Space Resources: Promising and Problematic: October 15-16, 2018.

Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study, Harvard University.

The Ethics of
Space
Expansion:
impact and Tony Milligan,
Department of Theology and Religious Studies, King’s
damage. College London
Anthony.milligan@kcl.ac.uk
 Typical Appeals
There is no clear- • A duty to extend life/human life.

cut justification • The value of space science.

• The need for a shift in perspective that space activity is
for space uniquely placed to bring.

exploration. • We have an innate urge to explore which should not be

frustrated.
• We must back up the biosphere.
• Space can relieve resource or population pressures on the Earth.
• There are major economic spin-offs.
 There is also no
Ethical arguments geared to an in principle
knock-down rejection of all space activity face a problem of
argument against realpolitik: this is going to happen.
space exploration.
If such arguments draw upon an understanding of
human action as unavoidably or inherently bad,
then they could also carry implausible
implications for how we live now, here on Earth.
 ‘doing things in a suitable way and with
Ethical discussion of appropriate constraints’
these matters may best be
thought of as a concern
about how best to expand ‘minimising repetitions of past mistakes’
our presence.
‘framing the expansion process in a socially
beneficial way’
The focus below will be upon some of the potentially
damaging impacts that an expansion of our activities in
space might have.
 Damaging impact
o Launch sites
 Damaging impact
o Launch sites
o Space debris (at GEO and especially at LEO)
Space debris Both an issue of environmental harm and justice.

Typical problem of environmental injustice: the

burden is likely to be carried, in the future, by a
significant number of launch states but the problem
has been generated by a much smaller number of
launch states.
 Damaging impact
o Launch sites
o Space debris (at GEO and especially at LEO)
o Asteroids
Asteroids
Should we worry about damage to asteroids?
 As long as we are talking about asteroids in the restricted sense
Asteroid (not minor planets in the asteroid belt like Vesta or Ceres)
terrestrial grounds for environmental protection (e.g. protecting
Mining integrity and/or diversity) are unlikely to carry over effectively.
There is little talk about the need for ‘asteroid protection.’

Ethical examinations of asteroid mining are not likely to focus

upon in situ damage but may focus upon its sustainability, and
about how best to contain the impact of such mining elsewhere
(on our terrestrial economy, on the minor planets and on Mars).
 Damaging impact
o Launch sites
o Space debris (at GEO and especially at LEO)
o Asteroids
o Lunar strip mining for 3He
Lunar Mining Given the variability of 3He deposits, their concentration
in the upper regolith, 3He mining could require extensive
surface disruption.

This makes such mining a far strong candidate for an

environmental ethics critique.
Ethical Problems
Lunar ‘integrity’ may be placed at risk by extensive mining for
of Lunar Mining 3
He, or extensive regolith use for habitat construction. The moon is
‘inherently important’ or else it is a culturally significant object,
part of our common heritage.

• Future science may lose important opportunities.

• Future generations may lose important experiential
opportunities.
• Such change is unwelcome and irreversible.
 Asteroid mining for 3He, although technically more
Impact of demanding than lunar mining, could relieve pressures
towards lunar mining.
asteroid
mining-1 This may help an ethical case for asteroid mining.
 Extensive asteroid of any sort (e.g. for platinum
Impact of group metals) could, however, bring a problem of
containment.
asteroid
mining-2 A sustaining mining industry would require access to
the Main Belt, and a base of operations for the
latter…somewhere with a shallow gravity well. Mars
fits the bill. This would give ground for reasonable
ethical concern.
Unless we restrict ourselves to a specialised theory which holds that ethical concern is
appropriate only where there is sentient life (sentientism) or an existing ecosystem (e.g.
a ‘Land Ethic’) then various environmental ethical considerations which apply in the
case of the Earth will also apply in the case of Mars.
Unless we restrict ourselves to a specialised theory which holds that ethical concern is
appropriate only where there is sentient life (sentientism) or an existing ecosystem (e.g.
a ‘Land Ethic’) then various environmental ethical considerations which apply in the
case of the Earth will also apply in the case of Mars.
Note: in each case of damaging impact above,
ethical constraining can also be seen (plausibly)
as enabling

…it keeps open future opportunities which might

otherwise be lost.
 At least some of
Do we:
the issues above
A) Go metaphysically deep and talk about
also pose a ‘value’ and ‘inherent value’ of places and of
possible microbial life?
dilemma about
how we run B) Stay more pragmatic and appeal to
ethical arguments universally accepted considerations: human
interest, future generations, sustainability
in space. and distributive justice (who gets to own or
to appropriate things)?
 This might not be an ‘either’/’or’ story.

‘precursor-
apt’ or In precursor discussions, we may want to draw upon matters
of depth (and so include various perspectives on ‘value’ or
‘inherent value’).
‘policy-apt’?
In policy discussions, we may want to draw upon insights
from precursor discussions, but in a way more likely to yield a
workable consensus.