Asteroid Affirmative



Download 0.74 Mb.
Page55/66
Date conversion29.04.2016
Size0.74 Mb.
1   ...   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   ...   66

Early Detection key



Adequate warning of a dangerous asteroid would allow preparation for the best deflection strategies

IRWIN I. SHAPIRO et al in 10,( Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Chair FAITH VILAS, MMT Observatory at Mt. Hopkins, Arizona, Vice Chair MICHAEL A’HEARN, University of Maryland, College Park, Vice Chair ANDREW F. CHENG, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory FRANK CULBERTSON, JR., Orbital Sciences Corporation DAVID C. JEWITT, University of California, Los Angeles STEPHEN MACKWELL, Lunar and Planetary Institute H. JAY MELOSH, Purdue University JOSEPH H. ROTHENBERG, Universal Space Network, Committee to Review Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies Space Studies Board Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS, http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~planets/sstewart/reprints/other/4_NEOReportDefending%20Planet%20Earth%20Prepub%202010.pdf)\

Prediction of a very unlikely but possible impact by a dangerously large (30 to many hundreds of meters diameter) NEO in the next decades. While such predictions will be common in future years, especially after next-generation telescopic surveys become operational, the initial responses should emphasize refining the prediction and possible preparations for NEO deflection missions. The chances of such an impact occurring during the next century are tens of percent. Should the probability of an impact increase to certainty and the regional locale of ground-zero become identified, then preparations should begin to minimize the potential losses to life and property in the event that deflection measures fail or are not implemented. These preparations would involve augmenting provisions for shelter, medical care, food for displaced persons, provision for pets, and so on, including advanced planning for communications, evacuation, and so on.
Sufficient warning of civilization-threatening asteroids allows the best mitigation tactics

IRWIN I. SHAPIRO et al in 10,( Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Chair FAITH VILAS, MMT Observatory at Mt. Hopkins, Arizona, Vice Chair MICHAEL A’HEARN, University of Maryland, College Park, Vice Chair ANDREW F. CHENG, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory FRANK CULBERTSON, JR., Orbital Sciences Corporation DAVID C. JEWITT, University of California, Los Angeles STEPHEN MACKWELL, Lunar and Planetary Institute H. JAY MELOSH, Purdue University JOSEPH H. ROTHENBERG, Universal Space Network, Committee to Review Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies Space Studies Board Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS, http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~planets/sstewart/reprints/other/4_NEOReportDefending%20Planet%20Earth%20Prepub%202010.pdf)\

Prediction of a possible impact by a potentially civilization-destroying (and species destroying) NEO in the next decades. This potential catastrophe would be unprecedented in human history. Reliance could be placed on efforts to avert the disaster, by orbital change. But, prior to successful change (or after unsuccessful change), if the impact is within a decade of happening, concurrent international efforts could begin to ameliorate the consequences of any impact that might occur, noting that there is likely to be a tendency for the entire social structure to collapse. These efforts will be most effective if they attempt to increase the robustness of all elements of society, ranging from appropriate risk communications and warning, provision for medical care, provision of food/water/shelter, shoring up the global financial/electronic/social/law-enforcement infrastructures, preparing for inevitable response-and-recovery operations


Detection Key To Deflection



Only focus on detection makes deflection technology politically/financially viable.

Urias Et. Al 96 (John M. Urias is the Vice President of Programs at Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems, retired colonel in the US Air Force. Ms. Iole M. DeAngelis, Maj Donald A. Aher,n Maj Jack S. Caszatt, Maj George W. Fenimore III, Mr. Michael J. Wadzinski. “Planetary Defense: Catastrophic Health Insurance for Planet Earth”. October 1996. Pg 26. http://csat.au.af.mil/2025/volume3/vol3ch16.pdf TDA)

Ready-to-go subsystems with ECO mitigation capabilities do not currently exist, though many scientists believe nuclear weapons could provide near-term protection with modification. Many potential nonnuclear defense subsystems have been identified in the past, and we have proposed several more, though we admit they are on the fringe between reality and imagination. Regardless of type, we are not convinced that mitigation subsystems need to be developed in the near term or even prior to 2025. It is perhaps better for us to encourage and wait for technology breakthroughs to drive the direction of these subsystems. If we develop a capable detection subsystem and it detects an ECO of concern, then a timetable for complete mitigation subsystems development and deployment will be necessary and priority for funding will be justified. By 2025 safer, cheaper, and more politically acceptable mitigation systems than the current nuclear systems should be available.


Timed Detection is key to Deflection

Borland 07(Small Asteroids May Be More Dangerous Than Believed By John Borland, December 19, 2007, http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/12/small-asteroids/, reporter for Wired.com G.L)

In their simulation, researchers found that a small asteroid striking the atmosphere would be compressed by the resistance of the air. As that pressure increases, the incoming stone would ultimately explode in an "airburst," creating powerful jets of hot gas shooting downward faster than the speed of sound. The additional energy from this explosion caused them to revise earlier estimates of the impact’s strength. Scientists had initially estimated the energy of the Tunguska explosion to be the equivalent of between 10 megatons and 20 megatons of TNT. Boslough and his colleagues now say it was more likely to be just three to five megatons – meaning a far, far smaller body was involved. But the damage it did was undeniable. What this means, they say, is that estimates of asteroid danger might need revision too. Smaller objects are statistically more likely to hit Earth than larger ones – and this analysis shows that even relatively small bodies can cause widespread devastation. "Any strategy for defense or deflection should take into consideration this revised understanding of the mechanism of explosion," says Boslough.




1   ...   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   ...   66


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page