NASA’s innovative solution for efficient space debris cleanup

A new NASA OTPS report identifies cost-effective methods for managing orbital debris with an emphasis on direct assessment of risks and costs over 30 years. Credit: SciTechDaily.com

New data analysis suggests so NASA and its partners may have discovered more cost-effective ways to deal with the growing problem of orbital debris than previously thought.

NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy and Strategy has released a new report that provides agency leadership with important new insights into how to measure the risks posed by orbital debris.

“Increasing activity in Earth’s orbit has brought us everything from faster ground communication to a better understanding of our changing climate,” said Charity Weeden, who leads NASA’s OTPS. “These blooming opportunities lead to a crowded space environment. This study is part of NASA’s work to rapidly improve our understanding of this environment, as outlined in NASA’s recently released Space Sustainability Strategy, by applying an economic lens to this critical issue.

The report, Cost-Benefit Analysis of Orbital Debris Mitigation, Tracking, and Remediation, is Phase 2 of OTPS’ work to address the technical and economic uncertainties associated with orbital debris.

A simulation of orbital debris around Earth demonstrating the population of objects in the geosynchronous region. Credit: NASA ODPO

Advances from previous reports

The OTPS Phase 1 report, released in 2023, provided initial information for policymakers seeking cost-benefit analyzes of remedial actions for orbital debris, including moving, removing, or reusing objects. A new report has improved the quality of estimates of the risks posed by orbital debris to spacecraft. These new estimates cover everything from the largest pieces of debris in the universe to millimeter-sized debris. The report also expands the focus of OTPS teams on actions that can mitigate the creation of new debris and monitor existing debris.

“This study allows us to begin to answer the question: What are the most cost-effective actions we can take to deal with the growing problem of orbital debris?” said NASA analyst Jericho Locke, lead author of the report. “By measuring everything in dollars, we can directly compare the shielding spacecraft to tracking smaller debris, or removing 50 large debris to remove 50,000 smaller ones.”

Innovative approaches to risk measurement

The new OTPS report differs from previous studies of orbital debris in that it directly estimates the risk posed by space debris, instead of risk proxies such as the number of pieces of debris in orbit. In addition, it measures risk in dollars—modeling the costs operators would incur in maneuvering the spacecraft to avoid debris, dealing with close approaches, and damage or loss due to debris impact. The study simulates how the orbital debris environment will evolve in 30 years.

Evaluating cost-effective strategies

Overall, the study compares the cost-effectiveness of more than 10 different actions that can be taken to reduce the risk of orbital debris, such as shielding, tracking small debris, or remediating large debris. Ultimately, the team hopes to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of combining different actions, known as portfolios.

The report’s analysis reevaluates common practices that the space community has historically considered to be cost-effective methods of promoting space sustainability. For example, the report estimates that some debris remediation methods may be as valuable as debris mitigation. He also estimates that quickly removing a defunct spacecraft from orbit is a cost-effective method of reducing risk. Such findings could provide new considerations for NASA leaders and the space community as they approach the issue of orbital debris.

Future plans and public availability

OTPS plans to publicly release the research code used to create the study. The research team plans to continue their work on understanding orbital debris and the various approaches to it, and will work to share their knowledge with stakeholders.