New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Insurance for Global Catastrophes, Whether Asteroids or Climate Change

Spend a little more time observing meteors or combating climate change, spend a little less time worrying about global catastrophes. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

It's hard to miss an asteroid the size of a truck exploding with all the force of a nuclear bomb. Such a space rock boiled across the sky near Chelyabinsk in southern Russia on February 15.

Space objects are a constant threat to Earth. In the worst case, the dust cloud from a major impact could shut down photosynthesis. No matter how much carbon dioxide humanity spews into the atmosphere, we may be powerless to prevent a kind of nuclear winter from the impact of an even bigger object, like 2012 DA14 which just passed within 17,200 miles of Earth.

That's closer than some of our Earth-observing satellites.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Big impacts have been trouble for life on Earth since the beginning, perhaps holding back life's first outbreak and pressing the reset button again and again throughout the planet's history. Just as it makes sense to take out an insurance policy against climate change, it makes sense to take out an insurance policy against spaceborne threats by spending a little bit more on the kinds of satellites and telescopes that can spot them.

Of course, the U.S. has been spending less on such observations in recent years. Our inability to adequately see ahead may yet prove our undoing, whether at our own hands or via the kind of massive meteorite that killed the dinosaurs.

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe