A Real Space Mission

Regarding "America needs a plan for space exploration" (Friday Outlook), I very much enjoyed Doug Cooke's article and his vision for reviving America’s space program.  Unfortunately his plan, like all others, is compromised by the lack of commitment to long term funding and the ever-changing vision of successive presidents.  Case in point, since the era of the Apollo moon landings, the direction of our space program has been substantially changed at least three times, most recently with President Obama’s decision to abandon the Bush plan of a return to the moon.  Likewise, funding has dwindled in the past 40 years.  NASA is the only department of government to shrink since the 60s, much less by 50%.

To move forward with a vigorous space program, what is needed is a mission that is consistently funded, and immune to political partisanship or differing visions of what America's role in space ought to be.  There is only one mission that meets these criteria, and that is Planetary Defense.  Humankind has no greater priority than survival, and yet we have done next to nothing to protect ourselves from collisions with meteors and comets.  The evidence that such things happen is all around us:

 

-       Two weeks ago, a comet estimated at 1,500 feet long flew within 2 million miles of our planet, a literal hair's width away, and we had no knowledge that it even existed until a week beforehand.  A meteor that size could devastate a continent and create a crater 2 miles wide.

 

-       A year ago, a small asteroid only 65 feet in diameter struck over Russia, injuring hundreds.  The explosion was the equivalent of a modern nuclear bomb, and if it had hit directly over a major city, it would have caused mass casualties.

 

-       In 1994, upwards of twenty comet fragments – some as large as one mile in diameter - struck the planet Jupiter.  A similar impact with the Earth likely would have resulted in the extinction of mankind.

 

There have been several other similar events in the modern era, including the 1908 Tunguska explosion in Siberia that destroyed hundreds of square miles of forest.  It was estimated to be a mere 200 feet in diameter, yet with a destructive power 1,000 times greater than the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima during World War II.

 

The advantages of Planetary Defense as the core of our space efforts are numerous and compelling:

 

-       The practicality of the program makes it a no-brainer: We either do it or risk mass death and possible extinction. 

 

-       It’s cheap: For the first decade, less than $15 per citizen of planet Earth per year.

 

-        Humankind will require a presence in space for as long as we occupy this planet, so funding will be consistent.

 

-       The infrastructure built to support a Planetary Defense program could be used to leverage exploration and colonization of our solar system for a fraction of what standalone missions would cost. 

 

-       Economies of scale would make space tourism a profitable reality, and help pay for the program.

 

-       We have a ready-made workforce for the manufacture, deployment and support of such an effort: hundreds of thousands of Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans already have the training and understanding of the technologies, organizational structure and  communications necessary to make the effort work.  Those same skills and mental toughness would also provide a huge pool of candidates to survive the very rigorous life of a much expanded  astronaut corp.  Another huge benefit is the ability to deploy disabled vets, particularly those who have lost limbs: not only would they survive in space, they would thrive.

 

-       It provides a practical use for America's arsenal of 5,000 nuclear weapons.  A single comet or asteroid might require scores of nukes to either destroy it or deflect its course.  The use of nukes to prevent a collision is actually favored by the Obama administration, and is the only available technology to deploy for many decades to come.

 

The program could be put in play for $100 Billion per year - a six fold increase in NASA's current budget.  That would be enough to pay not only for a couple of manned deep space platforms, but the transportation infrastructure to support them, a network of satellites to detect foreign bodies, and the launchers necessary to deal with any that threaten the Earth.

 

That represents a mere 15% of our military budget, or 5% of current entitlement spending.  We could fund the entire program simply by eliminating a small percentage of the waste and fraud in these programs, and a revived manufacturing sector based on space technology would do wonders for America's economy as well as reducing the need for an ever-expanding welfare state.  Another option is a $100 Billion reduction in the military spending we do to protect Europe, the Middle East and Southeast Asia, which currently costs us over a quarter trillion dollars.

 

If there is not a quick international consensus, America should start out doing this alone.  Otherwise, the bureaucrats will bog it down, and we will end up with another compromise boondoggle like the International Space Station: a noble idea that so far has cost over $150 billion, but accomplished little.  In fact, with the implementation of a Planetary Defense initiative, the ISS could be the platform to launch the effort, and be viable for generations. 

 

Bottom line, virtually every venture into space could then not only be sustained, but improved upon.  Every technology relating to space - including propulsion, habitats, communications and navigation - would be developed to allow us to seriously consider colonizing the solar system.

 

We are destined to be a space-faring people but that will never happen until we sustain our investment and have a foundational venture.  It's well past time to not only protect our species and all life on Earth, but to move beyond its confines.  Investing in our survival is the logical first step.

 

Pete Smith

Cypress, TX