brought back to Earth. They are often used in things like LCD TVs, but also a lot of sustainable technologies. A SUSTAINABLE ARGUMENT? One of the key arguments made by advocates of asteroid mining is that it can help create a sustainable future. Bringing those materials back can resource sustainable technologies. The sustainability dimension is incredibly important right now. Not so much in terms of what these companies promise mining operations will do, but, as with many speculative technologies, rather it is important to understand what they are doing with their narrative in terms of moving responsibility away from the present moment to future generations. By saying that we will one day be able to bring in more resources to Earth, and that we do not need to worry about exhausting those we have, they are kicking the can down the road. We have things we can be doing now rather than trying to pin our hopes to these speculative dreams. People say space will make us infinitely sustainable, but we could – should – stop making loads of emissions now rather than hoping something better will come along in the future. CLOSER THAN YOU THINK? If this all still sounds like science fiction, then bear in mind governments are taking it seriously – and there are geopolitical factors at play even today. There are important questions to ask around regulation and governance – ethical behaviour in outer space. In 2015, the Obama administration in the US went forward with the US SPACE Act, essentially permitting asteroid mining within the US context. Luxembourg legalised asteroid mining in their context. There has been draft legislation in India, and both Russia and China have said they will join the scramble for extraterrestrial resources. A key part of debate has been whether asteroid mining is compliant with the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which states that outer space is the common heritage of all mankind and that no-one can make a sovereign claim to it. But in 1967, there was no private enterprise involved in outer space, so the argument is the act only applies to nation states. The counterargument is that anything done in space is regulated, and is ultimately the responsibility of the country from where a mission is launched, or where the company launching it is based. In a globalised context, that becomes harder. Does the responsibility lie with country a craft is launched from? The country the company is registered with? Or the country the spacecraft is registered with? You have private corporations lobbying governments. Many will argue that it should remain unregulated, because otherwise it will kill off innovation. But will it? Or will they just work within the framework? While asteroid mining is being driven by private companies, it has also started to become a geopolitical flashpoint – if not around asteroids themselves, then around lunar mining. Different countries want to create lunar bases and scientific camps. This is led to the Artemis programme in America, the announcement that we are going back to the moon. China, Russia, Japan, India, and others want to be there as well. Attached to that are the Artemis Accords, principles for a ‘safe, peaceful and prosperous future in space’. The US, UK, Canada, Japan and India are among those signed up. In parallel, you have the International Lunar Research Station, an agreement between Russia, China, Pakistan, and others. There are already dividing lines in space – between countries, and between the public and private sectors. Everyone has their ideas and ideals for what will happen next. OR FURTHER AWAY? But maybe we are not so close to asteroid mining after all. There is a joke in the space sector that everything is always 10 years away. If you ask in 10 years, it is another 10 years. There have been various promises of when asteroid mining will become a reality since 2012: first for 2020, then 2025. Now it is 2035. There have been test launches, and companies are talking about testing satellites which would serve as prospecting units. This does not just test the overall technology, it creates spin-offs, different ways of commercialising operations through patents on equipment that can be used in other areas. Then you have a company testing a mini refinery, which would be sent to a nearEarth object, pick the minerals it wants, excavate them, and fire itself back to Earth. If that works, that would be a major step. But to my mind, the more realistic scenario is that people go back to the moon first. They probably are there for 50-100 years, then they look at asteroids. It is still some time away. FIFTY FOUR DEGREES | 33 Dr Craig Jones is a Lecturer in Management and Society in the Department of Organisation, Work and Technology. c.jones45@lancaster.ac.uk
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTI5NzM=