A New Roadmap for Space

Martin GILES: Welcome to The Interconnect, a new podcast series from the Council on Foreign Relations and the Stanford Emerging Technology Review. Each episode brings together experts from critical fields of emerging technology to explore recent groundbreaking developments, what's coming over the horizon, and how the implications for American innovation leadership interconnect with the fast-changing geopolitical environment. I'm Martin Giles, the managing editor of the Stanford Emerging Technology Review, and in this episode we'll be talking about space. 

Esther BRIMMER: So its a digital replica of our planet that integrates vasts amounts of data to provide an accurate interactive model that can be used for various purposes

Simone D’AMICO: It's again a change in thinking about the national security approach, a change in thinking about the economic approach. There are so many different changes happening as we examine human activity in space.

GILES: Joining me on the show is Simone D'Amico, an associate professor of aeronautics and astronautics at Stanford University and a science fellow at the Hoover Institution, and Esther Brimmer, the James H. Binger senior fellow in global governance at the Council on Foreign Relations and the project director of its task force report on space management policy. Thank you both for being with us today.

GILES: Okay, so space is being transformed by the seismic shift from the dominance of government-owned systems to a so-called new space economy driven by commercial companies whose innovative technologies are making it ever easier and cheaper to access space. And this is opening up exciting new opportunities for mankind, but together with increased military activity in orbit, it's also raising pressing questions about how we ensure the responsible use of space today and for generations to come. And we'll be addressing all of these issues in today's discussion. Simone, you are deeply involved in space research through your work at Stanford. What are some of the most exciting developments you are seeing in the domain today?

D'AMICO: Thank you for having me, Martin, and thanks for this initial question. I'd like to start with one sentence that encapsulates in a nutshell what's happening in space, technology, and the space research and development. Space is becoming an extension of terrestrial robotics. So what do I mean? So space is not special anymore like it was in the early days. Space is becoming commonplace. We rely on space technology in our daily life and I see three key trends in space technology that are basically creating a revolution in space exploration. First of all, the decrease of costs of launch technology. Second, the miniaturization of satellites combined with the improved access to space, thanks to reduced costs, lead to distribution proliferation of these space assets. In combination with the progress in autonomous artificial intelligence, this becomes a cocktail for huge opportunities. So for example, regarding launch costs, the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket reduced cost per kilogram to reach orbit to about three-thousand dollars compared with the thirty-thousand dollars away a few decades ago.

GILES: Wow. So that's a ten x reduction. Wow.

D'AMICO: Yeah, so space is more accessible than ever. And if we talk about Starship, so the largest rocket ever built by humankind, we have a hundred and fifty metric tons payload, we're talking about a reduction of that launch cost by ten times and longer term by about a hundred times. So this is what I mean when space is becoming the new terrestrial robotics. There is a democratization of space that is connected with this reduction of launch costs, but then this becomes, so to say, a chain reaction when you consider the progress in satellite and miniaturization. So we have reached a point where the capability of several tons of satellites, a minivan spacecraft, are now condensed within a mini satellite, a small satellite weighing a few hundred kilos. The number of small satellites that have been launched annually has skyrocketed. Now, there is a number that is really astonishing. So in the first fifty years of the space era, we have launched a few thousand satellites, but that's the number of satellites we expect to launch per year going into the 2020s, the 2030s and so forth. We're talking about two-thousand satellites per year as a plan. Think of SpaceX’s Starlink that aims to deploy forty-thousand satellites. OneWeb plans to deploy around seven-thousand satellites. There are three hundred constellations and mega constellations planned by 2040. So this is to give you an idea of what's happening in terms of proliferation. 

GILES: Right.

D’AMICO: And finally, autonomy and artificial intelligence. We are getting to a point where we can rely as little as possible from human operators on the ground and in those satellites with autonomous reasoning and decision making capabilities to collaborate with other satellites in distributed space systems to unlock potential that was not available before.

GILES: Got it. And so we've got rapidly declining launch costs, we've got miniaturization and proliferation of small satellites, and we've got increasing autonomy of operation. I mean Esther, those are three really powerful trends. How do you see what's playing out in space today and are there other trends that we should be thinking about and how do you think about those three that Simone mentioned?

BRIMMER: Well, first, as Simone has just indicated, there has been a dramatic expansion in human activity in space. Just in one year, 2019 to 2020, you had the number of objects launched into space doubled. It quadrupled between 2019 and 2023. 

BRIMMER: The other thing I'd like to note, when we think about the reduction in costs for access to space is the remarkable democratization of space. It now means that people around the globe are able to have access to crucial information. We think about navigation, we think about weather, but that's important both to big companies and small farmers who are maybe almost subsistence farmers, but now have access to information based on our assets in space. That's remarkable. In addition, you have over 90, that's nine zero, countries that have some form of asset in space. It's not just the big superpowers, now countries around the world are using technology to actually bring wellbeing to people. And again, that's an important part how we as human beings are benefiting from space as a whole. There are many different estimates about what the space economy might look at. One of the more forward leaning ones comes from the World Economic Forum, which in 2024 projected that the global space economy could be worth 1.8 trillion with a T in 2035 up from about six-hundred thirty billion in 2023, almost twice the rate of global GDP growth. Now that's just one estimate, but it gives a sense of just the extraordinary expansion in the space economy. We even have expansion in scientific exploration as well. We have now not one, but two space stations and we think both about the International Space Station and the Tiangong Space Station built by China. So these are remarkable developments. I'd like to take a moment and also say that this is an extension of human exploration driven by technology. So if we think of the past thousand years, what did we see? First, ocean going travel of various forms in various places, but being able to cross the oceans because you now were able to have the technology to do that. In the past century, we see air travel, the creation, the short time from the creation of the first aircraft and the Wright brothers to actually having commercialization. And now we see the expansion of space. In a sense, we're seeing the next step in human exploration and movement through technology.

GILES: And so some of the benefits that this brought us, I'm thinking of GPS navigation. We are so reliant on that today. That's only possible because of all of the trends that we've been talking about, accessing information from space. I'm thinking about maybe other areas like monitoring the Earth. Simone, I've heard you talk about using emerging space capabilities to construct the digital twin of the Earth. What did you mean by that?

D'AMICO: So, a number of space agencies, especially the European Space Agency and NASA, are paving the way for a digital twin of the Earth. So a digital twin of the Earth is a highly detailed virtual model of the planet that mirrors its physical, its environmental processes, in real time or in near real time. So it's a digital replica of our planet that integrates vast amounts of data from satellite, chiefly, but from ground sensors as well, and many other sources, combined with artificial intelligence models into one product which can be digested by an artificial intelligence model, that we can ask questions about or can give us warnings, can give us predictions about what's going on. 

GILES: Got it.

D’AMICO: So basically the goal is to provide an accurate interactive model that can be used for various purposes such as climate change monitoring, urban planning, disaster response, environmental management and defense purposes.

GILES: That's terrific. And let's do just a little bit more future gazing if we can and look at some of the opportunities we need to be thinking about for the future. Digital twin, clearly a very big one, but Simone what else is going on here, I know you do work with some startups.

D’AMICO: I advise space startups and one of those space startups is trying to enable space-based solar power. So this is a technology that we must have on our radar that provides the potential to collect solar and energy in space, so where the sun shines nearly continuously and transmitted wireless to Earth or reflected to Earth through mirrors. So this could provide a virtually limitless clean energy source that is not subject to weather or the time of the day. So this is to say that tackling the space flight sustainability paradox, it's so much about policy as technology.

GILES: And speaking about clean energy, I also know there’s been chatter about mining on asteroids, how wild is that.. Ester what do you think about all this?

BRIMMER: Well, it's very interesting. I think we actually have two different issues happening at the same time, and one of the questions will be what will end up being most viable? We have those who are looking at the opportunities for mining asteroids, and indeed the legislation signed by President Obama in 2015 does provide for companies to then own what they mine from an asteroid. That is not the case for a place like the moon, which is all shared and common under the Outer Space Treaty. But I think we also have to look at how we go to space. And so one of the important things, again as someone interested in international affairs and diplomacy, one of the important aspects is the greater degree to which countries are working together to take advantage of the space economy and take advantage of other assets. So something like the Artemis Accords, which includes some of the principles that we would need for better space management, we now see coalitions of countries saying they want to work together and go to space together. Even the United States, which is proud of its long tradition space, is working with other countries and has built out the Artemis Accords, a rare example of bipartisan cooperation first started by President Trump in 2020 with eight countries expanded to fifty-two countries by the end of 2024 by President Biden. And the idea here is that countries can benefit from cooperating in space, and I think that diplomatic measures also has benefits on Earth.

GILES: So that's interesting. And actually that segways to something I wanted to ask Simone about. I've heard you talk about the space sustainability paradox and how we are going to need more cooperation and collaboration around that. Can you talk about that, Simone? What exactly is it?

D'AMICO: Yes. So I've been studying the spaceflight sustainability/safety paradox in the last couple of years, which basically reflects the tension between two dimensions. So we can see spaceflight and the space technology as a part of the solution. It's one side of the coin when it comes to improving our lives on Earth and ensure sustainability on the long-term and the survival of the human species. And on the other side of the coin, we can see spaceflight as part of the problem because due to uncontrolled proliferation of space assets, we might reach a point where a portion of space, if not all near space, becomes not usable for generations to come. So a NASA scientist called Kessler postulated Kessler syndrome predicting that when the density of the space object population reaches a certain threshold, a collision between space assets will cause thousands of pieces of debris that then will cause in a chain reaction and exponential growth of the space debris all the way to a rendering completely unusable orbital shells.

GILES: So it's like a domino effect in space collision then causes all this debris which causes other collisions and shuts off space for generations to come. How likely is that? Is that way out there or is this something we really should be concerned about now?

D'AMICO: Well, I think we should be concerned immediately about this topic. If you look at data from, for example, the Starlink SpaceX constellation, they conduct tens of thousands of collision avoidance maneuvers every few months. So this is to give you an idea of the relevance of the topic.

GILES: Tens of thousands. Wow.

D'AMICO: And this is normal operations and part of my research is really to tackle the spaceflight sustainability/safety paradox, not only through technology, but also by informing policy through spaceflight technology.

GILES: Could you briefly talk about the technology with the experiments that you are working on? And then I'd like to ask Esther about her views of the sustainability paradox. But what exactly is the technology? I heard something about computer vision and AI. What are you doing up there in space?

D'AMICO: Well, in my lab, the Space Rendezvous Laboratory at Stanford and the Center for Aerospace Autonomous Research or CAESAR at Stanford, I am the director of both, we conduct research in, say, three main directions to tackle this problem. First of all, we develop controlled decision-making algorithms and in general autonomy stacks boosted by artificial intelligence models to enable on-orbit servicing. On-orbit servicing is the capability of one or multiple vehicles or satellites to safely and efficiently service other space assets, including inspection, characterization, orbital lifetime prolongation, repair, debris removal, et cetera. So second, my lab is developing sensing, identification and tracking algorithms and in general approaches to endow vehicles with self-awareness, awareness of the surroundings and collision-avoidance capabilities. And finally, we develop new mission concepts employing multiple coordinated satellites to realize scientific instruments of unprecedented capability. I have a swarm in orbit. So this is the NASA Starlink mission.

GILES: A swarm means multiple satellites?

D'AMICO: Yeah, it employs four small sats enabled by our algorithms. It's currently operational and in orbit where we are demonstrating for the first time an autonomous vision-based navigation system across distributed space systems.

GILES: And on that note, Esther, you've led a task force at CFR that's just published a big report on space management. What kind of policy issues do you see here and what recommendations do you have for a new administration and new congress?

BRIMMER: So first, Simone, thank you for that description of the types of research you're doing. I think what's fascinating is that we are working on different sides of the same problem and trying to say we need to have both the right policies in place that then support the innovative research that you're doing because you're creating the answers and we have to create the political framework in which those answers can be adopted and succeed. So a couple of different things. The first is to say that one of the things that we think are important is to be able to create a diplomatic framework where everybody is contributing. So first, everyone is actually registering with the United Nations office and Outer Space Affairs when they have a launch, that's what you're supposed to do. We think that everybody that is a spacefaring country, whether they are a launch country or participate in another way, signed the Outer Space Treaty, which actually has the basic rules of the road. And there are actually four major treaties that basically lay out some of the best practices. We also see that one of the challenges is how do we incorporate the voice of the private sector in governance? Governance traditionally is managed by governments, which have particular responsibilities. It is governments that then license their companies to launch. It is governments that participate with the International Telecommunications Union, one of our oldest international organizations, that participate in the allocation of frequencies. And so there are government structures and what we say in our report is that we actually need to expand the support of these institutions for the new environment so that there are ways of exchanging good ideas.

D'AMICO: Yeah, this resonates very much with me and I want to stress the importance for government to work to international bodies, such as the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs you mentioned, to create binding agreements to secure the sustainability of space. I advocate for the creation of a circular space economy, or at least the fostering of a circular space economy. So by which I mean one where the satellites are specifically designed for reuse, repurposing, repair, efficient end of life, the orbit. So one can conceive a system of incentives and penalties. I don't know if it's a space tax similar to a carbon tax, but this is obviously subject to debate, but could be based on an estimated orbital environmental impact of a space mission. Obviously we have to reach the trade-off, the sweet spot between safety and freedom when it comes to freedom of enterprise.

BRIMMER: That is so interesting because indeed one of the things we do in our report is say, "Are there lessons that we can borrow from the management of other domains?" The two logical ones are, of course, aviation and maritime. And if we look at what was done on the maritime side, that indeed there is something called the polar code, which sets up good practices for ships going through polar regions and basically all the reputable shippers, not talking about the unreputable, all the reputable shippers want to follow the polar code because they are scientifically based practical measures to take when going through the now warming but still ice-filled waters. So it's very exciting to hear what you're talking about and I could see how international structures could reinforce that and encourage good practice.

GILES: I think that sounds great, Esther, and I think those lessons are very important. But let me just play kind of a little bit of devil's advocate here because we want this collaborative environment, we want to manage space responsibly. At the same time, we have this big geopolitical question here and it's kind of how do we preserve space as a commons and what kind of governance goals do we need for that activity, Simone? I mean somebody, you launch satellites into space. How do you think about tackling this very, very difficult question because it's hard to get collaboration between countries who are effectively competing.

D'AMICO: Yes, this is a very difficult topic and it has been very transparent how space technology is becoming dual use. For example, when the war in Ukraine started, we have seen all over the news images generated by commercial actors that were used for intelligence purposes or we have seen a service that was intended for purely commercial objectives such as Starlink, so satellite-based internet used for military purposes. So this is a very pressing and important topic and we know how anti-satellite missile tests that intentionally destroy satellites, produce debris and are a major concern. I think there is no escape here when we try to look for a solution to go through international agreements so that not only regulate commercial activities, but also set strict limits on military actions in space, so bans, moratoriums, for example, on anti-satellite tests. So diplomatic efforts are needed, such as arms control treaties for space. These are critical to reducing debris generated by these activities. However, we need to be pragmatic. There is a reality check here. We should try to do these things, but enforcing them is exceedingly in difficulty in the current geopolitical situation because of the strategic importance of space and space assets for defense intelligence operations. So we need multilateral agreements that build trust, transparency measures.

GILES: So bit by bit?

D'AMICO: Yeah, satellite tracking data, you know, they should be shared.

GILES: Let's start there and then build up to more ambitious agreements. So it's like a phased approach, is that what you're saying?

D'AMICO: I think so, yes.

BRIMMER: If I may, pick up and share an example that pulls together some of which just what we've been talking about. As you indicate, the direct-descent anti-satellite tests have created a huge amount of debris and created real danger for people in space. If we take the November 2021 Russian action, you had Russian cosmonauts on the International Space Station sheltering with everybody else. They were just as much as in danger. It was extraordinary. But that led to a remarkable set of actions. In Spring 2022, the United States and Japan and others bring forward a resolution in the security council saying, "We should not be doing direct-descent anti-satellite tests." The Russians vetoed it, but there was enough international support to take it to the General Assembly and actually then have a General Assembly resolution where multiple countries, including those that work, let's say, closely with Russia on other things say, "Hold up, we don't like this. This is a problem. We are worried by these types of actions." Those sorts of diplomatic actions can reinforce the global norms that there's certain things we should not do because they endanger human beings in space. And indeed, we are seeing a remarkable shift also in attention. We're having to look at all different levels. The things that I'm looking at now are in low Earth orbit, but we also have to think about, for example, geostationary orbit. When we think about the national security issues that have always been a part of human exploration, that those exquisite national security types of assets, the ones that keep track, for example, of nuclear weapons and other life-threatening issues are fundamental to international security issues, there's a concern about greater vulnerability of these assets. And therefore, certainly deep concern for the United States government and the Department of Defense, is changing the strategy to have a proliferation also of those national security assets. It's again, a change in thinking at the national security approach, a change in thinking in the economic approach. There are so many different changes happening as we examine human activity in space.

GILES: That's fascinating. So you're saying the idea is to have more assets so you are less vulnerable, you don't have a few very, very high-cost assets up there. You've got a proliferation of relatively low-cost assets that can be replaced relatively easily.

BRIMMER: That's exactly the idea. And it's particularly important because the United States has the largest amount of national security assets in space. And so it's rethinking how those are deployed.

GILES: As we're touching on those things, what about the moon? The moon looms large in the night sky, but it also looms large in nations strategic ambitions. You know 2023 India became the first nation to touch down, to land on the moon's far side. NASA's Artemis program aims ultimately to establish a long-term presence on the moon. What's driving all this activity, Simone?

D'AMICO: Yeah, Martin, you got it right. We are living in the moon rush and I see three main motivations for this renewed interest in the moon. And Esther described very well the Artemis Accord and how this is becoming a worldwide effort. We have certainly the romantic and human-defining interest of space exploration and discovery. That's certainly there. Second, we have the strategic and  economic interests associated with the moon. And finally, we have a stepping stone there. The moon represents our stepping stone to Mars and beyond.

GILES: You know Esther, the Outer Space Treaty says no one should really claim ownership of the moon, right? It's a common resource. Do we think whoever's first there, presumably they could, if they wanted to, try and prevent other people from landing on the moon. I mean, how confident are you that the Outer Space Treaty will prevent that from happening? And what things should we be thinking about in terms of, again, multilateral discussions around how the moon is developed?

BRIMMER: Indeed. And just to step back to say that the underlying principles here, one, there's one school of thought that has existed for hundreds of years, which says if you get there first, it's yours. You know you stake a claim. Then there's an alternative view which says that certain places are actually shared in common by all of humanity. And the second principle is enshrined in the Outer Space Treaty. But there's also a view that if you happen to be there, can you use it? So one of the reasons that there's an interest in landing in certain places in the moon is that ice has been found. Because obviously water is useful both for sustaining astronauts and for fuel and other uses. So at this point, I think all countries want to at least hold up the Outer Space Treaty as an advantage. I think it's important that the United States, which is, at times, not always been comfortable with the idea of global commons, reinforce the idea of a global commons, that this is shared by everybody and that even if you're not first, that you share it. However, I would note that in governance structures, being a member of the club helps. So for example, when you read what Indian policymakers say as they're looking to their role in lunar discussions, they want to say, "We want to be part of the club." So one of the other reasons to basically have your foothold there is to say that when we do get to some sort of structured multilateral framework, those that actually have a physical presence expect that their voices will be heard a little louder.

GILES: So you're saying there's a benefit from getting there first in the sense that when the discussion happens, it's like "I'm already there, I've staked my claim. Therefore, I'm going to have more of a weight in those."

BRIMMER: Right. And even though we may agree that everything there is shared, the decision-making will probably be done by those countries that are already seen as lunar spacefaring countries.

GILES: Simone, what do you think of that argument?

D'AMICO: Well, I think I'm a little bit pessimistic regarding regulating a topic when there is a very strong geopolitical competition. So when we talk about getting access to the water on the moon in the south pole, in these permanently shadowed regions, getting access to materials like rare Earth elements or helium-3, which are expected to be abundant in the regolith on the surface of the moon, this can have significant economic value. And so countries are keen to stake claims and develop the technology to extract these resources. And so I think a possible way out of a military confrontation related to the moon consider that, this is something that it's often neglected, the moon represents a very strategic vantage point because it's much easier to get in Earth orbit from the moon because it's much easier to escape the gravity of the moon than to get in Earth orbit from the surface of the Earth. So it is also a strategically relevant vantage point for defense and military operations for agile deployment of spacecraft. And so to me, the only way out is a strategy similar to the Artemis Accord where nations collaborate to get there. They do joint missions. So it's not a matter of putting a flag of nation A or B, but it's about collaborating in order to get there and do that jointly so to avoid that very critical situation that we're talking about. 

GILES: This moon rush is going to be strategically so important and complex and we have to be thinking through very carefully how we manage it. And I think the ideas you've both put forward today have been very, very clear and very, very thoughtful. We have about a minute left and I just want to do a lightning round of questions. Let me fire straight in. Which sci-fi movie or book about space is your favorite, Esther?

BRIMMER: The Martian.

GILES: The Martian. Simone?

D'AMICO: Interstellar.

GILES: Interstellar - ah. When you were a kid, did you want to be an astronaut? Simone, I bet you did.

D'AMICO: Not as a kid, but about twenty years ago.

GILES: Got it. Esther?

BRIMMER: Yes. The closest I got was when I earned a fixed-wing pilot's license when I was twenty, but I don't have time to fly anymore.

GILES: Wow, that's great.

D'AMICO: If I can add, Martin, because I applied for an astronaut position.

GILES: You did?

BRIMMER: Wow. Very cool.

D'AMICO: Yeah, I got quite far ahead. I was in Europe at the time.

GILES: That's really impressive.

BRIMMER: Wow. Cool

GILES: Let's assume, Simone, that you got it and you are an astronaut. If you could go safely to any planet in the solar system, which is the one you would most want to go to and why?

D'AMICO: Wow, that's tough.

GILES: You got to pick one. 

D'AMICO: I would prefer to be on a space station.

GILES: Okay, we'll let you have that. Esther?

BRIMMER: I'm curious what's beyond the clouds of Jupiter?

GILES: Perfect. I think it was Carl Sagan who said, "If it's just us out there, it's a really awful waste of space." Is there other life out there, yes or no, Simone?

D'AMICO: I'm sure there is, emotionally speaking, and technically speaking, I'm working on the technology to try to find the science of biological activity about planets orbiting other stars. I think that the probability is very high.

GILES: Esther?

BRIMMER: I think there's something else out there, some being perhaps beyond human comprehension.

GILES: Last question, could a country or person ever turn the moon into a luxury resort? And if they did, would you go, Esther?

BRIMMER: They might, but no. And yes, I'll figure out how to actually make them follow the Outer Space Treaty.

GILES: They have all that ice for your cocktails there. Simone, would you go?

D'AMICO: Yes.

GILES: Awesome. Thank you both so much. It's been wonderful. Great conversation. Really appreciate your time.

BRIMMER: Thank you so much. Thank you.

D'AMICO: Thank you so much for having us. 

GILES: For resources used in this episode and more information, visit CFR.org/theinterconnect and take a look at the show notes. If you have any questions or suggestions, connect with us at [email protected]. And to read the new 2025 Stanford Emerging Technology Review, visit SETR.Stanford.edu. That's S-E-T-R.stanford.edu. And head to CFR.org to read the Council's recent task force report on space management policy.

The Interconnect is a production of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Stanford Emerging Technology Review from the Hoover Institution and the Stanford School of Engineering. The opinions expressed on the show are solely those of the guests, not of CFR, which takes no institutional positions on matters of policy, nor do they reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or of Stanford School of Engineering. 

This episode was produced by Gabrielle Sierra, Molly McAnany, Shana Farley, and Malaysia Atwater. Our audio producer is Markus Zakaria. Special thanks to our recording engineers, Laurie Becker and Brian Mendez. You can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your audio. For The Interconnect, this is Martin Giles. Thanks for listening.