By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Newly discovered asteroid 2024 YR poses a calculated 2.3% chance of impacting Earth in 2032, prompting a rise in its impact risk ranking. While initially assessed as a low-probability threat by the ESA, NASA’s Cneos now places it at a three on the Torino scale. However, scientists emphasize that these probabilities are subject to change with further observation and data collection on its trajectory and velocity. The likelihood of impact is expected to decrease significantly as more data becomes available.
Read the original article here
Asteroid 2024 YR, a space rock roughly the size of the Tunguska asteroid that devastated a Siberian forest in 1908, has recently garnered increased attention. Initial observations from a Chilean telescope put its width at approximately 90 meters. While this is significant, it’s crucial to understand the context of the threat. The object’s size, while capable of causing considerable regional damage – think widespread destruction within a few dozen miles of impact and potentially devastating tsunamis if it lands in the ocean – is not on a scale that would cause a global extinction event.
The increased likelihood of impact, as NASA’s Center for Near Earth Object Studies (CNEOS) reports a 2.3% chance of a 2032 strike, might sound alarming. This translates to roughly a one-in-43 chance, a comparatively low probability when considering the vastness of space and Earth’s surface area. It’s important to remember that these calculations are based on current data and are subject to revision as more observations become available. The current calculation reflects improved data, not necessarily a worsening situation. Indeed, the very nature of these projections involves refining our understanding over time, making the initial statement of “danger is likely to fall with more data” ultimately true despite the seemingly contradictory increase in the impact probability.
While the impact potential is small, it’s not negligible. The estimated energy release upon impact is around 8 megatons – equivalent to a substantial nuclear explosion. A direct hit on a densely populated area would be catastrophic. However, even a near-miss in a populated area could potentially cause significant devastation due to the force of the resulting shockwave. The projected impact zone spans a vast area, encompassing significant stretches of ocean and several megacities, illustrating the uncertainty associated with even precise calculations.
There are contrasting perspectives on how people are reacting to this news. Some are reacting with nonchalance or even a sense of morbid welcome, attributing the indifference to various factors like the state of the world or a feeling that the planet is overdue for a “hard reset”. Other reactions demonstrate more concern, but this is often overshadowed by a realistic appraisal of the situation. A significant point that many people have made is that, although a catastrophic event, a 90m asteroid is not an Earth-killer event.
The incident brings to mind the success of the DART mission, which successfully redirected a larger asteroid. While the cost of that operation ($350 million) is substantial, it demonstrates the technological capability to potentially mitigate such threats. Although the 2024 YR event is far from confirmed, such a precedent should offer a certain degree of reassurance. The technology to intervene does exist, and further research and development could make such interventions cheaper and more reliable. It also prompts us to consider investment in planetary defense technologies, so future generations will have more safeguards in place.
The overall conclusion is that while the probability of a significant impact has increased, it remains relatively low. The event, while concerning, does not warrant widespread panic. The news should rather serve as a reminder of the potential dangers posed by near-Earth objects and the importance of continued monitoring and the development of strategies for mitigation. While a direct hit in a populated area would undoubtedly be devastating, the chance of such an occurrence remains sufficiently low that widespread panic is unwarranted. Instead, a measured and informed approach, focusing on both continued observation and proactive planetary defense strategies, is the most appropriate response.