Thesis Final Forum - Allison Prater 2026

追加: 2026-05-06

[00:01:00][music] [music] [music] All right, this is your two-minute warning. Two minutes. You got two minutes.

[00:04:23]>> [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] [music] >> All right, if you guys can head to your seats, we can get started.

[00:07:21]Hi, and welcome to the fifth and final night of the senior thesis competition here at Veraritoss Academy. My name is AJ Hannenburg, and I am the thesis department head here at Veraritoss.

[00:07:30]Quintilian defined an orator as a good man speaking well. And that's in the ideal what these presentations are. But speaking well isn't quite a good translation. It would be more like speaking good as in speaking good into the world. And that's what we try to produce here is a student who can bring good into the world through their words.

[00:07:49]It's our aim. It's why I'm still a teacher. Each presentation tonight will be 20 minutes long followed by a 20-minute question and answer period from our [music] illustrious panel who no longer has their adviser or the friendly Mr. Donaldson on it. So, a tougher crowd. If they hit 20 minutes during their presentation, they'll hear this sound, which means they have one minute to wrap it up before we start bringing up the music. They're competing for a $2,000 scholarship, which will be awarded at graduation. They're evaluated not by the panel in front of you, but by the thesis team, which is scattered around the room. It includes myself, Graham Donaldson, Katherine Ball, Zeke Pickering, and Ashlin Thompson. They're evaluated on seven criteria. the five cannons of rhetoric, their question and answer period and the Osis. So the cannons of rhetoric, the first is invention, the crafting of the argument.

[00:08:34][music] Did they find ingenious ways to put together something that was convincing and complete? The arrangement of the argument is how they place everything for maximum effect. If you ever get lost during the presentation, something has gone wrong. The next is style. Is it easy to follow? Is it fun to listen to? Are there any memorable lines that will stick with you as you leave the auditorium? Memory is how well they can bring what they wrote to the stage. If that fails, then everything else is kind of a wash. And the last is delivery. Did they appear nervous and robotic, or were they warm, welcoming, and professional? That's kind of what we're looking for. For the Q&A, we're looking for them to answer their questions pointedly and directly and not meander. And then the Os are ethos, logos, and pathos. So ethos, are they a trustworthy speaker or did they at least come across that way? Pathos, did they tug at your heartstrings? and logos. Did they argue logically and free from fallacy?

[00:09:26]During the presentations, please keep your phones dark, silent, and in your pocket. This is all memorized, and a single ringer or alarm or fun ringtone might get distract them and make it hard for them to recover. For the same reason, the doors will lock. They are locked, and if you decide to leave, you won't be readmitted during the presentation. After each presentation, there'll be a 20-minut break during which those doors are open, and you can get drinks or whatever you need to do.

[00:09:50]The winner is announced at graduation where they will earn house points, um, top speaker commendation, a giant silly check, and a wreath made by myself out of real honest to goodness foliage. One year, I kid you not, as I handed it over, a spider started dropping down from it, and I had to tell them not to put it on. They'll also get a silly pin.

[00:10:09]Okay, I think we're ready to go. Uh, Mr. Cameron Cook, can you come pray for us?

[00:10:17]Let's pray.

[00:10:19]Heavenly Father, thank you so much for tonight. Uh thank you for the opportunity for our students uh to use the talents and the gifts that you have given them uh to speak well. Lord, you tell us in your word to be ready in and out of season season to give a defense for the gospel. And Lord, just like AJ, Mr. Hannenburgg said, Lord, I pray that they would use these gifts that you have given them for your glory uh to bring your truth, goodness, and beauty into the world. Lord, thank you so much for the families that are represented here tonight, the thesis advisors, the teachers, the faculty, all those who have poured uh into uh these finalists.

[00:10:53]And we just pray a prayer over the finalists, Lord, that they would uh have your spirit inside of them just like Jeremiah said, I don't have the words to say and you said that I will fill you up with what you should say. Lord, may you bless them, bless the presentations tonight. We are so proud of them. And it's your name we pray. Amen.

[00:11:11]>> Thank you, Mr. Cook. Please welcome to the stage for the second time, Miss Allison Prader with her thesis, there are no trash cans in space, why we need to clean up space debris. Let's give her a hand.

[00:11:30]A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, the world recognizes these words as the opening lines of the Star Wars franchise. Their flagship film, A New Hope, ends with a Death Star exploding into fading spots of light. Hollywood's earned their reputation for depicting life inaccurately. And a not so long time ago, in a galaxy very much our own, we discovered what really happens when large metallic objects explode in outer space, creating a similar result to Luke's missiles. An anti-satellite weapon, or ASAT, is designed to destroy satellites.

[00:12:08]In November 2021, Russia conducted an ASET technology test on one of their own nonoperational satellites that had been in orbit for 39 years. This test succeeded and such large scale destruction generated over 1,500 pieces of trackable space debris. This debris hindered ISS activities. And six months later, UT professor Mariva Jaw reported, quote, "Starlink satellites have evasively maneuvered nearly 2,000 times to avoid a predicted likely chance of collision." End quote.

[00:12:41]Satellite crashes are legitimately out of this world problems that utilities like banking, GPS, national defense systems, and smartphones rely on satellites to function.

[00:12:52]If space debris collides with these satellites and prevents them from functioning, those collisions will shake modern life to its core. No more extreme weather alerts or online banking. You would actually have to stop and ask directions when driving to a new place.

[00:13:07]Space debris related concerns continue to grow and addressing them needs to become a priority in the United States.

[00:13:14]Now, I would like to clarify what space debris is, the current debris situation, and potential solutions. The inter agency debris coordination committee is an association of different countries and space agencies. It defines space debris as all humanmade objects including fragments and elements thereof in Earth's orbit or re-entering the atmosphere that are nonfunctional.

[00:13:37]To be clear, anything natural like a meteor or functional like the ISS is not space debris. Right now, the majority of space debris comes from an object fragmenting in space or the whole thing just being left up there. However, the total global space launches have been trending upwards for over 10 years. In 2022, there were 186 satellite launches, which is about three per week. As launches become more and more common, pre-existing space debris will begin to collide, generating more debris independent of human activity.

[00:14:11]This is similar to what a rotten piece of fruit will do. If you put one moldy apple in a bowl, it infects the apples touching it. Those apples will will and infect more apples, even if you do not put any more rotten apples into the bowl, or in our case, launch anything else into space.

[00:14:28]The amount of debris we can track by radar should alarm you. Right now, about 8,000 tons of space debris circles the Earth, which is about 70 blue whales.

[00:14:37]Since 2017, the European Space Agency, or ESA, has published an annual space environment report. Their 2025 edition reported that there are about 3,000 nonfunctional satellites still in space.

[00:14:51]Additionally, there are over 140 million pieces of space debris 10 cm long or shorter. 10 cm sounds inconsequential compared to an entire satellite. But those smaller debris pieces can hit 22,000 mph. It's about Mach 30, 30 times the speed of sound. For reference, in Top Gun Maverick, Tom Cruz pushes a fighter jet to barely Mach 10. At Mach 30, a 1 cm paint inflicts the same level of damage as a grizzly bear running 60 mph here on Earth. This debris has punched holes in the ISS, and it needs to be dealt with. The saying, what goes up must come down, applies to space as well as Earth. Everything in Earth's orbit will eventually slow down enough to de-orbit, that is to reenter the atmosphere. Most debris re-entering our atmosphere does so without a controlled or planned landing path. We call this an uncontrolled re-entry. As of 2018, uncontrolled re-entries happen about once every 36 hours.

[00:15:55]Scientists are actively researching ways to collect space debris. Space debris mitigation methods fall primarily into two categories. passive debris removal systems and active debris removal systems. From now on, I will refer to these as PDR and ADR.

[00:16:11]PDR utilizes technologies to decelerate a spacecraft until it can reenter the atmosphere, whereas ADR directly intervenes to de-orbit them. An example of PDR would be a giant parachute that slows a satellite down until it can de-orbit. ADR can be as simple as controlling that parachute's path or as complicated as robotic claws designed to grab debris.

[00:16:32]Currently, PDR is more common than ADR.

[00:16:36]The exist the existing level of space debris is a major problem. And in 2025, a group of senators reintroduced the orbital sustainability act. The purpose of this bill is to fund debris remediation and establish practices that preserve outer spacees usability. To combat the growing level of space debris, the United States Congress ought to pass the Orbital Sustainability Act for three main reasons. First, this act promotes developing debris remediation technology. Second, this act calls for standardized space travel coordination.

[00:17:08]This will help prevent satellite collisions which create large amounts of debris. And third, Congress ought to pass this act because unchecked space debris growth ends in a crisis known as the Kesler syndrome. To begin, Congress ought to pass the Orbital Sustainability Act because it promotes developing debris remediation technology. As a reminder, this is classified as PDR, passive debris removal systems, and ADR, active debris removal systems. The orbital sustainability act explicitly focuses on ADR development.

[00:17:39]De-orbit control is the key reason why we should prefer ADR over PDR. And NASA state-of-the-art as small spacecraft technology report explains, quote, passive de-orbit methods require no further active control after deployment, relying only on natural perturbations and forces to de-orbit. End quote. As a reminder, uncontrolled re-entries happen about once every 36 hours. Space debris is literally falling from the sky and we can do nothing to change its course about ADR.

[00:18:10]In 2012, Russia requested Europe close all airspace to avoid an uncontrolled re-entry. Air traffic controllers ignored this warning to avoid a 20 million euro loss. In 2022, a rocket's potential re-entry trajectory crossed southern Europe, prompting France and Spain to close large parts of their airspace. They lost 3.5 million USD from these grounded flights.

[00:18:35]Uncontrolled re-entries force nations to choose between massive economic losses and human safety. But ADR solves this problem by retrieving debris in a controlled way.

[00:18:45]The Orbital Sustainability Act allocates $150 million to NASA over the next four years to fund ADR development.

[00:18:53]NASA's base 2026 budget request was $24.8 billion.

[00:18:59]Current NASA analyses suggest that de-orbiting a large object using ADR can cost between $4,000 to $60,000 per kilogram. Using the 150 million, NASA will offer monetary awards to groups to present a plan for an ADR demonstration project.

[00:19:15]NASA has successfully coordinated similar programs. In 2023, NASA awarded $98 million through their small business innovations research program. Projects these funds sponsored included a magneetto plasma rocket and an oxygen filtration system. A NASA executive said, quote, "Our program has the responsibility of supporting ideas and technologies that will have impact on NASA's work and strong commercial potential." End quote. Senator Wicker, a sponsor of the Orbital Sustainability Act, said, quote, "We should be empowering NASA to partner with the US space industry and active debris removal technology to tackle space threats." end quote. This axe method pours resources into vetted non-state actors who will then drive the research and expand the space economy. The CEO of Astroscale, a company focused on reducing space debris, reported to the UN in February 2025, but that although ADR missions are essential to fixing the space debris crisis, they are severely underfunded and underincentivized.

[00:20:18]The orbital sustainability act will help fuel the existing space debris removal companies into a full-fledged industry.

[00:20:25]Current companies with recent ADR breakthroughs include remove debris consortium partners who successfully tested netbased and harpoonbased ADR in 2019 and Astroscale Buildings Incorporated which captured space debris using magnetism in 2021.

[00:20:40]This year, Astroscale along with another private group called Clear Space is partnering with the UK to de-orbit satellites that will naturally de-orbit in over 100 years. Even if we could wait until all space debris could de-orbit naturally, it would cost tens of trillions of dollars in damage through uncontrolled re-entries and continued fragmentation.

[00:21:01]The space industry needs the financial support provided by the Orbital Sustainability Act for ADR to make a lasting impact.

[00:21:08]And now on to my next point. Congress ought to pass the Orbital Sustainability Act because it can help prevent satellite collisions by creating space traffic control. And fewer collisions means less debris. Earlier I shared a story about an exploding satellite. Now I'll illustrate how colliding satellites are just as dangerous for the space environment.

[00:21:29]On February 10th, 2009, a nonoperational Russian satellite collided with an operational American satellite. This collision generated upwards of 1,800 large debris pieces and about 200,000 small ones. A month later, the ISS had to take evasive action to dodge debris directly traceable for this collision.

[00:21:49]In November 2025, Chinese astronauts in outer space found cracks in the capsule that was supposed to take them home. And China Space Agency attributed these cracks to space debris. Those astronauts returned home after a 9-day delay. And this incident highlights how space threatens human life, not just impersonal equipment.

[00:22:10]In 2006, there were about 500 near misses per month between satellites and debris. In 2022, there were 5,500 near misses per month. Satellites don't bounce like bumper cars. They crash and we need to avoid crashing them and proliferating debris unnecessarily.

[00:22:29]Right now, there is no air traffic control equivalent for outer space.

[00:22:33]Organizations with satellites independently track other satellites. If two satellites's collision probability gets to be one in 10,000, the unwritten norm is one or maybe both of those satellites maneuvering.

[00:22:46]On September 2nd, 2019, a Space X satellite almost collided with an ESA satellite. The United States Air Force emailed these two organizations that their collision probability was 1 in 1,000, well above 1 in 10,000.

[00:23:02]Unfortunately, Space X's technology glitched and that email never arrived.

[00:23:07]The ESA satellite maneuvered out of collision range and then resumed regular operation.

[00:23:13]This hodgepodge system was barely pulling through in 2019.

[00:23:17]In 2024, there were 10,000 satellites in orbit. By 2030, the ESA predicts there will be 100,000 satellites. We need space traffic management to avoid active satellite collisions.

[00:23:31]Part of the Orbital Sustainability Act includes the Department of Commerce leading a project to develop space traffic control norms and gives them the freedom to pursue the system they think best. The DOC will be supported in this by the FCC and the National Space Advisory Council.

[00:23:47]A recent presentation at the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technology Conference reported on several key areas of space traffic management that need improvement. These improvements range from establishing rules of the road for outer space to studying how space weather affects satellite operations.

[00:24:05]Because the orbital sustainability act doesn't explicitly focus in on one aspect of space traffic space traffic management, experts will have government approval to officialize their work but still retain the flexibility to address concerns in an appropriate manner. We need space traffic management for satellites to continue function and astronauts to keep coming home.

[00:24:26]And finally, Congress ought to pass the Orbital Sustainability Act because unchecked space debrowth ends in a crisis known as the Kesler syndrome. The Kesler syndrome references a point where we've overcrowded space. Objects continuously collide and create new debris, even if we had stopped all launches.

[00:24:46]This debris proliferation will happen faster than natural de-orbit can offset.

[00:24:52]This is similar to a six lane highway trying to narrow down into one lane. All the cars or satellites and debris keep piling up until nothing else can safely fit. All these collisions will make outer space entirely unusable. All satellites stop working and all launches end.

[00:25:13]In 2005, NASA's orbital to debris program office ran simulations to model future space congestion. It started in the year 1957, the year the Soviets launched Sputnik, and assumed that all launches would stop after 2004, and that no one would clean up their debris.

[00:25:31]Natural Orbit could only counterbalance new debris created by collisions until 2055.

[00:25:38]If we apply our car analogy, this is when cars start piling up on the highway. In 2024, another group of researchers predicted future space debris levels. This newer model estimates that if launches and debris removal continue at their current rates, we will pile up too many cars and reach the Kesler Syndrome's point of no return in one to 200 years.

[00:26:02]Debris will constantly bombard in orbit satellites and replacement launches will just crash into more debris.

[00:26:09]Take a moment and imagine a world without satellites. Trivial losses like texting your best friend if you'd like to meet coffee or tracking a long- aaited package will disrupt modern social conventions or serious losses like Amber Alerts and GPS needed for disaster relief will jeopardize our safety and stability. The Department of Commerce and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration run an organization called SARSAT. Search and rescue satellite aided tracking. Since 1982, SARSAT has rescued over 63,000 people worldwide.

[00:26:45]From hurricanes to after school, satellites are the backbone of modern life. Additionally, amazing technological breakthroughs happen on board space stations. For example, astronauts on board the ISS use a special type of X-ray in their telescopes. And those X-rays actually create safer and more efficient CT scans. The ISS also contains a special type of air purifier which scientists modified to extend produce shelf life and counteract CO.

[00:27:15]If we trigger the Kesler syndrome, there will be no more space stations.

[00:27:20]We may not think about outer space as often as terrace or road work, but spacecraft shapes our lives.

[00:27:27]We can still prevent the KER syndrome, but now is a time for definitive action.

[00:27:33]Passing the Orbital Sustainability Act will be a major step in this process. It incentivizes ADR development to remove existing debris and space traffic control to avoid future debris proliferation.

[00:27:45]We need these measures in order to avoid the Kesler syndrome.

[00:27:49]Those who oppose the Orbital Sustainability Act will ask why we should be spending these resources on space instead of Earth when the United States produces hundreds of millions of tons of solid waste each year. Well, space debris removal efforts are just an extension of on Earth cleanups.

[00:28:07]Uncontrolled re-entries don't just cause problems with airplanes. Let me tell you a story about when radioactive debris returned to Earth. In 1978, a Soviet satellite decimated the Canadian tundra during a re-entry gone wrong. This nuclearpowered satellite split into hundreds of pieces over 600 km.

[00:28:28]All but one piece was radioactive, and many emitted fatal levels of radioactivity.

[00:28:35]Additionally, nuclear experts searched over 100,000 square km looking for nuclear fuel residue.

[00:28:42]This incident highlights how much terrestrial damage space debris can cause. The Orbital Sustainability Act will help us retrieve this debris before it crashes dangerously back into Earth.

[00:28:55]Others might ask why the United States should be focusing on this now when space debris is a globally created issue.

[00:29:02]As of February 2025, the United States, Russia, and China have collectively created 96% of all space debris, and each of us contributed about onethird to that 96%.

[00:29:15]The United States is a primary contributor to the space debris crisis.

[00:29:19]If we cleaned up our debris, we could reduce the global total by about 32%.

[00:29:25]The Orbital Sustainability Act will help us solve an Americanmade problem.

[00:29:30]The United States must take substantial action to mitigate space debris. To accomplish this, Congress ought to pass the orbital orbital sustainability act for three main reasons.

[00:29:41]This act incentivizes ADR research and development to remove existing debris.

[00:29:46]Space traffic control will help us avoid future debris proliferation.

[00:29:51]Finally, if we cannot take control of the space debris situation, outer space will become entirely unusable. Imagine a world where the final frontier just doesn't exist. Where the sky is in fact the limit. It wouldn't matter if you understood rocket science or not because there would be no more rockets.

[00:30:13]We could shoot for the moon and try to land in the stars, but we'd crash into space debris before we made it far. To infinity and beyond becomes obsolete.

[00:30:25]I know few, if any of us have encountered space debris before, but adopting an if you can't see me, then I can't see you mindset blinds us to a real and urgent problem. NASA's planning to go back to the moon in 2027. But if things continue as they are, our moon missions are numbered. So, please don't fall for the trap that space is a limitless resource. Because if we do nothing to preserve it, we'll destroy a beautiful natural wonder and close up a world full of possibilities. Thank you.

[00:31:02][applause] All right. Wonderfully done, Miss Brader.

[00:31:24]On our panel tonight, we have Mrs. Angie Thompson, who received her bachelor's in education at the University of Texas Austin. She's worked at Veraritoss for 19 years and has served the school of rhetoric head for four. She's been married to her husband Ken for 28 years and has three grown children who all graduated from Veraritoss Academy. She loves to read and be out in nature. She counts it a privilege and blessing to work at Veraritoss with such amazing faculty and talent and students. We also have Mr. Andy Cone who after receiving a graduate degree in electrical engineering moved in with his new bride moved with his new bride Kate to the midsized affordable town of Austin. He spent 15 years in the semiconductor industry before entering the field of classical Christian education, teaching science for 16 years. Veraritoss Academy. Together with his wife, they've raised four daughters, two Veraritoss graduates, one eggy, two Longhorns, one bear, and nine adorable golden doodle puppies. Don't you guys also have chickens? I seem to remember chickens.

[00:32:18]Chickens. We also have Mr. Luke Mars, who's completing his first year as our head of the school of logic. He's the husband of his wonderful wife, Katie, and the proud father of three Veraritoss scholars, Sawyer, Jimmy, and Betty. Once upon a time, he was an attorney, but now Luke is delighted to channel his instincts into asking thoughtful questions and to sit in judgment on senior thesis panels.

[00:32:38]Raised in New Mexico, he still occasionally returns to the high desert to enjoy its art, its beauty, and most importantly, its enchiladas. We also have Mrs. Nilto, who is the fine arts director at Veritas Academy and the director of the Citizens Theater Company. She recently closed her 20th Veraritoss production, Hades Town, and this fall she led her one act play to a state championship victory. Nila serves as the dean of the house of Bonhoffer, has two daughters that attend Veraritoss and various pets named after Asian foods. When she is not doing Veraritoss things, she spends her time reading sci-fi, studying theology, and making nail art and watching Kdramas. Oh, I imagine it's like K-pop, but no. Okay, not not Got it. Great.

[00:33:21]Okay, you guys know the drill with the paddle. Whenever you're ready, you can begin.

[00:33:30]>> I have some questions about the technologies for um ADR. I know you mentioned harpoons and claws. Also, I know that there are some certain net technologies. Specifically, if you could go into um the ground laser technologies, is that something that you looked into or studied? And is that a viable technology for space? So ground lasers are a viable option for space debris. However, they're mainly used for the smaller objects. So what how they do is they are on the ground. They're not something fired from an orbit satellites, but they shoot like energy up towards the smaller pieces and they ablate them or they just kind of they don't dissolve, but something similar to that where they will then de-orbit on their own. Those are primarily used on smaller pieces of debris. The technologies mentioned in my thesis are geared towards larger objects.

[00:34:23]Nice job. Hey, I want to ask about um whose responsibility this is. You you're putting um a lot on American taxpayers and it's not just our problem. I mean, sure NASA put some of that stuff up there, but who are the other two countries you mentioned?

[00:34:41]>> Uh the two other main contributors are China and Russia.

[00:34:44]>> Yeah. So, they they account for I guess what you said was 68%, right? about that.

[00:34:49]>> So I I think a bigger problem though might be the the private industries that are putting stuff up there now. Can you compare and contrast sort of how much NASA has put up versus what private companies have put up now? Is there do you have any statistics on sort of the comparison there?

[00:35:05]>> So in terms of retrieving space debris, it's on the launching country to retrieve the to retrieve the debris. So those guidelines were written in 1969 before private companies were sending debris. So right now it just really addresses national concerns. So it's on the launching country to get their debris down. And then in terms of private and public, a lot of the private satellite launches now we can engineer it to do orbit on their own. So a lot of the older debris that we're more concerned about will be government debris from previous launches.

[00:35:37]>> Oh, interesting. So So the the stuff that you're mostly referring to is mostly old NASA stuff. That's >> correct.

[00:35:45]>> Yeah. Um do you feel like moving forward though we need a policy with respect to private private companies who are putting things up or is there a policy already to ensure that they don't create a whole bunch of trash?

[00:35:57]>> Yes. So right now at least in the United States with the FCC they say that your satellite has to come down within 5 years of the end of mission.

[00:36:12]Lovely job, Miss Prader.

[00:36:15]But how much is this going to cost me?

[00:36:19]>> You personally?

[00:36:20]>> Well, we can get there maybe, but us then, how much is it going to cost the United States? And how are we going to share that burden with other countries?

[00:36:29]>> So, right now, the United States is not necessarily behind, but it's not leading the space debris removal efforts. that's primarily coming out of the European Union. So, and then China and Russia are also any c most countries well the countries with space debris are contributing to these efforts. So, it's not something that the United States would be doing alone. So, in my act it only specific the only specific monetary amount is 150 million which NASA's 2026 budget and initial 2026 budget was $24.8 8 billion which dwarfs 150 million and NASA's budget was less than 1% of the entire United States government spending. So this isn't going to increase taxes anything major by any means. This is not a large government spending effort. So what exactly was your question? Does that answer it? This is not going to be raising taxes on you.

[00:37:26]This is not going to be the United States trying to bring all the all debris down by itself.

[00:37:31]Gotcha. Okay, I'm tracking with you. Um, why not then, as a followup, sorry. Why not make the why have the taxpayers pay for it at all through NASA? Why why not have Elon pay for it?

[00:37:51]>> Yeah. Um, so a lot of this stuff is NASA debris. So NASA has an interest in getting it done.

[00:37:59]Everyone who relies on satellites to function has an interest on getting this debris down and then we'll come back to that. So NASA is a way the government interacts with outer space affairs and just as things progress more and more outer space doesn't have a lot of regulations on it right now. The government should be involved in what is going on with the outer with what satellites in space 3 and outer space is doing. And the main way to be do that is with financial incentives incentives.

[00:38:28]You can't try to go and regulate debris removal or satellite usage or any potential concerns down the road. You can't really you need to have a stake in the game for what's going on there. And then also for us in general, so GPS runs through satellites. Smartphones run through satellites. Most things we use every day have some interactions with satellites. So it is in the taxpayers's interest to bring this debris down before it hits satellites that we need to function.

[00:39:00]Great job, Alison. So, um I have one qu quick question I think and then a followup that's a little bit longer. Um so the this particular the orbital sustainability act did you say that that's inter agency or there's an international element or is it just were you saying we would just then align with what some other countries are doing? So this act specifically addresses the United States, but it will bring us into more closer alignment with what other countries are doing in regards to space debris.

[00:39:29]>> Okay. And so the basis then of of your proposal is that Congress needs to pass this act which then allows for funding, [music] right?

[00:39:39]>> That's one part of it, but that's a big part. Yes.

[00:39:41]>> Okay. So once they did that, then if you could just walk me through what are the practical next steps? So this act is passed. Woohoo. We have money. What are what are we going to do next with that?

[00:39:50]>> Yes. So, it's $150 million to NASA over the next four years. And so, that will go into NASA SAS. And then what NASA will do is create a set of criteria that companies who want to remove space debris and have a plan for that will need to meet like cost effectiveness, is it viable, is it safe, things of that nature. NASA will create a criteria list for what an ADR mission would look like.

[00:40:15]And then once NASA's created that, companies who remove debris will go to NASA and say, "Hey, I this I have this idea. This is what my plan is. Can you fund us somewhat?" NASA will either say yes or no. If NASA says yes, uh 30 days later, they will present a plan to Congress. This is what we're doing. And then allocate the money to the company.

[00:40:35]And then one year after the ADR project, the company reports back to NASA and says, "Hey, here's how it went. This is what we did. This is how we used the money.

[00:40:48]Back to Elon. So if SpaceX is putting up in Tell me the numbers if you know the numbers. How many objects in the low Earth orbit are from SpaceX? How many are planned to be from SpaceX? And if they're largely coming from a private company as opposed to like whether it's China, Russia, whoever, why not instead of passing a bill, why not incentivize the company before they put the objects in space to help with remediation?

[00:41:17]>> Yes. So, currently, I believe SpaceX is a has maybe 2,000ish satellites. I'm not exactly sure on that. That sounds right based on what I've seen, but they're aiming for a lot more. So they're aiming for like their entire global internet type circle net thing. And so with SpaceX, those are all going to be more modern satellites. So the concern with modern satellites is not really it becoming defunct and just staying up in outer space and creating space to be that way. Like Mr. Kron was asking earlier, the FCC says SpaceX after your satellite stops working, it has to come down within five years. And they can design their satellites to do that. So with active satellites or not active, modern satellites, the concern is not the satellite staying up there and creating space debris that way. The more concern is that satellite hitting another satellite and creating debris that way. The things that are just the old the satellites that are floating around there that are considered space to be are on the most part going to be the older satellites.

[00:42:19]>> So you described a couple of technologies that are already sort of in in progress. Um harpoons and nets, >> correct? Sounds totally cool. I've seen Star Wars. I hadn't seen those in Star Wars, but yeah.

[00:42:32]>> The the University of Suri has a video of their harpoon in outer space.

[00:42:37]>> Cool. Could you describe I pick one net or harpoon? Just describe what a mission would look like in terms of like going up and retrieving a piece of space debris and then I have a follow-up question.

[00:42:48]>> Yeah. Okay. Of course. So with go with a harpoon. So what that would be or the initial phases is going to be the same for all of them. is that that technology is on a satellite. You launch the satellite. That's going to be called the chaser satellite. So when they tested the Harpoon ADR, what they did was they didn't go after any existing debris.

[00:43:07]What they did was they put their own remove debris, put their own little object out in space for the harpoon to try to catch. And so the chaser satellite comes alongside the target, fires the harpoon, and then the harpoon tip is designed to have barbs so that they'll like flex and so it doesn't pull back out. And there's a in it that alerts the chaser satellite either we made contact or we did not make contact.

[00:43:30]If they don't if it doesn't make contact the har the chaser satellite detaches from the harpoon and it just it unfortunately does become another piece of space debris but it but it has wait but it has it has a specific tracker on it so then it's theoretically easier to bring down.

[00:43:50]They when they tested it, it did make contact and the little sensor said we made contact and then what will happen was it will stay tethered to the chaser satellite which will then it has it's a newer satellite so it has the capability to de-orbit both of them and burn up the object in them.

[00:44:07]>> So I love it. Um thank you for that explanation. Um sounds totally cool. Uh so the US government would be funding the development of this technology >> partially or >> I mean you got a bill to pass it and they're going to and so so um >> what am I thinking if I'm um Soviet Union or China and I've got military technology satellites up there and the US government is actively developing some sort of technology to potentially bring down my satellites. Um I mean it's kind of a dual use technology that we're developing.

[00:44:44]>> How what is your response to sort of how do I keep them sort of like not wanting to go develop their own harpoons or nets?

[00:44:50]>> That is a very valid concern when talking about active debris removal technology. It is they do call it a dual use technology like you mentioned. So first off it's not just the United States working on this type of thing.

[00:45:03]Russia, China, Japan, they're also all working on this these things. But in terms of space debris, all the major countries that have defense satellites in orbit are also the major contributors to the space debris problem. And space debris itself can't tell the difference in a Chinese defense satellite and an American satellite. So it is in the interests of all these major nations to have the who have the ability to develop this type of technology to develop this type of technology because space debris is a common threat to all of the countries and it's just Yes, there is the potential that it does um take out another country's satellites. It's kind I'm not done.

[00:45:47]It's taking out or causing another country's satellite to stop working isn't exactly going to be a covert operation. So, if you did do that, the entire world would know that Russia just harpooned America's defense satellite.

[00:46:02]There's not no one really has a great answer so far as to how do we prevent that from happening. other besides someone else doing it to your satellite.

[00:46:10]But space debris is something that might do that will eventually do that on its own even if no one's directing it.

[00:46:18]>> I was going to call both of you huge nerds, but I got to be honest, countries harpooning each other's satellites like some kind of sort of crazy wild west does sound pretty cool. In the words of Mr. Cone, go ahead.

[00:46:30]>> Um, Al, I want to talk about timeline a little bit. The Kesler syndrome call it syndrome.

[00:46:38]>> Um >> that is um I think you said it was it was 100 to 200 years >> correct >> in the future. That's a pretty big u range.

[00:46:50]>> Is it possible that it could happen sooner?

[00:46:54]>> Yeah. So what that simul what that model did was it graphed like the changes in space debris as the derivative of a function that combines like fragmentation launches debris removal things like that. So the way you would accelerate that timeline is continuously launching things at a faster rate but not but not removing debris. So if we keep launching, if SpaceX keeps launching all their satellites and we don't have the ability to bring old to bring old debris down, then that will happen faster.

[00:47:26]>> Thank you. Okay, makes sense. Um, is this kind of kind of a followup there? It's and it's about because it's about time also. And I'm wondering does this industry that NASA is proposing to create put itself out of business?

[00:47:43]Because If it's if they do really well, there's no more debris.

[00:47:49]>> Correct.

[00:47:50]>> And that's a good thing. But does it also disincentivize the development?

[00:48:00]>> No. I wanted to say so because um I mentioned earlier there are over about 3,000 nonfunctional nonfunctional satellites in outer space. It's going to be 3,000 missions to get those satellites. And then there's also discarded rocket bodies. And then there's the smaller three pieces that are small enough that are big enough to catch but might but wouldn't be classified as a whole satellite. So that going to be a long way in the future before that happens. So we would get to the point where debris would we would at the rate things are going we will probably get to the caster syndrome or concerningly close to that before that business burns itself out.

[00:48:45]How and then by the time we would get to it eliminate eliminate eliminating itself there we wouldn't necessarily have to discard all of the um technological advancements they've made. We've seen industries shift from like wartime to peace time and what they're doing. So you could shift like space debris removals. I don't know maybe undersea undersea debris removal.

[00:49:10]>> Question more about um a little bit more about the ADRs and the costs for the ADRs and a little bit more about I mean yes the harpoons sound pretty cool, the space claws sound pretty cool and so do the lasers. They all sound pretty cool but how expensive are they and How many pieces of debris within a year would they be able to collect or destroy within that budget?

[00:49:36]>> Right. So, let's start with um the lasers. That sounds like maybe your favorite. So, we have some we have some already. Creating more of like a widespread laser operating system could potentially cost maybe like $360 million. which is a big upfront cost, but then the renewal cost each year, like the upkeep, could be closer to $15 million, which is still a lot, but those lasers would be able to get rid of, I don't have like a specific number, but daily get rid of those smaller debris pieces. As concerning bigger object, um, when remove debris consortium partners tested their harpoon, it was about $15 million, which again, that's not cheap, but it's not terribly expensive. The robotic claws, they're coming from a group out of Switzerland. They're looking like they're going to finish out more like a hundred million dollars. So, as things stand right now, as things stands right now, at least with the Harpoon, that's going to be a a one object, one use mission. However, hopefully we'll be able to see it become renewable. We have new renewable rockets. Now, as time progresses, which so one mission for one thing with a harpoon could cost $15 million. However, Astroscale and NASA predict that some of these objects could cause 14,000, not 14,4,000 million dollars of damage if they do fragment and hit satellites that we need for the economy. So, right now, it is sizable, but not super super sizable costs, but the preventative cost will eventually outweigh what we could lose in the future.

[00:51:19]>> I want to move a little bit to your second point. Um you mentioned um the possibility of creating more of a standardized space traffic control that right now it's u more independently tracked. Is that correct? So how do you imagine like what does that look like?

[00:51:33]Is that like our current air traffic control run by the government? And so how do you imagine that playing out?

[00:51:38]>> Yeah. So it wouldn't exactly be like air traffic control because in outer space you can't really say you're in Canadian airspace now you're in American airspace now.

[00:51:48]You're just you're just kind of up there. You're dumb. So any any group dealing with space traffic control will have to deal with private public of all country of all nations satellites. So I don't think it be it shouldn't be something that the FAA or the United States government is running. So we do have some other international organizations. We have um we do have an international air traffic control organization. They don't do they don't really do that but we also have the international maritime organizations. We have examples of international organizations working together to schedule to schedule and deal with cross national transportation things. So for space traffic control think ideally and what would need to happen is either something running through the UN or we've had the creation of the inter agency debris coordination committee that's separate from the UN have it's called um the ISTMO but people proposing the international space traffic coordination committee and so what that would be would be like delegates from private companies from public groups coming together and planning this out so what this act does is it starts initially within the United States and so it wouldn't it would eventually progress to some type of international organization.

[00:53:03]What it does right now is it calls for people like the FCC, the National Space Advisory Council, the groups to begin looking at like American satellite patterns to begin make to be then begin create then begin creating recommendations for how this could view as like an international and really viable system.

[00:53:27]Sorry Mr. Cone, we are out of time.

[00:53:29]Let's give a hand.

[00:53:32][applause] All right, we'll be back in about 13 minutes. I'll see you then.

[00:54:32]>> [music]