Abraham Lincoln said, “With public sentiment, nothing can fail; without it, nothing can succeed.” In 1989 Americans celebrated the 20-year anniversary of Apollo 11 landing on the moon. Then President George H. W. Bush stated, “Before the 50th anniversary of our first flight landing on the Moon, the American flag should be planted on Mars!” We are now five years from the former president’s dream, and it appears all too certain that we will not be planting the American flag on Mars anytime soon. So what happened? When did we decide as a society our thirst for space exploration was quenched on the moon?
Under the George H. W. Bush Administration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) saw a welcome resurgence in federal funding. As a result, the number of shuttle missions doubled in the 1990s compared with the 1980s. This resulted in a number of technological advancements and scientific discoveries. For example, the Hubble Space Telescope has provided invaluable information which profoundly altered our understanding of the universe. It was Hubble which revealed the universe is 13.8 billion years old and the universe is actually increasing in speed as it expands. It confirmed the existence of black holes, identified the existence of “dark energy” and discovered visual proof depicting how planets form within a solar system.
When proposing an increase in funding for NASA, the first question people ask is, “Why should we spend tax dollars up there?” as they point to the sky. This statement reflects a fundamental lack of understanding regarding what our space program does for our country, not just “up there” but for people on Earth as well.
In order to illustrate this point we can look once again at the Hubble telescope. When it was launched in 1990, the images it captured were blurry. Future space shuttle missions would be sent to fix the problem; however, NASA addressed the situation by creating an algorithm to enhance the quality of the blurry photos. That algorithm has since been adapted to enhance mammogram imagery quality thereby increasing the detection rate of breast cancer. NASA calls these technological achievements “spin-offs.” Some other spin-offs include the development of insulin pumps for diabetics, moon boot technology adapted for athletic shoes, digital image processing technology adapted for CAT scans and state of the art water purification systems. NASA scientists invented the adjustable smoke detector. NASA’s shuttle and robotics programs have been adapted to create more functional artificial limbs. Fire resistant polymer fabric created by NASA has been used to protect military and civilian firefighters. The list goes on and on. Clearly, when we spend money “up there” rather than throwing money away, we are in fact investing it for future returns. All of these advances, and a great deal more, were made possible because of NASA’s Technology Transfer Program which seeks to open up NASA’s research and technology for use in the private sector.
NASA’s annual budget for calendar year 2014 is a mere 0.48 percent of the federal budget, which is less than half a penny on the tax dollar. That small sum pays for the Hubble telescope, the production of the James Webb Space Telescope, the three currently operational Mars rovers, the International Space Station (ISS), the planning of future missions, the immense array of satellites in orbit above us today as well as all of its facilities and personnel.
Under current budget allocations, NASA has stated they will be unable to undertake a manned mission to Mars. That pronouncement is completely unacceptable. When you see the transformation of a country that is the result of putting man on the moon, which is in our cosmic backyard, just imagine the ramifications of putting man on an entirely different planet. Consider this; imagine the Earth is the size of an average classroom globe. Proportionally, the moon would be 30 feet away from Earth while Mars would be 1 mile away. It took NASA astronauts about three days to travel to the moon. Conversely, it is estimated that it would take about eight months to reach Mars. Similarly, communication during the Apollo missions had a 2.6 second delay from the moon to earth and vice versa. Communications to and from the surface of Mars, however, vary from 4.3 to 21 minutes depending on the distance Mars is from the Earth. These issues are challenges that even NASA admits will be tough to overcome, but given the history of the aforementioned technological advances that were created just by exploring our “backyard,” imagine what we might achieve by walking a mile in a Martian’s shoes.
An international coalition of private and government agencies have said they could realistically land on Mars by the late 2020s or early 2030s, but this is contingent on two associated events. First, the coalition’s plan hinges on the availability of NASA’s two newest and most innovative space transportation systems to date: the Space Launch System (SLS) and the deep space crew capsule known as Orion. Second, for its plan to succeed, it would require an increase in NASA’s budget. This is telling of how significant NASA’s contributions still are, despite its minimal budget.
In 2011, NASA witnessed the end of its manned space shuttle program due to budget constraints on Capitol Hill. The decision to discontinue the manned program was unprecedented in NASA’s history. This did not mean the end of Americans in space, as there are still astronauts traveling to and from the ISS. We’re able to do that only by paying Russia $63 million per passenger to get them to the station. Despite Russia’s recent actions in the Crimean Peninsula and America’s sanctions against the Russians, NASA has paid them $457.9 million dollars for services rendered. Forcing NASA to rely on another country’s manned space program is a travesty of such magnitude it makes you wonder if our politicians are even aware of the consequences of their actions.
For nearly three years, we have been wholly dependent on the Russian government to allow us to hitch a ride to space in order to work on a space station in which we have invested nearly $100 billion, and continue to invest another $3 billion per year. Second, the discontinuation of the American space shuttle program didn’t simply mean we stopped launching our shuttles into space, it also meant that over 9,000 experienced engineers, physicists, mathematicians and production workers were laid off.
For the first time in 43 years, children no longer want to be astronauts. American children between ages 6-12 no longer rank astronaut as one of the top 10 jobs they would like to do when they grow up. We’re losing the next generation because they have nothing to dream about. This should come as no surprise. When kids don’t have heroes to look up to in a profession, what’s driving them to pursue a life devoted to that profession? If we no longer had athletes and pop stars on television for young children to look up to and emulate, would they want to be athletes and pop stars? I contend they would not. At a time when the United States is experiencing a shortage of engineers, mathematicians and scientists, by diminishing NASA’s budget, we seem to be sending a signal that those professions simply aren’t very important, but nothing could be further from the truth.
Just over two years ago, noted astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson was requested to testify before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation to talk about how NASA could be a program capable of kick-starting our economy. There are 24 senators on this committee. Of these 24 senators, only three came to Tyson’s testimony. In the 1960s America demanded our government beat the Soviet Union in the “Space Race.” Because the vast majority of the public was behind the space program, it received all the funding necessary to be the first nation to land on the moon. We must, as a nation, reenergize our space program and require Congress to reinstate adequate funding for NASA once more.
Now that our few remaining astronauts who are launched into space do so from somewhere in Russia and not the Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Fla., it’s as if they are the athlete that receives no airtime. Young Americans are no longer able to see the next crew of astronauts smile and wave to the folks sitting at home as they make that legendary slow motion walk in those all-too-recognizable blaze orange and blue trim flight suits. Younger Americans in particular are being deprived of the experience of sitting at Cape Canaveral and hearing a man over the intercom narrating: “T-minus 90 seconds and counting.” Children won’t sit on their father’s shoulders to get the best view in the house, and they won’t have their dads tell them that it could be them in that space shuttle someday. They won’t share the excitement of hearing the countdown, drowned out for a few seconds by the cacophony of the shuttle’s engine right before hearing the final “3. 2. 1. Liftoff! We have liftoff!” Will our youth ever again be witness to a behemoth of perfectly engineered craftsmanship ascend through the sky as if gravity decided to let this one go?
What is your view on NASA and funding space exploration? Please send all feedback to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
