IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bhw/wpaper/06-2025.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal path for orbital debris

Author

Listed:
  • Aneli Bongers

    (Department of Economics, University of Malaga)

  • Jose L. Torres

    (Department of Economics, University of Malaga)

Abstract

This paper introduces the DISE-2024 (Dynamic Integrated Space Economy) model, an Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) designed to analyze the economics of efficient mitigation policies for orbital debris. The DISE-2024 model integrates an optimal neoclassical economic growth framework with a physical model of the Earth's orbital environment, capturing the dynamics of orbital debris and the likelihood of collisions. The economic component of the model determines the optimal consumption path and investments across two capital assets: Earth capital and space capital (i.e., satellites). The physical component models the endogenous generation of orbital debris, accounting for factors such as launch activity, in-orbit breakups, and collisions. The model is simulated over a 200-year horizon under various policy scenarios, including no intervention, de-orbiting policy, no breakups, reusable launch vehicles, debris-free launch systems, collision avoidance, and the European Space Agency's (ESA) zero debris policy. A key finding of the study is that mitigation policies targeting debris emissions alone have a limited impact on reducing the long-term accumulation of orbital debris. Only scenarios involving complete collision avoidance can prevent the catastrophic chain reaction predicted by Kessler syndrome.

Suggested Citation

  • Aneli Bongers & Jose L. Torres, 2025. "Optimal path for orbital debris," Space Economics Working Papers 06-2025, Institute for Space Economics, revised Jun 2025.
  • Handle: RePEc:bhw:wpaper:06-2025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://spaceeconomics.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/SEWP-06-2025.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bongers, Anelí & Torres, José L., 2023. "Orbital debris and the market for satellites," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    2. Blake, Andrew P & Westaway, Peter F, 1995. "An Analysis of the Impact of Finite Horizons on Macroeconomic Control," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 98-116, January.
    3. Anelí Bongers & José L. Torres, 2024. "Star Wars: Anti-Satellite Weapons and Orbital Debris," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(7), pages 826-845, October.
    4. Nodir Adilov & Peter Alexander & Brendan Cunningham & Nikolas Albertson, 2022. "An analysis of launch cost reductions for low Earth orbit satellites," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 42(3), pages 1561-1574.
    5. Frank Ackerman & Elizabeth Stanton & Ramón Bueno, 2013. "Epstein–Zin Utility in DICE: Is Risk Aversion Irrelevant to Climate Policy?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 73-84, September.
    6. Yongyang Cai, 2019. "Computational Methods in Environmental and Resource Economics," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 59-82, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aneli Bongers & Jose L. Torres, 2025. "Optimal Active Debris Removal Policy in the Long-run," Space Economics Working Papers 07-2025, Institute for Space Economics, revised Jul 2025.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aneli Bongers & Jose L. Torres, 2025. "On the Social Cost of Orbital Debris," Space Economics Working Papers 04-2025, Institute for Space Economics, revised Mar 2025.
    2. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    3. Margaret Insley & Peter A. Forsyth, 2019. "Climate games: Who’s on first? What’s on second?," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 95(2-3), pages 287-322.
    4. Elettra Agliardi & Rossella Agliardi, 2021. "Corporate Green Bonds: Understanding the Greenium in a Two-Factor Structural Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(2), pages 257-278, October.
    5. Svenja Hector, 2013. "Accounting for Different Uncertainties: Implications for Climate Investments?," Working Papers 2013.107, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    6. Berger, Loïc & Emmerling, Johannes, 2017. "Welfare as Simple(x) Equity Equivalents," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 254044, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Yongyang Cai, 2020. "The Role of Uncertainty in Controlling Climate Change," Papers 2003.01615, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2020.
    8. Yuze Li & Shangrong Jiang & Yunjie Wei & Shouyang Wang, 2021. "Take Bitcoin into your portfolio: a novel ensemble portfolio optimization framework for broad commodity assets," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 7(1), pages 1-26, December.
    9. Dominika Czyz & Karolina Safarzynska, 2023. "Catastrophic Damages and the Optimal Carbon Tax Under Loss Aversion," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(2), pages 303-340, June.
    10. W. J. Wouter Botzen & Jeroen C. J. M. Van Den Bergh & Graciela Chichilnisky, 2018. "Climate Policy Without Intertemporal Dictatorship: Chichilnisky Criterion Versus Classical Utilitarianism In Dice," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(02), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Christoph Hambel & Holger Kraft & Eduardo Schwartz, 2015. "Optimal Carbon Abatement in a Stochastic Equilibrium Model with Climate Change," NBER Working Papers 21044, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Hänsel, Martin C. & Quaas, Martin F., 2018. "Intertemporal Distribution, Sufficiency, and the Social Cost of Carbon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 520-535.
    13. Adam Michael Bauer & Cristian Proistosescu & Gernot Wagner, 2023. "Carbon Dioxide as a Risky Asset," CESifo Working Paper Series 10278, CESifo.
    14. Caleiro, António, 2006. "On the Synchronisation of Elections -- A differential Games Approach," EconStor Preprints 142775, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    15. Sophie Zhou & Frederick van der Ploeg & Rick van der Ploeg, 2023. "Structural Change and the Climate Risk Premium during the Green Transition," CESifo Working Paper Series 10840, CESifo.
    16. Riccardo Rebonato & Riccardo Ronzani & Lionel Melin, 2023. "Robust management of climate risk damages," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(3), pages 1-43, September.
    17. Johnson Kakeu, 2023. "Concerns for Long-Run Risks and Natural Resource Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(4), pages 1051-1093, April.
    18. Richard S.J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have not changed over time," Working Paper Series 0821, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    19. Aneli Bongers & Jose L. Torres, 2025. "Optimal Active Debris Removal Policy in the Long-run," Space Economics Working Papers 07-2025, Institute for Space Economics, revised Jul 2025.
    20. Kelsall, Claudia & Quaas, Martin F. & Quérou, Nicolas, 2023. "Risk aversion in renewable resource harvesting," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D62 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Externalities
    • E21 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Consumption; Saving; Wealth
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bhw:wpaper:06-2025. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jose L. Torres (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/females.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.