Astroscale CEO Nick Shave: Debris Removal, In-Orbit Servicing, and ESA’s Sustainability Vision

As the space industry shifts from rapid expansion to long-term sustainability, companies like Astroscale are redefining what it means to operate in orbit. Orbital Today talked with CEO Nick Shave to discuss Astroscale’s evolving mission from tackling orbital debris to pioneering satellite servicing and in-orbit upgrades.

With partners like BAE Systems and the European Space Agency (ESA) backing new initiatives, the company is positioning itself at the forefront of the circular space economy. We dive into Astroscale’s current projects, the state of sustainability in orbit, and what’s next on the horizon.

From Debris Removal to In-Orbit Servicing

OT: The IRUS project that Astroscale and BAE Systems are working on sounds like it was a project waiting for a competition, rather than a response to one. How did the bid on IRUS come about?

Nick Shave: We have been discussing with BAE Systems how we could take the technology we’re developing for rendezvous, proximity operations and in-orbit servicing, and apply it to new areas like upgrading or refurbishing satellites.

When Astroscale was established 12 years ago, we were looking at debris removal. We have also been studying applications like refueling in orbit and inspecting satellites, if a customer wants to image their satellites in orbit. For example, an insurance company might want to look at potential damage for a claim assessment in orbit. So there’s a wide range of applications to consider as well as the rendezvous proximity operations capabilities, which are fairly unique. Not many companies in the world can do it yet, getting close to another satellite to capture it and de-orbit it. If we’re doing debris removal, those capabilities will enable us to take other actions as needed.

The IRUS project that we’re working on with BAE Systems is an extension of that capability to get close to and dock with another satellite. BAE Systems are building a satellite constellation at the moment that doesn’t have upgradable satellites, as it’s a customer’s Earth Observation constellation.

Looking ahead, the next generation of satellites they plan to build in a few years will be modular. This means they’ll be able to swap out things like the onboard computer processors, instruments, and even solar arrays to extend the life of the spacecraft. For instance, by updating the processors, they can keep the satellites’ tech up to date instead of letting it become outdated after just a few years.

Then we saw that ESA were planning to do a circular economy project, and we felt that the discussions we had been having were perfect to put forward as a proposal. Following submission, ESA included us in their short list of four, 6-8 months ago, and then we won. It’s an indicator that there’s a lot of interest in what we’re doing.

OT: Regarding the study and the other entries in that, did you get to look at what they were doing as well?

Nick Shave: Sure. Among the other studies, there was one proposal that was quite similar to ours. Now we’re looking at whether we can work together in future on that one, as there are several complementary aspects of that piece of work that the other company, smaller than Astroscale, has been doing. So we may be able to bring them on board, which is nice. We can capitalize on mutual benefit.

If I recall correctly, one of the projects was focused more on in-orbit recycling. Instead of upgrading satellites, it aimed to take space debris and recycle it for reuse. Personally, I think that’s a fantastic goal—it would really push us toward a more circular economy in space.. But it’s hard to do that, and it will take some time to get to the point of having factories in-orbit that can recycle satellites or spent rocket bodies.

We will get there, but it’s likely going to take decades before that becomes a reality, rather than the roughly five-year period we’re looking at with this application.

Why was ours selected? For one, we brought a customer with us, and I think ESA were really interested in that. The other studies didn’t, as far as I’m aware. BAE Systems are a customer with a constellation, and they are looking at what they do next in their constellation. Having a commercial customer that’s interested in this technology was seen as a real key point.

The Long Road to In-Orbit Recycling

OT: We don’t hear much about recycling. It’s a word that gets bandied about once in a while, but it really is quite far away from us still, isn’t it?

Nick Shave: Yeah, I wish it wasn’t, to be honest. It’d be great to be able to do it. But when it comes to melting down metals in orbit and that kind of thing, the technology is still a long way off. I’ve heard some companies in the US are working on it,, but it’s some way away. Considering how complex it is just to get to orbit and make sure everything is space-qualified, plus the challenges posed by the space environment itself, it is tough, as you well know.

OT: Three years ago or so, there really was a push on de-orbiting. And we went from de-orbiting to refueling. Do you feel that the idea of a circular economy or a circular space economy is just the next big thing? Or is it actually starting to gather some of these hot topics and putting them together to make something more coherent, maybe more fully fledged?

Nick Shave: I’d agree with the second part of your question. I believe it’s the end goal for some, foundation-type applications or technologies that we need to have a circular economy. It’s something that the CEO of Astroscale, my boss, Nobuo Okada, often talks about. You think about any industry on Earth, like logistics or aviation or the motor vehicle industry and lorries and everything else. What happens at the end of their lives? Do they get refurbished? Or, among other things, do they get scrapped in the end? How does that happen? And we just don’t have that in space.

That’s the thing we’re adding; making it circular. It is a catch-all in the end, and one of the reasons ESA set up this program was to enable some of the core fundamental technologies that we’re developing, like those for de-orbiting and other activities, and put it all together. The goal is to make the business side work too, especially since de-orbiting is becoming increasingly important, particularly from an institutional standpoint.

There are more and more agencies like ESA, JAXA and other agencies like the UK Space Agency and NASA all looking at how de-orbiting can help them to remove objects that they’ve launched and left in orbit many years ago. Eumetsat is another one that is seriously considering how this technology can help them.

In the commercial sector, there’s less of an imperative when it comes to adopting sustainable practices. This is largely because the regulations requiring operators to be more sustainable in their thinking haven’t yet been put in place. Some are focusing on sustainability. Eutelsat OneWeb have been good at putting docking plates on board their spacecraft. But without the pressure of regulatory requirements, these companies face a tough decision about committing their resources to sustainability initiatives. Do you see what I’m saying?

Environmental Impact: What Happens When We Deorbit?

OT: Oh, yes. There are two things I’d like to build on from what you’ve just said there. First, I’m wondering about the environmental effects of de-orbiting. There are journal articles coming out about metals in the upper atmosphere, things like that. Is this something that Astroscale itself is looking at to try and understand the actual effects, or are you waiting for researchers to shine some light on it?

Nick Shave: This is a topic we’re very interested in. Ideally, we want to avoid adding more metals to the atmosphere, but the reality is that all spacecraft – whether in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), or even up to about 2,000 km above Earth –are going to reenter at some point. What we’re doing through de-orbiting is simply accelerating that process. It is the most efficient approach to keeping space accessible for human use, at least until we discover a long-term solution that allows us to move beyond this issue. At this stage, it’s hard to see another way forward.

We’re really keen to understand the full picture, and it’s great to see some solid academic research happening, but I haven’t seen a lot of results yet. A lot of the studies are still in progress, and we’re expecting some findings to start coming in over the next few months or so. It’s a bit of a waiting game right now – waiting to see what the experts say and what the data shows us about the real impact. We’re not atmospheric scientists ourselves, so we’re not jumping in with our own opinions. We’re waiting for the experts to let us know what the issue is.

OT: The other thing is that you mentioned the docking plates. I remember when they came out, and I was wondering about the adoption of those. How’s the reaction been? OneWeb is putting them on. Who else?

Nick Shave: We’ve now got our docking plate version two, which is an upgrade from the first few that we put in orbit. Recently, a Japanese mission had a docking plate on board, and a recent Astro Digital satellite had the docking plate on board. That was launched on Transporter 12.

Our space-qualified docking plate V2 has a number of improvements for better capture, both from a mechanical and more importantly, magnetic, perspective, because that’s what our spacecraft is being designed to do in terms of other operators. We are making progress and there are a number of operators that are looking at adopting the docking plate, we’re in discussions with many of them.

My colleague who leads our sales activity, Andrew Fiola, was at the Satellite Show in DC in March, having discussions on many things, including the various LEO constellation providers out there. People like Rivada that are building up their network or certainly the design of their network, and they’ve got a contract in place with a manufacturer. Also Telesat. We’re in discussions with all the various stakeholders of these constellations. There’s a lot of interest in the docking plate because it provides an easier way to deal with de-orbiting, if you can’t deal with it yourself using your own propulsion system from the satellite. It’s a simple addition, and more people are starting to recognize the value in it. Plus, it sends a strong message that you’re taking steps toward sustainability. It’s clear that this is the direction things are heading.

Astroscale’s Goals for ESA’s Council of Ministers 2025

OT: Regarding ESA, you’ve got the ESA ministerial coming up in autumn. What are you looking forward to bringing to them?

Nick Shave: In the widest context, we’re interested in missions and opportunities in and around the Zero Debris Charter approach. We recently secured an ESA Phase A study on a mission called CAT IOD. CAT is a capture system that will require a mechanical rather than magnetic docking device that is on the client satellite. The future Copernicus satellites are all going to have this on board. The Astroscale solution is to take ELSA-M as a basis and replace the magnetic capture system with this new CAT system, which is a sort of a quadrapod device that moves in multiple dimensions, and forward slightly to capture the client satellite. ESA are planning an in-orbit demonstration program and we’d like to be on board for that, hopefully as a prime. Our service is already a good basis to do this mission, making us well-positioned to contribute.

That’s one of the things in Council of Ministers 25 that we have interest in and we’re proposing to the UK Space Agency to invest in that. Other areas I’ve mentioned, such as Eumetsat, may be looking at future removal projects, which we have an interest in. I believe the work we’ve done in the past on collision avoidance, through a project called CREAM, would be good because it’s important that Europe builds its capability in the area of automated collision avoidance, a bit like what the US already do through Starlink. The final point is IRUS, the project we talked about today, and looking at the next stage of that program.

Those are the main interests that we have as a company in the upcoming Council of Ministers. We’re briefing our national agency and other countries where we have suppliers on those potential projects to put forward their interest to their national agencies. That’s the way it works, as you know.