Today’s class will be discussion-based. This prompt is meant to help guide your discussion. We will convene as a class after ~35 minutes to discuss the issues raised.

Tipping points in space

Over the last few weeks we’ve been thinking a lot about orbit-use management policy. We’ve considered analogies to terrestrial environmental problems, policy design arguments from academics and the business community, and impacts (economic and national security) of different policy approaches. Let’s synthesize some of this work to think carefully about the economics of Kessler Syndrome.

Discussion questions

There probably isn’t enough time to answer all of the questions below, but try to discuss all at least a little bit and one or two in some depth.

  1. Some folks compare Kessler Syndrome to climate tipping points. Do you think this analogy is appropriate? If yes, what can we learn about Kessler Syndrome from climate economics? If not, why not and do you see a better analogy?


  1. We’ve discussed a lot of possible policy instruments: treaties, Pigouvian taxes (i.e. orbital-use fees), performance bonds (i.e. deposit-refund systems), forfeiture assessments, rental shares, command-and-control policies, and even a bit of cap-and-trade. How would you construct an economic policy to manage Kessler risk?
    1. Is the optimal level of Kessler risk zero? Why or why not?
    2. Do you expect your policy to ensure the optimal level of Kessler risk? Why or why not?
    3. Will your proposed policy ensure economically efficient orbit use or just stave off catastrophe?


  1. Some argue economic policies are unnecessary because active debris removal technologies will solve the problem. Do you agree? Why or why not? (There are currently no commercially viable ADR technologies, but there are some companies trying to bring the technology to market.)


Try to think of additional questions which you may not be able to answer but think are important in thinking about these questions.