At these velocities, debris of any size poses a collision risk for operational satellites and crewed spacecraft that support technologies such as GPS, communications and weather forecasting. Even very small fragments can puncture or disable critical components. "Even if a tiny, five-millimeter object hits a solar panel or a solar array of a satellite, it could break it," says Assistant Professor Hao Chen, whose research focuses on space systems design. "And we have over 100 million objects smaller than one centimeter in orbit. So if you want to avoid a collision, you have to maneuver your spacecraft, which takes up fuel and is costly. Additionally, we have humans on the International Space Station who sometimes must go outside the spacecraft where the space debris can hit them too. It's really dangerous."
Removing orbital debris requires complex technologies and significant funding, and there are currently no binding rules or financial mechanisms that oblige nations or commercial operators to pay for cleanup. In the absence of enforceable international regulation or a workable polluter-pays framework, operators can continue to use orbit while leaving debris behind, creating what Chen describes as a "cosmic free-for-all." In a new study titled "Space Logistics Analysis and Incentive Design for Commercialization of Orbital Debris Remediation," published October 5, 2025 in the Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, Chen and collaborators examine how to structure commercial services that would make debris removal financially viable for both satellite operators and remediation providers.
The team evaluated three broad approaches to debris remediation: uncontrolled reentry, controlled reentry, and in-orbit recycling. Each approach assumes the use of a debris-removal service spacecraft designed to locate, rendezvous with and capture pieces of junk in orbit, then transport them to a new trajectory or facility. The analysis considers how these service missions would operate logistically and what cost trade-offs they involve.
In the uncontrolled reentry option, the servicer would collect debris within its operating orbital band and lower each object to roughly 350 kilometers above Earth. From there, the debris would continue to circle the planet until atmospheric drag causes it to reenter and either burn up or fall to the surface. "It will either burn or drop somewhere on earth, but we don't know where because it depends on the atmospheric drag it receives," Chen explains. Because the servicer does not need to descend as far or travel as much between targets, this method has the lowest mission cost among the three scenarios.
Controlled reentry demands more maneuvering by the remediation spacecraft. In that scenario, the vehicle carries debris down to altitudes of about 50 kilometers before release. "Controlled reentry is more expensive because the servicer needs to bring the debris down closer to earth and then fly up again to get the next piece of debris," Chen says. "That consumes more energy and more fuel than an uncontrolled reentry." The higher fuel demand translates into higher operational expense, but it gives operators more control over where debris breaks up and where surviving fragments may land.
The third option involves transporting debris to a dedicated recycling site in orbit rather than sending it back into the atmosphere. Many spacecraft structures and components use aluminum, and Chen notes that keeping this material in orbit could offset the cost of future missions. Moving debris from its initial orbit to a recycling facility still consumes fuel, but storing and reusing metallic material in space reduces the need to launch the same mass from Earth. "It takes about $1500 per kilogram to launch anything from earth to space," explains Chen. "So if you don't have to launch from earth, it's a benefit."
Beyond the engineering analysis, the study focuses on how to distribute costs and benefits between satellite operators and companies that would carry out debris-removal missions. Chen's group applies game theory and Nash bargaining theory to identify arrangements that both sides could regard as fair. In this framework, satellite operators represent entities that own and run spacecraft exposed to collision risk, while debris remediators are potential service providers that would design, launch and operate cleanup missions.
"The debris remediators pay for the missions, the technology, and the actual work. Without some kind of financial incentive, they don't really gain anything from it - they bear all the costs while others reap the benefits," says Chen. At the same time, space operators gain improved safety margins for their satellites and reduce the amount of fuel they must spend on collision-avoidance maneuvers once debris density falls. "However, they don't actually do anything to remove the debris themselves - they just enjoy the cleaner, safer environment," Chen points out.
To align incentives, the team proposes a fee structure under which satellite operators contribute financially to remediation activities. "We will need some agency to create an incentive for the debris remediators," says Chen. "The money should come from the people who enjoy all those benefits. Our analysis shows that there is a surplus to be generated from the remediation of orbital debris, and that surplus can be optimally shared by space operators and debris remediators." Under such a scheme, both sets of actors would gain from a less cluttered orbital environment while sharing the costs that make it possible.
Chen warns that without mechanisms to support sustained cleanup, the space environment will continue to deteriorate as new missions leave hardware and fragments in orbit and existing debris fields generate additional collisions. Each new launch adds potential sources of future junk, increasing risks for satellites and crewed spacecraft if no remediation occurs. "That is what's needed to move us closer to a space industry that is safer, more sustainable, and still profitable."
The project received support from the NASA Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy. Chen and his colleagues are scheduled to present their findings at NASA headquarters on December 10, 2025, where they will outline both the technical scenarios and the proposed incentive models for debris-removal markets.
Research Report:Space Logistics Analysis and Incentive Design for Commercialization of Orbital Debris Remediation
Related Links
Stevens Institute of Technology
Space Technology News - Applications and Research
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
