Near Earth Object Response

1
Near Earth Object Response
2
Order of Ceremony

• Introduction
• Description of the NEO Threat at Hand
• Space-based Responses
• Earth-based Responses
• Action to be Taken
• Concluding Remarks
• Questions from the Press

3
Description of the NEO Threat at Hand

• Designation 1997 XF11
• March 1998 an 88-day follow-up study was carried
  out by Peter Shelus at the McDonald Observatory
• Estimated size the NEO 1.3 - 2.8 km
• 80 chance of impact in 2028

Vernal
4
Description of the NEO Threat at Hand

• NEO Disaster Effect Estimates

5
Mitigation Possibilities
(Km)
6
Plan of Action

• Follow-up observations
• Characterization missions
• Space-based responses
• Relocation planning
• Shelter planning

7
Task Force Needed
8
Treaties and Agreements Relating to Nuclear
Weapons
9
Current Efforts in Response

• No official program dedicated to the creation of
  an effective response system
• Relatively few reports on the subject
• PhD dissertation of Dr. Gritzner, report of the
  AIAA, three conferences (1992, 1993, 1995)
• Some political will is emerging
• US, UK, UN

10
Assessing the Response Mission Options
destructible
TECHNOLOGY
11
Space-based Responses

• 3 characteristics
• Preparation (P)
• Travel (T)
• Action (A)
• Permeated by two
• time constraints
• Short (S)
• Long (L)
• 8 classifications in total

12
Space-based Responses Software Demonstration
Decision Tree
13
Space-based Responses Characterization (1)
Characterization Missions

• Space-based characterization missions are needed
  to get better estimates of the
• Size
• Velocity
• Spin and material characteristics of the object
• Density
• Mass and structure data necessary for a
  deflection strategy
• Space-based telescopes needed to complement
  ground-based surveys

14
Space-based Responses Characterization (2)

• The most important decisions to be made
• Single or multiple spacecraft
• What payload to take
• Rendezvous with NEO or fly-by
• Use of a Lander
• Need for sample return to Earth
• Manned or unmanned
• Space Mission Specifications
• A few days for basic sampling and return of
  surface material to Earth
• Up to a possible six months for detailed study of
  the composition, experiments and attempts at deep
  drilling operations

15
Space-based Responses Characterization (3)

• Payload
• Seismographs, and may also include some of the
  components for the deflection mission attempt
• This mission may eventually include astronauts
  with sufficient expertise in the following areas
• Geology, geophysics, and / or geochemistry
• Space robotics
• Science instrumentation
• Explosives
• Drilling
• Seismography

16
Space-based Responses Deflection Destruction
(1)
Deflection Destruction Options
Kinetic Deflection
Nuclear Deflection
Mass Driver
Billiards Shots (D2D)
Nuclear Detonation
17
Space-based Responses Deflection Destruction
(2)
Equivalent Energy (kT of TNT)

• What made our choice?
• Deflectability
• Destructibility
• Pulverization capability

Size of NEO (km)
18
Space-based Responses Deflection Destruction
(3)
19
Space-based Responses Deflection Destruction
(4)
Nuclear Weapon Trade-Offs

• 3 main options
• Stand-off device - better to avoid fragmentation
• Surface-burst device - good for destruction
• Penetration device - effect depends on
  composition size of NEO

20
Space-based Responses Deflection Destruction
(5)
Deflect-To-Destroy (D2D)

• A smaller NEOs orbit is changed to achieve a
  collision with the bigger threatening one
  (billiards shot)
• What is the chance that the bigger asteroid is
  going to be destroyed?

21
Space-based Responses Deflection Destruction
(6)
Ethical and Organizational Issues

• Can people trust these technologies?
• What about the nuclear question?
• How is funding going to be raised?
• Who is going to be responsible for the management
  of this program?
• International response !!!

22
Earth-based Responses

• What is an Earth-based response?
• Relocation and Shelters
• In which situation would these Earth-based
  responses be needed?
• When there is not enough time to react to the NEO
  threat
• As a contingency plan in the case that either
  destruction and deflection fails
• In case there is an aftermath from the debris of
  the space-based response

23
Earth-based Responses Short and Long Term
Situation

• Long Term Situation
• NEO gt 10 Km
• Devastating effect global scale
• Goal
• To save the human race and repopulate Earth
• Ethical, social, cultural and psychological
  issues overwhelming
• Global Organization

• Short Term Situation
• NEO lt 2 Km
• Impact lasts for a few weeks
• Goal
• To save as many humans as possible
• Shelter and relocation issues not complicated
• Regional Organizations

24
Earth-based Responses Short Term (1)

• Before impact
• Emergency Response Plans
• Enhancement of building structures in earthquake
  zone
• Backburning to lessen fire susceptibility

25
Earth-based Responses Short Term (2)

• Effects of Impact
• From none (Tunguska) to global economic
  depression
• Localized dust, debris projection, earthquakes
  and fires

26
Earth-based Responses Short Term (3)

• Evacuation
• Uncertain impact location
• Some people would prefer to stay (cultural
  beliefs, ...)
• Maybe difficult to relocate refugees

27
Earth-based Responses Short Term (4)

• Shelters (1)
• No shelter construction need, use existing
  shelters and by using schools, sporting complex,
  governmental infrastructure, caves, tunnels,
  mines...
• Private vs public
• Stockpiling

28
Earth-based Responses Short Term (6)

• Recovery
• Whole region to be rebuilt
• Financial help from international community
• Struggles over property rights
• Global psychological aid

29
Earth-based Responses Long Term (1)

• Effects
• Massive ground shocks, high-pressure blast waves,
  large tsunamis and huge global fires
• Earth atmosphere upset for decades or centuries

30
Earth-based Responses Long Term (2)

• Evacuation (1)
• Land and maritime transports, public and private,
  stretched to the limit
• Design of new transport systems
• Relocate cultural heritage

31
Earth-based Responses Long Term (3)

• Evacuation (2)
• Military control of evacuation
• Population of host countries may rise up
• Possible wars between previously friendly
  countries
• Mediation by International Community

32
Earth-based Responses Long Term (4)

• Refugee Support
• Relocation may last for years
• Providing basics assets by maximazing key
  industry output and stockpiling.
• Social conflicts

33
Earth-based Responses Long Term (5)

• Goal of shelters
• To perserve
• Humanity
• Technologies
• Knowledge base
• Culture

34
Earth-based Responses Long Term (6)

• Shelter Technologies
• Energy/power supply
• Thermal humidity control
• Air filtration
• Sanitation waste management
• Communication systems
• Water filtration collection
• Medical support
• Food production storage
• Soil removal
• Oxygen production
• Archives

35
Earth-based Responses Long Term (7)

• Internal management
• of shelters
• Social aspects
• Selection of personnel
• Shelter organisation
• Political aspects

36
Earth-based Responses Long Term (8)

• Post-impact
• Individual reactions to disasters
• Assisting the survivors
• Recommended interventions
• Key psychological resources
• Key social resources
• Resource deterioration

37
Earth-based Responses Long Term (9)

• Shelter Study Analogue
• The Maginot Line
• Space stations, polar outposts, submarines
• Martian and lunar bases

38
Action to be Taken (1)
Properties of the NEO Threat

• Impact
• 1997 XF11 hits Earth
• 26th October 2028
• 1.3 2.8 km in diameter
• Orbital Parameters 1997 XF11
• Perihelion 0.74 AU
• Aphelion 2.14 AU
• Eccentricity 0.484
• Inclination 4.09 degrees
• Period 632 days

39
Action to be Taken (2)
40
Actions to be Taken (3)
Action Chart

• Timeline

f
41
Action to be Taken (4)
Deflection

• Deflection Mission Concept (1)
• Modify the 1997 XF11 orbit for it to miss Earth
  by a comfortable distance
• Several (10 to 15) small nuclear blasts
• Decrease NEO velocity during its perihelion
  passage (0.74 AU)
• ?V 10 cm.s-1 impact avoided by 235,000 km

42
Action to be Taken (5)

• Deflection Mission Concept (2)
• Dec, 2015 launch of 10 to 15 interceptors, each 1
  Mt nuclear bomb
• 8.5 months travel
• Each warhead provides
• 1 cm.s-1 ?V

43
Action to be Taken (6)
Destruction

• Destruction Mission Concept
• Deflect To Destroy (D2D) Alter the orbit of
  another striker asteroid (2000 HO40) with a
  series of nuclear blasts so that it collides with
  1997 XF11
• Mission Summary
• Preparation of interceptors 2003-2015
• Departure date January 2015
• Arrival on waiting orbit January 2017
• First nuclear blast May 2017 (Perihelion)
• 1997 XF11 and 2000 HO40 collision in July 2021

44
Action to be Taken (7)
45
Concluding Remarks (1)

• Conclusion Space-based Responses

• Theoretically, a few additional cm/s are enough
  to deflect a NEO from its collision course with
  the Earth (given enough action time)
• The nuclear option is the only solution that can
  cope with the deflection of big NEOs
• Nuclear blasts should not be triggered too close
  to the NEO to avoid its fragmentation
• The billiards shot or D2D option is
  theoretically feasible but hard in practice
• International space response needed
• Modifications of international treaties needed

46
Concluding Remarks Recommendations
Conclusion Earth-based Responses

• Many people will not believe in the threat, or
  will be unwilling to respond to it?
• It is the responsibility of our generation to
  plan ahead for the survival of the Earths living
  and cultural heritage
• No useful resource should be ignored, no time
  should be wasted
• Efforts must be global, according to potential of
  each state
• Keep calm, we will succeed!

47
Question Period
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
48
Thank you