Can we stop contaminating the universe?

We're only human, so probably not.

Photo by SpaceX on Unsplash

Thank God men cannot fly, and lay waste the sky as well as the earth.

—-Henry David Thoreau ¹

Space junk. Space debris. Leaving trash on the moon. Typical trash. But what about sending human remains to the moon.

Some enterprising businesses have promised clients they would take their ashes to the moon and scatter them, for a price of $5-10,000.² They advertise their launch dates and promise some feeling of lasting forever when your ashes are scattered into space or on the lunar surface.

Concerns about contaminating space and the planets including the Earth’s moon, was considered in 1962 by the United Nations body that focuses on space activities (UNCOSA) and eventually went into effect as the Space Treaty of 1967. The treaty embodies the principles that all signatory nations are responsible for what anyone does within their jurisdiction, typically the launching party — that is the launching of any object into outer space. It further binds parties to agree not to cause “harmful contamination”. ³ If a party engages in any activity that could cause “potentially harmful interference with activities of other States Parties in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, it shall undertake appropriate international consultations before proceeding with any such activity”.⁴

Could leaving human remains on the lunar surface be potentially harmful or interfere with other parties use of outer space? If so, the Outer Space Treaty calls for consultation with other parties to the treaty.

Other states are empowered by the Outer Space Treaty to ask for a consultation if they think some activity may be harmful. Parties have the right to request a consultation if they believe that “an activity or experiment planned by another State would cause potentially harmful interference with activities in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space.”⁵

The Outer Space Treaty’s Softness

International law is soft law, meaning there is no enforcing government, rather it is enforced by diplomacy and social approbation from sovereign nations for violating its terms. Since its going into force in 1967, parties have become increasingly bold with its disregard for the commitments of the Outer Space Treaty, particularly with regard to discarding trash and debris into outer space as well as the moon.

Equipment, keepsakes and other items have been left on the lunar surface.

The U.S. currently tracks 22,000 man-made objects in Earth orbit. There are estimates made of how many objects and what size these are as part of the tracking records. There are estimates that there are more than 500,000 objects from Earth that are larger than a centimeter and millions of objects smaller than a centimeter circling the Earth. The problem is the risk of a collision with even a small object at 17,500 miles per hour, because it can cause catastrophic damage to a spacecraft. These objects do not go away unless they enter the atmosphere and vaporize. Otherwise, they are likely to stay in outer space for 100,000s of years.

The disregard for leaving trash and debris in space was further exacerbated by the impossibility of capitalism to take care of the commercial need to remove it. The Outer Space Treaty also leaves title to all the debris to the sovereign nation that launched it into space. So any salvage company is not dealing with abandoned property like one can find on Earth in abundance. Rather every piece of debris is owned by the nation that launched it and would require their transfer of title and permission to collect it. Until there is a right of salvage, like the maritime right of salvage, removal will not be part of space debris control. So for that reason outer space has become a growing trash dump circling the Earth.

Further, China decided to practice its war capabilities in space by blowing up a defunct satellite. China’s anti-satellite exercise that destroyed the weather satellite, Fengyun-1C created 3,135 created 100,000s of pieces of debris that are now in low Earth orbit (LEO).

Visualization created by Dr Stuart Grey, lecturer at University College London and part of the Space Geodesy and Navigation Laboratory. This is debris in orbit around Earth as of 2015.

In 2020, the Artemis Accords were signed by a number of nations who are engaged in space exploration, and it continues to stay open for signature as a voluntary set of guidelines. This agreement restates the principles of the Outer Space Treaty, but adds that Nations must be responsible for their trash and debris.⁶ This is a promising update to the 1967 Outer Space Treaty with regard to the growing problem of debris.

But what about human remains?

With such serious consequences of deadly collisions with excessive debris to potential maneuvers that look like a prelude to space war, there is little chance that spreading human remains on the lunar surface is going to grab the attention of the international space community.

There is something much more visceral about contaminating the moon that warrants some thought. Humans have been looking at the same moon, imaging its vastness, as well as its mysterious but predictable monthly appearances. Some societies even consider it to be sacred.

The Navajo Nation and its people have always held the moon in high esteem. The Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren spoke out against the payloads of human remains that he learned were headed to the moon on January 8, 2024.⁷

“The moon holds a sacred place in Navajo cosmology . . .The suggestion of transforming it into a resting place for human remains is deeply disturbing and unacceptable to our people and many other tribal nations.”

—Pres. Nygren, statement released on the launch⁸

The response from the human remains entrepreneur, Celestis, was shockingly indifferent:

“We are aware of the concerns expressed by Mr. Nygren, but do not find them substantive,” Celestis CEO Charles Chafer told CNN.⁹

The Vulcan lander was the first of the contractors to launch a lunar lander who was awarded one of NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS). NASA secured reservations for five payloads among twenty spots on the launch paying $108 million.¹⁰ The human remains were presumptively among the other 15 remaining payload spaces bought by commercial interests. But the lunar lander never reached its destination, failing on January 18, and ended with a fiery reentry into Earth’s atmosphere.¹¹ The Navajo Nation expressed relief that the human remains never reached the moon.¹²

The Moon needs Protection

Justin Ahasteen, the Navajo Nation representative in Washington, D.C. questioned the mission of NASA’s Commercial Space Office when they defended the launch, saying they are responsible only for safety and national security concerns. But Ahasteen asked whether drugs could therefore be taken on the commercial payloads, which highlighted the lack of oversight in space activities.

Apparently the White House had a last minute meeting before the launch to discuss the possibility of a delay of the launch due to the Navajo Nation concerns.

Or the meeting could have been due to NASA’s failure to follow the President’s Executive Order, that requires every agency to have a consultation policy and discuss any governmental activity that affects any Native Nation with them before engaging in that activity. Pres. Nygren had called for consultation.

In fact, in 1999, when NASA crashed a spacecraft into the moon carrying the ashes of former astronaut, Eugene Shoemaker,¹³ the Navajo Nation raised an objection. At the time, NASA issued a formal apology and committed to engaging in a formal consultation.

There is no law to protect the natural beauty of the moon

The new Artemis Accords added a non-binding provision to protect the heritage of the moon, meaning spacecraft, artifacts and signs of activity rather than the natural heritage of the moon. It is almost like humans are repeating the same mistakes of the past by not thinking about preserving the natural environment.

The moon has meaning for all humans — it is a common view that we all share no matter where we are on Earth. It is likely anyone who could gaze at the moon has likely done so, and imagined its celestial position in the universe. Maybe humans take some comfort from that. Maybe gazing on natural wonders like the Grand Canyon or the Blue Ridge Mountains has a similar comforting effect for humans — that is why more than 300 million people are drawn to the U.S. National Parks each year. While the moon is legally beyond the jurisdiction of the U.S. to designate it as a National Park; it might be possible to consider using the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), to designate it as a World Heritage Site. The Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage of 1972 defines “natural heritage” without confining to a place on Earth.¹⁴ The moon would be the first World Heritage Site not on the planet Earth, but no one can deny that the moon is not part of our World’s heritage.

1. Thoreau’s journal entry of January 3, 1861

2. https://beyondburials.com/

3. Outer Space Treaty, Art. IX

4. Outer Space Treaty, Art. IX

5. Outer Space Treaty, Art. IX

6. https://www.state.gov/artemis-accords/

7. https://nativenewsonline.net/currents/read-navajo-president-s-reasons-for-his-objection-to-send-human-ashes-to-the-moon

8. https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/05/world/peregrine-moon-mission-navajo-nation-objection-human-remains-scn/index.html

9. https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/05/world/peregrine-moon-mission-navajo-nation-objection-human-remains-scn/index.html

10. https://spaceflightnow.com/2024/01/19/astrobotics-peregrine-lunar-lander-ends-mission-in-fiery-reentry/

11. https://spaceflightnow.com/2024/01/19/astrobotics-peregrine-lunar-lander-ends-mission-in-fiery-reentry/

12. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/19/peregrine-moon-lander-human-remains-navajo-nation/72279509007/

13. https://www.lowellmilkencenter.org/programs/projects/view/ashes-on-the-moon/hero

14. https://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext, Art. 2