The discovery marks only the second time that an asteroid’s impact risk has reached greater than a 1% chance.

Update (February 20, 2025): The Sentry system now lists the impact probability to only 0.27%, much less than earlier estimates. Now that the chance of impact has fallen below 1%, the Torino rating for 2024 YR4 has been downgraded from 3 to 1, meaning there is not much concern.

Update (February 19, 2025): JPL's Sentry system has updated with the newest positions, putting the impact risk from 2024 YR4 at 1.5%, lowering the impact chance from earlier estimates.

Update (February 13, 2025): Please see the latest on this asteroid in our update, "Webb Telescope to Weigh in on Impact Odds for Asteroid 2024 YR4".

The original story appears below.


Impact "corridor" overlaid on global map
The "risk corridor" (in red) outlines possible places where the newly discovered asteroid might impact, given current observations. Note that the impact chance currently stands at about 1%, and further observations are needed to refine the object's orbit.
Daniel Bamberger



Astronomers — professional and amateur alike — have turned their attention to an asteroid with a slight chance of impacting Earth in 2032, based on current observations. While the possibility is slim, and more observations are needed, the object itself might be large enough to devastate a city, motivating follow-up observations as well as archival searches for pre-discovery observations.

The asteroid, designated 2024 YR4, was first noticed on December 27, 2024, by the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS); searches quickly revealed that ATLAS had already imaged it two days earlier. Then, as observations accumulated, astronomers could roughly determine its orbit. That’s when the realization dawned: The object has some chance of striking Earth.

On Monday, January 27th, NASA’s Sentry impact-tracking system officially raised the asteroid to a level 3 on the Torino scale. This is only the second time that an asteroid has merited a rating greater than 2 on the 10-point Torino scale, created in 1999 to convey the risk of an impact. At this level, an object has more than 1% chance of striking Earth.  

Only one other object, asteroid 99942 Apophis, discovered in 2004, has ever reached that high on the scale. That asteroid peaked at 4, with a possibility of impact in 2029. But additional observations soon ruled that out, sending it back to a Torino rating of 0 — meaning no possible impact within the next century.

The chance of impact for 2024 YR4 is still slim: NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory estimates 1.2%. But if it does happen, German astronomer Daniel Bamberger (Northolt Branch Observatories) has used observations in hand to constrain the possible impact in time and location: The impact would take place on December 22, 2032, somewhere along a long line that extends from the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Mexico, through Ecuador and northern South America, across the Atlantic, through central Africa (from Kenya to Somalia), and then across to northern India.

The possible impact track covers big stretches of ocean as well as populated areas and some large cities. “I’d be really excited to see an impact,” Bamberger says, “but I don’t want it to be this one. Something over Antarctica, please!”

Given 2024 YR4’s estimated diameter of 40 to 100 meters — somewhere between the size of a tennis court and a football field — its impact could result in anything from the Chelyabinsk air-blast in 2013 to the ¾-mile-wide Barringer Crater in Arizona. It all depends on this object’s true size and mass, and those remain uncertain enough that the magnitude of a potential impact could vary by more than a factor of 10, Bamberger says.

Richard Binzel (MIT), a specialist in asteroid observations and developer of the Torino scale, explains that, until more observations are obtained, the asteroid’s orbit, and thus its current position in space, can't be known exactly. “When we first discover an object, there’s uncertainty about where it’s going to be many years or decades into the future, and that uncertainty stretches out into a long thin noodle,” he says. The spaghetti shape comes about because the greatest uncertainty lies along the direction of travel.

“As we get more and more observations of this asteroid . . . most likely, the noodle will begin to shrink,” he adds. “Eventually, we expect that the pinpoint spot for that tiny leftover grain of the noodle will miss Earth. That’s what the odds favor.”

But making those observations could take some time, and with the asteroid now receding fast, obtaining data precise enough to further refine its orbit will be increasingly difficult. It will return to Earth’s vicinity in late 2028, at which point it should be possible to determine a very precise orbit, and either positively rule out the chance of impact or prove that it’s highly likely.

 “More and more telescopes on Earth are making an effort to continue to follow the object,” Binzel says, “so I’m optimistic that we’ll get good tracking data over the next several weeks.”

On Closer Inspection . . .

It’s also possible that an impact is more likely than JPL’s initial estimate. Sam Deen, a California-based amateur astronomer, says that he searched through observations from the Subaru telescope in Hawai‘i taken in 2016, looking at the position the asteroid would have had if it were on possible non-impacting trajectories. He found no trace of the asteroid in areas covering roughly 80% of all such trajectories. That finding, in turn, raises the odds for a collision, which he estimates at between 3% and 6%.

“I invite people to double check me,” he says, “because it’s been just me looking at this. I could have missed something.” If his calculations are correct, it means the asteroid will pass at least within 120,000 km (80,000 miles) of Earth in 2032.

Deen tells Sky & Telescope that one way to rule out — or in — the possibility of impact is to find prior observations of exactly the point where the asteroid would have had to be if it were indeed on a collision course. If there were nothing there, then the asteroid couldn’t be on that course, and an impact would be ruled out.

Unfortunately, no publicly available images cover that particular patch of sky deeply enough to have resolved the issue. However, archives show that a telescope at Palomar Observatory did take three images of that exact region of the sky, also in 2016 — it’s just that they’re not yet not public. Deen has reached out to the observatory to see if those images could be released. If so, we could potentially resolve the question of 2024 YR4’s possible impact once and for all.

Comments


Image of Andrew James

Andrew James

January 29, 2025 at 3:07 am

The possible impact track covers big stretches of ocean as well as populated areas and some large cities. “I’d be really excited to see an impact,” Bamberger says, “but I don’t want it to be this one. Something over Antarctica, please!”

The last place in the world do you have an impact would be Antarctica. If enough energy was placed into the ice shelf, the amount of water that would be released would cause the sea levels to rise rapidly. If you thought climate change was bad, it would likely be certainly the true end of us all. It's an interesting thought, and such an explanation maybe an explanation for rapid rising changes of sea level in the same order as ice ages.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Daniel Bamberger

Daniel Bamberger

January 31, 2025 at 12:32 pm

If I may clarify: An impact large enough to affect the ice sheet would be catastrophic anyway. We're talking about a small one. Something like 2024 YR4 would have little to no serious effects in Antarctica.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Andrew James

Andrew James

January 31, 2025 at 7:23 pm

Agreed. However, I was referring to an actual report that was made in 2021 of a possible event that occurred 430,000 years ago. The study was done by Dr. Matthias van Ginneken from the University of Kent's School of Physical Sciences with other collaborators. This was from an estimated impact that was about 2000 km in diameter near the Sør Rondane Mountains in East Antarctica. Energies released would certainly send ice crystals, but because the ice shelf is so thick the resultant plume would be mostly water vapour and not much dirt.[1]
It seems the worst possible mass extinction event may have even occurred in Wilkes Land region in East Antarctica some 250 million years ago. The crater for this event 1,000 km. crater and may have been responsible for the Gondwana supercontinent for it to have broken it apart up and pushing Australia and India ever northward. It may have been the reason for the Permian-Triassic extinction too.
Whilst I do agree that the impact that this asteroid would have would not be as drastic, it sort of highlights formation of mascons and the risk of a very large asteroid events.
Regardless, this article is interesting for the continued need to understand these events and the possible impact it has on catastrophic effects on humanity from space. I appreciate your words. It is always very good when researchers make comments on stories like this. It has the excellent effect of getting people interested in the subject by knowing that the researcher is actually interested in the topic. It may not get a citation, but it sure improves the profile! Thanks.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Andrew James

Andrew James

January 29, 2025 at 3:12 am

I have good friends in both Cartegena in Colombia and New Delhi in India! Fingers crossed that the data is wrong or that the new observations improve the outlook somewhat. Otherwise these folk might get nervous.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Alain Maury

Alain Maury

January 31, 2025 at 7:12 pm

It's not really a problem of probability, it's a problem of the probability that the probability is incorrect. And that probability is quite high. I.e. unless a predicted impact is just weeks away, no communication should be done when the observations lead to such imprecise orbits. That's one of the major defect of the Torino scale. A 100m asteroid colliding with Earth in one week is way more dangerous than a 500m colliding in 30 years, because in the second case we have time to do something and mitigate the threat. There is no way to include the time before possible impact in the Torino scale. Since it is very likely there are no asteroids going to impact the earth in the coming century, this scale is useless, it just serves to scare the people who don't know every few other years. For such an asteroid, it was enough to alert the few telescopes still able to do something about it (it's currently above magnitude 22), improve the orbit, show that the probability of impact goes to 0, and that's it. But now, you can be sure there will be some tabloids who are going to make their covers out of that story, and in 2 weeks it will be forgotten. Talking about Apophis, we were "lucky" (?) that it reached it's highest fake probability during the week of the big tsunami in Asia, and nobody talked about it then.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Andrew James

Andrew James

January 31, 2025 at 7:35 pm

I kind of agree. The problem with probability is that the majority of people don't understand it. The papers are reporting that there is a 1% chance of impact. They attributed it as good odds, when a 1% chance is probable much more worrying. We know the real impact of an asteroid event, but the average person hasn't a clue. The reason we need to scare people into action, is so we can mitigate such events by interfering with the trajectory of an asteroid to miss the Earth. The biggest flaw is that the media is generally very ill-informed, and they need to report more precisely and understand the phenomenon. Education of reporters in the media is probably a higher priority. Someone, IMO, should be teaching THEM probability and what it means.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Glenn Horton-Smith

Glenn Horton-Smith

February 15, 2025 at 9:14 am

I'm confused why the "risk corridor" is so narrow. The JPL Horizons prediction for the asteroid's 2032 close approach has a 3 standard deviation uncertainty of about 20,000 km in the J2000 "Z" coordinate (which is the direction perpendicular to the equatorial plane, i.e., north/south on the map). That's 3 times the radius of the Earth. The uncertainty in the other directions is even larger.

In any case, the center of the most likely "corridor" for 2024 YR4 passes 160,000 km away from Earth. (Give or take 700,000 km or so.)

Is there some incredibly huge correlation between the orbital uncertainties that makes the band of possible trajectories so compressed in "Z" this far from the best fit trajectory?

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Image of Glenn Horton-Smith

Glenn Horton-Smith

February 16, 2025 at 7:00 am

So just to answer my own question: yeah, there is indeed a really huge correlation between the 6 orbital parameters.

If you ask JPL's Small Body Database API the right question you can get the covariance matrix of the orbital elements. A little principal component analysis reveals a nearly 100% correlation between eccentricity, perihelion distance, time of perihelion passage, argument of perihelion, and inclinationSo just to answer my own question: yeah, there is indeed a really huge correlation between the 6 orbital parameters.

Also, if you ask JPL's "Horizons" system the right query (CA_TABLE_TYPE="extended"), it will give close-approach ellipse in coordinates perpendicular to the track of the asteroid, and it is indeed really narrow in one dimension, like less than 1 km. They do warn that the these uncertainties can be off by factors of a few or more.

Anyway, the thinness of the line on the map by Daniel Bamberger is not inconsistent.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

You must be logged in to post a comment.