Debbie Lewis – Written evidence (RSK0021)

Resilience Preparedness Consultant, Axiom (Alderney) Limited, acting in an individual capacity

1. Introduction

1.1 The effects from Near-Earth Objects (NEO’s) are similar to those that have been experienced by natural disasters, such as the extent of the local and regional destruction and devastation caused by the Japan earthquake and tsunami that occurred on March 11th 2011. The hazard exists from both larger over 1km in diameter and from those under 100 metres in diameter. It is inevitable that, on an indeterminate date, the Earth will be in collision with a NEO. Although great uncertainty exists as to when such an event can be expected, it is another case, as with both the 2009 swine flu pandemic and the 2019 Corona Virus, of ‘when, not if.’ This assertion is evidenced from the numerous impact events which have occurred through the Earth’s history, such as the Yucatan Peninsula impact which resulted in the formation of the 200 km crater at Chicxulub in Mexico, 65 million years ago, Tunguska in 1908 which devastated 2000 km2 of forest and more recently, the meteor that entered Earth’s atmosphere, over Russia, on February 15th 2013.

1.2 The hazard to humanity from NEO’s demands the engagement of political establishments and international communities to review the severity of the risk and the likelihood of it occurring. In order to facilitate this, the NEO impact hazard ideally needs to be more considered as part of the UK’s National Security Risk Assessment. If, as a nation and through our membership of international community, we are able to substantially improve the collective resilience to the effects of NEO impact events, then we are also able to improve the resilience and response to emergencies from other natural hazard events.

2. Significant Extreme Risks

2.1 The most significant extreme risks that the UK faces are those posed by asteroids, meteors and comets.

2.2 These are discrete risks that have arisen from a naturally occurring phenomenon that, currently, is only recognised by the scientific community and does not appear to be fully understood by civil servants, politicians, non- specialist emergency planners and responders, nor by the general public.

2.3 In the NEO context, the term ‘extreme risk’ is defined as a potential event that is unlikely to occur but could have a catastrophic impact on human welfare, behaviour, essential services, security, the environment and the economy. 3. Types of Risks

3.1 The UK is poorly prepared to respond to impact events from asteroids, meteors and comets.

3.2 The reason for this is that the status quo determines that there is, perhaps understandably, more emphasis upon ensuring that lessons are leaned from previous incidents, so as to promote better preparedness for future disasters of the same or similar effect. However, there is a danger with preparing for previous incidents that the potential for new risks emerging and ‘Black Swan’ events are not effectively considered. An example of such an event was the eruption of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland in 2010, the volcanic ash cloud from which severely disrupted aviation and led to stranded, displaced people and interrupted supply chains.

3.3 This type of event had not been considered, nor risk assessed, prior to its occurrence in 2010 and as a result it was not included within the UK’s National Security Risk Assessment. Consequently, no preparation to mitigate the effects from this risk had been considered nor put in place prior to this event occurring. However, since this event, the risk has subsequently been added to the NSRA.

3.4 The current arrangements for considering new risks needs to be reviewed and, in particular, a broader approach taken as to how new and emerging risks are assessed and managed. Ideally, scientists, subject-matter experts and specialist emergency planning professionals need to be more fully engaged in the process, conducting the required research and analysis when new risks are being considered for inclusion on the National Security Risk Assessment.

4. Risk Assessment

4.1 The Government’s approach to the risk assessment process could be strengthened by including the input from subject matter experts, particularly those who work in this area in the UK, such as The Centre, which is home to the National Near Earth Object Information Centre, as well as Universities, scientists, academics, and emergency planning professionals with expertise pertaining to the understanding of the risk posed by asteroids, meteors and comets.

4.2 The UK Space Agency and the Cabinet Office Civil Contingencies Secretariat could also be strengthened to coordinate and collaborate with other space agencies such as NASA’s ‘Planetary Defense Coordination Office’ and ESA’s NEO Coordination Centre as well as to enhance the role of The Spaceguard Centre.

4.3 The UK Government should also be aware of the Discovery programme which seeks to: identify and quantify those asteroids, meteors and comets that could be on a collision course with the Earth; analyse whether the UK lies within the risk corridor; and assess the potential impact site to confirm whether that is either in the UK or a UK dependent territory and if British interests overseas could also be affected by an .

4.4 Any panel of experts advising the Government should include representation from as wide a cross section of related disciplines as is appropriate to the likely impact of the hazard.

4.5 Scientific advice, which encompasses social sciences, engineering and technology, should be a central component of the National Security Risk Assessment (NSRA) process. The Government Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA) and the Government Office for Science (GO-Science), in conjunction with the Cabinet Office, need to be officially participative in of all the NSRA stages. The CGSA, once satisfied that all risks requiring scientific involvement and evaluation have been fully considered, should sign off the NSRA. Further to this, consideration should be given for GO-Science to be located within the Cabinet Office, whilst retaining a semi-autonomous status. In addition to this the Cabinet Office should also include representation and participation from the UK Space Agency as the nominated lead government department for the NEO impact hazard.

4.6 As the NSRA is an understandably unpublished document, public and parliamentary assurance could be provided by an independent scientific advisory committee, which would be established to provide risk assessment advice to the Cabinet Office. This would be similar to the previous standing committee, the Scientific Advisory Panel on Emergency Response (SAPER) which provided scientific advice to the GCSA informed by a variety of sources such as the ministries, agencies and wider academia. This would ensure that effective decision-making mechanisms were in place prior to a disaster occurring, rather than the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies being activated only during the response to provide scientific advice to the government. It cannot be emphasised enough that, where a NEO impact event is concerned, this would be far too late to provide the scientific advice required.

4.7 The risk assessment process required for a NEO impact, would additionally benefit from the previously established behavioural insight team. The involvement of the team would be required for determining public policy in relation to civil protection in order to better understand human behaviour. Further consideration should be given to the appointment for the role of the Government Chief Social Scientist (GCSS) working with the GCSA and the Cabinet Office.

4.8 More openness and transparency are required in which risk assessments are conducted, along with the rationale used for decision-making. Consideration should be given to the provision of available information such as scientific papers and following the NEO characterisation missions, publication of the estimated size, scale and prediction of likely fatalities consequent upon an impact event occurring.

4.9 In conclusion, the Government should ensure that it identifies and considers as wide a range of risks as possible by reviewing the ‘register’ of those currently involved in the risk assessment process, broadening its scope through the inclusion of more subject matter experts. Submissions should be sought from a wider audience than that included under current arrangements, making these more inclusive and transparent.

5. Risks Currently Excluded from the National Security Risk Assessment

5.1 Within Annex B, Full Scenario Assessments, of the 2019 NSRA is the inclusion of section 07, entitled, “Risks Under Review”. This section provides a list of risks and the rationale for monitoring them. Although reassuringly this list is headed up by the NEO impact risk, the reasonable worst-case scenario is only based on a 50m diameter hitting the Earth and the example cites just one impact event, that of Tunguska which occurred in 1908.

5.2 Some rather one dimensional and spurious analysis has been conducted which asserts that, “a land fall of such an impact somewhere within the UK would be estimated to occur on average once every 200,000 years”. As a result of this observation the likelihood of occurrence is calculated to fall below the threshold required for inclusion of the NSRA.

5.3 This rather limited perspective fails to take into consideration other aspects of this hazard, such as impact scenario planning for the different types and sizes of asteroid; an awareness of previous impact events and their consequences; the impacts from small objects; and an awareness of the possible environmental impact effects. This information needs to be taken into consideration when determining the extent of the risk posed. The sheer diversity of likely NEO events and their likely effects - notwithstanding the singular example of the 1908 - are illustrated in the attached four annexes.

5.4 The airburst over Tunguska nevertheless carries with it a worrying implication: that smaller asteroids are much more dangerous than previously considered. As there are so many more of these smaller asteroids than the larger ones, the risk these smaller objects present is far more serious than first considered to be. Scientists estimate that there could be over a million of these smaller asteroids moving across space, however no one knows where they are or where they are headed.

5.5 On February 15th 2013, a small asteroid of between17 - 20m in diameter, with a mass of 10,000 tonnes, exploded approximately 30km above the Earth’s surface over the city of Chelyabinsk, Russia. The initial explosion carried an equivalent to about 500kt of TNT, and the from the explosion shattered innumerate windows and injured about 1,400 people. The impact effects were experienced at least 70km away.

5.6 The meteor came in at an oblique angle, which spread its energy over a large area and the damage came from its shock wave resulting in flying glass and at least one collapsed building. After the explosion, a number of pieces had been found in and around Lake - 43 miles (70 km) north of Chelyabinsk.

5.7 The impact took the world by surprise not, only because it was so small but also because it arrived from the direction of the , rendering it impossible to observe prior to impact.

5.8 From Chelyabinsk and other recorded airbursts, it is estimated that the number of objects with diameters of 10 metres or more that could hit Earth is ten times as large as previously assumed. Many of them, like Chelyabinsk, are invisible. In the absence of space-based surveys we are prone to this risk.

5.9 In 2010 the American National Academies of Sciences “Defending Planet Earth: Near Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies: Final Report”, was so concerned about the potential threat to Earth from the smallest type of asteroids that it called for a new survey to identify them. The problem is, however, that even for dedicated asteroid observers, these objects are extremely hard to find.

5.10 There is no doubt that 2020 was a record-breaking year for near-earth Asteroid discoveries, with twenty-five percent more than in 2019. As at the beginning of January 2021 there are 24, 632 asteroids and 113 comets - 268 NEOs were discovered in December 2020 and 2,941 NEOs have been discovered since 1st January 2020. However, as only two percent of the estimated number of asteroids have been identified there is clear potential that there may be many, many others, some of which could pose a serious hazard to Earth.

5.11 Uncertainty exists as to the extent of the risk posed by NEO impact events for six main reasons. First, the extent of the small NEO population with the potential to collide with the Earth is not sufficiently understood. Second, it is not possible to determine the mean impact levels for objects between 50 metres to 140 metres in diameter. Third, the composition of any particular NEO is unknown so it is not clear if the objects are an assembly of loosely held material or a solid mass. Fourth, although the size, mass, density, velocity and speed of a NEO may be obtained, the collision effects will vary depending upon where in the atmosphere the object becomes fragmented, the location of the impact site - which could be in either shallow or deep water - and, if on land, the geology of the area. Fifth, the effects may exceed either a local or a regional area and cause global effects such as climate change or tsunamis. Sixth, it is not clear what size or which type of NEO would cause these effects. Similarly, the effects of a NEO impact are determined by a number of factors, such as the mass and speed of the NEO, which will determine its velocity, along with the angle of its approach to the Earth and the density, diameter, composition and structure of the NEO.

5.12 As a result of all of these uncertainties surrounding the hazard posed by NEOs and the rather complex of the hazard along with the devastating regional impact effects, not only the immediate acknowledgement of this hazard is required but so too, a more thorough risk assessment than has been previously acknowledged so that the risk can be managed appropriately. As such, the political establishment, and its advisers and functionaries must be more fully engaged in the hypothesis that NEO impact events are a scientific fact rather than purely science fiction.

5.13 In conclusion, the greater risk exists from our continued ignorance, prevarication and reluctance to comprehensively risk assess this real and present hazard and to work collaboratively with international partners, such as space agencies and leading scientists, who are already involved in determining the extent of the hazard and attempting to better understand its intrinsic uncertainties. Further delay only compounds the risk and damages our ability to determine effectively the required mitigation required to plan for and respond to future NEO impact events. Annex 1 - Impact Scenario Planning1

Imminent impact Those near the impact site or ground zero should stay (days or hours) indoors, keep away from windows and not gaze directly from a very at the atmospheric explosion. Possibility of small object (1- raining down causing craters and breaking windows. 10 metres in Plans need to be made for risk communication. diameter) Short-term Likelihood of occurrence this Century. As the affected warning (days to surrounding area from the impact site could be up to weeks) of a tens of kilometres, evacuation is required. Similar small NEO (10- approaches for natural disasters for flooding, volcanic 25 metres in eruptions, although NEO evacuation plans need to diameter) include transferability of planning from these natural events. Un-notified and Likelihood of occurrence this Century. Modest to severe no prior warning local consequences. Planning arrangements similar to given for a natural and man-made disasters. Effects include destructive building collapse, fires, social confusion, injuries and impact by a fatalities. Appropriate risk communication and public modest size NEO engagement with NEO impact experts helpful to counter (10-100 metres) any concerns that larger impacts are to follow. Long-term Although unlikely, should the probability increase to warning (20 – 30 certainty and the impact site and area are identified, years) of an preparations should be made to minimise loss of life and impact from a damage to property. In case orbit altering techniques dangerously fail or are not invoked then provisions for shelter, large NEO (30- medical care, food for displaced persons, and provision >100 metres in for pets along with advanced communication plans for diameter) evacuation. Imminent impact Should technical methods for mitigation fail then impact (days to a few effects will be similar to other large disasters such as years) from a previous earthquake events, the Indian Ocean tsunami dangerously of 2004 and World War II. Lessons from these events large NEO (100 could be used to inform disaster management plans. to many 100s of Reliable risk communication is required to address any metres in misconceptions. diameter) Prediction of a Reliance placed on plans for orbital change. possible impact International arrangements need to take place to from potentially ensure societal resilience, such as risk communication civilisation- and warning, making medical care provision, preparing destroying (and stockpiles of food and water and sheltering facilities. species- Infrastructure support for financial, electronic, social, destroying) NEO law-enforcement institutions and preparing disaster in the next management plans. decades

1 (National Academy of Sciences, Defending Planet Earth: Near Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies: Final Report, 2010:69) Short term Extremely unlikely, however traditional disaster warning (less management response plans would be irrelevant and than a few insufficient time for developing technological mitigation years) by a method. civilisation of species destroying NEO

Annex 2 - Previous Impact Events2

Age Impactor size Location Consequences (years) or date

K-T mass 10-15 km 200 km Crater Estimated extinction of 70% biota diameter discovered of animal and plant species, boundary, asteroid or Chicxulub including the dinosaurs between comet Pueblo, Cretaceous Yucatan Penetrative tsunamis and Peninsula Gulf of Mexico Cessation of photosynthesis tertiary and climatic cooling due to geological dust in atmosphere, ozone periods, depletion, burning, acid rain, 65 Million shock waves, drowning and years ago poisoning from heavy metals and chemicals thrown into the atmosphere. 50,000 150 Barringer Creation of a crater one mile years ago feet in diameter, Crater, across, 2.4 miles in weighed Arizona circumference and >550 feet 300,000 tons, in depth. travelling at a speed of 28,600 The resulting explosion miles per hour equalled 2.5 megatons of (12 kilometres TNT, or about 150 times the per second). atomic bomb that destroyed

2 (Atkinson, 2000; King as cited in Atkinson, 2000:39; Brandt and Chapman, 2004; Nemchinov, 2008:3; Krinov and Fonton; Krionov and Melosh as cited in Nemchinov, 2008:10; Yeomans et al., 2009; Morrison, 2009; Schweickart et al., 2010: 27; National Space Centre online, 2010) Age Impactor size Location Consequences (years) or date

Hiroshima.

4,000 Meteorite Kaali Crater, Formation of 100 m crater years ago Estonia

30 June Airburst with an Tunguska, Destruction of 2000km2 of 1908 energy 10 to 30 central forest, knocking trees over megatons from Siberian and charring the barks of an asteroid plateau trees on one side. between 30-50 m in diameter. The explosion was 1000 times larger than the nuclear bombs at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 28 June Nakhla Meteorite Alexandria, Fragments from the 1911 Egypt meteorite were buried up to a metre in depth following an explosion in the upper atmosphere. 1930 10-50 m object Brazil Tunguska –like airburst, significant ground damage, no crater identified.

February Iron , Sikhote-Alin, The creation of 150 craters 1947 initial mass 200 Russia due to fragmentation varying tons breaking up in size between 26.5 m to at 0.1 m by an energy 5 kms equivalent to 100tonnes TNT. The smallest fragments formed a (elliptical area 2km long and 1 km wide)

24 The 50 kgs of Barwell, Local damage to property and December assorted Leicestershire, gardens caused by falling 1965 meteorites were UK fragments originally a single chunk of space rock. The incoming meteor exploded into several pieces as it hit the atmosphere producing a Age Impactor size Location Consequences (years) or date

meteorite shower. 16-22 July Comet Inner Solar Fragmented comet collided 1994 Shoemaker-Levy System with creating Earth- 9 collision with sized impact zones Jupiter 15 Carancas Peru-Bolivia A stony () September on border meteorite with an original 2007 the Altiplano. mass of a few tons hit the Asteroid 1-2m in Earth’s surface at a few km/s diameter speed and formed a 15-m wide crater. Considered to be an anomalous event as small rocky objects are not deemed to reach Earth’s surface 7 October Asteroid 2008 Nubian Desert Creation of a large fireball on 2008 TC3 5m in explosion diameter 8 October Asteroid Bone, South An atmospheric fireball blast 2009 impactor 5- Sulawesi, detonated with the energy of 10m in diameter Island of 50 kilotons (110 million Sulewesi, pounds of TNT). Indonesia.

Annex 3- Documented Impacts (from small objects) on Earth between 1990 and 20003

Date Location Diameter of object (metres) 7 April 1990 Netherlands (house hit) 2 July 1990 Zimbabwe 31 August 1991 Indiana, USA 14 August 1992 Uganda (building hit) 9 October 1992 Pookskill, New York (car hit) 1 November 1994 Pacific Ocean 39 3 November 1994 Bay of Bengal 15 7 December 1994 Fort McMurray/Fort Chipewyan, Alberta 3

3 (Lewis as cited in Atkinson, 2000:40; US Air Force Early Warning Satellites as cited in Atkinson, 2000:40) Date Location Diameter of object (metres) 16 December 1994 1000 km south of Cape of Good Hope at 7 30km altitude 18 January 1995 Northern Mongolia, 25 km altitude 10 16 February 1995 Pacific Ocean 8 16 February 1995 Pacific Ocean (10 hours later) 4 7 July 1995 Near New York City 12 9 December 1995 Cuenca, Ecuador 11 22 December 1995 1500 km south of Argentina (Antartica) >2 15 January 1996 2000 km south of New Zealand >3 26 March 1996 West of the coast of Mexico 3 29 March 1996 Hawaii 10 30 March 1996 1000 km west of the Chilean coast 11 27 April 1997 Indian Ocean, West of Australia 27 5 September 1997 South of Mauritius, Indian Ocean 14 30 September Off coast of South Africa 5 1997 1 October 1997 Mongolia 8 9 October 1997 Near El Paso, Texas, 36 km altitude >12 9 December 1997 Near Nuuk, Greenland 11 January 1998 Near Denver, Colorado >2 7 July 1999 North Island, New Zealand. 28.8 km altitude >2 5 December 1999 Near Montgomery, Alabama. 23 km altitude >2 18 January 2000 Yukon, 25km altitude 5

Annex 4 - Possible Environmental Impact Effects4

4 (Napier, 2008:230; Wolbach, Gilmour, Anders, Orth, and Brooks as cited in Chapman et al., 2001:18) Scope Environment Regional Civilisation K/T Extinct al Effects Disaster Ender Event (300-500 m (1-2km diameter (10-15 km diameter object) diameter object) object) 1 million MT 10,000 MT 100 million MT Land Earthquakes  Earthquake  Civilisation-  Species- over 250- destroying destroying 1000km earthquake global  Local  Significant conflagratio ground damage within n and shaking. hundreds of destructive miles of earthquake ground zero.  Modest to moderate damage globally.

Fires  Localised  Destructive  Fires Ignited by fire at blast, fires ignited fireball and/or ground ignited only globally; re-entering zero. within global ejecta  Regional hundreds of firestorm fires, blast km of ground assured zero.  and possibly fire over continental dimensions Total Crater zone Crater zone ˜50 Crater zone destruction ˜5-10 km km across. several in crater across. hundred km zone across. Sea Tsunamis Flooding of  Shorelines of  Primary historic proximate and proportions ocean flooded secondary along shores of inland tens of tsunami proximate km. flood most ocean.  (Mega)tsunam shorelines is around 100 km ocean rims inland, inundating low-lying areas worldwide.  Ocean rim devastation ; cities replaced by mudflats; Scope Environment Regional Civilisation K/T Extinct al Effects Disaster Ender Event (300-500 m (1-2km diameter (10-15 km diameter object) diameter object) object) 1 million MT 10,000 MT 100 million MT oceans acidified

Air Stratospheric  Sun  Agriculture  Land and dust obscured; collapses; sea Obscures possible ozone ecologies sunlight 536 AD depletion; acid collapse; event rain; sky ozone  Stratospher darkened for depletion; ic dust years. acid rain; below  Sunlight drops sky black catastrophic to “very for years. levels. cloudy day”  Global (nearly night; globally); vision is global impossible.  Severe, agriculture multi-year threatened by “impact summertime winter.” freezes.

Other None Sulphates and  Synergy of atmospheric (except smoke augment all factors effects: locally). effects of dust; yields Sulphate ozone layer may decade- aerosols, be destroyed. long winter. water injected  Approaches into level that stratosphere, would ozone acidify destruction, oceans nitric acid, (more smoke, etc. likely by sulphuric acid). Climat Possible brief Global warming Global e cooling followed by sharp warming cooling followed by Scope Environment Regional Civilisation K/T Extinct al Effects Disaster Ender Event (300-500 m (1-2km diameter (10-15 km diameter object) diameter object) object) 1 million MT 10,000 MT 100 million MT cosmic winter

25 January 2021