No. In the very hedged language of the scientist, it means that conditions have been found that are consistent with the presence of that life. But "consistent with" and "evidence for" are two very different things. As McKay says in an essay posted to the Cassini website this week: "This is still a long way from 'evidence of life'." [But], he continues, "it is extremely interesting."
McKay goes on to list four possible explanations for the observations, "in order of their likely reality." First, the hydrogen migration might not really be happening. It's not a direct observation, but rather an extrapolation based on how much hydrogen is in Titan's upper atmosphere compared to the lower atmosphere. If the model that was used to make the extrapolation is wrong in some way, then the result could be a false positive. (See pictures of Earth from space.)
Second, if the model is correct, some other process could be pulling (or pushing) hydrogen toward the surface. Third some kind of strange surface chemistry, rather than living organisms, could be eating up the hydrogen. That's the same conclusion scientists reached — although not unanimously — when the Viking landers detected unexpected chemical activity on the surface of Mars in the 1970s.
Fourth, and least likely: Life on Titan!
The good news for those who are looking for extraterrestrial life is that even though actual biological activity comes last on McKay's list, it does remain an intriguing conjecture. These new results have done nothing, at least, to rule it out. Still, don't wait around for the press conference — at least not yet.
Thursday, Jun. 10, 2010
Life on Titan? Intriguing Findings on Saturn's Moon
By Michael D. Lemonick
Back in August of 1996, headlines around the world were ablaze with three remarkable words: "Life on Mars!" The evidence was circumstantial but compelling: a Martian meteorite recovered in the Antarctic contained what seemed to be fossilized bacteria. NASA's breathless press conference breaking the news, which pre-empted daytime programming, signaled that the discovery should be taken very seriously. But before long, scientists came to the general conclusion that it was probably all just a mistake. Never mind.
That embarrassing episode might help explain why NASA scientists were so quick to muzzle talk of another such "discovery" last week. This one concerned the possibility of life on Saturn's largest moon, Titan. Space agency scientists waved off reports — which had been popping up in science publications and bouncing around the Internet — that something might be stirring out there. Such official caution notwithstanding, the findings that led to all the buzz cannot be dismissed entirely. (See the top 50 space moments since Sputnik.)
The whispers began a few weeks ago, with reports coming from the team monitoring the Cassini spacecraft, which has been orbiting Saturn and barnstorming its moons since 2004. Titan was a major focus of the mission all along, since it's bigger than the planet Mercury and the only moon massive enough to have a significant atmosphere. That atmosphere is rich in organic compounds, including methane and other hydrocarbons, so while the moon's frigid temperatures preclude any sort of life as we know it, it has long been thought to offer hints about what a planet might look like before biology takes hold.
Investigators have, however, pondered one other remote possibility. If an alternate form of life could exist with liquid methane taking the place of water in cells and other biological parts — something that's theoretically conceivable — Titan is just the sort of place it might thrive.
About five years ago, NASA astrobiologist Chris McKay and others suggested that if such "methanogens" existed, their collective metabolism could lead to lower levels of ethane and acetylene in Titan's atmosphere than you'd normally expect, and a net migration of hydrogen down onto the surface, where the methanogens would theoretically be sucking it in as food. It's the same kind of clue that might pique the interest of aliens if they noticed the fluctuations of carbon dioxide in our own atmosphere as the changing seasons lead to more and less leaf coverage and greater or lesser CO2 uptake. (See pictures of Saturn.)
Scientists already knew there wasn't as much ethane in Titan's atmosphere as they'd expected. If there had been, the moon would have been covered with an ocean of the stuff several meters deep and Cassini saw nothing of the kind. Now, the spacecraft seems to have found that the other two conditions have been met as well.
So does that mean methanogenic life exists? No. In the very hedged language of the scientist, it means that conditions have been found that are consistent with the presence of that life. But "consistent with" and "evidence for" are two very different things. As McKay says in an essay posted to the Cassini website this week: "This is still a long way from 'evidence of life'." [But], he continues, "it is extremely interesting."
McKay goes on to list four possible explanations for the observations, "in order of their likely reality." First, the hydrogen migration might not really be happening. It's not a direct observation, but rather an extrapolation based on how much hydrogen is in Titan's upper atmosphere compared to the lower atmosphere. If the model that was used to make the extrapolation is wrong in some way, then the result could be a false positive. (See pictures of Earth from space.)
Second, if the model is correct, some other process could be pulling (or pushing) hydrogen toward the surface. Third some kind of strange surface chemistry, rather than living organisms, could be eating up the hydrogen. That's the same conclusion scientists reached — although not unanimously — when the Viking landers detected unexpected chemical activity on the surface of Mars in the 1970s.
Fourth, and least likely: Life on Titan!
The good news for those who are looking for extraterrestrial life is that even though actual biological activity comes last on McKay's list, it does remain an intriguing conjecture. These new results have done nothing, at least, to rule it out. Still, don't wait around for the press conference — at least not yet.
Space Solar Still Unknown in Solar Industry
Dwayne Day blasts Space Solar as being a Retro, Fringe Idea. Enjoy his jabbing editorial, which contains some useful advice to advocates:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1641/1
"Instead of holding the “Second NSS Space Solar Power Symposium” at the International Space Development Conference next year, they should try to hold it at SOLAR 2011. They should see if they can face the members of the American Solar Energy Society directly and hear what they think of the idea of space solar power. It’s time for the space solar power advocates to decide if they want to be a social organization, no different from a knitting circle or a model train club, or if they want to be an industry."
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1641/1
"Instead of holding the “Second NSS Space Solar Power Symposium” at the International Space Development Conference next year, they should try to hold it at SOLAR 2011. They should see if they can face the members of the American Solar Energy Society directly and hear what they think of the idea of space solar power. It’s time for the space solar power advocates to decide if they want to be a social organization, no different from a knitting circle or a model train club, or if they want to be an industry."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
