Scientists are calling for a legally-binding treaty to protect Earth’s orbit from irreparable harm caused by the expansion of the global space industry. With an expected increase of satellites in orbit from 9,000 to over 60,000 by 2030 and fears that large parts of Earth’s orbit will become unusable, experts in satellite technology and ocean plastic pollution stress the urgent need for global consensus on how to govern Earth’s orbit.
In the week that nearly 200 countries agreed to a treaty to protect the High Seas after a 20-year process, the experts believe society needs to take the lessons learned from one part of our planet to another. They acknowledge that a number of industries and countries are starting to focus on satellite sustainability, but say this should be enforced to include any nation with plans to use Earth’s orbit.
Dr. Imogen Napper, Research Fellow at the University of Plymouth. Credit: Eleanor Burfitt/University of Plymouth Heather Koldewey, ZSL’s Senior Marine Technical Advisor, said: “To tackle planetary problems, we need to bring together scientists from across disciplines to identify and accelerate solutions. As a marine biologist I never imagined writing a paper on space, but through this collaborative research identified so many parallels with the challenges of tackling environmental issues in the ocean. We just need to get better at the uptake of science into management and policy.
Source: Education Headlines (educationheadlines.net)
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Planet Uranus: Facts About Its Name, Moons and OrbitUranus is more than just a silly name. It was actually the first planet to be discovered with a telescope ⬇️ Before the telescope the known universe was limited to see things with the naked eye. Serious question. Is it pronounced starting with Urine or ending in Anus? Why a silly name 🤣🤣🤣 is everybody as broken as me 🤣
Source: SPACEdotcom - 🏆 92. / 67 Read more »
Source: WSJ - 🏆 98. / 63 Read more »
Source: Jezebel - 🏆 153. / 63 Read more »
Source: NPR - 🏆 96. / 63 Read more »
Source: IntEngineering - 🏆 287. / 63 Read more »
Source: IntEngineering - 🏆 287. / 63 Read more »