1

Near-Earth objects – a threat for Earth?Or: NEOs for engineers and physicists

Lecture 9 – Politics

Prof. Dr. E. Igenbergs (LRT)Dr. D. Koschny (ESA)

Image credit: ESA

News

Web site of the European Commission-funded project NEOShield is online since 21 Jun 2012 – NEOShield will study strategies on asteroid deflection, budget ca. 5 Mio Euro. Check out http://www.neoshield.net

2

More news

Asteroid 308242 (2005 GO21) – size 1.4 km! - flew within 17 lunar distance of Earth yesterday

3http://www.neoshield.net/en/news-and-events/news/close-approach-of-large-asteroid-today.htm

44

Context

Outline

The United Nations (UN) and the NEO threat – history of the Action Team 14 (AT 14)

How do the UN work

Intermezzo – the IAU and risk metrics

The decision process within ESA

Proposed decision process within AT 14

History of the Action Team #14

In 1999, the NEO issue came to the attention of the UN during the Unispace III conference (3rd UN conference on the exploration and peaceful uses of outer space)

Resulted in 40 ‘recommendations’

If a country offered to take the lead in following up any of the recommendations, an ‘Action Team’ would be installed

Unispace 3 conference 1999 as the starting point of UN’s interest

See: A/Conf. 184/6

The Space Millennium: Vienna Declaration on Space and Human Development, Resolution 1 , para (1) (c)

(i) To improve the scientific knowledge of near and outer space by promoting cooperative activities in such areas as astronomy, space biology and medicine, space physics, the study of near- Earth objects and planetary exploration;

(iii) To improve the international coordination of activities related to near-Earth objects, harmonizing the efforts directed at identification, follow-up observations and orbit prediction, while at the same time giving consideration to developing a common strategy that would include future activities related to near-Earth objects.

In 2001, the ‘Action Team on NEOs, also known as Action Team 14’ was established by COPUOS. Two phases:

• Assessment phase

• Implementation phase

… “develop draft recommendations for the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee on the international response to the NEO threat []. As endorsed by the Subcommittee, the recommendations pass on for consideration by COPUOS. If COPUOS endorses the recommendations, they move on to the UN General Assembly.“

AT-14 milestone: 2008 report by the Association of Space Explorers “Asteroid Threats: A call for Global Response”

The final AT-14 report is due in February 2013 to the STSC; will go to COPUOS in June 2013

8

Interim reports can be found athttp://www.oosa.unvienna.org/oosa/en/COPUOS/stsc/2012/docs.html

9

10

Status – proposed structure

United NationsSecurity Council

MAOGMission Authorisation and

Oversight Group

IAWNInformation, Analysis, and

Warning Network

SMPAGSpace Mission Planning

and Advisory Group

From the ASE report “Asteroid Threats:A call for global response”

IAWN: observations, orbit prediction, impact effects modelling, communication

SMPAG: assess space missions for impact mitigation

MAOG: political body

Disaster management community

The United Nations

COPUOS = Committee for Peaceful Use of Outer Space

STSC = Scientific and Technical Subcommittee

NEO WG = NEO Working Group

General Assembly

Legal SC

Action Team 14

STSC

COPUOS

NEO WG

Security Council

Intermezzo – the IAU

IAU = International Astronomical Union

Requires that if a data centre computes an impact risk larger than 1 % of the background risk, the results have to be validated with another data centre

13

Intermezzo – metrics for impact probabilities

14

• IP = Impact Probability• E = Energy released by the impact in Mt• T = Time span until the impact in years

PS = log10 R

The Palermo scale

R ~ IP

pbT

NOTE 1: pb = background riskpb = 0.03 E-4/5

Note 2: PS = -2 means that the particular impact risk is 1% of the background impact risk until the time of impact.

NOTE 3: 1 kt TNT = 4.184 * 1012 J

2011 AG5

d = 130 – 290 m => assume 200 m, v = 15 km/s

T = 28 years

With = 2000 kg/m3: m = 8 109 kg

Kinetic energy E = 9 1017 J or 225 Mt TNT

pb = 3.9 10-4 per year

PS = -0.74 – on NEODyS -1.06 (different diameter assumed?)

15

How are decisions taken in ESA’s SSA programme?

SSA-NEO-ESA-HO-055/1-, 06 May 2011, dvkPage 17

Directorof SRE

Key players and responsibilities - I

DirectorGeneral

ESACore Team

ESATechnical Staff

ProgrammeBoard

advises

directs

directs

supports

report

Directorof HSO

directs

UserGroup

Contractors(Industry, institutes)

HSO = Directorate of Human Spaceflight and Operations

SRE = Directorate of Science and Robotic Exploration

SSA-NEO-ESA-HO-055/1-, 06 May 2011, dvkPage 18

Key players and responsibilities - II

User group

• Consists of experts, stake holders, and user representatives (space agencies, political decision makers, …)

• Advises both Core Team and Programme Board on requirements, architecture, implementation

Programme Board

• Consists of Delegates to ESA of the subscribed countries (political people)

• Decides on requirements, architecture, implementation (normally based on documentation prepared by Core Team)

Director General

• Can override decisions by Programme Board

• Decides on locations based on recommendations by the Programme Board

SSA-NEO-ESA-HO-055/1-, 06 May 2011, dvkPage 19

Key players and responsibilities - III

ESA Core Team

• Consists of the Programme Manager, three Segment Managers, some other people dedicated 100 % to SSA

• Acts as ‘executive’ – manage the implementation of the programme following the directives from the Programme Board

• Responsible for technical decisions

• Prepare and follow design and implementation as done by industry/institutes (Statement of Work, progress meetings…)

Contractors

• Consist of industry or institutes

• Actually perform the work as defined by Core Team

• Report to Core Team

SSA-NEO-ESA-HO-055/1-, 06 May 2011, dvkPage 20

So what does the Action Team 14 recommend?

Status – proposed structure

United NationsSecurity Council

MAOGMission Authorisation and

Oversight Group

IAWNInformation, Analysis, and

Warning Network

SMPAGSpace Mission Planning

and Advisory Group

From the ASE report “Asteroid Threats:A call for global response”

IAWN: observations, orbit prediction, impact effects modelling, communication

SMPAG: assess space missions for impact mitigation

MAOG: political body

Disaster management community

Status - IAWN

Information, Analysis and Warning Network (IAWN)

• Workshop in Mexico City, January 2010

• Space-related elements of IAWN essentially exist: observing teams, modellers, risk analysts

• In fall 2012: Formation of an IAWN Steering Group, hosted by NASA

Screenshot of NEODyS, the European system to predict possible impacts

Optical Ground Station – ESA’s 1-m telescope used ~4 nights per month for asteroids

Status - SMPAG

Space Mission Planning Advisory Group (SMPAG)

• 1st: Hosted by ESA in Darmstadt, Oct 2010

• 2nd: Hosted by NASA in Pasadena, Aug 2011

• Draft Terms of Reference were written

• Discussed by a first ’SMPAG preparation meeting’ with space agencies in the margins of COPUOS STSC meeting, Feb 2012 + second meeting on 08 Jun 2012

• Third meeting possibly in Oct 2012

SMPAG workshop #01, Oct 2010, ESOC

Status - MAOG

MAOG

• Has been discussed in latest AT 14 meetings, 11/12 Jun 2012

• Proposed to be COPUOS

• IAWN and SMPAG will report to COPUOS via statements of the national Delegates

Status – interaction with disaster management organisations

Still open

Interaction chain within countries needs to be defined

http://www.lrt.mw.tum.de/

Summary

For a system model, the following points need to be taken into account in addition to any technical points:

Organizational structure as proposed by the Action Team 14

Decision process within the agencies

Decision process within the UN

27

PublicPublic