SPACE DEBRIS MITIGATION

Mr. Shane Chaddha

School of Law, University of Manchester (UK)
[Link]@[Link]

Abstract measures are not binding under international

space law: compliance is voluntary. The Space
Space debris has been and still remains a Debris Mitigation Guidelines are preventative
growing threat for the international space practices designed to control the increase of
community. As a source of pollution, orbiting space congestion in popular orbital regions like
debris adversely damages the space LEO and GEO to preserve their commercial and
environment. There is an increased risk of scientific value as well as use of, and access to,
additional debris being generated by colliding by future space users. It shall be demonstrated
with space objects, and such fragments that in the absence of legal liability and
remaining in space permanently. Every space sanctioning being imposed on space operators
actors, whether State-sponsored, civilians or the mitigation practices can be ignored.
commercial, are affected by the space debris
population. Human lives are endangered: 1. Introduction
astronauts undertaking extra-vehicular activities
or even the paying public enjoying commercial In her opening statement before the US House of
human spaceflights run the risk of colliding with Representatives Committee on Science and
pieces of debris. The continuing growth of Technology’s Subcommittee on Space and
debris in heavily used orbital regions, like Low Aeronautics on ‘Keeping the Space Environment
Earth Orbit (LEO) and Geostationary Earth Safe for Civil and Commercial Users’1,
Orbit (GEO), not causes minor or complete Chairwoman Gabrielle Giffords described the
abruptions to space operations, but potentially ‘relentless growth of space debris’, which has
could prevent launches of planned space been a continuous concern for policymakers and
vehicles; thus, denying future access to, and use interested bodies2. There is early evidence of the
of, outer space. Further to stifling space international community recognising the
development, the quality of the space increase of space debris and the hazards
environment is degrading, therefore. Preserving presented to and in the outer space environment,
and sustaining that environment as a valuable as well as the need to prevent and minimise the
resource for future space users has motivated creation of new on-orbit debris. Tan reveals that
interested space bodies to consider mechanisms Russia was first to unofficially acknowledge that
to control the increase of debris. Such space debris presented a risk to the space
international meetings like the 5th European environment. These sentiments were later
Conference on Space Debris and the US House echoed by Al Gore who indicated that problems
of Representatives Committee on Science and with orbital debris and nuclear contamination
Technology’s Subcommittee on Space and polluting the space environment warrant
Aeronautics on ‘Keeping the Space Environment international concern and coordinated action in
Safe for Civil and Commercial Space Users’ order to sustain access to, and use of, outer
have arrived to the same conclusion: better space3.
international agreed space debris mitigation
methods to reduce the probability of additional The growing population of orbital debris in the
debris must be created as well as remediation outer space environment threatens, inter alia, the
mechanisms being imposed. This Paper shall safety of civil and commercial space users
explore the different meanings and sources of carrying out current and future space-related
‘space debris’. The population of orbital debris, activities. Space assets are, too, vulnerably
also, is quantified, and three galvanising events exposed to the risk of colliding with such debris
are identified and commented as exacerbating its which would cause significant economic loss to
growth since 2007. This Paper then shall the space community4.
examine the effectiveness of space debris
mitigation practices, which were adopted by the The US Space Agency, the National Aeronautics
international space community, to tackle the and Space Administration6, for example, have
rising population of orbiting debris. These had to repair damaged windows at least twenty-

Electronic copy available at: [Link]

seven times on various orbiters carrying the US creation of new orbital debris persists and
Space Shuttle7. The damage was occasioned by remediation measures have not been designed
minute particles of space debris8, including and implemented to physically and efficiently
‘flecks of paint as small as 0.3 [millimetres] in remove existing debris, such ventures could
size travelling at a mere 14 400 [kilometres per suffer from a minor, yet abrupt, disturbance to
hour]’9. The Agency, moreover, had to take frustrating the entire activity undertaken19. Such
evasive measures to avoid colliding with debris inconvenience could be experienced by Virgin
which would otherwise have had affected its Galactic and SpaceX with their respective
operations. NASA’s Earth’s Observing System, commercial space operations. Virgin Galactic
as from May 2009, had been manoeuvred three intends to offer its first suborbital human space
times to avoid collision with orbital debris10. flight to privately paying passengers in 2011 or
NASA tracked a large piece of debris from a 2012 from the newly built New Mexico
spent European rocket which was launched in spaceport20. SpaceX, on the other hand, intends
August 2006 to send two communications to enter and travel farther into space than
satellites in orbit11. The decision to steer the passengers on-board Virgin Galactic’s
docked Shuttle and the International Space spacecraft, SpaceShipTwo. It has entered into a
Station12 to dodge the debris was not executed as contract worth US$3.5 billion with NASA to
it passed at a safe distance13. A small piece of provide commercial space transportation
space litter from a derelict 2007 Chinese weather services to and from the ISS in replace of the
satellite, which was destroyed under a retiring US Space Shuttle at the end of the fiscal
coordinated effort by the Chinese government year 201021. It is suggested that the now
with a military missile, was detected by NASA abandoned US Constellation programme could
on September 7, 200714. Although it was have afforded an example of a future national
expected to head towards the ISS, the debris did space mission being potentially redundant. This
not pose a threat as it passed the orbiting programme was coordinated by the then
laboratory15. In November 2009, the Agency President George W. Bush aimed of expanding
announced that a small piece of space debris human presence into the solar system and
approached some 1,640 feet from the ISS. returning astronauts to the Moon by 202022. As
Although the debris posed no threat to the Viikari states, ‘[i]n the future, if human activities
Station or its crew, the six astronauts were in and around the Moon increase significantly,
informed that as a safety precaution they might lunar orbits may also become congested with
have to evacuate the ISS to board their Russian man-made debris. There, the situation could
Soyuz spacecrafts lifeboats. NASA further deteriorate much faster because the Moon has no
revealed that it had difficulty tracking the object appreciable atmosphere which could burn up
because of its very small size, and that it was too debris’23.
late to steer the orbiting laboratory away from
the close encounter16. It was reported later that This Paper shall explore the different meanings
the 2-inch debris fragment uncomfortably passed and sources of ‘space debris’. The population of
the Station, but it was not close enough to force orbital debris, also, is quantified, and three
the astronauts to aboard the Russian lifeboats17. galvanising events are identified and commented
as exacerbating its growth since 2007. This
NASA has not been the only space actor Paper shall then examine the effectiveness of
plighted with the proliferation of debris space debris mitigation practices, which were
populating the outer space environment: adopted by the international space community,
commercial space users have, too, suffered. to tackle the rising population of orbiting debris.
GeoEye, a commercial imaging satellite
company, has had to manoeuvre some of its 2. What is ‘Space Debris’?
space vehicles to avoid collisions with debris.
For example, a 10 year old Ikonos satellite was ‘Space debris’ is synonymous with ‘orbital
steered seven times to evade such impacts. A debris’24. There are, also, a number of colloquial
year after its launch, GeoEye-1 satellite also had phrases to describe ‘space debris’25. These terms
to take evasive action on four occasions18. include ‘space trash’26, ‘space garbage’27, ‘space
refuse’28 and most commonly ‘space junk’29.
The hazards of space debris cluttering the outer However many expressions there are to refer to
space environment warrant concern for future orbital debris, the international space community
space endeavours. It is claimed that if the has yet to agree on a single definition30. A

Electronic copy available at: [Link]

generous definition could, nonetheless, be Committee in its mitigation guidelines
provided. That is to say, ‘space debris’ are all handbook, which says:
man-made objects launched in to outer space by
space actors undertaking space-related activities, ‘Space debris are all man-made objects
and these objects served their or have no useful including fragments and elements thereof, in
function31. earth or re-entering the atmosphere, that are
non-functional’37.
It is suggested that the absence of a legal
definition of space debris might have had The above definitions imply, therefore, that
attributed to the uncertainty for the space ‘orbital debris’ has an all-encompassing meaning
community to accept a universal one. The US as any object launched by man that has no useful
National Science and Technology Council function could potentially be classified as such38.
Committee on Transportation Research and
Development32 is of the view that ‘orbital debris 3. Sources of Orbiting Debris
is a popular rather than a legal term’33. Reading
on the face of international space law framed by Baker argues that the sources of in-orbit debris
the United Nations, ‘debris’ is not even can be categorised into four heads: ‘inactive
mentioned34. payloads’, ‘operational debris’, ‘fragmentation
debris’ and ‘microparticulate matter’39.
Efforts have been invested by interested space
bodies to form a definition in the absence of a ‘Inactive payloads’ are launched space objects
legal one, nonetheless. In 1999, the Scientific which have become derelict and cannot be
and Technical Subcommittee of the United controlled by their space operator for a re-entry
Nations Committee on the Peaceful uses of to Earth40. At the end of 2003, there were 10,000
Outer Space states: total catalogued space objects orbiting the
Earth41. Professor Walter Flury, a space debris
‘“Space debris are all man-made objects, expert for the European Space Agency42, states
including their fragments and parts, whether that 22 per cent of these objects were inactive
their owners can be identified or not, in Earth spacecrafts; a mere 6 per cent of space vehicles
orbit or re-entering the dense layers of the were detected and tracked as being operational43.
atmosphere that are non-functional with no
reasonable expectation of their being able to The second head is ‘operational debris’, and
assume or resume their intended functions or relates to all associated material used to carry
any other functions for which they are or can out the space endeavour which remain in
be authorized”’35. space44. Such debris includes spent and
discarded upper rocket stages to provide the
In its Position Paper on Orbital Debris, the necessary thrust for the launched space vehicle
International Academy of Astronautics offers a to enter space45. The ESA claims that, at the end
closely related definition, and provides that of 2003, 17 per cent of the total catalogued
‘space debris’ are: debris was burnt-out rocket bodies46. Mission-
related objects, like ejected nose cones, payload
‘any man-made Earth orbiting object which separation hardware and Yo-Yo de-spinners, fall
is non-functional with no reasonable within ‘operational debris’47. Human space
expectation of assuming or resuming its participants carrying out extravehicular activities
intended function or any other function for have, too, been known to have contributed in
which it is or can be expected to be littering outer space. An astronaut’s glove48,
authorized, including fragments and parts tools49 and lens caps50 have been, for instance,
thereof. Orbital debris includes non- been lost in space during manned space
operational spacecraft, spent rocket bodies, missions. Two accounts of intentional littering
material released during planned space are provided by Baker51. The first instance
operations, and fragments generated by concerns US astronauts John W. Young and
satellite and upper stage breakup due to Michael Collins throwing a bag containing
explosions and collisions’36. rubbish overboard the US Gemini 10 space
vehicle ‘“in a manned reminiscent of [earth-
Viikari prefers the ‘more concise definition’ bound automobile] [sic] travellers”’52. The
stated by the Inter-Agency Space Debris second instances involved a similar account as

3
the first. Here, a bag containing dirty clothes, time of his writing, Baker claims that there were
food wrappings and such other items were between 10 billion and thousands of millions of
projected in space by cosmonauts from the then microparticulate matter in space ranging in size
Soviet Union aboard the Mir, or Salyut 7, Space from 1 – 100 microns66.
Station53. According to the ESA, the percentage
of ‘operational debris’ has rose from 30 per cent 4. Quantifying the Population of Orbital
in 200354 to 38 per cent in 200955; thus, Debris
representing an increase of 8 per cent within 6
years. Sputnik I was the first man-made satellite to be
successfully launched and enter outer space by
‘Fragmentation debris’ is the third source, and is the then Soviet Union on October 4, 195767.
produced when there is a break up of a space After that satellite’s launch, there have been
object as a result of an explosion, collision or for thousands of space objects launched into space.
some other cause56. Explosions may be More than 4600 space missions have been
accidental or deliberate. An accidental explosion carried out and have launched around 6000
occurred on February 19, 2007 where a Russian satellites into orbit68, and 196 satellites have
rocket booster for unknown reasons exploded broken up and are responsible for the rise in on-
whilst in orbit. Space surveillance networks orbit debris69. The first recorded instance of
detected and tracked 1,111 additional debris fragmentation caused by an artificial satellite
pieces entering the space environment57. On occurred on June 29, 1961. Here, two satellites,
February 11, 2007, the Chinese government Injun and Solar 3, did not separate from one
coordinated the deliberated destruction of its another as planned, owing to a malfunction with
derelict weather satellite with the use of a the fuel tank which occasioned the subsequent
military missile. At the time of this incident, the collision70. These objects have contributed to the
fragmentation of that weather satellite accounted creation of space debris which continues to rise,
for more than 25 per cent of total catalogued therefore.
objects in Low Earth Orbit58. Debris fragments,
moreover, have been occasioned by collisions Unlike natural debris like meteoroids, man-made
between intact space vehicles. Such an impact objects potentially stays in space permanently71.
occurred on February 19, 2009 where an It is until external forces disturb the orbital
operational US communication satellite collided trajectory of the debris that determines whether
with a malfunctioned Russian military satellite. it passes through Earth’s near-orbit or re-enters
This unprecedented event of two intact Earth. According to the 2004 Aerospace
spacecrafts colliding with the other, resulted 823 Corporation study, the creation rate of debris has
pieces of new debris being detected and tracked, outpaced the rate of its removal. It claimed that
and smaller fragments have yet to be the debris population in Low Earth Orbit grows
catalogued59. ‘Fragmentation debris’ remains as annually by some 5 percent72. Later research
the largest source of total catalogued objects carried out by US scientists, however, suggest
harming the outer space environment60, and is that the rise in carbon dioxide on the outer edge
expected to be the primary cause for the creation of Earth’s atmosphere could increase the lifetime
of new debris resulted from more ‘hypervelocity of orbiting debris74. New and existing debris
impacts’ between space objects by 205561. This remaining for longer in the space environment,
type of debris also accounts for approximately therefore, is expected.
56 per cent of the total catalogued debris in 2009
from more than 200 in-orbit satellite break ups62. In its Orbital Debris Quarterly News, NASA
In the last two decades, conversely, such debris takes the view that collisions would be the
was responsible for almost 49 per cent of all primary source of creating new in-orbit debris by
catalogued space objects resulting from nearly 205575. Dr. Heiner Klinkrad, a debris analyst at
100 satellite break ups63. the European Space Agency’s Space Operation
Centre76, claims:
The fourth classification from Baker’s works is
‘microparticulate matter’, which consists of ‘“If you calculate the combined profile area
particles, gases and spaceglow64. Such debris is of all satellites in orbit, you find that the
generated from different sources, including average time between destructive collisions
solid-propellants rocket motors, surfaces of in- is about 10 years," …’77.
orbit objects and manned spacecrafts65. At the

4
At the 2009 European Air and Space Conference those objects were space debris. This year,
held in Manchester, UK, the findings of a recent however, some 19,000 objects larger than four
study carried out by British space debris analysts inches have been tracked orbiting Earth and
were delivered. Dr. Hugh Lewis from the School 7,500 of these objects are space debris87.
of Engineering Science at the University of
Southampton led this study which examined, 4.1. Three Galvanising Events
inter alia, the likelihood of the risk of on-orbit
collisions increasing as the amount of debris The rising population of the total catalogued
sharply increased by 40 per cent since 2007 debris has been exacerbated owing to three
owing to two major events78. Owing to the galvanising events88. The first event happened
significant increase of orbiting debris, the study on January 11, 2007. As part of a test of an anti-
claims that the number of ‘close encounters’, satellite system referred to as ASAT, the
that is to say where space objects are some 5 Chinese government launched a military missile
kilometres from each other, would rise from 50 to intentionally destroy a targeted,
per cent in the next decade and quadruples in decommissioned Fengyun – 1C weather
205979. The number of ‘close encounters’ are satellite89. NASA Orbital Debris Quarterly News
currently estimated as 13,000 per week, meaning described this event as ‘[representing] the single
that there would be 20,000 such close worst contamination of low Earth orbit (LEO)
approaches in a week by 2019 and then during the past 50 years’90, and poses a
increasing to 50,000 per week in 205580. significant collision risk to all space objects in
and passing LEO91. At the time of this event, the
Although the risks and hazards of colliding fragmentation of the weather satellite accounted
space debris have materially increased, such for more than 25 per cent of catalogued objects
impacts might not necessarily result. Space users in LEO, and the estimated population of debris
must bear additional and unwanted larger than one centimetre generated from the
consequences. These include taking a greater intentional destruction is expected to increase to
number of evasive manoeuvres to avoid impacts, 15,00092. Presently, however, debris from this
which incurs higher operational costs on actors incident is responsible for 17 per cent of the total
and reduces fuel and the lifetime of the space catalogued objects in orbit93. For pieces of debris
vehicle81. Moskowitz provides that taking at ten centimetres or greater shall remain in orbit
collision avoidance manoeuvres also consumes for decades or even centuries94.
time to re-chart a safer orbiting projection of the
spacecraft. Human space participants like On February 19, 2007, the second incident
astronauts performing extravehicular activities generated 1,111 detectable pieces of new debris
for NASA or on-board the ISS are also at risk of over Australia95. The event involved an Arabsat
injury or death from in-orbit debris. At great 4A communications satellite being carried by a
expense, NASA must have sensors which are Russian Proton rocket using a rocket booster
capable to detect and track any object presenting called Breeze-M, or Briz-M. On February 6,
itself a risk to the ISS and Space Shuttle, and the 2006, there was a malfunction to the rocket’s
ISS must have high levels of protective launch resulting the satellite entering the wrong
shielding82. orbit, but was later operated for a controlled re-
entry to Earth. The Breeze-M rocket booster
Presently, it is estimated by the US Department remained in orbit, however. That booster for
of Defense’s Space Surveillance Network83 that unknown reasons exploded on February 19,
there are more than 24,500 objects in outer 2007 – almost a year after its launch96.
space; 8,000 of those objects are being
monitored by the SSN: 560 satellites are An unprecedented accidental collision between
operational, with the remainder being derelict two intact spacecrafts occurred on February 10,
satellite and fragments of debris84. According to 2009 above Siberia, and represents the third
NASA Orbital Debris Program Office, the break major event adding materially to the creation of
ups of satellites are the most significant category new debris. Here, a US commercially owned
causing on-orbit debris which accounts for communications satellite, Iridium 33, and a
almost 48 per cent of the total catalogued derelict Russian military satellite, Cosmos-
debris85. From 1989 to 2009, space traffic has 2251, collided in-orbit and both were destroyed.
quadrupled within these 29 years86. In 1980, it This impact caused 823 pieces of additional
tracked about 4,700 objects in space and 280 of debris being tracked with smaller sizes yet to be

5
catalogued and increased the risk of causing involves methods where their effects to reduce
damage to the ISS by some 6 per cent and other the creation of new debris are short-term111.
manned spacecrafts97. Mechanisms, on the other hand, which are also
capable of having a long-term effect, fall within
Commenting on the Fengyun -1C and Arabsat the second category112.
4A satellite breakups, which equally could apply
to the Iridium/Cosmos incident, NASA Orbital Passivating, de-orbiting and re-orbiting the space
Debris Quarterly News writes that: vehicle are examples of procedures set by the
IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines, and
‘The increase in catalogued orbital debris fall within the first category. These methods are
was by for the most of any year of the space accepted by the international space community
age, and the consequences will be felt for as an attempt to minimise the creation of
many, many years to come’98. fragmentation debris, which is the largest
contributing source of debris polluting the space
5. Practices Reducing Orbital Debris environment, caused by the on-orbit break ups of
spacecrafts. An example of a mitigation method
The international space community and under the second head would be remediation
interested space bodies have collaborated and mechanisms to actively remove debris.
taken collective action to tackle the growth of
the orbital debris population by implementing The process of passivation is designed to reduce
practices designed to minimise additional debris the probability of a space vehicle from breaking
being generated. A draft code of Space Debris up, resulting from its stored energy by
Mitigation Guidelines was developed by the eliminating all of the sources of such energy
Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination held. Paragraph 5.2.1 of the IADC Guidelines
Committee101 in 2002, which were later provides:
endorsed by the United Nations’ General
Assembly in December 2007102. This is ‘… a ‘In order to limit the risk to other space
document that outlines space debris mitigation systems from accidental break-ups after the
measures for mission planning, design, completion of mission operations, all on-
manufacture and operational (launch, mission board sources of stored energy of a space
and disposal) phases of spacecraft and launch system, such as residual propellants,
vehicle orbital stages’103. batteries, high-pressure vessels, self-
destructive devices, flywheels and
The IADC Guidelines are a set of best practices momentum wheels, should be depleted or
for space users which were developed by space safed when they are no longer required for
debris experts, not by international lawyers104. mission operations or post-mission
These measures are not binding under disposal’113.
international space law: compliance is
voluntary105. Many Members of the United The space operator must identify all potential
Nations like the US and the ESA, nonetheless, energy sources which present the risk of causing
have implemented them through domestic latent explosions114. Once all sources have been
instruments106. The Space Debris Mitigation determined, that space user has a variety of
Guidelines, therefore, are preventative measures passivation approaches to deplete the remaining
formed as an attempt to control the rise of space energy supplies. These include burning or
congestion in protected orbital regions, namely venting the unconsumed propellant and
Low Earth Orbit107 and Geostationary Earth pressurised gases in space, and discharging
Orbit108 for their commercial and scientific batteries115.
value, by imposing an ‘environmental-
obligation’ on space actors to support such Another short-term procedure to mitigate the
efforts in order to preserve the outer space possibility of collisions once the space-related
environment for current and future users109. activity or the operational life of the spacecraft
has ended, involves disposing that craft by
By adopting the US National Research Council manoeuvring it for a controlled re-entry by
Committee on Space Debris’ typology, it is Earth’s atmosphere or by placing it to a higher
suggested that the mitigation regime could be orbit called the ‘graveyard orbit’116. These
divided into two categories110. The first head actions are respectively referred to as ‘re-

6
orbiting’ and ‘de-orbiting’117. Space actors using environment, inflicting bodily harm on humans,
or passing through the LEO region would and damaging property. A live threat of
employ the former practice. The space vehicle contaminating Earth’s environment from
would be slowed and manoeuvred to a lower radioactive material occurred on January 24,
attitude relying on atmospheric drag to reduce 1978. Here, the Soviet Cosmos 954 satellite,
the orbital lifetime of that spacecraft118. Studies using uranium as a source of fuel, re-entered
carried out by the IADC and other space- Earth. This unscheduled re-entry decayed that
interested bodies on the effects of post-mission satellite but scattered radioactive remains landed
orbital lifetime limitation on collision rate and on Earth. Majority of the debris was located in
debris population growth arrive to the same the Northwest of Canada which was uninhabited.
recommendation that the orbital lifetime of the The affected territories had to undergo an
spacecraft in the LEO should not exceed 25 extensive search and clean up operation, and
years after the completion of the undertaken such expense to the Canadian authorities
space endeavour119. The IADC argues that this exceeded one million Canadian dollars124. As
lifetime limit of 25 years for the disposal of the noted by commentators, the risk to human health
launched space object is ‘reasonable and and damage to property could have been much
appropriate’120. Although expensive to worse had the radioactive debris landed in
implement, this de-orbiting policy is very populated areas125.
effective: it takes the shortest time possible to
remove and decay the vehicle from the outer Another incident which merits discussion is the
space environment ‘without significant and US Space Station, Skylab. This orbiting
disproportionate increase in de-orbit propellant laboratory was left abandoned by the US. NASA
consumption’121. In addition to recommending did not intend the reuse of the Station in later
this orbital lifetime practice, the IADC suggests space missions126. Compton and Benson
that the change of the space vehicle’s attitude describe the dilapidated state of the Shuttle:
should be below 700 kilometres to limit its
remaining duration in orbit and accelerate the ‘With one control moment gyro inoperative
rate of its decay122. and another ailing, with two coolant loops
behaving erratically and several of the
Executing these de-orbit recommendations may power-supply modules approaching the end
materially decrease additional debris being of their expected life spans, the $2.5-billion
formed, they bear serious consequences if debris orbiting laboratory was junk’127.
enters and surfaces the Earth. The Committee,
however, undermines the potential hazards, Overwhelmed with political pressure caused by
decayed space debris presents to humans, the American public reaction to the re-entry of
property and Earth’s environment. It claims that: Cosmos 954, the US Space Agency was forced
to regain control of Skylab128. The decision to
‘If a space system is to be disposed of by re- re-boost the derelict Station by docking a
entry into the atmosphere, debris that propulsion system to provide the necessary
survives to reach the surface of the Earth thrust to increase its altitude was adopted.
should not pose an undue risk to people or NASA hoped that the success of this mission
property. This may be accomplished by would extend the orbital lifetime of Skylab by
limiting the amount of surviving debris or five months, allowing the Station to remain in
confining the debris to uninhabited regions, space orbiting at higher altitude or provide
such as broad ocean areas. Also, ground sufficient time to design a controlled re-entry
environmental pollution, caused by programme129. These plans did not materialise,
radioactive substances, toxic substances or however. The demand for funding was too great
any other environmental pollutants resulting as well as ‘[Skylab’s] rapidly decaying orbit,
from on-board articles, should be prevented plus the increasing difficulty of controlling its
or minimised in order to be accepted as altitude, made this rescue mission impossible’130.
permissible’123. NASA shifted its efforts to attempt to control the
re-entry in order to mitigate the risk to
These expressed views are not shared by this habituated areas. On July 11, 1979, the re-entry
speaker. There are a number of events of Skylab caused a wide scatter of decayed
illustrating the re-entry of decayed space objects, debris over the South eastern Indian Ocean and
whether coordinated or not, polluting Earth’s sparsely populated areas of West Australia131.

7
 The second school, on the other hand, states that
The first known incident of a human being stuck removing the spacecraft above the
with decayed orbital debris occurred in 1997. geosynchronous belt does not prevent the
American Lottie Williams, whilst walking in a creation of further debris, but exacerbates such
park, was hit on the shoulder by a 6 inch piece of problem by affecting a wider orbital region139. A
metal, which was later discovered to belong to a commentator provides that:
Delta rocket that was launched a year earlier.
She was uninjured132. In July 2008, a lump of ‘Objects moved to disposal orbits still
metal caused property damage to a bungalow contribute to the debris hazard in their
owned by British pensioners. The Royal Air original orbit, however, since debris
Force Flight Safety identified that a piece of generated through collisions or explosions
space debris, believed to have been orbiting for that take place in disposal orbits may
more than a decade. That object, which weighed intersect the original orbit’140.
appropriately four pounds and measured five
inches by three by one and a half, penetrated the The probability of collisions at the graveyard is
titled roof, resulting in a hole and two broken expected to rise as more derelict space vehicles
titles133. are added. In 2004, Williamson claims that 20 to
25 additional payloads are launched in GEO
Re-orbiting requires space users in GEO to annually141. This means that 10 to 20 non-
deliberately manoeuvre their space vehicles to a functional satellites are boosted to the disposal
higher orbit and remain stationary in that orbit, orbit142. The total population of orbital debris
so as not to cause interference to other space will grow, therefore.
actors within that protected geosynchronous
ring134. The higher orbit outside that protected Active remediation measures are long-term
region is colloquially referred to as the solutions to limit the growth of orbital debris
‘graveyard orbit’, and is at least 300 kilometres polluting the space environment143. It is
above to minimise the risk of solar radiation and suggested that the Mitigation Guidelines would
other forces from pushing that spacecraft back to soon be displaced in favour of debris removal
the GEO belt135. procedures. Klindard states that the mitigation
regime, even if all launching activity were
There are two schools of thought among the stopped, is incapable of preventing the
international space community and space- ‘cascading effect’ from occurring in LEO, but
interested bodies who are divided on their merely postpones it144. The 5th European
opinions as to the appropriateness of disposing a Conference on Space Debris favourable held that
space vehicle at the graveyard orbit. One school remediation procedures are necessary to sustain
in favour argues that such a disposal procedure access to, and use of, outer space for future
is a mere transfer of orbital location of the craft generations145.
which benefits space actors within the
geosynchronous orbit and the outer space As mentioned above, the IADC mitigation
environment itself. Re-orbiting is a cost- regimes suggests that they are intended to be
effective procedure than its more expensive preventative measures designed to minimise the
counterpart because a greater quantity of fuel risk of new on-orbit being generated until the
must be carried and used for the latter space activity has been completed. A key
[Link] to the US National observation to note is that compliance with these
Research Council Committee on Space Debris, practices is voluntary. They are not legally
‘the transfer to a disposal orbit above GEO is a binding under international law. The coordinated
simple maneuver requiring only as much destruction of space object like the Fengyun 1-C
propellant as typically required by spacecraft for incident and the avoidable Iridium/Cosmos
three months’ station keeping’137. Steering the collision between the operational US satellite
space vehicle to the graveyard would reduce and the decommissioned Russian satellite imply,
space congestion, and so protect the valuable however, that in the absence of the threat of
and heavily used orbit from new orbital debris legal liability and sanctioning being imposed on
being generated from collisions as well as space operators the mitigation practices can be
causing signal interference to other space ignored.
operators therein138.

8
A study has found that the space community are and exploration of outer space actors as well as
poor at adhering to the Guidelines. Before the space being a common resource are exploited.
2005 Proceedings of the fourth European The IADC Space Debris .Mitigation Guidelines,
Conference on Space Debris, Jehn et al. said that identifying a set of best practices and requiring
from 1997 to 2004 ‘… only about one third of voluntary compliance, are superficial: they have
all satellites follow the internationally agreed been proved ineffective in controlling the actions
recommendations. Two out of three satellites are of space users and minimising space congestion.
reboosted into an orbit so low above GEO that There must be an effective governance regime
they will sooner or later interference with that imposes restrictions on the exercise of the
geostationary satellites or they are completely freedom of exploration and use of, as well as
abandoned without any end-of-life disposal limiting accessibility to enter, outer space. The
manoeuvre’146. absence of such framework would act as a
catalyst, accelerating the harm caused to the
The additional costs involved, furthermore, act space environment by the creation of additional
as a disincentive for space actors to comply with debris and leading to its ultimate destruction.
the mitigation measures147. Current space users
may be reluctant to pay because such
expenditure exceeds any immediate benefits
derived. Viikari, too, shares this view, and
writes: 1
Hereafter referred to as the ‘Committee on
‘Given the typically high short-term costs of Space Environment Safety’.
2
curbing environmentally harmful effects of U.S. House of Representatives Committee on
the use of outer space, it is no surprise that Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on
many of the relevant shareholders can be Space and Aeronautics. Keeping the space
hesitant to take measures to prevent environment safe for civil and commercial users:
environmental degradation’148. Opening Statement by Chairwoman Gabrielle
Giffords. U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Science and Technology’s
The IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics. April
have not been devised and implemented for the 28, 2009. Available from:
sole benefit in protecting the space environment [Link]
from deteriorating caused by debris. Instead, [Link]?OSID=2712. Date Accessed:
they are ‘pragmatic and self serving’ 14/09/2009.
3
mechanisms to control the population of such Tan, D. Towards a new regime for the
objects accumulating in valuable and heavily Protection of Outer Space as the “Province of
used orbital regions in order to sustain those All Mankind”. Yale Journal of International
orbits for future actors to carry out commercial Law. 2000, Vol. 25, pp. 145 – 194 at pp. 153 –
and scientific space endeavours149. 154. See, also: Gore, A. Jr. Outer Space, The
Global Environment, and International Law: Into
6. Conclusion the Next Century. Tennessee Law Review. 1989
– 1990, Vol. 57, pp. 329 – 338 at p. p. 334.
4
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on
To conclude, ‘[t]he space environment of man- Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on
made and debris objects is a mirror image of Space and Aeronautics. Written testimony by
almost half a century of space activity following Marion C. Blakey, President and CEO
the launch of Sputnik-1 on October 4, 1957’151. Aerospace Industries Association. Keeping the
In 2009, approximately 24,500 objects have space environment safe for civil and commercial
been catalogued and about 7,500 of those objects users. April 28, 2009 at p. 2. Available from:
are space debris. Orbital debris is the largest [Link]
contributor to the number of catalogued space ommdocs/hearings/2009/Space/28apr/Additional
objects and the most significant pollutants to the _Documents_Submitted_for_the_Record.pdf.
space environment152. Disregard has been had by Date Accessed; 14/09/2009.
the space community to the adverse 6
Hereafter referred to as ‘NASA’.
environmental consequence their space
endeavours would occasion, therefore. It
suggests that the unqualified freedom in the use

9
7
Williams, C.D. Space: The Cluttered Frontier. [Link]
Journal of Air Law and Commerce. 1995, Vol. [Link]. Date
60, pp. 1139 – 1189 at p. 1140. Accessed: 06/11/2009.
8 19
Ibid. Atney-Yurdin, I. Space debris legal research
9
European Space Agency. Focus – Space debris guide. Pace Year of International Law. 1991,
spotlight. European Space Agency. September Vol. 3, pp. 167 – 198, at pp. 168 – 169 at p. 169.
20
28, 2007. Available from: Chaddha, S. U.S. Commercial Space Sector:
[Link] Matured and Successful. Journal of Space Law.
ureWeek_0.html. Date Accessed; 20/09/2009. 2010, Vol. 36(2)(forthcoming).
10 21
[Link]. Space junk problem visualized. Ibid.
22
[Link]. September 12, 2009. Available Ibid.
23
from: [Link] Viikari, L. 2008. The Environmental Element
[Link]. Date accessed: in Space Law: Assessing the present and
12/09/2009. charting the future. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers:
11
Malik, T. Trash in space may force shuttle, Leiden at p. 45.
24
station to dodge. [Link]. September 2, 2009. Throughout this study, both of these
Available from: expressions shall be used.
25
[Link] Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. 32.
26
[Link]. Date Accessed: For instance, see: Malik, T. Trash in space
2/09/2009; and [Link]. NASA eyes junk may force shuttle, station to dodge. [Link].
drifting toward space station. Maneuvre to avoid September 2, 2009. Available from:
piece of old rocket probably won’t be necessary. [Link]
[Link] September 2, 2009. Available from: [Link]. Date Accessed:
[Link] Date 2/09/2009
27
Accessed: 2/09/2009. Jasentuliyana uses ‘space garbage’ in:
12
Hereafter referred to as the ‘ISS’. Jasentuliyana, N. Space debris and international
13
Space junk problem visualized. Supra, note 9. law. Journal of Space Law. 1988. Vol. 26, pp.
14
Malik, T. NASA tracks Chinese satellite debris 139 – 162.
28
headed near space station. [Link]. Baker, for example, favours this phrase than
September 7, 2009. Available from: the use of ‘space debris’ or ‘orbital debris’. See:
[Link] Baker, H.A. 1988. Space Debris: Legal and
[Link]. Date Accessed: Policy Implications. Martinus Nijhoff
07/09/2009. Publishers: The Netherlands.
15 29
Space junk problem visualized. Supra, note 9. This term of reference has been enjoyed
16
Malik, T. Station Astronauts May Take Shelter recently by Malik in his recent press releases for
From Space Junk. [Link]. November 6, [Link]. See, for instance: Malik, T.
2009. Available from; [Link]. November 6, 2009. Available from;
[Link] [Link]
[Link]. Date [Link]. Date
Accessed: 06/11/2009. Accessed: 06/11/2009; and Malik, T. [Link].
17
Malik, T. Space Junk Buzzes Station as November 7, 2009. Available from:
Astronauts Sleep. [Link]. November 7, [Link]
2009. Available from: [Link]. Date
[Link] Accessed: 07/11/2009.
30
[Link]. Date Scientific and Technical Subcommittee of the
Accessed: 07/11/2009. United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses
18
Moskowitz, C. U.S. 'Decades Behind' on of Outer Space. 1999. Technical report on space
Space Debris Threat, Official Says. [Link]. debris. A/AC. 105/720. United Nations
November 6, 2009. Available from: Publication: New York at para. 6. Available
[Link] from:
[Link]. Date Accessed: [Link]
06/11/2009; and Fester, W. GeoEye Dodging ort_on_Space_Debris99.pdf. Date Accessed:
Space Junk With Increasing Frequency. 30/08/2009.
31
[Link]. November 4, 2009. Available Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 3; and Viikari.
from: Supra, note 23 at p. 31.

10
32
Hereafter referred to as the ‘NSTC’. the crew. Sturcke, J. Astronaut loses tools during
33
National Science and Technology Council spacewalk. The Guardian. November 19, 2008.
Committee on Transportation Research and Available from:
Development. 1995. Interagency report on [Link]
orbital debris. Executive Office of the President /19/spacetechnology. Date Accessed:
of the United States – US Office of Science and 12.11/2009.
50
Technology Policy: Washington, D.C. at p. 45. Focus – Space debris spotlight. Supra, note 8.
51
Available from: Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 4.
52
[Link] Hall, R.C. Comments on Salvage and removal
[Link] . Date Accessed: 30/09/2009. of man-made objects from outer space. Journal
34
Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. 36. of Air and Commerce Law. 1967, Vol. 33, pp.
35
Scientific and Technical Subcommittee of the 288 – 313 at p. 288 cited by Baker. Ibid.
53
United Nations Committee on the Peaceful uses Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 4.
54
of Outer Space. 1999. Technical report on space Focus – Space debris spotlight. Supra, note 8.
55
debris. A/AC.105/720. United Nations European Space Agency. Space debris
Publication: New York at para. 6. Available environment. European Space Agency. February
from: 20, 2009. Available from:
[Link] [Link]
ort_on_Space_Debris99.pdf. Date Accessed: Q8VPXPF_0.html. Date Accessed: 20/09/2009.
56
30/08/2009. Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 4.
36 57
International Academy of Astronautics. 1999. Than, K. Rocket explodes over Australia,
Position paper orbital debris. International Showers space with debris. [Link]. February
Academy of Astronautics: France at p. 3. 21, 2007. Available from:
Available from: [Link]
[Link] [Link]. Date accessed: 17/09/2009; Rincon,
Date Accessed: 01/09/2009. P. Space blast’s huge debris field. BBC News.
37
Inter-Agency Space Debris Committee. February 26, 2007. Available from:
Section 3.1 of the Space Debris Mitigation [Link]
Guideline. Cited by Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. Date Accessed: 18/09/2009; and NASA Orbital
33. Debris Quarterly News. Four satellite breakups
38
Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. 32. It should be in February add to debris population. Orbital
observed that there has been an exclusion of Debris Quarterly News. April 2007, Vol. 11(2),
naturally occurring debris like meteoroids from pp. 1 – 10 at p. 3.
58
the stated definitions. See Baker who argues that NASA Orbital Debris Quarterly News.
a distinction between artificial debris and natural Chinese Anti-Satellite test creates most severe
debris in order to justify for the latter’s orbital debris cloud in history. Orbital Debris
exclusion. Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 3. Quarterly News. January 2008, Vol. 12(1), pp. 1
39
Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 3. – 10 at pp. 2 – 3. Available from:
40
Ibid, p. 4. [Link]
41
Focus – Space debris spotlight. Supra, note 8. pdfs/[Link]. Date Accessed:
42
Hereafter referred to as the ‘ESA’. 14/09/2009; and NASA Orbital Debris Quarterly
43
Focus – Space debris spotlight. Supra, note 8. News. Fengyun- 1C Debris: Two Years Later.
44
Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 4. Orbital Debris Quarterly News. January 2009,
45
Ibid. Vol. 13(1), pp. 1- 12 at p. 2. Available from:
46
Focus – Space debris spotlight. Supra, note 8. [Link]
47
Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 4 and 23. pdfs/[Link]. Date Accessed:
48
Ibid, p. 4. 14/09/2009.
49 59
In 2008, US astronaut Heidemarie U.S. House of Representatives Committee on
Stefanyshyn-Piper dropper her space bag Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on
containing tools as she attempted to repair a Space and Aeronautics. Hearing Charter.
damaged part of the ISS. Owing to the lose of Keeping the space environment safe for civil and
the bag and tools, the remaining spacewalks commercial users. April 28, 2009 at p. 7.
planned during the US Space Shuttle Available from:
Endeavour’s mission had to be changed to [Link]
ensure the safety of the space vehicle as well as ommdocs/hearings/2009/Space/28apr/Hearing_

11
[Link]. Date Accessed: 14/09/2009. satellite coordinated by the Chinese government
Hereafter referred to as the ‘Committee on Space with a military missile. The second event
Environment Safety Report’. concerned a collision with two intact space
vehicles: a US operational satellite and a
See also: [Link]. Satellite collision could decommissioned Russian satellite. See: Kelland,
pose space threat. Crash creates debris; slight K. Space junk storm will up mission costs,
risk to space station, minor impact on Iridium. experts predict. [Link]. November 4, 2009.
[Link]. February 12, 2009. Available from: Available from:
[Link] Date [Link]
Accessed: 12/02/2009; and Malik, T. Debris hnology_and_science-space/. Date Accessed:
from space collision poses threat to other 04/11/2009; and Atkinson, N. Space junk
satellites. [Link]. Available from: threatens future missions. [Link].
[Link] November 3. 2009. Available from:
[Link]. Date Accessed: [Link]
12/02/2009. e-junk-threatens-future-missions. Date
60
Williams. Supra, note 6 at p. 1143; and Accessed: 03/11/2009.
79
Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. 37. Kelland. Ibid; and Atkinson. Ibid.
61 80
Committee on Space Environment Safety Ibid.
81
Report. Supra, note 61 at p. 5. Kelland. Ibid.
62 82
Space debris environment. Supra, note 57. Moskowitz. Supra, note 17.
63 83
Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 4. Hereafter referred to as the ‘SSN’.
64 84
Ibid, p. 8. Cain, F. How many satellites in space?.
65
Ibid, pp. 8 – 9. [Link]. November 6, 2009.
66
Ibid, p. 8. Available from:
67
Chaddha. Supra, note 19. [Link]
68
NASA Orbital Program Office. 2008. History space/spaceflight/how-many-satellites-in-space.
of on-orbit satellites fragmentation. 14th ed. Date Accessed: 06/11/2009.
85
NASA: Houston, Texas, at p. 30. Available NASA Orbital Program Office. Supra, note 70
from: at p. 9. Here, it is claimed that only 6 per cent of
[Link] the catalogued orbit population are operational
elliteFragHistory/[Link]. Date spacecraft. 38 per cent of the total catalogued
Accessed: 17/09/2009. debris could be accounted to decommissioned
69
Ibid, p. 9. satellites, spent upper stages and mission-related
70
Ibid, p. 30. objects like launch adopters. The remaining
71
Baker. Supra, note 28 at p. 3. percentage of space debris was generated from
72
The Aerospace Corporation. Center for more than 200 in-orbit fragmentations which
Orbital and Reentry Debris Studies. January 2, have been recorded since 1961.
86
2005. Available from: U.S. House of Representatives Committee on
[Link] Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on
l. Date Accessed: 14/09/2009. Space and Aeronautics. Statement of Lieutenant
74
Amos, J. Space junk ‘will stay longer’. BBC General Larry James Commander Joint
News. December 16, 2006. Available from: Functional Component Command for space on
[Link] keeping the space environment safe for civil and
Date Accessed: 14/09/2009. commercial users. April 28, 2009 at pp. 2 – 3.
75
Committee on Space Environment Safety Available from:
Report. Supra, note 61 at p. 5. [Link]
76
Hereafter referred to as ‘ESOC’. ommdocs/hearings/2009/Space/28apr/James_Te
77
European Space Agency. ESOC: Focal point [Link]. Date Accessed: 14/09/2009.
87
for ESA space debris activities. European Space Ibid. See, also: Malik, T. Space junk around
Agency. April 11, 2008. Available from: Earth on the rise, expert say. [Link]. April
[Link] 29, 2009. Available from:
E_0.html. Date Accessed: 14/09/2009. [Link]
78
These two events are discussed in detail [Link]. Date Accessed: 11/09/2009.
88
below. In summary, the first incident involves Committee on Space Environment Safety
the intentional destruction of a derelict weather Report. Supra, note 61 at pp. 1 and 8 – 9.

12
89 103
Chinese Anti-Satellite test creates most severe Committee on Space Environment Safety
orbital debris cloud in history. Supra, note 60 at Report. Supra, note 61 at p. 17.
pp. 2 – 3. 104
U.S. House of Representatives Committee
90
Ibid, p. 2. on Science and Technology’s Subcommittee on
91
Fengyun- 1C Debris: Two Years Later. Supra, Space and Aeronautics. The Testimony of Dr.
note 60 at p. 2. Scott Pace, Director, Space Policy Institute,
92
Ibid. Elliott School of International Affairs, The
93
NASA Orbital Program Office. Supra, note 70 George Washington University at pp. 2 – 3.
at p. 1. Available from:
94
Ibid, p. 386. [Link]
95
Than. Supra, note 59; and Rincon. Supra, note ommdocs/hearings/2009/Space/28apr/Pace_Test
59. [Link]. Date Accessed: 14/09/2009.
96
Four satellite breakups in February add to 105
Committee on Space Environment Safety
debris population. Supra, note 59 at p. 3. Report. Supra, note 61 at p. 17; and Focus –
97
Committee on Space Environment Safety Space debris spotlight. Supra, note 8.
Report. Supra, note 61 at p. 7. See also: Satellite 106
Committee on Space Environment Safety
collision could pose space threat. Crash creates Report. Ibid.
debris; slight risk to space station, minor impact 107
Hereafter referred to as ‘LEO’.
on Iridium. Supra, note 61. 108
Hereafter referred to as ‘GEO’.
98
Chinese Anti-Satellite test creates most severe 109
European Space Agency. Space debris
orbital debris cloud in history. Supra, note 60 at mitigation: the case for a code of conduct.
p. 3. European Space Agency. April 15, 2005.
101
Hereafter referred to as ‘IADC’. This Available from:
Committee ‘is an international governmental [Link]
forum for the worldwide coordination of x_0.html. Date Accessed: 14/09/2009.
activities related to the issues of man-made and 110
U.S. National Research Council Committee
natural debris in space’. Eleven space agencies on Space Debris. 1995. Orbital Debris: A
from different countries are members of the technical Assessment. National Academy Press:
IADC, including the British National Space Washington, D.C. at p. 135.
Centre, the ESA, NASA and the Russian Federal 111
Ibid.
Space Agency. 112
Ibid.
113
Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination
Paragraph 1 of the terms of reference states the Committee. IADC Space Debris Mitigation
primary function of the Committee. It reads: Guidelines. IADC-02-01. Inter-Agency Space
Debris Coordination Committee. October 15,
‘The primary purpose of the IADC is to 2002. Available from: [Link]
exchange information on space debris [Link]/[Link]?item=docs_pub. Date
research activities between member space Accessed: 20/09/2009.
agencies, to facilitate opportunities for 114
U.S. National Research Council .Supra, note
cooperation in space debris research, to 179 at p. 138.
review the progress of ongoing cooperative 115
Ibid at pp. 138 and 141; Committee on Space
activities and to identify debris mitigation Environment Safety Report. Supra, note 61 at p.
options’. 19; and IADC Space Debris Mitigation
Guidelines. Supra, note 182 at para. 5.2.1.
See: Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination 116
Committee on Space Environment Safety
Committee. The terms of reference for the Inter- Report. Ibid; Space debris mitigation: the case
Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee for a code of conduct. Supra, note 178; and
(IADC). October 4, 2006. Available from: Malik, T. What happens when satellites fall.
[Link] [Link]. January 23, 2009. Available from:
Date Accessed: 20/09/2009. [Link]
102
[Link]. Date Accessed:
International cooperation in the peaceful uses 23/09/2009.
of outer space, G.A. Res. 62/217, UN GAOR, 117
U.S. National Research Council. Supra, note
62nd Session, 79th plenary meeting, U.N. Doc. 179 at p. 43; IADC Space Debris Mitigation
A/RES/62/217* (2007). Guidelines. Supra, note 182 at para. 3.4.2. –

13
3.4.3; and Inter- Agency Space Debris [Link] Date
Coordination Committee. Support to the IADC Accessed: 02/12/2009.
127
Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines. IADC Ibid.
128
WG4. Inter- Agency Space Debris Coordination Ibid; and Zak, A. Dangerous space mission
Committee. October 5, 2004 at para. 5.3. reentries of spacecraft. [Link]. June 2,
Available from: [Link] 2000. Available from:
[Link]/[Link]?item=docs_pub. Date [Link]
Accessed: 20/09/2009. ous_reentries_000602.html. Date Accessed:
118
IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines. 02/12/2009.
129
Supra, note 182 at para. 5.3.2; and Space debris Ibid.
130
mitigation: the case for a code of conduct. Compton and Benson. Supra, note 195.
131
Supra, note 178. Ibid; and What happens when satellites fall.
119
Ibid. Supra, note 185.
120 132
Support to the IADC Space Debris Mitigation Toner, M. Final frontier littered with junk.
Guidelines. Supra, note 186 at para. 5.3.2. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. February 26,
121
Ibid. 2009 at p. A1; and Adams, S. Lump of space
122
Ibid. junk hurtles through the roof of couple’s
123
Ibid; and IADC Space Debris Mitigation bungalow. The Daily Telegraph. October 16,
Guidelines. Supra, note 182 at para. 5.3.2. 2009 at p. 18.
124 133
Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. 48; and Cheng, Ibid. For additional, summarised case studies
B. Convention on International Liability for of re-entering spacecrafts and the damaged
Damage Caused by Space Objects. In: occasioned, see: Zak. Supra, note 197. The
Jasentuliyana, N. and R.S.K. Lee (eds). 1979. Soviet Mir Space Station is an example of a
Manual on Space Law. Vol.1. Oceana successful controlled re-entry which presented
Publications, Inc: New York. Chapter 3 at p. 84. no material risk of injury to humans, damage to
125
Ibid. The Canadian government initiated a property or harm to Earth’s environment. The
claim for the sum of $6,041,174.70 against the Russian Mission Control Center reported that all
Soviet Union for the damage caused on January debris were deposited in the South Pacific
23, 1979, under the UN Convention on Ocean. See: Saradzhyam, S. Mir dies at Sea.
International Liability Caused by Space Objects. [Link]. March, 23, 2001. Available from:
That amount was reduced to $6, 026,083.56 [Link]
because ‘those costs in respect of the operations c_splashdown_010323.html. Date Accessed:
which would not have been incurred had the 02/12/2009.
134
satellite not entered Canadian territory’. IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines.
Supra, note 182 at para. 5.3.1; Support to the
See: Christol, C.Q. International liability for IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines.
damage caused by space objects. American Supra note 186 at para. 5.3.1; and US National
Journal of International Law. 1980, Vol. 74, pp. Research Council. Supra, note 23 at p. 179.
135
346 – 371 at p. 346. Christol citing the Space debris mitigation: the case for a code
Government of Canada, Department of External of conduct. Supra, note 178. The first satellite to
Affairs, Communiqué No. 8, January 23, 1979. be disposed at the graveyard was undertaken by
the commercial satellite operator, Intelsat, in
According to Mason, after 21 months of 1997. See: Jehn, R., V.A. Agapov., and
negotiations, the Soviet Union settled to pay Hernández, C. End-of-life disposal of
three million Canadian dollars. geostationary satellites. Proceedings of the
fourth European Conference on Space Debris.
See: Manson, H.C. The impact of international ESA SP-587. April 18-20, 2005. Available from:
outer space commerce on the environment. [Link]
Texas International Law Journal. 1991, Vol. 26, 373J. Date Accessed; 02/12/2009.
136
pp. 541 – 560 at p. 551. Space debris mitigation: the case for a code
of conduct. Supra, note 178; and U.S. National
126
Compton, D. and C.D. Benson. Living and Research Council Committee on Space Debris.
Working in Space: A history of Skylab. NASA Supra, note 179 at p. 177.
137
SP-4208. National Aeronautics and Space US National Research Council. Ibid.
138
Administration. Available from: Ibid.

14
139
Ibid, pp. 149 and 153.
140
Ibid, p. 149.
141
Williamson, M. Protection of the space
environment: the first small steps. Advances in
space research. 2004, Vol. 34, pp. 2238 – 2243
at p. 2240.
142
Ibid.
143
Examples of remediation measures which
could be developed to reduce space traffic are
discussed by Bryner. See: Bryner, J. Cosmic
clean-up: Wild ideas to sweep space. [Link].
March 19, 2008. Available from:
[Link]
[Link]. Date Accessed:
14/09/2009.
144
Klindard cited by David See: David, L.
Orbital debris cleanup takes center stage.
[Link]. October 7, 2009. Available from:
[Link]
[Link]. Date Accessed: 07/10/2009.
145
European Space Agency. Fifth European
Conference on Space Debris to address key
issues. March 25, 2009. Available from:
[Link]
x_0.html. Date Accessed: 14/09/2009.
146
Jehn, Agapov and Hernández. Supra, note
271. During those eight years, 117 spacecrafts
reached their end of life; 39 were re-orbited in
compliance with the IADC recommendation, 41
were re-orbited below the minimum
recommended altitude, and 37 were abandoned
without any end-of-life disposal manoeuvre.
Ibid.
147
Vogler, J. 2000. The Global Commons:
Environmental and Technological Governance.
2nd ed. John Wiley and Sons Ltd: Chichester at
p. 107.
148
Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. 5.
149
Williamson. Supra, note 210 at p. 2239.
151
Klindard, H. 2006. Space Debris – Models
and Risk Analysis. Springer-Verlag: Chichester
at p. 5.
152
Viikari. Supra, note 23 at p. 31.

15