1 / 27

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

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.

akiko
Télécharger la présentation

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

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  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

  2. 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

  3. More news http://www.neoshield.net/en/news-and-events/news/close-approach-of-large-asteroid-today.htm Asteroid 308242 (2005 GO21) – size 1.4 km! - flew within 17 lunar distance of Earth yesterday

  4. Context 4

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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.

  8. 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

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

  10. Status – proposed structure United NationsSecurity Council • IAWN: observations, orbit prediction, impact effects modelling, communication • SMPAG: assess space missions for impact mitigation • MAOG: political body MAOGMission Authorisation and Oversight Group From the ASE report “Asteroid Threats:A call for global response” SMPAGSpace Mission Planning and Advisory Group IAWNInformation, Analysis, and Warning Network Disaster management community

  11. The United Nations General Assembly Security Council • COPUOS = Committee for Peaceful Use of Outer Space • STSC = Scientific and Technical Subcommittee • NEO WG = NEO Working Group COPUOS Legal SC STSC NEO WG Action Team 14

  12. 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 IP R ~ pbDT • IP = ImpactProbability • E = Energyreleasedbytheimpact in Mt • DT = Time spanuntiltheimpact in years The Palermo scale PS = log10 R • NOTE 1: pb = backgroundriskpb= 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

  14. 2011 AG5 d = 130 – 290 m => assume 200 m, v = 15 km/s DT = 28 years With r = 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?

  16. Key players and responsibilities - I ProgrammeBoard ESACore Team DirectorGeneral Directorof SRE Directorof HSO UserGroup directs directs ESATechnical Staff directs supports advises report HSO = Directorate of Human Spaceflight and Operations SRE = Directorate of Science and Robotic Exploration Contractors(Industry, institutes)

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. So what does the Action Team 14 recommend?

  20. Status – proposed structure United NationsSecurity Council • IAWN: observations, orbit prediction, impact effects modelling, communication • SMPAG: assess space missions for impact mitigation • MAOG: political body MAOGMission Authorisation and Oversight Group From the ASE report “Asteroid Threats:A call for global response” SMPAGSpace Mission Planning and Advisory Group IAWNInformation, Analysis, and Warning Network Disaster management community

  21. 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 Optical Ground Station – ESA’s 1-m telescope used ~4 nights per month for asteroids Screenshot of NEODyS, the European system to predict possible impacts

  22. Status - SMPAG SMPAG workshop #01, Oct 2010, ESOC • 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

  23. 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

  24. Status – interaction with disaster management organisations • Still open • Interaction chain within countries needs to be defined

  25. Summary Public 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

More Related