Chapter 4
Dual-Use Benefits

A PDS system has many potential dual-use capabilities, with or without modification, such as earth and space surveillance, space debris detection and mitigation, ballistic missile defense, and as a space-based offensive weapons system. The overall system is, however, only one of many benefits of a decision to embark on a PDS research, development, and deployment effort.

The technologies required for the PDS would be, in of themselves, major benefits of such a program. Indeed, revolutionary deep-space detection methods, quantum communications, ultra-fast computer processing, large data-storage capabilities, high specific impulse propulsion, high kinetic energy systems, high power-directed energy systems, mass driver/reaction engines, solar sail and collector systems, chemical, biological, and mechanical "eaters," magnetic and force field generation, tractor beams and gravity manipulators, and the ability to manhandle large objects in space and move them into more desirable orbits present significant technical challenges. Once developed, however, these new technologies will, in effect, change our lives, as military and commercial spin-offs and dual-use capabilities from these new technologies will dramatically stimulate the global economy. As deep-space detection allows us to reflect, we may find answers to energy shortages and sources of dwindling critical resources.

It is conceivable that not only would the PDS serve as a defensive system for EMS protection, it also could be used to maneuver selected asteroids into stable earth orbits for various operations. A particularly interesting benefit involves mining asteroids for their rich deposits of metals and other valuable minerals. A thought brings into focus a space mining company making frequent trips into space to mine the asteroid that presented the original global threat. Further, controlled asteroids could be used as space bases or platforms for space stations or space colonies. Indeed, such possibilities would enhance the attractiveness of the PDS effort due to their economic potential.
 

Chapter 5
Recommendations

As we bring our discussion to a close, we issue the recommendations that follow. We also advance the caveat that simply because meteorologists include no data regarding planetary defense in their evening forecast is no reason to disregard or minimize such a significant issue.

Benefits

The Planetary Defense System (PDS) will provide a functional defensive capability against threat objects from space by 2025-a capability that may prevent catastrophic destruction and loss of life and even save the human race from extinction. Obviously, there is no guarantee that an asteroid or comet will pose a threat before, during, or even after this time frame, but, in any case, the global community will be prepared once the PDS is developed and deployed. The previous chapter also listed numerous dual-use benefits for the PDS.

Issues

Although promising signs exist in terms of more frequent workshops, technical discussions, and increased international cooperation, we must address several issues to resolve the planetary defense problem by 2025. First and foremost, does the global community believe that an unacceptable risk to the EMS exists, and, if so, is it committed to developing a solution? Obviously, the concepts presented in this paper require many new technologies that will take much time, talent, and resources to develop. Commitment does not equate to paper studies alone-it must be supported by substantial research and funding for these studies to be followed up with action. In an era of declining budgets, this issue presents a significant dilemma for leaders across the world. It should be remembered, however, that the threat of nuclear war was uncertain and even improbable during the cold war period; yet, the US spent more than $3 trillion over this 50-year time frame to maintain its strength against this uncertainty. These authors suggest that one needs only to consider the potential catastrophic effects from a large (>1 km diameter) ECO impact to conclude that humanity has a moral obligation to protect humanity.

Second, once a PDS becomes functional, especially if nuclear weapons are used, who controls it? Is it the United States, the United Nations or, perhaps, a consortium of world leaders that contributed to its development? These authors contend that the UN should be the controlling authority for the PDS. We acknowledge that such countries as the US, Russia, China, and possibly members of the European Union should carry greater weight and provide primary leadership for an effort of this magnitude. To gain the support of other nations, however, it will likely be necessary to use the UN as the controlling authority.

Third, some alternate future worlds developed during the 2025 study present a bleak outlook for enhanced technical development and resourcing during the next 30 years. Although these worlds are not predictive in nature, they do highlight that, if global conditions do not favor large monetary expenditures and committed focus on technical development, including the US itself, needs and ideas will never result in the required technologies to support a PDS.

Investigative Recommendations

The planetary defense problem is real and deserves serious attention. In this regard, we provide the following recommendations.

It is imperative that the global community unite to discuss, debate, and agree upon a plan to deal with the planetary defense problem. The participation by an increasing number of countries during technical workshops is highly encouraging. However, it must be noted that this is only an initial step in a long-term process. It is recommended that these workshops continue at all costs, since they require commitment and support by all nations.
Recommend that a team of engineers and scientists from the US, Russia, China and the European Union brief Congress on the results of the planetary defense studies, emphasizing the ECO threat, by Spring 1997. Additionally, to garner support from other countries, recommend that this team, led by the deputy undersecretary of defense for space and the deputy director of space policy, present the planetary defense topic at a future combined session of the United Nations, preferably within the same timeframe. Hopefully, such an effort will lead to a cooperative spirit among these nations.
Working closely with other nations, recommend that the US take the lead in developing and executing a program to educate the public about the ECO threat problem. This program is not intended to create anxiety or panic; rather, it seeks to reduce them through increased awareness. As discussed earlier, television documentaries and such computer links as the Internet will serve as the best educational media. Properly developed and presented, these tools would also serve as means of increasing support for further research, resourcing, and, ultimately, the development of a PDS.
We recommend the formal establishment of a global PDS consortium, perhaps at the next ECO workshop or during the proposed UN session, to commit required research and development funds for initial studies and PDS strategy development that will be required for the ultimate production of a three-tier PDS for EMS defense against ECOs. As a sign of good faith, we also recommend that the US immediately restore the $20 million to support Clementine II and sign-on as a primary stockholder for planetary defense.
Recommend that a phased acquisition strategy be adopted and implemented, leading to the ultimate development and deployment of a complete three-tier (consisting of detection, C4I and mitigation subsystems at each tier) PDS by 2025. For the near term, recommend that most of the available resources be used to upgrade detection capabilities worldwide, enabling scientists to more efficiently detect, and classify unknown ECOs.
Historically, humankind has used ingenuity and cunning to develop solutions to life-threatening challenges. Some of these threats have been immediate; others possible but not probable; and still others extremely remote. But, although planetary defense falls into the latter category, one must consider the extreme consequences that would likely result from an ECO impact. The issue is not if, but when an asteroid or comet will suddenly be detected as an EMS threat, causing global chaos and panic and ultimately placing all of humanity at risk. Obviously, our forefathers thought highly enough about our species to invest in capabilities to ensure its survival. The obvious question, then, is: Do today's leaders possess the same conviction towards preserving the human race, and, are they willing to invest in the PDS as a "catastrophic health insurance policy" for planet Earth?
 

Bibliography

"Agreement Governing the Activities of the States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies" 1979. On-line, Internet 1979, available from: gopher://gopher.law.cornell.edu:70/00/foreign/ fletcher/BH766.txt.

Ahrens, T. J. and Harris A. W. "Deflection and Fragmentation of Near Earth Asteroids," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Brown, Sen George E. Jr. The Threat of Large Earth-Orbit Crossing Asteroids: Hearings before the House Sub-Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. 103d Congress, 1st sess., 1993.

Bowell, Edward and Karri Muinonen. "Earth Crossing Asteroids and Comets: Ground-based Search Strategies," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Canavan, Gregory H. "The Cost and Benefit of Near-Earth Object Detection and Interception," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Carusi, A. et al. "Near Earth Objects: Present Search Programs," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Chapman, Clark R. and David Morrison. "Impacts on the Earth by asteroids and comets: Assessing the hazard." Nature. 6 January 1994, 33-40.

Clube, Victor and Bill Napier. Cosmic Winter. Basil Blackwell, 1993.

Cooling, B. F., ed. Air Superiority. Washington, D. C.: Center for Air Force History, 1994.

"C/1996 B2 (Hyakutake)," n.p.,: on-line, Internet, 30 May 1996, available from http://medicine.wustl.edu/%7Ekronkg/1996_B2.html.

Darrah, J. "Near Earth Object Search with Ground-Based Electro-Optical Surveillance System (GEODSS)." A Presentation Prepared for Plenary Session I: Threat Workshop, 22 May 1995.

Director, Test and Evaluation and Technology Requirements and U.S. Naval War College. "High Energy Particle Beam (HEPB) Warhead." Technologies Initiatives Game 95 (Systems Handbook), 18-22 September 1995.

Director, Test and Evaluation and Technology Requirements and U.S. Naval War College. "Anti-Material Biological Agents." Technologies Initiatives Game 95 (Systems Handbook). 18-22 September 1995.

Gehrels, Tom. "Collisions with Comets and Asteroids." Scientific American. March 1996, 57-59.

Gehrels, Tom. "Spacewatch." A Presentation Prepared for Plenary Session I: Threat Workshop. 22 May 1995.

Gehrels, Tom, ed. Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Harris, Alan et al. The Deflection Dilemma: Use vs. Misuse of Technologies for Avoiding Interplanetary Hazards. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Center for Radiophysics and Space Research, 3 Feb 94.

Hartmann, W. K. and A. Sokolov. "Evaluating Space Resources," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Hecht, Jeff. "Asteroid 'airburst' may have devastated New Zealand." New Scientist. 5 October 1991, 19.

Hellstern, LCDR Mark J. et al. "Spacelift - Integration of Aerospace Core Competencies." A 2025 White Paper. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College, 1996.

Hyde, Roderick et al. "Cosmic Bombardment III: Ways and Means of Effectively Intercepting the Bomblets." A Presentation Prepared for the NASA International NEO Workshop, 14 Jan 1992.

"ISO, unique explorer of the invisible cool universe," ESA Presse, no. 21-95, 07 October 1995. On-line, Internet, available from http://isowww.estec.esa.nl/activities/info/info2195e.html.

Kobres, Bob. "Meteor Defense." Whole Earth Review. Fall 1987, 70-73.

Lewis, John S. Rain of Iron and Ice. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1996.

Johnson, L. et al. "Preparing for Planetary Defense." A Spacecast 2020 White Paper. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College, 1995.

Melosh, H. J., I. V. Nemchinov and Yu. I. Zetzer, "Non-Nuclear Asteroid Diversion," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

"Meteorite House Call." Sky & Telescope. August 1993, 13.

Morrison, David et al. "The Impact Hazard," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Nadis, Steve. "Asteroid Hazards Stir Up Defense Debate." Nature 375. 18 May 1995, 174.

NASA Ames Space Science Division. The Spaceguard Survey: Hazard of Cosmic Impacts. 1996.

Powell, C. "Asteroid Hunters." Scientific American. April 1993, 34-40.

Proceedings of the 1993 Space Surveillance Workshop. Lexington, Mass.; R. W. Miller and R. Lincoln Laboratory, 1993.

Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop. Edited by G. H. Canavan,. J. C. Solem, and J. D. G. Rather, Los Alamos, N. Mex,: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1992.

"Satellites Detect Record Meteor." Sky & Telescope. June 1994, 11.

Shafer, B.P. et al. "The Coupling of Energy to Asteroids and Comets," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Sikes, L. R. and D. M. Davis. "The Yields of Soviet Strategic Weapons." Scientific American. January 1987, 29-37.

Simonenko, V.A. et al. "Defending the Earth Against Impacts from Large Comets and Asteroids," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Solem, Johndale C. and Charles M. Snell. "Terminal Intercept for Less Than One Orbital Period Warning," in Tom Gehrels, ed., Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids. Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994.

The Spaceguard Survey: Report of the NASA International Near-Earth-Object Detection Workshop. Edited by David Morrison. Pasadena: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 1992.

Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, In Outer Space and Under Water (1963). On-line Internet, date, available on: gopher://gopher.law.cornell.edu:70/00/foreign/ fletcher/BH454.txt.

Treaty On Principles Governing The Activities Of States In The Exploration And Use Of Outer Space, Including The Moon And Other Celestial Bodies (1967), in Arms Control and Disarmament Agreements. Washington, D.C.: United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1982.

2025 Concept, No. 200013. "Quantum Effect Communications." 2025 Concepts Database. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996.

2025 Concept, No. 200045. "Defending the High Ground of the Earth-Moon System." 2025 Concepts Database. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996.

2025 Concept, No. 900393 "Chemical Morphing Weapon." 2025 Concepts Database. (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996.

2025 Concept, No. 900394 "Gravity Manipulation." 2025 Concepts Database. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996.

2025 Concept, No. 900412 "Change Detection." 2025 Concepts Database. Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996.

Tyson, Peter. "Comet Busters." Planetary Defense Workshop: An International Technical Meeting on Active Defense of the Terrestrial Biosphere from Impacts by Large Asteroids and Comets. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 22-26 May 95.

United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. International Conference on Near-Earth-Objects. United States, 1995.

USAF Scientific Advisory Board. New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century, Summary Volume. Washington, D.C.: USAF Scientific Advisory Board, 15 December 1995.

USAF Scientific Advisory Board. New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century. Unpublished drafts, the Directed Energy Volume, the Recommended Actions Executive Summary Volume, the Space Applications Volume, and the Space Technologies Volume. 15 December 1995.

Whipple, A. and P. Shelus. "Long-Term Dynamical Evolution to the Minor Planet (4179) Toutatis." Icarus 408. 1993, 105.

Wood, Lowell L. et al. "Cosmic Bombardment IV: Averting Catastrophe In the Here-And-Now." A Presentation to Problems of Earth Protection Against the Impact With NEOs, 26-30 September 1994.
 
 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Notes

1. Much information was gathered from reports from recent conferences and workshops conducted to increase awareness and incite action in developing a cooperative solution within the global community, including: The Spaceguard Survey: Report of the NASA International Near-Earth-Object Detection Workshop, ed. David Morrison, (Pasadena, Calif.: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 1992); Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, eds. G. H. Canavan,. J. C. Solem, and J. D. G. Rather (Los Alamos, N.Mex..: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1992); Problems of Earth Protection Against the Impact with Near-Earth-Objects (Livermore, Calif.: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1994).

2. Peter Tyson, "Comet Busters," Planetary Defense Workshop: An International Technical Meeting on Active Defense of the Terrestrial Biosphere from Impacts by Large Asteroids and Comets, (Livermore, Calif.: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 22-26 May 1995).

3. Tom Gehrels, "Collisions with Comets and Asteroids," Scientific American, (March 1996), 57.

4. "C/1996 B2 (Hyakutake)," n.p.,: on-line, Internet, 30 May 1996, available from http://medicine.wustl.edu/%7Ekronkg/1996_B2.html.

5. Bob Kobres, "Meteor Defense," Whole Earth Review (Fall 1987): 70-73.

6. Victor Clube and Bill Napier, Cosmic Winter (Basil Blackwell, June 1993), 1-15.

7. The NASA Ames Space Science Division, The Spaceguard Survey, Hazard of Cosmic Impacts (1996), 2.1.

8. Steve Nadis, "Asteroid Hazards Stir Up Defense Debate," Nature 375 (18 May 1995): 174.

9. "Meteorite House Call," Sky & Telescope August 1993, 13.

10. John S. Lewis, Rain of Iron and Ice (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1996), 176-82.

11. A. Whipple and P. Shelus, "Long-Term Dynamical Evolution to the Minor Planet (4179) Toutatis," Icarus 408 1993, 105.

12. C. Powell, "Asteroid Hunters," Scientific American, April 1993, 34-40.

13. "Satellites Detect Record Meteor," Sky & Telescope, June 1994, 11.

14. Clark R. Chapman and David Morrison, "Impacts on the Earth by asteroids and comets: assessing the hazard," Nature 367 (6 January 1994): 35.

15. Lewis, 176-82.

16. Jeff Hecht, "Asteroid 'airburst' may have devastated New Zealand," New Scientist, 5 October 1991, 19.

17. The Spaceguard Survey: Report of the NASA International Near-Earth-Object Detection Workshop, ed. David Morrison (Pasadena, Calif.: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 1992), 8.

18. The NASA Ames Space Science Division, 2.4.

19. Lewis, 83.

20. Gregory H. Canavan, "The Cost and Benefit of Near-Earth Object Detection and Interception" in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994),1157-88.

21. Chapman & Morrison, 39.

22. Gregory H. Canavan, 1157-88.

23. Ibid.

24. The NASA Ames Space Science Division, 8.1 and 9.3.

25. Ronald R. Fogleman and Sheila E. Widnall, memorandum to Dr McCall, New World Vistas, 15 December 1995, attach 1.

26. USAF Scientific Advisory Board, New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century (unpublished draft, the recommended actions executive summary volume, 15 December 1995), 63.

27. W. K. Hartmann and A. Sokolov, "Evaluating Space Resources," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: The University of Arizona Press, 1994), 1216.

28. Ibid.

29. This section was contributed by Ms Iole De Angelis, a graduate student at the International Space University, Strasbourg, France. Her participation in the 2025 Project came at the request of Air University to provide expertise in the areas of space treaties and international law. In addition, her insights lend an international flavor to a truly global problem.

30. "Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies," Arms Control and Disarmament Agreements (Washington D. C.: United States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 1982), 48-50.

31. Ibid., 52.

32. "Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies," 1979, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 30 May 1996, available from gopher://gopher.law.cornell.edu:70/00/foreign/fletcher.

33. "Treaty on Principles.

34. "Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space and Under Water," 1963, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 30 May 1996, available from gopher://gopher.law.cornell.edu:70/00/foreign/fletcher.BH454.txt.

35. This section was contributed by Ms Iole De Angelis.

36. Meteor, dir. by Ronald Neame, prod. by Arnold Orgoline and Theodore Pareign (Hollywood: Orion Studios, 1979). The motion picture depicts a nuclear weapon system used to mitigate an ECO predicted to impact Earth.

37. The juste retour policy forces the governmental and private interests into cooperation: from a given amount of money one government puts in the common project, private enterprises of its country receive comparable amounts to build the components. For example, there is a project that costs $100; country "A" finances for $50; country "B" for $30; and country "C" for $20. So the enterprises of country "A" will receive contracts for $50, the enterprises of country "B" will receive contracts for $30, and the enterprises of country "C" will receive contracts for $20.

38. This section was contributed by Ms Iole De Angelis.

39. "ISO, unique explorer of the invisible cool universe," ESA Presse, no. 21-95, 07 October 1995, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 30 May 1996, available from http://isowww.estec.esa.nl/activities/info/info2195e.html.

40. "Alternate Futures," 2025: CSAF Directed Study on Air and Space Power, Draft 2, 11 March 96, 36.

41. Ibid., 37.

42. Ibid., 55.

43. Ibid., 57.

44. Ibid., 67.

45. Ibid., 68.

46. Ibid., 83.

47. Ibid., 84.

48. Ibid., 99.

49. Ibid., 101.

50. Ibid., 111.

51. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, eds. G. H. Canavan,. J. C. Solem, and J. D. G. Rather, (Los Alamos, New Mex.: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1992), 117.

52. Ibid., 120.

53. Alan Harris et al., The Deflection Dilemma: Use vs. Misuse of Technologies for Avoiding Interplanetary Hazards (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Center for Radiophysics and Space Research, 3 Feb 1994).

54. Planetary Defense System (PDS) Mission Statement based on consensus by the 2025 Planetary Defense team (Team B).

55. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, eds. G. H. Canavan, J. C. Solem, and J. D. G. Rather (Los Alamos, N. Mex.: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1992), 85. We have modified the table.

56. Proceedings of the 1993 Space Surveillance Workshop 30 March-1 April 1993, eds. R. W. Miller and R. Sridharan (Lexington, Mass.: Lincoln Laboratory, 1993), 213.

57. John S. Lewis, Rain of Iron and Ice (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1996), 76.

58. Ibid., 79.

59. Tom Gehrels, "Spacewatch," A Presentation Prepared for Plenary Session I: Threat Workshop (Livermore, Calif.: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 22 May 1995).

60. Tom Gehrels, "Collisions with Comets and Asteroids," Scientific American (March 1996), 59.

61. A. Carusi et al. "Near-Earth Objects: Present Search Programs," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 129-35.

62. The NASA Ames Space Science Division, The Spaceguard Survey: Hazard of Cosmic Impacts (Moffett Field, Calif.: San Juan Capistrano Research Institute, 1996), 93.

63. Edward Bowell and Karri Muinonen, "Earth-Crossing Asteroids and Comets: Groundbased Search Strategies," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 185.

64. The NASA Ames Space Science Division, 8.1.

65. Ibid., 5.1.

66. Ibid., 5.3.

67. Lewis, Rain of Iron and Ice, 212.

68. J. H. Darrah, "Near Earth Object Search with Ground Based Electro-Optical Space Surveillance System (GEODSS)," A Presentation Prepared for Plenary Session I: Threat Workshop (Livermore, Calif.: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 22 May 1995).

69. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, eds. G. H. Canavan, J. C. Solem, and J. D. G. Rather (Los Alamos, N. Mex.: Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1992), 18.

70. 2025 Concept, No. 900412, "Change Detection," 2025 Concepts Database (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996).

71. USAF Scientific Advisory Board, New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century, summary volume (Washington, D.C.: USAF Scientific Advisory Board, 15 December 1995), 20.

72. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 238.

73. Air Superiority, B. F. Cooling, ed. (Washington, D.C.: Center for Air Force History, 1994), 115-78.

74. 2025 Concept, No. 200013, "Quantum Effect Communications," 2025 Concepts Database (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996).

75. Ibid.

76. A. F. Cheng et al, "Missions to Near Earth Objects," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 651-69.

77. Anonymous, Clementine II WWW Page, n.p.; on-line, Internet, 30 May 1996, available from http://trex.atsc.allied.com.

78. A.F. Cheng et al., 668.

79. A.F. Cheng et al.; S. Nozette et al., "DoD Technologies and Missions of Relevance to Asteroid and Comet Exploration" and T. D. Jones et al., "Human Exploration of Near Earth Asteroids" from Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 651-710.

80. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234; H. J. Melosh, I.V. Nemchinov and Yu. I. Zetzer, "Non-Nuclear Asteroid Diversion," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 1111-31.

81. LCDR Mark J. Hellstern et al., "Spacelift - Integration of Aerospace Core Competencies," A 2025 White Paper (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College, 1996), 17-36; Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 229-232.

82. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234.

83. T. J. Ahrens and Alan W. Harris, "Deflection and Fragmentation of Near Earth Asteroids," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 922-23.

84. V.A. Simonenko et al., "Defending the Earth Against Impacts from Large Comets and Asteroids," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 949.

85. Roderick Hyde et al., "Cosmic Bombardment III: Ways and Means of Effectively Intercepting the Bomblets," A Presentation Prepared for the NASA NEO Workshop, 14 January 1992.

86. Lowell L. Wood et al., "Cosmic Bombardment IV: Averting Catastrophe In the Here-And-Now," A Presentation to Problems of Earth Protection Against the Impact With NEOs, 26-30 September 1994; B.P. Shafer et al., "The Coupling of Energy to Asteroids and Comets," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 955-1012; and Johndale C. Solem and Charles M. Snell, "Terminal Intercept for Less Than One Orbital Period Warning," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 1013-33.

87. L. R. Sikes and D. M. Davis, "The Yields of Soviet Strategic Weapons," Scientific American (1987): 29-37.

88. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234. The figure reflected in the reference is actually $0, however, we felt modifications to existing systems would be necessary at a cost of at least $1B.

89. Director, Test and Evaluation and Technology Requirements and US Naval War College, "High Energy Particle Beam (HEPB) Warhead," Technologies Initiatives Game 95 (Systems Handbook), 59-61.

90. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234.

91. Melosh, Nemchinov and Zetzer, 1116.

92. Solem and Snell, 1030-32.

93. Ahrens and Harris, 904.

94. Hyde et al.

95. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 235.

96. New World Vistas, (unpublished draft, the space applications volume), 113.

97. Melosh, Nemchinov and Zetzer, 1130.

98. Shafer et al., 965.

99. New World Vistas, (unpublished draft, the space applications volume), 81.

100. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234-35; New World Vistas, (unpublished draft, the directed energy volume), 24. USAF Scientific Advisory Board estimates laser energy costs at $1-$2 per joule up to the megajoule range.

101. New World Vistas, (unpublished draft, the directed energy volume), 59.

102. Ibid.

103. Melosh, Nemchinov and Zetzer, 1129-30.

104. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234. The directed energy cost was doubled to account for the large phased array required.

105. Melosh, Nemchinov and Zetzer, 1117-18.

106. Ibid., 1119.

107. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234.

108. Melosh, Nemchinov and Zetzer, 1120.

109. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234.

110. Melosh, Nemchinov and Zetzer, 1125.

111. Ibid., 1126.

112. Proceedings of the Near-Earth-Object Interception Workshop, 234. This figure was obtained by averaging the cost of solar sails and the cost for directed energy systems.

113. Director, Test and Evaluation and Technology Requirements and U.S. Naval War College. "Anti-Material Biological Agents," Technologies Initiatives Game 95 (Systems Handbook), 148-51.

114. 2025 Concept, No. 900393, "Chemical Morphing Weapon," 2025 Concepts Database (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996).

115. Preparing for Planetary Defense, Spacecast 2020 White Paper, R-29.

116. D. Morrison, C. R. Chapman, and Paul Slovic, "The Impact Hazard," in Hazards Due to Comets and Asteroids, ed. by Tom Gehrels (Tucson, Ariz.: University of Arizona Press, 1994), 64.

117. 2025 Concept, No. 900394, "Gravity Manipulation," 2025 Concepts Database (Maxwell AFB, Ala.: Air War College/2025, 1996).