Hacker News Reader

Comment by danpalmer | Hacker News Reader

I'm all for more access to space and more innovation, but in a way almost unique to space (maybe only applying to things like the internet), borders aren't really practical and the cost of problems may have to be borne by bystanders.

I think there are some agreements/treaties on how access to space will be done, but I believe they're quite US-centric, stemming from NASA's work in 50s. I don't believe that China (or Russia?) subscribe to that kind of regulation.

How do we incentivise all countries with launch capabilities to be good citizens in space? Cleaning up after themselves, controlling re-entries, thinking about ground safety, etc.

View on HN

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosmos_954#Aftermath:

“Under the terms of the 1972 Space Liability Convention, a state which launches an object into space is liable for damages caused by that object. For the recovery efforts, the Canadian government billed the Soviet Union C$6,041,174.70 for expenses and additional compensation for future unpredicted expenses; the USSR eventually paid C$3 million.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Liability_Convention says China, Russia and the USA ratified that convention.

Responsibility has always ended at the border, Shipping trash overseas or dumping it in a river is the status quo. Space is not special. Kessler syndrome is a risk akin to global warming when we entered the industrial age.

>I don't believe that China (or Russia?) subscribe to that kind of regulation.

Most launches are being done by US/EU based companies. if those adhere to not polluting space in an unproductive manner then we'll be fine. making 'rules' that everyone can adhere to just leads to everyone sticking to the lowest common denominator. Which to me, is a worse situation than legislature picking up resposibility on their own.

Well, considering there's tens of millions of space junk already I wonder which countries/institutions are currently not doing a good job at that?! NASA and US would be top of the list.

There are currently very few (no other?) pieces of space junk as big as this one.

Not if you limit it to anything that might fall to Earth any time soon.

Much of these are old and were put up a long time ago. In the last 10 years most people putting things in space have been far more careful to make good end-of-life plans, safe de-orbiting plans, and more. I don't think a rocket launched by SpaceX/ULA/Arianespace would be leaving their second stages to re-enter the atmosphere uncontrolled, it's just not really accepted anymore.

> I don't think a rocket launched by SpaceX/ULA/Arianespace would be leaving their second stages to re-enter the atmosphere uncontrolled

Well, except the Falcon 9 rocket that did just that 2 months ago: https://geekologie.com/2021/03/a-falcon-9-rocket-made-an-unc...

Disappointingly, neither that article or the parent about the Chinese Long March rocket make it clear how planned or unplanned this was.

Falcon 9 rockets usually land or attempt to, so that was a failure or malfunction, that left it out of control in a short-term orbit?

And in the Chinese one? Was this outcome expected or was it due to a failure to de-orbit in a controlled way?

> I don't believe that China (or Russia?) subscribe to that kind of regulation.

> How do we incentivise all countries with launch capabilities to be good citizens in space?

re: China and Russia, we need to worry more about how to get Space Marines and defense systems up there.

The whole "co-operative, neutral citizens of space" ship has long since sailed, and anyone who thinks we shouldn't at least treat it like contested international waters is naive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com