Michael Listner, Monday, 5-6-13 May 6, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: Apollo artifacts, cubesat issues, GEO debris, ITAR, LEO debris, liability, liability limitations, Michael Listner, national security issues, Outer Space Treaty, PPWT, Project Azorian., space debris, space debris mitigation, space debris policy issues, space salvage, space weapons, technical issues, Transparency Confidence Measures (TCM)
9 comments
Michael Listner, Monday, 5-6-13
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/2003-BWB-2013-05-06.mp3
Guest: Michael Listner. Topics: Space debris issues and ideas for solutions. Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information.
We welcomed Michael Listner back to the program to discuss space debris and Apollo artifact issues along with his ideas for possible solutions to the debris problem. On The Space Show blog, you will find three of Michael’s Space Review articles on the subject plus his Power Point slide presentation at the end of the blog summary statement. In addition, Michael had an article in the current Space Review on the preservation of Apollo historic sites. For this article, see www.thespacereview.com/article/2290/1. In the first segment of our 1 hour 44 minute show, Michael offered us his definition of space debris and pointed us to his slides which I urge you to have available when listening to this show. Again, his slide presentation is uploaded to the blog for this program and is the last item of the uploads. He summarized the space debris issue as both legal and thorny! After defining debris and the issues using the first few of his slides, he talked about other issues including ITAR, property rights, technical, and even national security issues. Listeners asked him several questions, mostly focused on LEO as that is the most crowded region at this time and the priority for debris mitigation. CubeSat issues came up given the potential debris problem should the cubesats manifest in the quantity talked about and planned. We talked policy issues and different strategies as suggested by China and Russia. We also talked about weapons issues and dual use for the military as well as for civilian use. Michael went over Transparency Confidence Measures (TCMs) instead of new treaties and mentioned the proposed Russian/Chinese treaty, PPWT, which does not have wide support in the UN. Late in the segment, Michael talked about the OST and the definition of a space object. We also talked about space salvage compared to ocean salvage. He told us to check out Project Azorian www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb305) (but did not tell us what this was.
In our second segment, Michael wanted to focus on solutions & he offered us some of his ideas on the subject. Still referring to his PPT slides. One suggestion was to offer limited liability to third parties or those working to mitigate a debris issue, similar to what many of the commercial spaceports are doing with the suborbital spaceship companies and manufacturers. He talked quite a bit about the proposed Swiss concept for debris mitigation which he liked very much. Michael wrote another Space Review article on this concept last year which you can read at http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2032/1. Toward the end of the program, we talked about the need to preserve the Apollo landing sites as historical sites and some of the issues and challenged faced in doing so.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. Michael can also be contacted at michael.listner at spacesafetymagazine dot com.
Legal issues surrounding space debris remediation
Addressing the challenges of space debris, part 1: defining space debris
Addressing the challenges of space debris, part 2: liability
Alan Steinberg, Friday, 2-1-13 February 2, 2013
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: "Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding, "Weapons in Space: The Need to Protect Space Assets, ABM, Alan Steinberg, ASAT, ASTROPOLITICS, beamed energy, cyber warfare, Dept. of Defense space, enforcement., international space law, NASA, PPWT, public opinion, self-defense, space advocacy, space debris, space weapons, U.N. Charter, U.N. treaties
2 comments
Alan Steinberg, Friday, 2-1-13
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1941-BWB-2013-02-01.mp3
Guest: Alan Steinberg. Topics; Protecting our space assets, weapons in space, space policy and public opinion. Please direct all comments and questions regarding Space Show programs/guest(s) to the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments and questions should be relevant to the specific Space Show program. Written Transcripts of Space Show programs are a violation of our copyright and are not permitted without prior written consent, even if for your own use. We do not permit the commercial use of Space Show programs or any part thereof, nor do we permit editing, YouTube clips, or clips placed on other private channels & websites. Space Show programs can be quoted, but the quote must be cited or referenced using the proper citation format. Contact The Space Show for further information. We welcomed Alan Steinberg to the program to discuss both is latest Astropolitics article, “Weapons in Space: The Need to Protect Space Assets,” and his 2011 Space Policy article, , “Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding.” Both of these articles are available for purchase by using Google the full title of the article. During the first half of the program, we focused on Alan’s Astropolitics article. As you will hear, the issue of protecting our space assets is not an easy one to address or solve. Furthermore, as Alan and listeners suggested, the response the U.S. might make to an attack on space assets is unclear, especially if the attacking party or nation had an excuse, said it was an accident, or denied intentionally doing the deed. Alan and listener Michael defined the term space weapon and Michael provided us with the PPWT proposed treaty language defining space weapons. Alan had much to say about protecting space assets and weapons in space in the context of the U.N. treaties. We talked about U.S. as well as international enforcement here and in other countries. Space debris was discussed, especially in light of the difficulty in diplomatic action leading to tangible action against a debris causing country or party. Also discussed was government being responsible for commercial space assets under its flag.
In the second segment, we mostly talked about Alan’s 2011 Space Policy article, “Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding,” although many listeners via email and the phone kept returning to the space weapons topic. Alan took lots of questions about the role and impact on policy of space advocacy and as you will hear, its not easy or clear to pin down. Alan had much to say on how best to influence members of congress but was clear in pointing out that space advocacy does not have the numbers of the larger and more powerful lobbying groups that are far more effective in influencing policy than is the space community. Another of his points focused in on the significant influence of the aerospace industry as compared to space advocates and enthusiasts. We also learned from his concluding paragraph that when researching this issue, “research on what influences space policy attitudes and even space policy public opinion is in short supply.” In addition, we learned that while Americans like our space program and NASA, they don’t have a good understanding of it, the actual amount of funding NASA gets in relationship to the budget, and that their liking of the space program simply does not translate to more funding and more programs.
Please post your comments/questions on The Space Show blog. If you want to contact Alan Steinberg, you can do so through drspace@thespaceshow.com.
Keith Henson, Sunday, 12-2-12 December 3, 2012
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: chemical rockets, costs per Kwh, fossil fuels., fusion power, GEO satellites, hydrogen exhaust, ISP, Keith Henson, laser propulsion, laser rockets, microwave beaming energy, nuclear propulsion, powered sats, Reaction Engines, space solar power, space weapons, SSP economics, Thorium
7 comments
Keith Henson, Sunday, 12-2-12
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1905-BWB-2012-12-02.mp3
Michael Listner, Monday, 1-2-12 January 2, 2012
Posted by The Space Show in Uncategorized.Tags: arbitration agreements, Article 9 of the Outer Space Treaty, Austrian domestic space law, benefit sharing, careers in space law, Chinese space policy, DOD space, Draft Treaty On The Prevention Of The Placement Of Weapons In Outer Space, ESA, European Code of Conduct For Outer Space Activities, FAA, Google Lunar X-Prize, Indian space policy, international treaties, ISS, launching country, Liability Convention, lunar artifacts, lunar mineral extraction, Michael Listner, Moon Treaty, NASA, New Space, Outer Space Treaty, Registration Convention, rogue nations, SLS, space law, space property rights, space weapons, The Space Review, The Threat Or Use Of Force Against Outer Space Objects (PPWT)., Transparency and Confidence-Building Measures (TCBMs), United Nations space treaties, voluntary agreement
5 comments
Michael Listner, Monday, 1-2-12
http://archived.thespaceshow.com/shows/1681-BWB-2012-01-02.mp3
Guest: Michael Listner. Topics: National and international space law issues including property rights, the Moon Treaty & more. You are invited to comment, ask questions, and discuss the Space Show program/guest(s) on the Space Show blog, http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com. Comments, questions, and any discussion must be relevant and applicable to Space Show programming. Transcripts of Space Show programs are not permitted without prior written consent from The Space Show (even if for personal use) & are a violation of the Space Show copyright. We welcomes Michael Listner to the program to discuss national and international space law issues and related matters. We started out discussing the new Austrian domestic space law and inquiring of our guest why we should take note of this Austrian law here in the U.S. As you will hear from Mr. Listner, the new Austrian law relates specifically to the UN space treaties and plays a role in international space law. Our guest wrote a recent article on this subject in The Space Review on Dec. 12, 2011. You can read his article at www.thespacereview.com/article/1988/1. Another interesting article of his you might value is in DefensePolicy.org from July 7, 2011 and titled “TCBMs: A New Definition and New Role for Outer Space Security.” You can download it at www.defensepolicy.org/2011/michlis/tcbms-a-new-definition-and-new-role-for-outer-space-security. Our discussion then focused on launching country issues and liability, satellite operations in different countries and both the Liability and the Registration U.N. Conventions. This discussion led us to talking about the European Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities and Michael updated us on the status of this voluntary agreement, both on the international front as well as here in the U.S. Other issues discussed in this segment included space debris and the Draft Russian Chinese Treaty On The Prevention Of The Placement Of Weapons In Outer Space (PPWT). We also talked about the Chinese GPS system covering Asia, its military focus, and Chinese geo political intersects. Michael then introduced us to Transparency and Confidence Building Measures (TCBMs) as alternatives to treaties. This prompted several listener questions and comments about “so called” government transparency, the word of governments, and their effectiveness so far. This was an interesting discussion, especially when I asked our guest for his personal opinion on these types of agreements. Space tourism became a subject and we spent some time on the liability issues and the states that have passed liability protection laws for the space companies. Jack from Virginia was listening and provided us with important information about the Virginia law which he largely authored and which has become a model for the laws in Florida, Texas, and New Mexico. We spent the rest of the first segment talking about liability and space tourism issues. In the second segment, Helen asked if funding levels for NASA and space interests correlated to up’s and downs in space policy. As you will hear, most policy is driven by politics, not funding levels. There were lots of questions about the legality of the Moon Treaty and its applicability to commercial space, even Google Lunar X Prize contestants. We fielded questions on lunar mineral extractions as well as messing with Apollo artifacts on the Moon. We then jumped over to property rights and what this actually means regarding space issues. As we were nearing the end of our discussion, I asked Michael if space law was largely an academic field or if it was becoming a career choice field in terms of practical application. He said it was becoming more and more practical and more and more schools were offering commercial law classes. If you have comments or questions for Michael Listner, please post them on the blog URL above.
