Low Earth Orbit Junk Yard Nearly Full

vlado4 writes "The New York Times has up an article on the amount of space junk in Earth Orbit. According to NASA officials, the amount of stuff we've put into LEO is at critical levels. Additionally they have great graphics of the nearly 1000 new pieces resulting from testing the new Chinese anti-satellite weapon, as well as the damage to Hubble's solar array. The litter is now so bad that, even if space-faring nations refrained from further interference, collisions would continue to create more clutter just above our atmosphere. Space debris appear to be a difficult problem to deal with and may hinder future space exploration."

Comments

No problem

[2.7182]

We'll just have the Chinese clear it out with their new laser death beam things.

Re:No problem

[Anonymous Coward]

The Chinese anti-satellite weapon that caused all of the space-debris was a missile. The Chinese laser death ray is something completely different. If you had been keeping up on current events instead of nitpicking posts on slashdot while sniffing magic markers you would know that.

Re:No problem

[AVryhof]

Perhaps we need Megamaid

Re:No problem

[rblancarte]

You can see that the stress of all the debris is having a bad effect on astronauts already.

RonB

Re:No problem

[pe1chl]

It is of course very easy to point at the Chinese for shattering a satellite into a thousand pieces, but don't forget that the US has their share of stupid mistakes as well.
For example, in 1963 the US Military launched 480 million tiny needles into orbit (project West Ford), to see if they could be used to reflect radio signals.
That did not work well, but the needles remained in orbit for years.
And if scientists would not have been very opposed to it, they probably would have launched even more to see if the idea would work.

Also, it is difficult to say that space is "full" of junk. The LEO area has such a large volume that even hundres of millions of junk particles at a uniform distribution still means they are all many kilometers apart. So what is "full"?

Re:No problem

[rucs_hack]

"We'll just have the Chinese clear it out with their new laser death beam things."

that will never work unless they can breed sharks that can survive in space..

Re:No problem

[cayenne8]

Hmm...well, why don't we create and send up the equivalent of a 'space' Roomba. Just let it go up there, and vacuum up debris...when full, it returns to the space station up there, where they bag it and shoot it further out into space away from us...?

Re:No problem

[pe1chl]

One reason this is not so simple, is that there is so much space to vacuum. You will not find much junk by just vacuuming (especially in the vacuum of space)...
Then there is the problem that speeds are very high. A particle in a different orbit than your Roomba will probably go right through it, instead of being properly processed.

Re:No problem

[God'sDuck]

IANARS, but I would think a big (say, square mile) plow would be able to "catastrophically catch" many objects; and anything that had enough kinetic energy to blast through it like a bullet would probably be slowed enough to drop into a decaying orbit. Thoughts?

Re:No problem

[Zephyros]

And then when it's got everything, we can aim it at whomever we want and switch it from "suck" to "blow"...

Re:No problem

[dpilot]

I've sometimes mused about a big hunk of aerogel in orbit. I suspect that you don't really need to catch or stop things, just slow them down. If these pieces of junk could just be persuaded to drop perigee down into the 100 mile range, then atmospheric decay would help out.

Re:No problem

[mfrank]

Just increase the rate of global warming. The warmer atmosphere will expand further into space, and all the junk will re-enter and burn up.

Also, we can schedule a date and time where everybody exhales simultaneously. That'll help.

Re:No problem

[Rei]

Picture trying to pull a moped off the road at 60 miles per hour.

Now increase the speed of the moped threehundred fold (and its energy almost a hundred thousand fold). Think that will work? No? Bingo. You wouldn't even change the orbit measurably if it flew past a just centimeter from your magnet.

You can take out debris by many methods, such as: applying direct thrust to it (say, attaching a small engine); subjecting it to more drag (say, attaching a sail to it to drag through the rarified atmosphere, or increasing the rarified atmosphere); rendering it into small enough particles that either cannot do enough damage to be problematic, will reenter soon (greater surface area to mass ratio), or most likely, both at the same time; colliding it with a target (having either the debris be either largely contained or disintegrated, as per above); etc.

Re:No problem

[dpilot]

It's the old "Space is BIG!" problem. But the nearly meaningful adder to the aerogel idea would be to station some blocks of it ahead of and behind valuable things, notably the ISS. (If you stationed any around the HST, you'd also want to be able to move it when you wanted to look in that direction. Even this idea still has trouble with the "Space is BIG!" problem, but at least you're trying to protect a smaller space. Obviously it would be necessary to form the aerogel on-orbit, presuming that's possible.

Re:No problem

[jvkjvk]

Also, it is difficult to say that space is "full" of junk. The LEO area has such a large volume that even hundres of millions of junk particles at a uniform distribution still means they are all many kilometers apart. So what is "full"? An operative definition of "full" can be found in utilizing the probability that when orbiting your satellite, or during it's operative lifetime one of those pieces of space junk causes it to become inoperative.

Now for different organizations "full" is going be defined with different probabilities. If you have as much money as the DOD, for example, "full" might be somewhere north of 50%, but I can't see many for profit companies putting up with a 50% satellite failure rate. For them, "full" probably is south of 10%.

Re:No problem

[willy_me]

Now increase the speed of the moped threehundred fold (and its energy almost a hundred thousand fold). Think that will work? No? Bingo. You wouldn't even change the orbit measurably if it flew past a just centimeter from your magnet.

I agree. I had envisioned an autonomous satellite that would synchronize its orbit with whatever junk is to be removed then apply a magnetic field so that the object would drop out of orbit. The benefit of this is that you wouldn't have to setup a collision to remove objects - you would just have to get close (wrt proximity and velocity). Of course, this is all a bit futile if carbon fiber and Al make up a significant portion of the junk up there.

In all honesty, I know nothing of this field so anything I have to say is simply speculation and should be treated as such. For example, after reading your reply I'm beginning to think that an autonomous satellite that lays a field of gas in front of oncoming objects might be a better approach. But running out of gas would be a problem. Or how about positioning a mobile mass large enough to absorb the impact from any orbiting junk? Simple, crude, but effective.

Heh

[Moby Cock]

I hereby claim ownership of the concept of the space zamboni.

Re:Heh

[ArcherB]

How about a space vacuum?

Re:Heh

[operagost]

I anticipate that there will be a huge demand for brave space pilots to obliterate this menace. Therefore, I have already begun training on an advanced debris-elimination trainer software using the latest vector graphics technology. I realize that space is not two dimensional and the "hyperspace" technology has not yet been developed, but I will be prepared in advance once our brilliant scientists make space junk elimination possible. In addition, I will have a head start on blasting those flying saucers that will be piloted by our vile Chinese nemeses.

Look at the bright side

[Anonymous Coward]

Space debris appear to be a difficult problem to deal with and may hinder future space exploration.

Sure, but it also prevents stuff from comig in. Things like alien landers, etc. Or in an earth hostility only mode, it is a cheaper, and more effective, vresion of the Star Wars defense. Put more up there and let it shield us.

Solution

[EveryNickIsTaken]

Launch a new ball of garbage into orbit to propel the old ball of garbage away from earth. It's foolproof.

Re:Solution

[Moby Cock]

The Katamari Damacy Solution. I like it.

How bad are we?

[SQLz]

Not only are we destroying our own environment, our planet is surrounded by floating trash.

Re:How bad are we?

[rblancarte]

Does this make us the hillbilly's of the galaxy?

What's next, a space station on cinder blocks?

RonB

Re:How bad are we?

[grammar fascist]

Not only are we destroying our own environment, our planet is surrounded by floating trash.

I applaud your progressive sense of guilty despair. Not only is it enlightened, it's constructive as well!

Re:How bad are we?

[Intron]

Not really. Decay time due to drag for LEO is fairly short. Debris in orbits below 300 km (where ISS lives) falls in less than 30 days. Debris up by the Hubble can stay up for years, but will fall eventually. Here is a chart of orbital decay vs. altitude.

Re:How bad are we?

[careysub]

Not really. Decay time due to drag for LEO is fairly short. Debris in orbits below 300 km (where ISS lives) falls in less than 30 days. Debris up by the Hubble can stay up for years, but will fall eventually. Here is a chart of orbital decay vs. altitude.

This is correct. At low enough altitudes space debris does not cause a run-away debris scenario. This point was made in the New York Times article - if the Chinese had conducted their test at the ISS orbital altitude there would be no long term problem (just a medium term one for the ISS).

In fact drag automatically clears debris below about 700 km, eventually, but not above that altitude. There was a good article on this a year ago in Science: "Risks in Space from Orbiting Debris" by Liou and Johnson (20 January 2006: Vol. 311. no. 5759, pp. 340 - 341). They published a debris vs altitude chart for 2004, 2104, and 2204 showing that (assuming nothing else is launched into space), the existing debris cloud would be entirely cleared below 400 km in 100 years, and at least reduced below today's density between 400 and 700 km. Above that altitude the density keeps climbing century after century. By far the worst hazard is between 800 km and 1050 km.

This limits the hazard to a certain band of orbital altitudes, a fact not brought out in the news article. It isn't a denial of space by any means, but it is a significant restriction on usable orbits.

The Garbage Scow

[Gr8Apes]

Didn't Arthur C Clarke or Isaac Asimov detail this problem years ago and posit that a space garbage service would have to be setup to collect this stuff?

It will counter global warming

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

All these debris collide with one another and create fine dust covering the earth. It will reflect just enough sunlight to reduce the amount of absorbed radiation to counter the global warming. What a great relief! Last momement reprieve, brought to you by Frank Merrywell.

Hah--!

[EinZweiDrei]

Hey, wait, I played Math Blaster -- I am ready for this .

CERISE satellite

[amightywind]

A year later, apprehension rose as the fuel tank of an abandoned American rocket engine exploded, breaking the craft into 713 detectable fragments -- until now, the record.

The NYT calls out the US but makes no mention of the the loss of the CERISE satellite by a fragment of an exploded Ariane upper stage in 1997.

But seriously...

[Panaqqa]

This is a HUGE problem. Considering that kinetic energy is proportional to the square of velocity, think about how much damage even a small chip of paint can do at orbital speeds (low Earth orbit = approx. 5 miles per second). Then think of a 2 lb. chunk of metal at the same speed (8 times the speed of a rifle bullet).

Right off the top of my head I can't think of a feasible way of beginning to clean this up. Perhaps large orbital superconducting magnets (easy to maintain cryo temperatures in space) for the ferrous stuff, but what about ceramics and all the other junk?

This has the potential to make what is usually the safest part of space travel (sitting there in orbit) the most dangerous part, unlike the historical danger zones of liftoff and reentry.

Re:But seriously...

[Annirak]

It is NOT easy to maintain cryo temperatures in space. Disposing of heat in space is quite difficult, as your only means of heat loss is radiation and the sun tends to shine on whatever you're cooling most of the time.

Re:But seriously...

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

>anything it would collide with would also be moving at a comparable speed

Comparable speed but not comparable velocity: if something in polar orbit hits something in equatorial orbit, grief will ensue.

Re:But seriously...

[IcePop456]

Isn't speed relative? I mean we can catch the Space Station or Hubble without a problem and they contain more mass than a chip of paint.

This is also the reason I roll my eyes when they talk about working in space at 17,600 MPH. Yes they are, but so is what they are working with. People don't seem to have any issue picking up their cell phone while driving 80MPH - simply because the phone is going 80 MPH too.

Typical

[eno2001]

This is typical of the shortsighted idiotic human being. Most people just seem incapable of thinking multiple steps ahead. It's a pretty obvious problem that clear thinking would have revealed from the get go. But, as is the human way, it was far easier to just forget about the problem until it interferes. Of course as soon as someone would have suggested that we find a way to clean up the space junk early on, they would have been derided for getting in the way and worrying about petty concerns. Humanity disgusts me.

Re:Typical

[ScentCone]

Humanity disgusts me

And yet, here you are, still breathing. I guess you're waiting until you can take more out with you, or something? I know, it's getting more and more expensive to build underground lairs and doomsday devices and whatnot. But if you just step out in front of bus today, you can avoid all of those management and finance headaches, and still immediately cease being disgusted.

BTW, which nascent technology's 40-years-from-now problems are you accurately predicting today, and acting to correct? Just curious.

Re:Typical

[Shiptar]

Global warming. I burn all my garbage, vote republican and bought a fortress on a mountain.

The sooner I get rid of you guys the better.

Killing yourself is never the answer, killing everyone else is a better and less selfish solution.

Re:Typical

[Red Flayer]

Of course as soon as someone would have suggested that we find a way to clean up the space junk early on, they would have been derided for getting in the way and worrying about petty concerns.

Bah, it's hubris to think that mankind has put enough stuff in LEO to affect the entire orbital space.

Furthermore, what's to say that natural sources don't put more space junk in LEO than human processes?

And who cares if we've "filled up" LEO -- surely technological advances will enable us to deal with the complications as they arise.

And why should we (the US) have to bear the biggest burden of reducing the trash in LEO, when developing nations (those without a space program) get off scott free? It's not like we're the major contributor or anything.

Besides, the jury is still out... plenty of independent* scientists dispute the findings of this study, and we should take no action until there is consensus.

*Independent: funded by the "other side" of the interested parties

Re:Typical

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

It's a pretty obvious problem that clear thinking would have revealed from the get go.

It's very easy to go round finding mistakes that people have made and then criticize them with the benefit of hindsight. If you're the kind of person who likes to wallow in self-loathing for humanity you can spend all day looking for examples. But please, spare the rest of us.

new moon

[mdemonic]

Maybe it will become a new moon some day, and we could inhabit it, and create a new layer of orbiting junk

Already Solved The Problem

[compact_support]

Didn't somebody design a really cheap system of kamikaze satellites that would grapple the dangerous pieces and de-orbit them into the atmosphere? By really cheap I mean ~10,000 dollars. Surely we could put a couple of those on the ISS in case it looked like something was coming for it. I know it's expensive to launch the things, but AFAIK they're about the size of a propane tank for a BBQ and could be launched in vast numbers on a single rocket. The space is so large we only need to worry about the stuff in the space we WANT to be in or go through. All the geosynchronous stuff is in a much higher orbit, so we only need to worry about the stuff in LEO and the stuff going through it. It shoudn't be a problem to plot a course through it, and we can clear the orbits as we go.

We've finally done it.

[Rob T Firefly]

We've broken Space.

I guess we'll just have to go back to throwing our crap exclusively into the air and oceans. Last one to the beach with a six-pack is a rotten egg!

I have a radical idea

[realmolo]

NASA needs to cut a deal with Blizzard. Make each of the pieces of "space junk" an ultra-rare item in World of Warcraft that the players have to go and collect themselves.

The problem will be solved in 3 months.

Dear China,

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems you missed the announcement, the space junk race has been canceled. While your actions are impressive, and as irresponsible as any superpower has ever been, there is no need to attempt to catch up with the US and the states formerly known as the Soviet Union.

You also might be interested to know that there has been a litany of terrestrial environmental mistakes made over the past century or so. While we recognize that it's you're right to fuck shit up on your own, we strongly suggest at least making an attempt to learn from mistakes already made.

In summary, we all remember our first beer too, but come on, it's time to grow up a bit.

Sincerely,

The World

Leave it alone

[amightywind]

Right off the top of my head I can't think of a feasible way of beginning to clean this up.

You leave it alone and it will go away. The drag forces on small objects in LEO will cause their orbits to decay in 3-5 years. Debris in higher orbits is another matter.

saweet

[esobofh]

Soon those saturn bastards will envy OUR ring!!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Ok, didn't Nasa Tell teh Astronaughts not to fl

[multipartmixed]

> how much is human waist?

Depending on the human, somewhere around around 32 inches.

Java to the Rescue!

[Flwyd]

All space software should now be written in a garbage-collected language.

Hafrumph!!!

[StressGuy]

Republican

{...ducks...}

A giant vacuum...

[cobrajs]

Now if only we could create some giant space vacuum...

Re:Ok, didn't Nasa Tell teh Astronaughts not to fl

[multisync]

> how much is human waist?

Depending on the human, somewhere around around 32 inches.

Not around these parts.

Petri Dish

[scopius]

Put a culture in a petri dish, and the population increases exponentially. After a lapse in time, the waste material created by the culture follows suit. At some point in the petri dish, the waste starts killing the culture and the population begins to decrease and eventually die out. This can be charted as a bell curve. We are all in a giant Petri Dish and our waste will eventually kill us.

Re:Petri Dish

[mahmud]

No.
We have a massive technology growth. That's the reason why we didn't all starve to death as this bloke would have liked us to believe.
If we will need to, we will find a way to deal with evil waste.

I do, however, hope that you were arguing the case for space colonization in an indirect manner, preparing the ground, so to speak. And since the cause in this case is pretty awesome, everything, including false analogy, goes:)

Planetes

[Pwipwi]

Reminds me of that manga called "Planetes" about a team of space debris cleaners.

The story started as a discovery-type vessel got hit by a screw which led to a window exploding, killing everyone.

It's a pretty good reading imho, very informative for what's about to come in the space exploration adventure.

Re:How bad are we? Oceans too!

[Nom du Keyboard]

Not only are we destroying our own environment, our planet is surrounded by floating trash.

And so are our oceans -- 2 millions tons of it according to an article I saw yesterday.

An idea who's time has come?

[Junior J. Junior III]

Makes me think of Planetes...

Re:Planetes

[EightySeven]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetes

It was made into a great (and I mean GREAT) anime as well.

The story of Planetes takes place in the near future. Unlike many other anime and science fiction productions, special care was given in Planetes for a very realistic depiction of space and space travel. For instance, when in a weightless environment, the cel count dramatically increases in order to make weightless motion more fluid and realistic. Also, spaceships make no noise in the vacuum of space and astronauts routinely suffer from known space illnesses such as radiation poisoning, decompression sickness, cancer, brittle bones and mental illnesses spawned from isolation in the vacuum of space. One character, born on the Moon, grew to be abnormally tall due to the lesser lunar gravity.

Concepts like momentum in weightlessness are early plot points and are always illustrated naturally. Director Goro Taniguchi stated in the DVD commentary that he learned much about orbital mechanics in the course of making the series. This can be shown in showing specific orbital energy, through changing orbits by applying thrust throughout the series. Even the necessity for the retrieval of space debris that is central to the plot is rooted in the serious and growing problem with space debris today.

Re:How can you blame them?

[drinkypoo]

A country that can't keep from polluting their own land, how can we expect them to not pollute space..?

Uh, have you looked around the US? I personally live in a valley in Northern California that used to be a sort of paradise in which the locals (Pomo "Indians") used to regularly live over 100 years due to their diet and lifestyle. Today the lake is horribly polluted with mercury and agricultural run off. The lake is called Clear Lake, and it was when white men first showed up here. Today it is about the same color as pea soup and frankly you can't see much further through it most days.

This is pretty much the story of the US. Some people were living in harmony with nature, doing controlled burns on a regular basis to provide stewardship of the land. (In fact my lady and I were just looking at a seed catalog and found a plant that said "to germinate, burn several inches of pine needles above the seeds" etc etc.) Then some white guys showed up, killed and enslaved lots of them, and cut down their oaks (depriving them of a major staple) in order to plant crops or grow cattle. Then the government gets involved, and kills most of the rest of them. We have an island up here now known as Bloody Island because the army came through and massacred all but a small handful of members of one band. The island is up the road from where I work in a tribal casino. Next the government would take further action to make sure they couldn't maintain their old way of life; besides granting all their land to some other white people, they actually paid people to plant walnut trees. Walnuts are tasty but they provide nothing like the nutrition of oak acorns.

You are sadly deluding yourself if you think China is any different from the US. They're just behind. And they're catching up rapidly.

Re:Not far off

[buckeyeguy]

So you're saying the Shuttle will be up on blocks. OK. Wonder how much a really big Trans Am decal would cost?

a couple of stats

[White Yeti]

At 850km, the "lighter" objects (high area-to-mass ratio, e.g. insulation, thin plates) will decay within 30 to 60 years. A 1cm steel sphere at that altitude, for example, will only drop about 80km over the next 100 years.

NASA's Orbital Debris Quarterly News has general articles, and always ends with a launch table and "box score". We'll have to wait for the next issue, but China has more than tripled its cataloged debris. With this one event, it's now got about a quarter of what the US and Russia each have, pulling well ahead of France and locking in its position in 3rd place.

I'm really curious about what's going on behind the Chinese wall. I know that NASA in no way controls what the US DoD does in space, and can only nag the administration to keep its promises. NASA scrambles the same way no matter who does the test. Does the Chinese Minsistry of Science (or whatever) butt heads with the Ministry of Defense? I look forward to reading the history, many years from now.

Not really an issue

[cyberanth]

First, this is not a permanent problem. It does not take long for an abandoned LEO satellite to decay, fall into the atmosphere, and burn up. Second, imagine about 1000 cars on a surface slightly larger than the earth (not even addressing that LEO satellites are in a pretty wide variation of altitudes). Now image these 1000 cars just driving around the earth in random directions. Collisions seem unlikely. To be precise, is we put the satellites all at 7000km from the earth's center, we have an area A = 6 million km^2. Now, give them roughly the area (actually circumference in 2D) of lets say a bus (to be generous), that be sigma = 6e-2 km. Thus, that gives us a mean free path of l = (1000*sigma/A)^-1 = 10,000,000 km. At a LEO orbital velocity of 7.8 km/s, that would be a collision every 14 days. And if we bumped it up to the full 3D problem, that'd be another couple orders of magnitude.

We must boycot the NYT for this egregious slight!

[spun]

Because the NYT hates America, right? Glad you rectified their egregious oversight.

They don't "call out" the US. They happen to mention that as a small part of a larger story that really "calls out" the Chinese, if anyone. But we can't let any slight against the US, no matter how small or even entirely in your head it might be, go unchallenged. And of course, the best way to excuse anything is to point out that someone else is also doing it.

Rah! Rah! Rah! We're number one! USA! USA! USA!

Re:Not so bad, if you think about it

[Z0mb1eman]

From the article:

"During an eight year period ending in 2002, the solar panels on the Hubble Telescope were struck by space debris at least 725,000 times. Five thousand of these left crates and holes large enough to be seen by the naked eye."

Nope, not too high at all.

Re:How long will it stay up there?

[SeanAhern]

Um...On the second page of TFA:

The breakup was dangerous because the satellite's orbit was relatively high, some 530 miles up. That means the debris will remain in space for tens, thousands or even millions of years.

"Sooner or later" ends up being much, much later.

Re:Collect it, yes. Throw it away, no.

[Rei]

Because those "chowderheads" are aware of the facts that:

1) We have no space tugs
2) Space tugs still cost money to operate (ion engines still use fuel, just less of it)
3) All craft break, even tugs, and in-space maintenence is ungodly expensive
4) Due to widely differing debris orbits and the need to match your target's orbit, it could take an ion engine years *per particle*.
5) The stuff is seen as junk for a reason.
6) There is no in-space forge, either researched or built or launched. Developing one would be a massive (unfunded) research project
7) There is no in-space casting facility. See above.
8) There is no in-space welding infrastructure. See above.
9) Any in-space manufacture would cost a fortune due to the extremely high labor and maintenence costs.
10) Any of the necessary components (tug, forge, casting, welding) could outright fail, making the entire system worthless.

All for what benefit -- eliminating one launch per several *thousand* pieces of debris captured? Great plan there. It's just not realistic, nor economical. Apparently non-"chowderheads" aren't aware of this.

Time for...

[FuzzyDaddy]

An enormous low earth orbit marshmallow. And it will get toasted on re-entry!

Junk Science

[Nefarious Wheel]

Oh my gosh... now you can combine a science degree with an environmental studies degree and get a PhD in Junk Science!

Bad astronaut behavior

[EmbeddedJanitor]

You have to admit that NASA is losing in the TV rankings war. This is just a scam to boost viewer interest.

Weightless bitch-fighting.... hand me the beer and peanuts! Send 8 of 'em to space and they could make it into a survivor-style reality TV series.

Re:Bad astronaut behavior

[networkBoy]

Being voted off that island would certainly suck!
-nB

mode parent up Re:An idea who's time has come?

[Fubari]

This is *hugely* interesting.
This looks at the economics of how "space garbage collectors" might be managed.

"Planetes" is an outstanding anime - *very* well thought out for the medium-term future of space development. It has a richly envisioned, deeply layered world w/Power struggles (political, corporate), collapse of petroleum economy, widening divide between 1st & 3rd world economies. It is a Very well crafted series; a rich tapestry woven of thought provoking ideas.

The gui "interface" they designed for the space suits is reason enough to watch it. It is Frickin' Cool!

The story line is Exceptionally well done, too.
(Oh yeah, first rate animation is a bonus; nice to see, too.)

Use microwaves to decelerate objects

[KellyDunn]

Microwave emitters can be used to setup standing waves around orbiting objects and induce deceleration. The idea has been tested and was originally proposed to harvest ore from asteroid fields. In this setup ,however, a series of earth transmitters would use phase coherance to modulate the location of a standing wave to within the known location of a piece of junk. By moving the standing wave just a little behind the object the object will decelerate to try to stay within the trough. It would eventually burn up. The beauty of this idea is that transmission power can be very low for each of the transmitters but the cumulative signal at the calculated point is enormous. The stronger the signal at point x, the greater the force that could be applied. The zone of the standing wave would be the wave length of the transmission frequency therefore by using low frequency signals one could move relatively large objects(half meter, ect). There you go humanity, don't say I never gave you anything. And for those that want to say my mumbo jumbo is foobar, the original idea was proposed by nasa....ok, the diaper lady sorta ruined that street cred but....