The $1BN Plan to Demolish the International Space Station

Video narrated and hosted by Fred Mills. This video contains paid promotion for Masterworks.

IN 2030, a heavily modified SpaceX Dragon capsule is set to undertake the dramatic task of deorbiting the International Space Station (ISS), guiding the monumental structure to its final resting place in the remote depths of the South Pacific ocean. The Dragon, equipped with 46 enhanced Draco thrusters and a lengthened trunk for increased fuel capacity, will execute what is being described as the most complex demolition project in history.

This mission will mark the end of a 25-year, USD$160BN endeavour, a testament to human ingenuity and international collaboration. The ISS, a sprawling complex of 43 interconnected modules, has withstood extreme temperature fluctuations and been meticulously assembled in the harsh environment of space.

The question now looms: why must this extraordinary achievement be decommissioned? Could it not be preserved as a monument to human endeavour? To understand the reasoning behind this decision, we must first examine the ISS's origins and its significance to the future of space exploration.

Above: The International Space Station above Earth.

The story begins with the Soviet Union's Salyut 1, launched in 1971. Though a groundbreaking achievement, Salyut 1's lifespan was tragically short. The first crewed attempt to board the station failed, and the second resulted in the deaths of all three cosmonauts aboard the Soyuz 11 capsule, which depressurized during re-entry. Consequently, Salyut 1 was decommissioned and allowed to burn up in the Earth's atmosphere just months after its launch.

Despite this initial setback, both NASA and the Soviet space program continued their pursuit of crewed space stations. Over the next 16 years, eight more stations were launched. The United States' first attempt, Skylab, was launched in 1973.

As technology advanced, so did ambitions. Space stations grew larger and remained in service for longer periods. The Soviet Union's Mir, launched in 1986, represented a significant leap forward. Unlike its predecessors, Mir was modular, constructed in stages over a decade.

In the 1980s, the United States began developing its own modular station, dubbed "Freedom." However, escalating costs and subsequent budget cuts led to the program's cancellation in the early 1990s.

The end of the Cold War, coupled with Russia's struggles to maintain Mir, led to a historic partnership between the two nations. In 1993, they joined forces to create the International Space Station. Recognizing the project's significance, other space agencies joined the collaboration, transforming the ISS into a truly international endeavour, demonstrating an unprecedented commitment to space exploration and scientific advancement.

The result of this collaboration is the ISS as we know it today: a sprawling structure, larger than a football field, comprising 43 interconnected modules and elements.

The ISS’s construction began in 1998 with the launch of the Russian-built Zarya module. Fabricated in Moscow from 1994, Zarya, constructed of rolled aluminium and steel, was fortified with thermal insulation and kevlar armour. Its two solar arrays, powering six nickel-cadmium batteries, provided a modest three kilowatts of power, comparable to that of a domestic oven. Zarya was also equipped with 36 steering jets and two engines for orbital adjustments and stability maintenance during subsequent module additions.

Above: The Zvezda Module. Image courtesy of NASA.

A month later, the U.S. Unity module, designed to provide living and working space, was integrated. This integration highlighted a fundamental challenge: the incompatibility of Russian and U.S. docking systems. The U.S. employed the Common Berthing Mechanism, utilizing interlocking rings and motorized bolts, while Russia utilized the Androgynous Peripheral Attach System, which employed symmetrical rings with a capture mechanism, allowing for either end to be active or passive.

To resolve this issue, Pressurized Mating Adapters were developed, creating pressurized tunnels between the modules. Three PMAs were added, constructed at a slight angle to ensure clearance between the Space Shuttle's cargo bay and the ISS modules during docking.

The Zvezda module, the first fully operational living area on the ISS, was added on July 26, 2000, following Unity. It housed life support systems, flight controls, and crew quarters, forming the core of the Russian segment.

Further support units, including a spare PMA and external storage bins for supplies and equipment, were installed over the subsequent four months.

A critical milestone was reached at the end of 2000 with the installation of the P6 Truss, which housed the first significant heat sink panels and large solar array wings. These arrays substantially increased the station's power generation capacity, enabling long-term habitation.

On November 2, 2000, NASA astronaut Bill Shepherd and Russian cosmonauts Yuri Gidzenko and Sergei Krikalev became the ISS's first full-time residents, marking the beginning of continuous human presence in space.

The ISS's main construction phase spanned another 11 years. At the forward end of the station, Unity, also known as Node 1, acts as the ISS's "bridge" and is the first section to receive sunlight each day. Unity connects to Tranquility on its starboard side and Destiny at the front.

Tranquility houses the Cupola, offering panoramic views of Earth. Destiny serves as the ISS's primary laboratory.

Above: The cupola of the ISS. Image courtesy of NASA.

Destiny connects to Harmony, another node for module connection. Harmony links to the European Columbus laboratory on its starboard side and Japan's Kibo research module on its port side. The Exposed Facility, located at the end of Kibo, enables experiments to be conducted directly in the vacuum of space.

The Canadian Space Agency's (CSA) Canadarm, a robotic arm, played a vital role in the ISS's assembly and maintenance. Controlled from within the station, it can manipulate large objects, including spacecraft, payloads, and entire station modules, and capture cargo vehicles carrying essential supplies.

The Integrated Truss Structure is crucial for the station's power and thermal regulation, housing the station's power plant and radiators. Constructed over three years, the truss features nine segments anchored to the roof of Destiny. Solar panels were added incrementally, with some retracted to maintain balance. In 2007, the P6 Truss was repositioned.

The ISS's solar arrays generate up to 120 kilowatts of electricity, sufficient to power approximately 40 homes. This exceeds the station's 75 to 90 kilowatt requirement, with excess power stored in batteries for use during Earth's shadow. The solar arrays are mounted on gimbals, enabling them to track the sun for optimal power generation.

The radiator panels, part of the active cooling system, are essential for maintaining the ISS's thermal equilibrium. They dissipate excess heat generated by the station's systems and experiments into space as infrared radiation. Maintaining stable temperatures is critical for both crew safety and the structural integrity of the ISS.

Above: The ISS as we know it today.

The International Space Station's (ISS) orbital stability is inherently limited by atmospheric drag at its current altitude. This necessitates regular orbital reboosts to maintain its position. 

Without these corrections, the ISS would eventually experience an uncontrolled descent back to Earth.

While elevating the ISS to a higher orbit could potentially extend its lifespan by thousands of years, the associated costs and technical complexities are prohibitive. The increased distance would significantly complicate and escalate the expense of routine crew and cargo missions.

Above: The height of the ISS is carefully calibrated. 

The ISS is perpetually vulnerable to micrometeoroids and space debris. While its kevlar armour and manoeuvrability offer protection against larger objects, smaller particles, travelling at speeds up to 10 kilometres per second, pose an unavoidable threat. Incidents such as the 2016 window crack caused by a paint fleck and the 2022 Soyuz capsule damage, which stranded astronauts, underscore this vulnerability.

Above: The crack discovered on the window of the cupola in 2016. Image courtesy of NASA.

Beyond physical impacts, the ISS contends with thermal expansion and contraction. Orbiting Earth 16 times daily, the station experiences extreme temperature fluctuations, ranging from 120 degrees Celsius in sunlight to -150 degrees Celsius in Earth's shadow. This constant cycle of expansion and contraction exerts substantial stress on the station's structure, increasing the risk of failures.

The combined threats of unpredictable debris impacts and the ongoing stress of thermal cycling highlight the precarious nature of the ISS's operational environment. Despite its advanced technology and scientific achievements, the station operates within a harsh and unforgiving space, where even minor flaws can have catastrophic consequences.

NASA considered several options for decommissioning the ISS. Disassembly and return to Earth was deemed impractical due to the extensive spacewalks required and the lack of a vehicle capable of safely transporting large components through atmospheric re-entry.

The option of propelling the ISS into deep space was deemed unfeasible due to resource and technological limitations. Similarly, boosting it to a higher orbit was problematic due to the high concentration of space debris, which would shorten its lifespan, and the absence of a suitable rocket capable of docking and moving the ISS without causing damage.

Because of this, the controlled deorbit of the ISS was determined to be the only viable option. The plan involves a specially developed Dragon spacecraft guiding the ISS into a controlled descent, ensuring its disintegration poses no risk to terrestrial life. Upon atmospheric re-entry, the ISS will break apart and burn up, with only a few fragments reaching the ocean.

While commercial space stations are under development, they are generally smaller and driven by private enterprise, unlike the international collaborative nature of the ISS. The ISS has been a vital hub for research and space exploration, serving as a gateway to the stars. 

Its legacy extends beyond space, demonstrating the power of international cooperation and the human drive to push the boundaries of exploration.

This video and article contain paid promotion for Masterworks, you can skip their waitlist here.

Video narrated and hosted by Fred Mills. Additional footage and images courtesy of NASA, ESA, Chris Brown Explores, SpaceX, Viktor Patsayev, Axiom Space, HAZEGRAYART.