After the year 2030, what will become of the International Space Station? Explanation of NASA's Deorbit Strategy

The International Space Station (ISS), the most expensive and complex structure ever assembled in space, has become both an unrivaled hub of scientific research and an increasingly difficult aging outpost to maintain in low Earth orbit. The International Space Station (ISS) has been a laboratory for experiments in everything from advanced materials science to microgravity biology for more than two decades. But as it nears its planned retirement, stakeholders are grappling with how to responsibly wind down its operations, manage its physical end, and transition to new orbital platforms.

Recent research has shed light on how seemingly insignificant threats, like specks of orbital debris, have the potential to cause catastrophic events, providing one of the most vivid examples of the station's vulnerability. Fragments of defunct satellites or rocket stages frequently orbit Earth at speeds of approximately 28,000 kilometers per hour (17,500 miles per hour). Although most threats are tracked and avoided, detection systems are limited—only objects larger than a few centimeters are monitored reliably.

Within minutes to hours, a perilous loss of pressure could occur as a result of a penetrative strike that penetrates the station's hull. Astronauts would try emergency procedures like plugging the leak or isolating damaged parts, but depending on the damage, they might have to evacuate. Mission control on Earth would have to choose between trying to guide the ISS into a controlled re-entry or risking an uncontrolled descent that could scatter debris across large swaths of the planet if such a scenario occurred and rendered the ISS uninhabitable while it was still in orbit.

Ideally, the ISS would be gently steered into a remote region of the South Pacific Ocean by a dedicated deorbit spacecraft that is currently being developed by SpaceX under contract with NASA. This would minimize any risk to human populations. NASA and its international partners have outlined plans to retire the ISS around 2030. It is no longer possible to extend operations indefinitely because of its complicated modular design and the wear and tear it has sustained over decades in space. The station's original lifespan of 15 years has been extended by many years, but its primary structural components, life support systems, and electronics are getting old, making it expensive and risky to continue habitation.

In preparation for the end of life, NASA awarded a contract worth hundreds of millions of dollars to develop a U.S. Vehicle from Deorbit. For a controlled atmospheric re-entry, this specialized spacecraft is intended to dock with the station and provide the final thrust. The objective of this mission, which is scheduled to take place around 2030, is to target Point Nemo, a Pacific island that has no inhabitants and is frequently referred to as the "spacecraft cemetery" due to its extreme isolation. However, not every policymaker is content with a single course of action.

In recent congressional deliberations, lawmakers proposed that NASA examine alternatives to simply dumping the ISS into Earth’s atmosphere. One idea is to “stash” the station in a higher, stable orbit once its mission concludes. Proponents of this concept argue that preserving the station could allow future generations to access and potentially reuse the structure. However, engineers warn that reaching and maintaining such an orbit would necessitate enormous amounts of propellant, new technologies for propulsion, and continuous operational support—a combination that may be technically feasible but financially impractical.

In addition to scientific accomplishments, the ISS represents decades of international cooperation between the United States, Russia, Europe, Canada, and Japan. Its retirement raises broader questions about the future of human activity in low Earth orbit. Support for commercially developed space stations that could replace the ISS after 2030 is included in NASA's transition plan to guarantee continued access to microgravity research and orbital services. These private platforms—built by companies like Axiom Space and others—are envisioned as successors that NASA and other agencies could lease for research and commercial purposes.

Even though this strategy works, some experts say that if new stations aren't ready before the ISS goes down, there could be a gap in orbital presence. Others raise strategic arguments, noting that China’s own Tiangong space station currently maintains a continuous human presence in orbit, and ceding leadership in low Earth orbit could have geopolitical implications.

The scientific knowledge, partnerships, and technological advancements that the ISS enabled will not be the sole determinants of its legacy. Commercial ventures, international collaboration, and new orbital destinations define humanity's presence above Earth, and its planned descent into Earth's atmosphere marks the end of one chapter and the beginning of another. Yet even as we plan its farewell, the debates over how best to honor and preserve its contributions continue to reflect the station’s enduring significance in the story of space exploration.