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 2

More news Asteroid (2005 GO21) – size 1.4 km! - flew within 17 lunar distance of Earth yesterday 3 today.htm

4 4 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 (3 rd 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

Interim reports can be found at 9

10

Status – proposed structure United Nations Security Council MAOG Mission Authorisation and Oversight Group IAWN Information, Analysis, and Warning Network SMPAG Space 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 = log 10 R The Palermo scale R ~ IP pbTpbT NOTE 1:p b = background risk p b = 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 = * J

2011 AG5 d = 130 – 290 m => assume 200 m, v = 15 km/s T = 28 years With  = 2000 kg/m 3 : m = kg Kinetic energy E = J or 225 Mt TNT p b = per year PS = – on NEODyS (different diameter assumed?) 15

How are decisions taken in ESA’s SSA programme?

SSA-NEO-ESA-HO-055/1-, 06 May 2011, dvk Page 17 Director of SRE Key players and responsibilities - I Director General ESA Core Team ESA Technical Staff Programme Board advises directs supports report Director of HSO directs User Group 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, dvk Page 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, dvk Page 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, dvk Page 20 So what does the Action Team 14 recommend?

Status – proposed structure United Nations Security Council MAOG Mission Authorisation and Oversight Group IAWN Information, Analysis, and Warning Network SMPAG Space 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) 1 st : Hosted by ESA in Darmstadt, Oct nd : 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 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

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 Public