Speakers
Description
Post-mission disposal (PMD) is increasingly embedded in the policy framework for space debris mitigation. However, the growing expectation that missions should dispose of space objects at end of life does not automatically mean that disposal solutions are practicable at scale. As commercial space activity expands rapidly, the key policy question is no longer only whether PMD is desirable, but whether current PMD policy assumptions are sufficiently grounded in implementation reality. This is particularly important because launch vehicle upper stages and satellites are increasingly expected to undergo PMD at end of life, making the availability of practicable PMD methods a matter of growing importance.
This presentation argues that space debris mitigation policies should be assessed not only in terms of regulatory intent, but also in terms of practical applicability introducing PMD. Rather than relying solely on government spending to advance debris mitigation, it is increasingly important to establish practicable approaches that commercial operators can adopt voluntarily. As commercial missions continue to grow, three considerations are becoming increasingly important to whether PMD policy can work in practice: (i) economic viability, (ii) technology readiness, and (iii) risk relevance. A disposal approach may be conceptually sound, but if it is too burdensome to integrate, too costly to adopt widely, insufficiently mature for near-term deployment, or insufficiently connected to the actual risk environment faced by operators, its practical policy effect may remain limited. If PMD is to function as an effective mitigation measure rather than a formal expectation, policy discussions should place greater emphasis on mission-level implementation conditions, including mass and power constraints, integration simplicity, operational robustness, business-case viability, and practical implications for operator risk.
More specifically, this presentation will show that (i) economic viability is relevant not only because passive PMD can reduce propellant reservation requirements, but also because it may create additional operational lifetime and business opportunity, thereby giving commercial operators a positive incentive to adopt PMD voluntarily. It will further show that (ii) technology readiness should be understood not only in terms of formal mission timing, but also in light of actual engineering progress, test evidence, deployability, and the role of passive PMD as a complementary backup to active disposal approaches. It will also argue that (iii) risk relevance matters not only for compliance-related and collision-related considerations, but also for space insurance, suggesting that risk profile effects and economic viability should be considered together. Finally, through an illustrative industry case, this presentation will show how ongoing efforts by BULL, one of the JAXA Partner Startups and a 3-year-old Japan-originated company that established a European subsidiary in 2025, to deploy passive PMD in actual missions can help bridge the gap between policy ambition and practical implementation.
This presentation therefore proposes that PMD policy should explicitly incorporate economic viability, technology readiness, and risk relevance when evaluating the real applicability of debris mitigation measures. In an environment of rapidly increasing commercial space activity, practicable and scalable PMD solutions will be essential if policy expectations are to translate into meaningful sustainability outcomes.
| Which section would you like to submit your abstract to? | Session 9: “Space debris mitigation policies” |
|---|