Facing tough competition from China, the United States and even tiny Luxembourg, Germany is racing to draft new laws and attract private investment to secure a slice of an emerging space market that could be worth $1 trillion a year by the 2040s.
The drive to give Germany a bigger role in space comes as European, Asian and U.S. companies stake out ground in an evolving segment that promises contracts for everything from exploration to mining of outer-space resources.
Firms likely to benefit from any future spending rise in Germany include Airbus, which co-owns the maker of Europe’s Ariane space rockets, and Bremen-based OHB.
The new legislation would limit financial and legal liabilities of private companies should accidents happen in orbit, set standards for space operations and offer incentives for new projects, the German economy ministry told Reuters.
The Luxembourg government has agreed to purchase up to 49 percent of the equity in asteroid-mining company Planetary Resources’ Luxembourg operations as part of the effort to make Luxembourg the nexus of space-based resource exploitation, an industry official said.
An announcement of the agreement was scheduled for June 13 in Luxembourg, the official said.
Luxembourg will make an initial investment of 200 million euros ($227 million) to become the “Silicon Valley of space resources” under an initiative that will primarily benefit two American asteroid mining companies.
The investment will fund asteroid survey missions by Deep Space Industries and Planetary Resources that will be launched within three years, government officials said at a press conference on Friday. Luxembourg will also fund research and development into technologies needed to identify, extract and process minerals, water and other materials.
The two companies have agreed to set up operations in the European tax haven. Deep Space Industries has signed an agreement with the Luxembourg government to work together, officials said. A similar agreement with Planetary Resources is in the works.
In addition to funding space missions and R&D, Luxembourg is considering making direct capital investments to become shareholders in the two companies, Vice Prime Minister Étienne Schneider told journalists.
Those efforts are seemingly emboldened by the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (CSLCA), legislation passed by Congress and signed into law last November. A section of the law grants companies the rights to resources they extract from asteroids, which clears up, at least at the level of domestic law, the question of whether companies could own material they extract from an asteroid. Yet, even with that law in effect, there are still unresolved issues, both at the federal and the international level, for prospective asteroid miners.
Asteroid mining company Deep Space Industries, together with the Luxembourg Government and the Société Nationale de Crédit et d’Investissement (SNCI), the national banking institution in Luxembourg, have signed an agreement formalizing their partnership to explore, use, and commercialize space resources as part of Luxembourg’s spaceresources.lu initiative.
The Luxembourg Government will work with Deep Space Industries to co-fund relevant R&D projects that help further develop the technology needed to mine asteroids and build a supply chain of valuable resources in space. The co-funding will be implemented under the Luxembourg space program, (LuxIMPULSE), the national R&D support program, and using financing instruments of the SNCI.
Whether people realize it or not, there is a new space race on. This time, its less about getting to a place first, so much as attempting to build a sustainable, reliable space program with guaranteed access to space. To be sure, the world will be going to Mars, but the steps to get there are much bigger than simply going to the Moon. The US, China and others are build the infrastructure to get there. Who will build fastest and sustainably will be the first ones to step onto the Red Planet.
The New Space Race will be an aggregation of news about those efforts that will be posted as sufficient news of interest has accumulated.
The new Airbus+Safran rocket is hinging on a French tax ruling.
The Ariane 6 is moving ahead, but will not be reusing any of its parts, unlike the American rockets being developed.
Safran believes the first first contract for the Ariane 6 will be signed by year's end.
Russia:
The first satellites have been shipped to Russia's new spaceport for launch.
Russia will be substituting local parts for its rockets that used to be made in Ukraine.
Russia's new Federation space capsule being developed is touted as being cheaper than the SpaceX Dragon Capsule.
Due to the crashing Russian economy and slashed Russian space budget, the new Angara-A5V rocket first launch has been postponed at least ten years to 2025.
USA:
Did the law that granted Americans and American companies rights to mine asteroids not go far enough? Should the US have allowed foreign companies to register claims? I think that would have clashed with the international treaties regarding outer space, but also would have ended up making the US the defacto arbitrator of all things space. That seems like a really big...presumption.
Dragon 2 landing rocket test.
SpaceX also tested the Dragon 2 capsule's parachute system, but with a mass simulator rather than a capsule.
The NASA awarded three new resupply contracts for the space station. SpaceX will continue with their Dragon capsule. Orbital ATK will continue with their Cygnus module. The new addition is Sierra Nevada with a unmanned cargo version of their DreamChaser. This is partially being funded by the Europeans. The really good news about the decision is losers, Boeing and Lockheed, will not be protesting the selections!
Lockheed has stated the Orion capsule is still on schedule for its 2018 first launch. Work on the pressure vessel for the first Orion has completed.
European specialists in space law on Dec. 4 said the recently enacted U.S. Commercial Space Act may contravene international treaties and will inevitably stir up a hornet’s nest of opposition.
The law confers on U.S. citizens the right to engage in commercial exploitation of outer space minerals, a right that might be viewed as violating the United Nations Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which says in part: “Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.”
The United States is a signatory to this treaty.
On Nov. 25, U.S. President Barack Obama signed into law the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, whose shorthand title is the Commercial Space Act of 2015.
The law includes a chapter on “space resource commercial exploitation and utilization” whose language is clear enough. The goal, the law says, is to “facilitate commercial exploitation for, and commercial recovery of, space resources by United States citizens.” The act defines space resources as including water and minerals.
The law was applauded by commercial space advocates in the United States as removing an obstacle to capital investment in companies planning to mine resources on the moon or elsewhere.
None of these companies has raised anywhere near the financing needed to start commercial mining, but the law’s passage excited enormous discussion on social media networks, including allegations that it was a “criminal” appropriation by the United States of the global commons.
“Is the Commercial Space Act a violation of the Outer Space Treaty’s prohibition of national appropriation?” asked Alexander Soucek, head of the legal services department at the 22-nation European Space Agency. “It is very controversial; I can say that. There are lots of opinions on this.”
Language in a new commercial space law that grants companies rights to resources they extract from asteroids and other solar system bodies provides them with some certainty, but they acknowledge that the law is likely not the last word on the issue.
President Barack Obama signed into law Nov. 25 the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, the final version of a commercial space bill approved by the House and Senate earlier in the month. Most of the bill is devoted to issues regarding commercial space transportation, including extensions of third-party launch indemnification and restrictions on regulations regarding safety of commercial spaceflight participants.
One section of the new law, though, that has received a large amount of attention is the part about space resources. That section states that U.S. citizens shall have rights to any resources they extract from asteroids, moons or other bodies, “including to possess, own, transport, use, and sell” those resources.
[...]
With that interest, though, has also come controversy. Some space law experts, particularly outside of the United States, have raised questions about whether the language in the new law might conflict with international accords like the Outer Space Treaty, which prohibits countries from claiming sovereignty over territory beyond Earth.
Even some people within the U.S. government have raised questions about the law. “I’m not sure that the U.S. Congress can pass a law that authorizes American citizens to go do something” like claim rights to space resources, NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said at a Dec. 1 meeting of the NASA Advisory Council at the Johnson Space Center, when asked by a council member about the new law.
Bolden said he’s asked lawyers for their opinions about the new law and how it might affect NASA’s exploration plans, such as enhancing commercial use of space. “It is encouraging the entrepreneurs and others who say they want to go mine asteroids and mine the moon and the like, so I’m encouraged by their encouragement,” he said.
An in-depth analysis and systematic comparison of asteroid redirection methods is performed within a resource exploitation framework using different assessment mechanisms. Through this framework, mission objectives and constraints are specified for the redirection of an asteroid from a near-Earth orbit to a stable orbit in the Earth-Moon system. The paper provides a detailed investigation of five redirection methods, i.e., ion beam, tugboat, gravity tractor, laser sublimation, and mass ejector, with respect to their capabilities for a redirection mission. A set of mission level criteria are utilized to assess the performance of each redirection method, and the means of assigning attributes to each criterion is discussed in detail. In addition, the uncertainty in physical characteristics of the asteroid population is quantified through the use of Monte Carlo analysis. The Monte Carlo simulation provides insight into the performance robustness of the redirection methods with respect to the targeted asteroid range. Lastly, the attributes for each redirection method are aggregated using three different multicriteria assessment approaches, i.e., the analytical hierarchy process, a utility-based approach, and a fuzzy aggregation mechanism. The results of each assessment approach as well as recommendations for further studies are discussed in detail.
Who owns asteroids in outer space? What about if you go up and take a chunk out of one, who owns that bit? According to a newly signed law, you own whatever asteroid resources you manage to obtain—but it only applies if you’re a US citizen.
President Obama signed the US Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act into law on 25 November 2015. Among other things, the Act essentially opens the prospect of asteroid mining up to commercial entities in the US. It states:
A United States citizen engaged in commercial recovery of an asteroid resource or a space resource under this chapter shall be entitled to any asteroid resource or space resource obtained, including to possess, own, transport, use, and sell the asteroid resource or space resource obtained in accordance with applicable law, including the international obligations of the United States.
The broader space community is, however, not completely enthusiastic about the US’s finders-keepers policy, with some experts claiming the new law may even be at odds with international space law.
The Commercial Space Launch Act, which includes provisions allowing American companies the right to keep resources that they mine in space, was recently signed into law by President Barack Obama. While the act has been hailed as groundbreaking in the United States, the space mining title has gotten an angry reaction overseas. In a Friday article in Science Alert, Gbenga Oduntan, Senior Lecturer in International Commercial Law, University of Kent, condemned the space mining provisions as environmentally risky and a violation of international law. Ram Jakhu, a professor at Canada’s McGill University's Institute of air and space law, adds that space mining is a violation of the Outer Space Treaty and should not be allowed.
Oduntan’s environmental argument is expressed thus:
“So what’s at stake? We can assume that the list of states that have access to outer space - currently a dozen or so - will grow. These states may also shortly respond with mining programmes of their own. That means that the pristine conditions of the cradle of nature from which our own Earth was born may become irrevocably altered forever - making it harder to trace how we came into being. Similarly, if we started contaminating celestial bodies with microbes from Earth, it could ruin our chances of ever finding alien life there.
“Mining minerals in space could also damage the environment around Earth and eventually lead to conflict over resources. Indeed what right has the second highest polluter of Earth’s environment got to proceed with some of the same corporations in a bid to plunder outer space?”
Leaving aside the anti-American, anti-capitalist swipe, Oduntan’s argument could be applied to forbid even the peaceful exploration of space, lest space probes and astronauts “contaminate” the “pristine’ nature of space.
Both gentlemen try to invoke the Outer Space Treaty as binding against space mining, a dubious position. Oduntan attempts to claim that the notorious Moon Treaty, of which the United States is not a party to, is still binding as “customary law,” an odd position to take that suggest that the parties to an agreement can force their views on those countries that have chosen not to be parties by fiat.
An event of cosmic proportions occurred on 18 November when the US congress passed the Space Act of 2015 into law. The legislation will give US space firms the rights to own and sell natural resources they mine from bodies in space, including asteroids. Although the act, passed with bipartisan support, still requires President Obama’s signature, it is already the most significant salvo that has been fired in the ideological battle over ownership of the cosmos. It goes against a number of treaties and international customary law which already apply to the entire Universe.
The new law is nothing but a classic rendition of the "he who dares wins" philosophy of the wild west. The act will also allow the private sector to make space innovations without regulatory oversight during an eight-year period and protect spaceflight participants from financial ruin. Surely, this will see private firms begin to incorporate the mining of asteroids into their investment plans.
Supporters argue that the US Space Act is a bold statement that finally sets private spaceflight free from the heavy regulation of the US government. The misdiagnosis begins here. Space exploration is a universal activity and therefore requires international regulation.
The act represents a full-frontal attack on settled principles of space law which are based on two basic principles: the right of states to scientific exploration of outer space and its celestial bodies and the prevention of unilateral and unbridled commercial exploitation of outer-space resources. These principles are found in agreements including the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 and the Moon Agreement of 1979.
We have a precedent! Noel pointed out in email that asteroid mining only needs a Guano Islands Act: no sovereignty, but US can protect the islands and commercial interests.
U.S. President Barack Obama signed legislation on Wednesday providing a framework for space companies to mine ore from asteroids and other bodies, but legal critics are worried the measure could lead to violations of international law.
The Space Resource Exploration and Utilization Act gives any American who successfully extracts natural resources from outer space the property rights over the haul.
But it has long been agreed between countries that outer space is not to become another Wild West, some legal scholars argue, and the new law risks privatizing a realm that is meant to belong to all of humanity.
"My view is that natural resources [in space] should not be allowed to be appropriated by anyone — states, private companies, or international organizations," said Ram Jakhu, a professor at McGill University's institute of air and space law.
He said the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, signed by the U.S. and other countries, including Canada, makes it clear that the surfaces and contents of asteroids and other celestial bodies are protected from commercial harvesting.
The treaty's Article 2 reads, "Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means."
That view isn't unanimous among legal scholars, however. Some say small asteroids don't qualify as "celestial bodies," while others say it's not "appropriating" an asteroid to extract minerals from it. And the new law does contain a clause making it clear the U.S. isn't asserting sovereignty or exclusive rights over any celestial body.
Ricky Lee, an Australian lawyer who wrote his doctoral thesis on the legalities of space mining, said companies are already making routine, for-profit use of limited space resources by launching satellites into low orbits, and especially into high-up geostationary orbits, of which there are a maximum number of slots available.
"So the idea that commercial use of space resources is prohibited by the Outer Space Treaty... is quite simply absurd," he said in an email.
The House of Representatives has approved the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, paving the way for it to be sent to President Barack Obama for signature. The Senate approved an identical measure last week.
[...]
Space Resource Exploration and Utilization
Establishes a legal right to resources a U.S. citizen may recover in space consistent with current law and international obligations of the United States. Directs the President to facilitate and promote the space resource exploration and recovery.
[...]
Identifies Appropriate Oversight for the Commercial Development of Space
Directs the Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with the Department of Transportation, Secretary of State, NASA and other relevant Federal agencies, to assess and recommend approaches for oversight of commercial non-governmental activities conducted in space that would prioritize safety, utilize existing authorities, minimize burdens on industry, promote the U.S. commercial space sector, and meet U.S. obligations under international treaties.
The ambiguous or indeterminate nature of legal norms in space law can be problematic. However, consensus may often develop around a general principle much quicker than around a detailed plan of action. The very existence of a principle can be significant because, at best, it can lead to positive change or at least can ensure the continuation of a dialogue. Such principles might have a conceptual autonomy to develop in ways that the actors most responsible for their inception, usually nations, had not foreseen. Their very ambiguity can render such evolution more likely.
In this essay, [Aganaba-Jeanty] examine[s] the intended justice outcome of space law by exploring the foundational principle of space law that “the exploration and use of outer space… shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interest of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development.” [Aganaba-Jeanty] re-explore[s] the objective of a group of developing nations to find meaning to Article 1 of the Outer Space Treaty, which concluded with the adoption of a UN Declaration known as the Space Benefits Declaration.1 That declaration ultimately did not create any new rights for the developing nations and based on that experience, [Aganaba-Jeanty] argue[s] that it is almost impossible in today’s context to adopt legally binding rules in the space context that all can agree with.
The asteroid mining firm Deep Space Industries (DSI) announced today that Metatron Global, A.S., an international investment firm with offices in the Czech Republic, has agreed to make a substantial investment in the company. The investment will enable DSI to accelerate its plans to prospect for resources at an asteroid in the near future, hire more top level leadership and develop high value products based on its groundbreaking technologies.
"DSI is not your usual company. Our business plan is not your usual business plan. It takes a special kind of investor to step up and support what we are doing," said DSI Chair Rick Tumlinson. "Metatron is that kind of company. Not only are they incredibly sophisticated, not only do they take due diligence to another level, they "get it". More, they are not just writing a check, but adding their expertise and energy to ours as we move forward, adding a new and important dimension to our team."
Over the last two years, U.S. business and policy makers have focused afresh on the commercial possibilities of the asteroids—the solar system's minor planetary objects. Most of these are located between Mars and Jupiter, while some are closer to Earth. Some have large deposits of precious metals and other potentially valuable substances. In the last few years, some private operators have announced plans to mine them commercially, a concept that, until now, has been exclusively the realm of science fiction.
In apparent response to these initiatives, the House of Representatives recently passed the "Space Resource Exploration and Utilization Act of 2015," H.R. 1508, part of a broader SPACE Act of 2015, H.R. 2262. The proposed legislation aims to assure private companies of title over "[a]ny asteroid resources obtained in outer space"—assuming, of course, that they are eventually able to get there. Although this initiative only began in the late part of the last congressional session, with relatively brief hearings, it was sponsored by key members of the House Committee on Space, Science and Technology. The bill now goes to the Senate (where it already has at least two potential adherents, including presidential candidate and Senator Marco Rubio). If enacted, this will be a bold, if controversial, development in U.S. space policy.
NASA has selected Honeybee Robotics for four Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and one Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR) Phase I contracts, including one that would help develop a resource prospecting spacecraft capable of refueling itself using in-situ resources.
The five proposals include:
The World is Not Enough (WINE): Harvesting Local Resources for Eternal Exploration of Space (STTR)
Planetary Volatiles Extractor for In Situ Resource Utilization (SBIR)
Development of a Hermetically Sealed Canister for Sample Return Missions (SBIR)
Lunar Heat Flow Probe (SBIR)
Miniaturized System-in-Package Motor Controller for Spacecraft and Orbital Instruments (SBIR)
WINE, which is being done with the University of Central Florida in Orlando, involves a 3D-printed CubeSat that would be able to refuel itself by extracting in-situ resources. The spacecraft would be able to land on an asteroid or moon, examine the location, and fly to another location using the water it extracted in its thruster system.
“NASA can use this system to prospect for mining that will support Mars exploration missions. It can also use the system for any planetary exploration when there is a known water resource close to the surface,” according to the proposal. “The system could be used by several commercial companies that are interested in In Situ Resource Utilization for financial gain. These include Planetary Resources and Deep Space Industries targeting asteroids.”
Under the Planetary Volatiles Extractor for In Situ Resource Utilization proposal, Honeybee would examine two methods for extracting water known as sniffer and corer. The company will compare these techniques with the Mobile In-Situ Water Extractor (MISWE), which Honeybee developed under a previous SBIR agreement with NASA.
At the end of the Phase 1, we will trade all 3: Sniffer, Corer, MISME and select one for further development in Phase 2,” the proposal states. “After the Sniffer and the Corer tests, a trade study will be conducted to compare Sniffer vs Corer vs MISME approaches. The trade study will include figure of merits (e.g. extraction efficiency etc), potential for scaling production up, easy of deploying on more than one planetary body, as well as mission implementation challenges and risks.”
In a contentious hearing on Wednesday, the Republican controlled House Science Committee approved a measure that would give companies rights to materials they mine from asteroids over complaints from Democrats that the measure was unconstitutional and drawn up to benefit a single company.
The Space Resource Exploration and Utilization Act of 2015 was approved by a party line vote of 18-15. The bill is sponsored by Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL) and Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-WA). Identical legislation has been introduced in the Senate.
Posey said the measure would give companies the right to own and sell materials they mine from asteroids. The measure does not allow a company to own asteroids, nor does it apply to the moon or other planets, he said.
Democrats called the measure unconstitutional, saying it clashed with the nation’s obligations under the 1967 Outer Space Treaty that banned ownership of extraterrestrial resources. They cited an expert who testified to that effect at a hearing last year.
Legislation that would grant property rights to entities mining asteroids has been introduced in Congress.
“Any asteroid resources obtained in outer space are the property of the entity that obtained such resources, which shall be entitled to all property rights thereto, consistent with applicable provisions of Federal law,” the measure states.
Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) has introduced the Space Resource Exploration and Utilization Act of 2015 with Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) as co-sponsor. Rep. Bill Posey (R-FL) has introduced an identical measure in the House with Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-WA) as co-sponsor.
Washington State is home to Planetary Resources, one of two American asteroid mining companies. The other company is Deep Space Industries, which is located in California.
The legislation would require the President to submit to Congress within 180 days a report containing “recommendations for (1) the allocation of responsibilities relating to the exploration and utilization of space resources among Federal agencies; and (2) any authorities necessary to meet the international obligations of the United States with respect to the exploration and utilization of space resources.”
The United States government has taken a new, though preliminary, step to encourage commercial development of the moon.
According to documents obtained by Reuters, U.S. companies can stake claims to lunar territory through an existing licensing process for space launches.
The Federal Aviation Administration, in a previously undisclosed late-December letter to Bigelow Aerospace, said the agency intends to “leverage the FAA’s existing launch licensing authority to encourage private sector investments in space systems by ensuring that commercial activities can be conducted on a non-interference basis.”
In other words, experts said, Bigelow could set up one of its proposed inflatable habitats on the moon, and expect to have exclusive rights to that territory - as well as related areas that might be tapped for mining, exploration and other activities.
However, the FAA letter noted a concern flagged by the U.S. State Department that “the national regulatory framework, in its present form, is ill-equipped to enable the U.S. government to fulfill its obligations” under a 1967 United Nations treaty, which, in part, governs activities on the moon.
