Who is responsible the UN, NASA, the DOD, or the EPA?

Isn’t there some guy who posts here all the time grumbling about the need for a Space Guard?

A better argument would be who would fund, staff, and control the Space guard the USA, a coalition, or the UN?

Surprised no one brought up a Space Guard.

“Most people, if told that something was coming to kill them in ten years’ time, would not be willing to seriously inconvenience themselves immediately to avert it.”

Since this is a theoretical discussion, I’ll concede that, since there are many people that are prone to procrastination.

However I think there are enough people that are not procrastinators that it won’t be a problem. But we won’t know until the problem presents itself, however I know which group I’ll be in…

“But that is the time scale needed to effectively deal with small asteroids.”

Today maybe, since we haven’t had to focus on the problem. But with greater advance warning, and more experience, we may have far more time than that.

My, aren’t we cynical. Impending death has a way of clarifying things – it won’t be a problem.

For some values of “impending”. And therein lies the problem. Most people, if told that something was coming to kill them in ten years’ time, would not be willing to seriously inconvenience themselves immediately to avert it. But that is the time scale needed to effectively deal with small asteroids.

“There is a lunatic fringe to the environmental movement that regards humanity as a disease which should be eliminated.”

Yes, and I’m sure there are quite a few religious conservatives that will see impending doom as a quick way to heaven.

But the 99% of the people in the world that would prefer to continue their existence here on Earth will be cheering on the use of any and all means to avert disaster.

“And I would be willing to bet that there will be lawsuits filed against the implementation of any particular means, because NIMBY, or because it discriminates against group XYZ, or . . . whatever.”

My, aren’t we cynical. Impending death has a way of clarifying things – it won’t be a problem.

The moment a planet-killer asteroid is determined to be on track to hit us, everyone on Earth is going to be cheering on the use of any and all means to avert disaster.

Well, not quite. There is a lunatic fringe to the environmental movement that regards humanity as a disease which should be eliminated. And I would be willing to bet that there will be lawsuits filed against the implementation of any particular means, because NIMBY, or because it discriminates against group XYZ, or . . . whatever.

There are likely to be significant political and diplomatic problems in deciding where to put these ground stations. The local politicians will see them as pork. The technicians to run them may come from abroad but their guards and cleaners can be recruited locally.

High explosives and solid shells are suitable for most meteors, comets and end-of-life satellites.

The expense is close to zero, as those capabilities are already in place for handling other natural disasters.

The problem since I started to cover this in 1997 has been getting the necessary warning times, and if you get an early enough warning time, then other options open besides simply cleaning up afterwards.