Orbital Debris Remediation Market Seen Needing US Kick-Start

“The technology and the engineering is probably the easy part of solving this problem,” while setting norms and a legal framework could be more challenging, said Secure World Foundation Program Planning Director Brian Weeden. Principles of implementation of space debris removal are hazy when the launching state can't be identified, he said. Space lawyer Charles Mudd said the federal government should make clear how companies can acquire and recapture debris under the Outer Space Treaty's legal paradigm, so rights and interests are clear.

OSTP expects to issue a plan this summer for agencies on policy steps and R&D that the U.S. should prioritize for orbital debris, said Space Policy Assistant Director Ezinne Uzo-Okoro. That plan will look at remediation and prevention, tracking and modeling, she said. OSTP has another event Jan. 20 to get input on possible mitigation actions.

"We need a customer," said CisLunar Industries Chief Technology Officer Joseph Pawelski, urging government support for creating strategic metal and propellant supplies made from captured and recycled orbital debris to help drive the market for recycling debris. Christie Iacomini, Prime Movers Lab vice president-engineering, said technology demos could be followed by regulations that help close the business cases for that tech's use. "We need a catalyst other than a catastrophic event" to drive demand for remediation services, she said.

OSTP should formulate a priority list of objects in orbit that came from the U.S., pose the highest debris risks and for which the government would be willing to pay for cleanup, said Satellite Design for Recovery founder Michael Maloney. He said that would then drive work on mission planning and cost estimates, which would help then solidify the business case for remediation. Maloney urged a record-keeping requirement by operators on how their satellites were made and with what parts, to facilitate orbital recycling efforts years from now.

Navies have understood for decades they're responsible for taking care of their defunct ships, and it's not clear why that same government responsibility isn't the norm for space debris, said space consultant Doug Loverro. He said space launches shouldn't be authorized without "a for-certain deorbit plan."

The biggest debris risks are dead satellites and large upper-stage rockets, and the U.S. should fund competitive fixed-price contracts to remove the highest risk ones, said Turion Space CEO Ryan Westerdahl. That would drive tech development and drive down prices, he said. Bradford Space CEO Ian Fichtenbaum said when it has discussed cost-effective removal of U.S.-generated debris, agencies are receptive but afraid of committing. He said there should be a way of creating a precedent for the government taking responsibility for its messes. Fichtenbaum urged a requirement that commercial launches obtain third-party deorbit services when a mission in a particularly problematic orbit fails.

The White House needs to make clear which agency “owns” debris remediation and can be the coordinator for all the various agencies that have a hand in it, said Astroscale Vice President-Global Space Policy Charity Weeden. NASA seems like a natural fit, she said. U.S. R&D priority should be funding a flagship large debris remediation demo, she said.

Increased use of autonomous systems is crucial as commercial space grows, and U.S. leadership is needed on rules and standards that promote autonomy, such as requiring satellites to have maneuverability capabilities if deployed in certain orbits, said Kayhan Space CEO Siamak Hesar. Companies with new remediation tech ideas face a hurdle as opportunities to demo that tech on operational satellites might have to wait years, said Tethers Unlimited Chief Technologist Rob Hoyt. He advocated federal support for such rapid testing.