In 1969, there was a sizable appetite for manned space exploration. U.S. astronauts landed on the moon, and the public was able to witness it. The success of the Apollo program invigorated NASA’s space program, and general enthusiasm for the possibilities of space. Since the beginning of space travel, there has always been an ambition to go further, faster, and longer. Efforts such as the International Space Station demonstrate a global commitment to collaboration on the mission to explore beyond our atmosphere. A recent NASA program, Constellation, was very similar to the Apollo program in that it seeks to put people on the moon again by 2020. President Obama’s recent budget proposal all but kills the Constellation program. However, a closer look at the budget demonstrates that space exploration itself is not dead yet.
Constellation was essentially seeking to put U.S. astronauts on the moon in a manner similar to the moon mission decades ago. A panel convened by Obama’s administration, which included former astronauts, deemed the Constellation program to be a stale effort, not worth the cost. This new approach does not doom U.S. space exploration. In fact, it could invigorate it.
The 2011 budget gives NASA $276 million more than the previous budget. And more increases are coming in the following years. According to The Washington Post, “the language in the budget repeatedly emphasizes technological innovation to make space travel less expensive.” This new focus is what NASA needs. George W. Bush’s call to get back to the moon was ambitious. But it was also arcane and short-sighted. NASA should seek a more well-rounded approach to its mission. Space travel should not just be about planting a flag on the moon for a must-see TV moment. In addition, fears that people will lose their jobs might be unrealistic. NASA has not been left behind. In consideration of the problems that we are having taking care of the one planet that we have, opportunities in space need to be explored. Former astronaut Sally Ride described the shift in focus as a vote of confidence for NASA that utilizes the Agency as an “engine of innovation.”
We can go to the moon. Recent evidence suggests that there is frozen water on the moon. Fresh water shortages on this planet are already present, and could soon become critical. We also need to find other options. Some believe that asteroids and other space debris may contain fresh water. There is limited evidence that there may be other planets outside of our solar system that are habitable. Gliese-581 e and Gliese-581 d both point us in the right direction. And even planets in our own system have resources (such as minerals) that people might be able to utilize back here on Earth.
The new budget is seeking innovations in space flight itself. This could lead to space taxis that will make travel and commerce around the planet even quicker. Furthermore, it is another way to travel that might prove friendly to the environment. Congestion and pollution in space will be more easily mitigated than it is within the atmosphere that we depend on. NASA can and should be working on making space travel faster and more efficient so that we might go even further than the moon. There is a renewed focus on encouraging private enterprise in the space travel sector. Private enterprise will create competition. This should increase quality and efficiency in a technological sector that needs innovation. The new budget also calls for any new exploration to be an international collaboration, according to The New York Times. The vast challenge of space does warrant cooperation. While delays by one country, or diplomatic issues, could hinder the overall program, it is worth a shot. The reasons for exploring space should not be merely about national pride. Everyone on this planet has a stake in what we do in space. The new approach proposed by the administration might just be a sustainable and effective path to space operations.
A New Plan for Space
February 1st, 2010 by merlin36745 Leave a reply »
Advertisement
I agree, but with some caveats. The exploration of space often seems to be overlooked in favor of seemingly more immediately and more pressing issues such as homeland security and the economy….perhaps rightly so, but space exploration is not entirely devoid of importance. During the 60s a great deal of our “appetite for manned space exploration” resulted from a sense of competition with the soviets and fear of any military advantage they might gain over us. While the cold war has since died and we are no longer in a blatant arms race with any other nation, I believe that the development of manned exploration in space strongly ties into America’s military security. The loss of the constellation project and the uncertain future of a replacement to the space shuttle program provide opportunities for counties like China to begin to close the gap on the huge American advantages in space exploration. At the moment space may not seem as an area of critical importance in terms of national security, but Russia thought the same thing about Alaska before they sold it to us for a song.