Privatize Outer Space
The Review of Human Spaceflight Plans Committee (also known as the Augustine Committee, after its chairman, aerospace exec Norman Augustine) was set up by the Obama White House to assess future options for NASA. It has just released its final report, “Seeking a Human Spaceflight Program Worthy of a Great Nation.”
The report makes some good points but should have been bolder. At bottom, it is a cautious document, the kind of thing that Washington committees produce. The report asserts, plausibly, that NASA’s projected budget won’t allow any meaningful manned exploration beyond Earth orbit anytime soon and suggests the budget either be expanded (by a not-trivial but not-absurd $3 billion per year) or its ambitions scaled back.
It further argues, also reasonably, that a “moon-first” goal or a “flexible path” agenda that involves landing on asteroids and operating in free space are more feasible options for the next couple of decades than any crash program aimed directly at Mars, though the Red Planet is widely agreed to be a logical longer-term focus for human space exploration.
The committee pushes, rightly, for making Earth orbit travel into a commercial service (though fueled by government contracts) rather than the government operation it has long been. That prospect has raised some hackles, notably from Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, a staunch defender of the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center that’s located in his state.
The committee also argues, less convincingly, for extending the life of the International Space Station, on the grounds that doing otherwise would weaken the U.S. ability to gain international cooperation on future government space projects. (Even if true, this raises the question of how much real benefit the U.S. has gotten from such cooperation so far.)
How could the committee have been bolder? For one thing, by contemplating a serious private-sector role even in activities beyond Earth orbit. Government’s emphasis on the moon and even Mars could focus on offering cash prizes to companies that meet specified objectives of space exploration and development.
The committee also could have explored how space technology can address critical future issues of energy and climate. Space solar power (beaming energy from orbital or lunar solar arrays to Earth) is one such path. Another is mining helium-3 on the moon and using it as fuel for nuclear-fusion reactors. Humans, as well as robots, would be involved in constructing and operating such systems. Such ideas have been discussed by space enthusiasts for years, but have gained little notice in Washington.
These are futuristic possibilities, but the space program should be about the future. Revamping the human spaceflight agenda makes sense and should be done with real ambition — to solve terrestrial problems and build an extraterrestrial economy.