Space Exploration & Bush's Proposal

[Azyael]

WASHINGTON ¡X President Bush announced an ambitious plan Wednesday to send astronauts back to the moon, to create a permanent lunar colony and finally to make the first manned mission to Mars."It is time for America to take the next step," Bush said at NASA (search) headquarters in Washington, D.C. "We will begin the effort quickly. We'll make steady progress ¡X one mission, one voyage, one landing at a time."

The space program has "always reflected the finest values of our country," said Bush. "The desire to explore and understand is part of our character and that quest has brought tangible benefits that improve our lives in countless ways."

Bush said he envisioned "a new foothold on the moon ... and new journeys to the world beyond our own," underscoring renewed commitment to manned spaceflight less than a year after the loss of the space shuttle Columbia (search) and a crew of seven.

Under the plan, the United States would withdraw from the International Space Station (search) by 2010 and the aging space shuttle fleet would be retired at about the same time. The shuttle now costs NASA about $4 billion a year and the station about $1 billion.

In the shuttle's place, Bush called for development of a new Crew Exploratory Vehicle (search), capable of carrying astronauts to the space station and the moon.

The plan also calls for astronauts to go to Mars (search) by 2030. The president asked for an increase of less than 5 percent a year to NASA's budget, about $800 million per year over the next three years. A manned landing on the moon is estimated to cost about $50 billion.

The 2004 budget awaiting approval from the Senate calls for $15.5 billion for NASA, a $90 million increase over the previous year.

White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan says much of the funding for this initiative will come from shifting around about $11 billion within NASA's current five-year, $86 billion budget.

"There will be requests for additional funding," McClellan said. The president submits his annual budget request to Congress in early February.

McClellan would not say what the administration estimates the total cost of such programs would be, instead suggesting that other countries, perhaps including Russia, would share in the project and help bear the costs.

"Russia would have some important contributions," McClellan said
NASA administrator Sean O'Keefe (search) said the additional request is not a great demand on future budgets.

"What we're looking at is an investment that the president is going to propose that is less than 1 percent of the federal budget. Indeed, the average taxpayer will contribute what amounts to a monthly cable bill amount towards this, and that's about the extent of what is involved, it's not just a budget buster," O'Keefe told Fox News.

O'Keefe said that Bush's plan to set up a landing base on the moon will set NASA's agenda for the next 10 to 15 years.

NASA recently sent an unmanned craft to Mars, which has been sending back photographs of the surface of the planet. NASA scientists say that the images reflect the hypothesis that Mars once had water and the pictures show a surface of dried-out lake beds.

O'Keefe told Fox News that the space station provided some of the data needed to determine whether a lunar base is possible, and a lunar base will help determine the possibility of a manned mission to Mars.

"The effects of radiation, the effects of degeneration of muscle mass and bone mass and all those are factors that we can mitigate, and that's what we are doing on the International Space Station right now and will continue to do for the next decade, at least as to determine what those human endurance, human effects kinds of challenges are in order to make space exploration a reality," he said.

The effort to return to the moon will require building new spacecraft and sending out robotic craft to provide materials to be used later by human explorers, say experts.

O'Keefe said a colony on the moon could be used to exploit mineral resources of the lunar surface, such as helium-3 (search), an isotope that theoretically could be used for rocket fuel. There are suggestions that the moon has deposits of water near its poles. Water could be chemically split to obtain hydrogen and oxygen, a combination that could be used as a rocket propellant. The oxygen could be used for an atmosphere inside sealed shelters.

Almost one year ago, the president appeared at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas, to eulogize the seven astronauts who perished aboard Columbia.

At the time, Bush emphasized that the rationale for manned space flight transcends questions about money.

"This cause of exploration and discovery is not an option we choose; it is a desire written in the human heart. We are that part of creation, which seeks to understand all creation. We find the best among us, send them forth into unmapped darkness, and pray they will return. They go in peace for all mankind, and all mankind is in their debt," he told mourners.

Tell us your thoughts and ideas! Explain your poll answer.


Also, is Bush's idea a good one? What's a better way to go about it?

[drasoini]

I say "WOO HOO!"...then again I'm a space exploration advocate. I feel the space program could be a route for new technologies to be developed for the common man (Ie: us). Yes, there are problems here on Earth, and yes the money could probably be spent on them...but I really feel like the boys and girls at NASA know what they're doing more so than some of the other agencies within the U.S. government. Also, by the time ALL the problems on Earth are resolved, the world will end. There will ALWAYS be problems, because someone will ALWAYS find fault with someone else and complain and demand that it be changed. Oh yes, there are MANY more problems than just the complaints between one human and another...bah, I say go for it...we've been too idle in our exploration.

[Kard]

Originally posted by drasoini
I say "WOO HOO!"

So do I, I've always liked the thought of mankind pioneering into one of the last great unknowns. The Columbia disaster was a great blow to the space program, but I'm glad to see NASA get back to its feet to continue exploration.

Besides, I'm looking forward to the Moon becoming the 51st state.

[Lokrian]

New technologies of various sorts crossover from one to the other application, this is true, but that is not limited to new technology developed for space exploration. Any large scale push in technology of one sort or the other is going to enjoy some crossover profitability.

What we are discovering on the moon and Mars are elements of which we have an abundance already here on earth. In the meantime, much of the floor of our very own ocean remains unxplored if you need a "frontier" for people to expand into. It seems a rather odd set of values to try to set people on the moon, sending resources away from the earth to make it happen, when so much that we need to do is still right here, and could actually provide resources much more easily and profitably than any sort of space project could.

I chose the second choice of "now is not the time" not so much because I don't think exploration of space should continue, but that for now it seems that it would be best to continue it in unmanned status and as cost-effectively as possible in the sense of what is learned per dollar spent.

The biggest thing that makes me question myself on this is that I believe that in every age of progress, something has to fire the imagination of the people who make that progress. Space, without doubt, captures the spirit and imagination of a lot of people. It could be that this increase in funding for Nasa and these projects is more or less a banner being raised to unite people towards a common goal, and then use that emotionalistic wave to drive the engines of more practical endeavors as well as the space exploration. I'm not real sure if it's even possible to rate the "cost effectiveness" of something like that. It may be that this is just the time for this to be happening. I guess what I am trying to get at is there is a lot of dissillusionment out there, and this might be just the thing to create a more optimistic mindset in general.

To me though, just right now, it seems really pointless. Mars and the moon are basically just glorified rocks. We got lots of rocks. It's a question of priorities to me. Excitement is contagious, and if this sort of attention were given to say, medical infrastructure problems, with the same enthusiasm and with the same attention to the dollars and cents and long term goals and so forth, people might not only be more optimistic, but stand some chance of actually enjoying a better, healthier lifestyle to boot.

It might even result in a lot of people who don't necessarily have Phd's in physics or who are not world class pilots getting jobs.

[Aristotle]

Money spent on exploring space is far better spent than wasting it on welfare brood mares and other government giveaway programs.

Furthermore, the technologies that space exploration ends up yielding are unbeliveable. Modern day technologies like virtually all plastics, satellite/mobile communications, most ceramics (and ceramics are needed for fiber, which is the backbone of the internet), and microwave ovens are all thanks to the space program, for example.

[Wyden]

Personally, I think this is all bullshit on Bush's part to detract from the fact that the U.S. economy is still in the toilet (jobless rate remains high, dollar is sucking ass, etc.). Obviously, these things are bad for an incumbent during election year.

I'm going somewhat against the grain here, but I think the money is better used elsewhere, especially in areas that boost small business, which accounts for about half the jobs. Small biz accounts for about half the nation's GDP and accounts for most of the new jobs created in the US. Large projects like space exploration only go to big corporations who seldom create sub-contracts for smaller businesses).

Basically, I'm not opposed to space exploration, but I don't think it should be a high priority and I question Bush's motives for pushing it right now.

[Aristotle]

His motives are obvious: he wants to give the country something positive to look to rather than just war and economic garbage.

The motive is obvious, but the motive is a good one.

It has been far too long since the US put its economic might towards something this positive.

And as for helping small business: government investments in technology are always the biggest boon possible to the economy and to small business.

Hello internet?

[Jidoe]

Originally posted by Kard
Besides, I'm looking forward to the Moon becoming the 51st state.

Will they add another star to the flag, or will they add a moon?

Food for thought.