Comments on: Launch indemnification extension goes down to the wire http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/12/30/launch-indemnification-extension-goes-down-to-the-wire/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=launch-indemnification-extension-goes-down-to-the-wire Because sometimes the most important orbit is the Beltway... Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:35:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38 By: Ben Brockert http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/12/30/launch-indemnification-extension-goes-down-to-the-wire/#comment-392418 Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:08:09 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6112#comment-392418 AM Swallow, they already have a proper insurance system, they’re required to have insurance up to a specific (and quite high) level. Replacing the current commercial launch indemnification with another insurance program is a step in the wrong direction. If indemnification isn’t reinstated, the companies will continue being able to launch, but will pay more for bigger commercial insurance policies.

The point of indemnification is to help make American space launchers competitive with international launchers. As the GAO found, “the United States provides less commercial space launch indemnification for third party losses than China, France, and Russia”, i.e. almost the entire remainder of worldwide commercial launchers. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-899

The objective here is not to internalize an externality, it’s to subsidize a domestic industry against similarly subsidized international competitors.

]]> By: A M Swallow http://www.spacepolitics.com/2012/12/30/launch-indemnification-extension-goes-down-to-the-wire/#comment-390688 Sun, 30 Dec 2012 17:22:44 +0000 http://www.spacepolitics.com/?p=6112#comment-390688 Replace this by a proper insurance system. The launch company pays a premium to the Federal Government and is given protection for 2 years. Once the new law is passed the only things that need adjusting are the starting level and the price.

]]>