ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.พ. 2025
- Space debris is a huge problem, but we can fix it.
Subscribe to our channel! goo.gl/0bsAjO
Humans are filling the space around Earth with trash. Most of this junk comes from abandoned satellites, discarded jet engines, and other mission-related debris. And when these objects unintentionally collide, they explode into thousands of debris fragments that can seriously damage operational spacecraft. With a booming commercial space industry that has put an unprecedented number of new satellites in space in just the past few years, our space debris problem is only getting worse.
Scientists worry about a situation called the “Kessler syndrome,” coined in the 1970s, where a runaway chain reaction of collisions and fragmentation results in a cloud of debris around Earth so dense that it threatens future space missions.
But there are a few options to begin clearing out the debris surrounding us, most of them united in a strategy of slowing the objects down enough to de-orbit them - forcing them to reenter Earth’s atmosphere to be destroyed. For the largest category of debris, fragments measuring more than 10 centimeters in size, one solution would be to send a small spacecraft into orbit, where it would rendezvous with the large piece of debris and slow its orbit either by pushing or pulling it.
For the smallest class of debris, which spans a range of 1 millimeter to 1 centimeter in size, there are two main ideas. One would be to put a physical sweeper into orbit to catch or slow these tiny, untrackable fragments. The other would be to introduce a cloud of metal dust into orbit to weigh them down and drag them into Earth’s atmosphere.
For the class of space debris in the middle, measuring between 1 and 10 centimeters, the idea of using ground- and space-based lasers as a cleanup method has circulated for years. In this approach, a laser would use radar to track a piece of debris as it flies into view and then blast a pulse of energy at it. The goal is to nudge the debris enough to disrupt its orbit, ideally enough to slow it down.
Right now, NASA considers this the most cost-effective way to deal with most space debris, but it will take commitment from the international space community to implement any space debris removal strategies.
Further reading:
For more stories like this, check out Future Perfect, Vox's section focused on finding solutions to the world's biggest problems: www.vox.com/fu...
NASA's Cost and Benefit Analysis of Orbital Debris Remediation
www.nasa.gov/w...
NASA's Orbital Debris Program Office:
orbitaldebris....
The European Space Agency's latest on space debris:
www.esa.int/Sp...
Claude Phipps' 2014 paper, "L'ADROIT - A spaceborne ultraviolet laser system for space debris clearing"
ui.adsabs.harv...
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out www.vox.com.
Watch our full video catalog: goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Facebook: goo.gl/U2g06o
Or Twitter: goo.gl/XFrZ5H
"before its too late".
The bane of human existence
“A thing isn’t beautiful or tragic because it lasts, that’s only the case when it is destined to be extinct.” - Nabhan Mehrab Ali
@@JaehaerysTheConciliatorcringe
Prayer With You: Heavenly Father, Your Son Jesus Christ, born crucified resurrected For us ,Family ,Friends. Forgive Our Sins Give Us Eternal Life. In Jesus Christ's name.Amen
Fr
Space trash is the true cause of climate catastrophe! Where’s Greta and all her zombies?
It’s ironic they say the sweeper is to expensive but don’t ever acknowledge the unthinkable costs that will be incurred when we lose most or all GPS and global communications satellites.
This video was talking about things in low earth orbit. GPS and most communications satellites are in mid to high/Geostationary orbit. There's more space and less debris in those orbits so its less of a concern.
@@chrisoconnell8432 But when low Earth orbit is so polluted that you can't get through any more, you can't replace broken satellites in higher orbits. _That_ is going to be our biggest problem with all that space debris, at some point it stops us from leaving the planet.
@@rolfs2165 exactly. It won’t be immediate but we won’t be able to replace or repair. Plus after a collision event, the debris isn’t all stuck in L.E.O.
@@rolfs2165 Well yeah, thats why they're working on reducing space junk. There won't be a moment where we go from being able to access space to unable to access it. As space junk gets worse there will be smaller and smaller windows where we can access space.
So when they say its "too expensive", they really mean its not urgent enough. Everyone is well aware of the importance of GPS and comm sats.
@@chrisoconnell8432yes, I’m sure you’re right about how they are thinking about the cost. But as the man said in the video, one major collision could cause a chain reaction that could cause us to go from access to no access. All within a few hours.
Imagine your space-based anti-debris laser gets hit by space debris.
"debris" actually means enemy satellites and missiles.
@@toolbaggersno. It means space trash.
@@toolbaggers Enemy? Bro, it's both the works of our allies too. Stop being so shallow minded. Had both our allies' and enemies' grandparents and their grandparents thought this through and not chase for space superiority, this conversation wouldn't've existed.
@@toolbaggersbro forgot about SALT 1 and 2
you wouldn't go to war with space debris without an armor 😉
Timestamped Highlights
00:21
🌍 Humans are filling up space with trash, increasing the risk of collisions.
01:45
🛰 Space agencies and companies are working on solutions, including lasers.
03:11
💥 Collisions and fragmentation can lead to an uncontrollable cascade effect.
04:47
🛠 Different approaches are needed to remove different sizes of space debris.
07:05
🔭 Lasers can be used to nudge small debris and disrupt their orbit.
09:34
💰 Cost and international laws are obstacles in implementing laser systems.
11:00
🌐 International cooperation and mitigation efforts are crucial in solving the space debris problem.
Summarized by @NoteGPT
I cant imagine Wall-E visually predict how vast the space debris are
Those renders aren’t accurate
@@weekiely1233Well, they had to make the debris recognizable.
This is Gordon Shumway's job
That's too risky. I highly recommend picking up them one by one with hands.
The gov should provide trash can and cleaning service on space.
Don’t let a Sergeant Major hear you. They’ll have a whole detail of new Privates out there by 0830.
This guy has watched Planetes.
@@pakxenonI just finished the first episode a few minutes ago lol
ez work for us viltrumites
Kudos to Vox for consistently using metric units.
yeah great way to alienate the majority of their audience
guess what NASA and SpaceX uses? @@williamwade2674
@@williamwade2674just adapt to the better system 🤦🏿♂️😂
@@BoB-gt4xt it’s not that simple bro even if i adapt all the roadways signs and other stuff are still in customary so i’d have to convert everything so it’s really unrealistic unless the government is will to standardize the metric system
@@williamwade2674yeah what do you use? feet?
There was a paper quite recently that looked at the electromagnetic impact of conductive spacecraft junk in our orbit, the findings make the tungsten dust idea sound like a planned extinction event.
_"We don't know who struck first, us or them. But we do know it was us that scorched the sky."_
@@LabGeckobeat me to it. Good job.
what's it from?
@@LabGecko
@@tungsten2009 _The Matrix_
cool. downloads the information straight to my brain@@LabGecko
Awesome, thanks a lot for bringing space lasers to people's attention! Really well-made video. I have been an avid supporter of space-based laser removal since 2018 and published a paper on its feasibility (small-scale debris removal using space-based lasers, by L.Pieters and R.Noomen).
One small correction: at 6:18 you mention the space-based laser would have a more favourable angle wrt the debris object. While this is true, the orientation you show isn't the most favourable. You want to be hitting the debris objects as head-on as you can. This way you decrease the velocity, which makes the object de-orbit and burn up in the atmosphere the fastest.
Let's hope this method gets realised in the near future.
Yes, shooting a laser to push an object towards earth would just change its orbit a little; it wouldn't help de-orbit any debris we need to worry about.
Ah, so the ground based one would also be most effective at a head on angle... but to achieve that it has to go through so much atmosphere. Any idea what the optimal angle is for ground based? Other considerations?
@@tofferr ground based lasers are less worried about the geometry, since they can’t change their orientation anyway. They are always going to follow the target flying overhead for the max amount of time. Indeed, an object close to the horizon has better geometry but the laser spot size increases drastically as it has to traverse almost 1500 km to reach an object at 600 km altitude. I believe somewhere around 45 degrees angle the two effects balance out and the effect is largest
i'm so glad i found this comment. I'm writing a report on this topic and was struggling to find material 😭😭
edit: I read your paper! and enjoyed it way too much. I'm just a college student so I doubt my comment would be of much value but I was invested the whole way through. What a well written paper!
This is so weird. I literally had a dream about this exact concept last night, and here we are: a video about it this morning.
Next time try dreaming about a cure for aging.
i want one for how to make sure a robot doesn't take my job or something
that's not weird. the day before, something happened which got you thinking about this, or maybe not but it otherwise was on your mind. your dreams are there to resolve issues, as it were, to practice for what might possibly come. it's also why dreams are so scant on details but the focus of dreams are premonitions, so you should expect events to follow dreams. of course, your mind sometimes gets it wrong, like badly, so as a precaution, wipes your memory and basically counts on deja vu
Finally, a video on laser brooms.
The concept of using nets to catch trash has always seemed ridiculous. A drop in the ocean. But a laser broom can be located in a single location and target orders of magnitude more pieces of debris than even a fleet of net satellites.
A net or grasping arms would only be used for big objects, such as satellites that are a meter or more.
You know we have a serious problem with trash/waste management when even in space- it is abundent.
It’s not that abundant. Renders are often not accurate to scale. It’s more of a future risk
Plus most is old, Chinese or Russian.
Anti-satellite and anti-ballistic missile systems under the guise of 'cleaning up space.' Ronald Reagan would be proud of this Star Wars laser system.
Humans are... dirtballs; even in space.
😂😂😂
Oh my, I totally agree.
This is different
@@weekiely1233 Hitler, Stalin, different or basically the same?
so's the earth?
I can't wait to find plastics in mars
It's still mind-boggling to think that lasers were once considered "a solution in search of a problem" lol
This is what they call wishful thinking, we can't even clean the litter off the ground we walk on to work every day.
Interesting; FYI almost all communication satellites are in Geosynchronous Orbit (26K miles above the earth), not Low-Earth Orbits. GPS is in a Walker Constellation around 12k miles up.
If i had a nickel for every NASA related problem that was solved by a broom id have two nickels, which isnt a lot but odd it happened twice
Lasers in space 👍 Count me in 😂
Make sure you make them Jewish, then the whole right wing will go nuts, courtesy of MTG.
Thank you for this very instructive video. It is definetely an issue that shoul be dealt be ASAP !!
It is
Oh sure, we can have laserbeams in space but when will I get my sharks with frigging laser beams attached to their heads!? 😤
There's a Manga+Anime about this topic - Planetes.
I don't see why the US Space Force isn't already doing this. Not only is space debris a matter of national security, but why wouldn't they want a space-based laser in orbit, just in case?
Atmosphere will make the space laser ineffective at ground based targets
@@Someone-sq8im World militaries already have ICBMs and cruise missiles for hitting terrestrial targets. Space-based laser systems are for redirecting space debris and disabling enemy satellites.
@@kentslocum ah, that does make some sense.
I’m doing some policy research on space debris right now. All of these new technologies are really neat, but they’re so unproven right now and still in the early stages of development. The real problem going forward is space debris prevention-lessening the rapid creation of debris, as opposed to taking care of existing debris. The FAA has an excellent proposed rule working its way through the bureaucratic chain that would require commercial operators to dispose of their rocket bodies. Rocket bodies make up 95% of the mass of all space debris, and are by far the largest and heaviest pieces of trash in orbit (which makes them the most likely to collide with things and fragment). We need to first stop commercial companies from leaving their junk in space before we start implementing costly tech to deal with existing space debris.
Commercial launch providers don’t leave spent stages. SpaceX, ULA, rocket lab etc all de orbit their spent stages or place them into graveyard orbits.
Most spent stages are from decades old missions from the U.S. and Russia in the Cold War
I'm confident that the increased interest in this technology isn't solely due to concerns about space debris. It also holds potential as a secondary application for disabling enemy satellites.
If you use laser ablation at the correct times it's possible to decelerate objects in orbit, the issue is that it can only be used for short periods, tracking targets and aiming with precision can be difficult. Unless the light is wider on one of the axes, making it easier to hit a target but could hit other objects that are close by.
Using a laser would create smaller but deadly debris,
You need to de-orbit the trash to burn up
Is creating a Space Roomba is still too difficult to do?
Yes
Space-Plow
It got stuck and its just spinning in circles on the test run
How exactly is a vacuum cleaner supposed to work in the vacuum of space?
(Sidenote: just responding to the inevitable in advance, - yes, I know it's a joke, I'm just a buzzkill).
Space fly paper
There's something poetic about humans creating so much trash in space, that we get completely trapped in an orbiting trash bubble on our trash filled planet.
What is this doomerism in the comments?
I am personally glad that there are enough people working on the issue who haven't just thrown up their arms and given up.
Humanity solved the ozone hole, we can deal with this issue too.
My cats would love this
When a satellite burns up, it doesn’t disappear. It ends up as smaller nano sized particles that stay in the stratosphere. This can cause climate problems among others. By 2030, there will be on average 1 satellite re-entering earth’s atmosphere every hour.
Just looked some of this fascinating information...
NASA.. of left in Orbit below 600km debris is normally falls into our atmosphere, but debris left in Orbit 800km could take centuries...
Wow
It’s still, at a 5 entry event per hour, rate an incredibly low impact on the environment
Quote from Styropyro:
"Just like most problems in life, this can be solved with very powerful lasers.
man, videos like this make me appreciate VORs....
Humans are... dirtballs; even in space.
Space debris is different
Why should TAXPAYERS pay for this!? Private companies are the ones putting their satellites in space for profit, therefore it should be THEIR job. Give this task to the private sector, I bet they'll fix it quickly to preserve their own profit margins.
Where’s the money to be gained from space lasers?
@@Someone-sq8im the companies putting satellites in space are private entities. This space junk poses a threat to THEIR investments. It's in their own private interests to clean up space junk that could damage their property.
Satellites and debris are completely different
Companies like SpaceX leave no debris from launches and all commercial satellite operators are required to have disposal plans to mitigate debris
Most debris is from the Cold War specifically russian.
Modern debris comes overwhelmingly from Russia and China not private companies
@@pinkaceso because they’re the ones impacted we as civilians should also be paying for climate change mitigation on earth?
Or do you want companies to pay for everything you don’t like?
@@weekiely1233 well, space x is not flying rockets for fun, the whole idea is to fly SATELLITES up there for private businesses.
It’s a *real life* ‘arcade’ claw-machine 3:00
the fact a idea interesting enough is simple not possible because its expensive.
Humans are amazing. We litter everywhere: in the deep oceans, across the land, into space, and even other planets.
Is there any research done on what the residue gases of burnt up space debris does to the atmosphere?
Some but it’s such a low amount of emissions it’s not even a concern atm
Nothing
@@weekiely1233 Just throw the garbage in the ocean said our grandparents.
@@toolbaggers so when they mitigate debris it’s bad and when they don’t it’s bad?
Make your mind up
There is approximately 16,000,000 kg of meteors entering the Earth's atmosphere every year, and an unknown amount of radioactive dust floating around from all the nuclear weapons testing in the last 80 years or so. A few hundred (or thousand) satellites shouldn't make too much of a difference.
8:10 Where there's a will there's a way. ❤
where there's a hole there's a goal❤
NASA will sometimes just approach a problem by saying "alright folks, what's the coolest possible solution to this issue?"
You're saying we could use a Gundam, right? Amuro ikimasu!
Space laser expert Marjorie Taylor Greene has been talking about this for years 🧠 Old news, Vox!
Every story is new to somebody, no matter how long it has been around. And the video itself stated explicitly that the concept has been around since the 90s.
is future perfect a new playlist, it will be dope
the whole point of nano satellites is to be infuriatingly difficult to eradicate but if they collide in sufficient numbers, will eventually make a pretty sparkly ring around the planet. Tossing anything into orbit can only help.
So the laser is like a mini Death Star super laser, but directed towards space instead of a planet.
Is this how there gonna cover up the space lasers conspiracy
I see my idea for a bunch of Wall-E's equipped with jetpacks deployed into LEO wasn't considered...
"we can still fix it before it's too late" - where did i hear this before?
The conclusion makes sense, boring decommission rules are probably the best way forward, instead of exciting laser tech.
The boring decommission rules are to prevent the issue from getting worse, but we still need lasers to clean up the mess we've already made.
There's stil gonna be debris, not matter how much we try to regulate it. Regulating only decreases the amount
@@rizizum True, but debris in low earth orbit falls back down eventually. So luckily we don't need to be perfect, just keep it from getting out of control.
Yeah yeah I don't need a big intro just tell me about the lasers
How about using a mirror? A laser from the ground and a mirror in space. I don't know if it would reduce the intensity of the laser.
it would. have you ever seen any laser used in real world scenarios? this is pure science fiction
@@toolbaggers I own a handheld 5 watt laser (that I bought on Amazon) that will set wood on fire from 5 meters away. It would probably work a lot better aimed by a computer and in the near vacuum of space. It also burns paint off of metal, which would give thrust to the object. physics is cool! ;)
@toolbaggers said _"have you ever seen any laser used in real world scenarios"_
Look up StyroPyro's laser build _"StyroPyro long-range LASER turret in my yard" using an off-the-shelf 2 Kw laser he modded. It could easily burn things at 220m, and if you look at the 30 min mark he explains the projected max range. And he did this on a homemade focuser using PVC on a shaky tower. Or check CNet's vid _Real Laser Weapons Used by the US Military_ on the US Navy's 30Kw laser system. _"Anyone who could play XBox or PS4 games could use the [LaWS]"._ And that was in use in 2014. Much more powerful ones are in use now.
We can afford those on military vehicles all over the world, but no, taking out space trash is too much work.
On the other hand if we give the debris enough time we will get a second moon made of metal 😂
It’s a sad testament to how much waste we can create when it potentially poses a risk of humanity never leaving the planets atmosphere again
a big step forward would be moving towards full reusability/full de-orbit of all discarded hardware. single stage to orbit craft, or craft with fully reusable first and second stages, would flesh the idea out well. SpaceX has already commercialized the first half of that objective, and is actively pursuing the second.
The issue with these system is that they can easily be used as a weapon (or be considered as such by other nations). Plus, what is actual debris and what is a stealth satellite masquerading as it might also become a problem.
i love your videos.bro ❤
Id love this job. Ive been practicing since i was a kid 🎉🎉🎉
It's funny how such persistent problems can be easily solved by using giant lasers
Companies should have to pay to lease a specific orbit. There's the money.
Not how orbits work
Thanks for this good news
"Let's dump heavy dust into our atmosphere! That won't backfire."
Kessler Syndrome keeps me up at night. It's so beyond scary.
It’s not a threat atm.
You also shouldn’t be worried. It’s very overblown and sensationalised by the media
It should be written into law that every agency or organization in space is responsible for their litter…the same way Singapore arrests litterers on the same pace as drug traffickers and murders…
How does a laser move a piece of space garbage?
What we **NEED** is space based recycling. We spent a ton of money to get it up there. Reuse or recycle, make space stations for pennies on the dollar.
Yes, the up front cost is going to be high, but return on investment is very high.
Like the Death Star? Not even a big Star Wars fan but pretty easy to see this one
Fund your space laser concept by selling collision insurance to satellite owners.
3:55
3:56
"Too expensive to even consider.." - N.A.S.A
When talking about manufacturing equiptment to recover broken up and fallen space debris.. but whatever current or future project is wayy more important. Yikes
Correct title - "How to weaponize space without saying you're weaponizing space."
When "freedom" is used as a substitute word for war and profit.
Very informative
A system of space mirrors with boosters to guide its angle/trajectory in middle earth orbit would allow ground lasers with a renewable/constant power supply to bounce its beam at an X angle to hit the debris in lower earth orbit downward toward the atmosphere so it can burn up. The solution is always lasers, magnets and mirrors.
another error: the graph listed the ground-based laser as more expensive than space-based. you're battin' 1000 today, vox
Space is important too
wait, you're telling me that there are NO islands of plastic in our oceans???
lasers? robots? man space is becoming more like star wars every day
Anti-satellite and anti-ballistic missile systems under the guise of 'cleaning up space.' Ronald Reagan would be proud of this Star Wars laser system.
Remember when burning trash was a good idea before the greenhouse catastrophe?
And here I thought the video was about taking all of earth’s trash and sending it to space
9:29 There are 6 songs called "critical condition" on APM, which one did you use? Again, list your full music bibliography. Name your artist or album or something.
i love that we can't get 2 minutes into this video without labeling russia and china as the big bad here. Like spacex isn't sending satellites up to occupy LEO before china can. these state department takes are why I still sub to Vox.
Most debris is Russian. SpaceX leaves no debris from launches whereas China routinely leaves it on every launch including large cores that have fallen randomly to earth
Our solution will probably come from a combination of miniaturized drones equip with lasers launched from high altitudes like space-ballons. Easy to build, lower cost and no problem with decommissioning.
Scientists must look for garbage in other planets if they want to look for human life in other planet 😂
Everytime your mum tells you to put the trash in the bin, make sure to throw it into space
This is the premise of the movie "Gravity"
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said... "I drank what?"
Over time the low Earth orbit space junk deorbits by itself. At 400 km altitude, it'll naturally decay in under five years, however at orbital altitudes beyond 500 km, there is no guarantee the spacecraft will deorbit within that timeframe and some may have trouble deorbiting in under 25 years.
they found out that the space debris defends us, now they are clearing them for us to experience the full brunt of the sun.
Dayum they were right about space lasers....😂
just call for Supermans help
WALL●E is becoming a reality
I hope that one day we do not have to see junk in our once clear blue sky
I think we should just get a big trash bag, and scoop.
very interesting thank you
ooooh, MTG will have a debris-field day with these space lasers...
Hopefully, all the countries and enemies can work together to create these machines and collectively remove the junk.
Excellent!
What a title!
if we could just negate the "cost" and just produce as a species infrastructure which could save us we'd be pretty capable of seeing change happen when it should.
When I was younger about in 1999 me, my brother and friend saw debris on fire in the sky. It was from far away but it must have been a lot or big because it covered a large part of the sky with fire. We thought it was a plane exploading in the air. It almost seemed like the fire was just floating there because as we were watching it for a while it never seemed to go further down. For the next few days we heard absolutely nothing on the news. Later in life I was with an ex driving down the highway and seen the same fire in the sky but this time it was smaller. Again it looked like it was just stationary in the air over the 30min I watched it. That also never made the news.
That sounds more like a planes landing lights than debris. Either that or you’re embellishing it
Spacecraft move fast. It would never appear stationary or last 30 minutes
This reminds new of an anime : Planetes.