We are running short of space in space. It is becoming increasingly crowded up there: old rocket boosters and dead satellites jostle with the growing number of surveillance, weather and telecoms satellites and spacecraft. The problem is that countries that send objects into space are not bringing them back down. This means that expensive satellites risk being damaged by orbiting debris.

Recently a defunct Russian military orbiter and a live American commercial satellite collided, and the crew of the International Space Station were forced to take refuge in their escape ship as space junk skimmed by.

Even tiny fragments pose a risk to satellites and spacecraft. Because objects in orbit are moving on different paths, at different inclinations and at speeds of 17,500mph [about 28,000kmh] and faster, it has been estimated that something as small as a grain of sand would strike with the power of a bowling ball hurtling at 100mph.

Some complex solutions have been put forward for clearing up the mess, including creating lassos to drag debris closer to Earth, where friction would cause them to burn up. However, there are simpler solutions, according to Lawrence Wein, Professor of Management Science at Stanford Graduate School of Business, and Andrew Bradley, a doctoral student at Stanford’s Institute for Computational and Mathematical Engineering.

They say that rather than designing new technologies, it would be better to urge countries to comply with Nasa guidelines that require that objects be removed from orbit within 25 years of launch.

“Spacecraft are supposed to have enough ‘gas’ in their tanks to propel them downward toward the atmosphere [to burn up] when their lifecycle is concluded,” Professor Wein said. “But international compliance, while perhaps greater than 50 per cent, is not extremely high.

“It appears that if full compliance of the 25-year spacecraft deorbiting guidelines can be achieved within the next few decades and no Asats [antisatellite weapons] are used or tested in the future, then the lifetime risk from space debris . . . may be sustainable at a tolerable level.”

That level would be a one in a thousand chance that a live satellite would be damaged by debris, they say. They also suggest setting fees for every launch and penalties for those who litter in space.

“The political and economic issues associated with the establishment of such fees are fairly daunting,” Professor Wein said, “but if we could get high compliance this problem could stay under control.”

The fees would be used to compensate for spacecraft destroyed in future collisions, and partially fund research and development into space debris mitigation technologies.

“Compared to the length of time man has been contributing to ocean pollution, space is just beginning to suffer from man’s encroachment,” Professor Wein writes on the March edition of the Stanford GSB News website. “Taking action now will protect communication satellites today as well as protect a resource.”

Times Recommends

• Lies and cover-up at MG Rover exposed by report
• High oil prices push manufacturing costs up
• Primark founder steps down as chief executive