To complete the International Space Station by 2010 (after which the US will withdraw from the project). To aid in this the Space Shuttle will be returned to flight. The shuttle will then be retired.
A new manned exploration vehicle to explore beyond Earth. The new spacecraft, the Crew Exploration Vehicle, will be developed and tested by 2008 and will be in service by 2014.
The United States will aim to return to the Moon no later than 2020 and use it as a stepping stone for more ambitious missions. The United States will aim to send a series of robotic missions to prepare for future human exploration. Using the crew exploration vehicle, the US to undertake extended human missions to the Moon as early as 2015.
The United States will aim to use the Moon as a base for further human space exploration beyond the Moon beginning with Mars.

Following his speech President Bush announced in February that the NASA budget for 2005 would be increased by 5.6% to $16.2 billion, with an increase of 13.6% (to over $6.6 billion) in spending on space flight programmes and a 13.3% increase (to reach $8.5 billion) in the budget for human space exploration.

Plaudits say that it provides a much needed setting of goals for NASA. They say that such ambitious plans will attract talented people to science and engineering fields.

Some critics say that the details revealed so far are much too vague in terms of cost and financing. Although costs were not specified the previous President Bush's administration estimated it would cost from $300 to $500 billion for a manned flight to Mars.

James Van Allen (who discovered the belts of radiation around the Earth that were later named after him) is among those who question whether there is a future for a manned space exploration component. NASA's experience has shown that remote exploration with robotic probes and space telescopes yields far greater scientific benefits than manned exploration. Just two days after President Bush unveiled his new space program proposals, NASA announced it was to cancel future maintenance of the Hubble Space Telescope. For the last ten years Hubble (often termed the most significant telescope since Galileo's in 1609) has helped astronomers to make discoveries that have revolutionised their understanding of the universe.

Former astronaut John Glenn (the first American to orbit the Earth) has also questioned the abandonment of a wide-ranging scientific programme for the International Space Station and the extra cost of building a Cape Canaveral on the Moon as a stepping stone to Mars.

It has also been suggested that the timing of the announcements is related to the November re- elections. Some suggest that Bush is looking for some big themes to guide his re-election efforts. The states with most to benefit from space exploration are Florida and California. Both states could be pivotal in the re-elections.

So what is there to worry me?

Nuclear Power in Space
NASA claims that the enormous distances between Earth, Mars and beyond mean that the only viable source of power is Nuclear Power. Last year NASA changed the name of its Nuclear Systems Initiative to Project Prometheus. Prometheus is targeted at utilising nuclear energy for space exploration in two ways: Nuclear Fission based propulsion systems (nuclear rockets) to propel spacecraft and Radioisotope based generators to provide energy for the mission tasks.1

Nuclear Fission based propulsion systems: There are two types - Nuclear Thermal Propulsion and Nuclear Electric Propulsion. For both the idea is to use a small nuclear reactor to split (fission) uranium atoms. The fission process consists of neutrons being fired at uranium atoms, causing them to split into smaller atoms called fission products. The energy released during the process is in the form of heat (thermal energy) which can be converted to electricity or used directly to power the spacecraft.

The idea behind Nuclear Thermal Propulsion is to use the heat generated by the fission process to heat a propellant and create thrust. Nuclear Electric Propulsion converts the heat into electricity which, in turn, is used to ionise the atoms in a propellant by stripping them of electrons. The atoms would then have positive electric charges and could therefore be accelerated by magnetic or electrical grids out of the spacecraft at very high exhaust speeds. This would propel the spacecraft. 2

Radioisotope based generators: These work by converting heat emitted by the natural decay of radioisotope materials into electricity via the use of a thermocouple. The electricity is then used to carry out mission tasks, power instrumentation etc. The radioactive material used is typically plutonium-238 dioxide. Radioisotope based generators have been used for over twenty years in the form of Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators (RTG). Indeed the Cassini probe that caused great alarm by carrying 71 pounds of plutonium for RTG operation during a flyby maneuver around the Earth in 1999. NASA aims to develop a new generation of radioisotope based generators that will supply even more power.

Having a nuclear reactor in space, however small, is not necessarily a good idea. Accidents do occur. In April 1964 a U.S. military satellite with 2.1 pounds of plutonium-238 on-board fell to Earth and burned up as it hit the atmosphere spreading the toxic plutonium globally.3 In 1978 a Soviet Cosmos 954 satellite scattered approximately 100 pounds of uranium-235 over Northwest Canada.4 In 1970 the ill-fated Apollo 11 mission jettisoned 8.3 pounds of plutonium-238 before re-entering the Earth's atmosphere. NASA claims it lies intact at the bottom of the South Pacific Ocean. Since 1969 there have been at least 8 incidents involving the loss of Soviet/Russian spacecraft powered by nuclear reactors fuelled by uranium or plutonium. In 1996 a nuclear powered Russian Mars mission disintegrated over South America, spreading its payload of nearly half a pound of plutonium over Chile and/or Bolivia.

The Columbia shuttle disaster last year was a tragedy, but if Columbia had contained a nuclear fission based propulsion system then radioactive material from the reactor would have been sprayed over the southwest of the United States.

NASA claim that their existing radioisotope based generators contain safety measures to prevent any of the plutonium leaking in the event of an accident and that the new generation will be even safer. However, as Columbia proved, sooner or later catastrophic system failures do occur.

NASA's launch record shows that space travel carries an inherent risk and accidents occur however hard one focuses on safety. Although nuclear power may give scientists increased quantities of power with which to explore the solar system (although more efficient solar cells are now able to power space missions out into deep space - beyond the orbit of Jupiter) they come with an increased risk. Surely, it is one risk we can do without until other, safer alternatives are developed?

Space exploration as a Trojan Horse to maintain the US military advantage

Although there would not be much of an advantage in establishing a base on the Moon for future trips to Mars - it would make a very useful military base.

The Bush administration has become concerned about the vulnerability of their space-based systems on which the US military have come to depend for conducting their global operations. Without high-speed satellite communications, weather monitoring and prediction, global positioning systems, navigation for precision-guided munitions and high-resolution imagery, the US military's ability to respond quickly to world-wide situations would be seriously diminished. All space-based assets have inherent vulnerabilities stemming from their technological and operational parameters. As more and more countries develop their own space capabilities, the US is becoming increasingly worried that their technological advantage in space is diminishing and that their space based systems are becoming more susceptible to interference from its enemies. Furthermore, new commercial technology that could be put to military use (such as high-resolution commercial imagery and satellite navigation/positioning equipment) is increasingly available on the open marketplace.

The collapse of the Soviet Union left the United States as the only superpower. However, China is rapidly taking the USSR's place. According to a June 2000 DoD report to congress, the US believes that China may have ambitions to use space for military purposes:
"Although nearly all major aspects of China's manned space program began within the last five years or so, Beijing is still aiming for a possible first manned launch by 2001. While one of the strongest motivations for this program appears to be political prestige, China's manned space efforts could contribute to improved military space systems in the 2010-2020 time frame. In addition to scientific and technical experiments, Chinese astronauts, for instance, could investigate the utility of manned reconnaissance from space." 5

In October 2003, China reached the milestone of putting its first piloted space flight in Earth orbit and has announced plans for sending more astronauts into space in 2005, to launch a Moon probe within 3 years and to go to the Moon by 2010. Bush's interest in space may be the U.S. response to this, especially since military domination of space is a key part of the US Missile Defence plans.

The United States aims to put sensors, radars and missile systems into space to detect, track and destroy hostile missiles. In February 2004, budget papers sent to the US congress showed that George W. Bush's spending plans, for the fiscal year starting 1 October 2004, included an unspecified amount, according to the Pentagons Missile Defence Agency, for "advanced, lightweight, space-based (missile) interceptor components." The agency said that it was seeking $47 million to start "technology development of such weapons and others that could be phased into a multi layered U.S missile shield starting in January 2012". The Pentagon aims to have missile interceptors in orbit for testing by 2014. It would give the United States the capability to attack enemy satellites as well as incoming warheads. China has voiced strong objections.6

This could be the start of a new space race between the US and China with the aim on both sides of gaining domination of space to use it for military purposes. If this sounds a little farfetched to you, then bear in mind that what originally motivated the space race between the US and Soviet Union was not a desire to plant an American or Soviet flag on the Moon, nor the desire to gather some interesting rocks but the spectre of nuclear weapons in space pointing at each other's cities. In fact both sides went on to sign (along with around 90 other countries) the 1968 'Outer Space Treaty' which prevents the stationing of nuclear weapons in space.

China is already a nuclear power and the US missile defence plans are encouraging China to further develop its nuclear capability to overcome the US limited missile shield. In turn this is pushing China's neighbours, India and Pakistan to enhance their nuclear arsenals.

Claiming ownership of the Moon's resources

Another reason for the Bush administration's interest in space could be that the extended human presence on the Moon would enable the United States to harness the abundant resources of the Moon and planets. Scientists have discovered valuable resources on the Moon. Helium-3, a scarce isotope of normal Helium, is a fuel that is seen as a replacement for the dwindling supply of fossil fuels back here on Earth via nuclear fusion. Helium-3 is rare on Earth but abundant on the Moon.

It is estimated that the Moon contains 1 million tons of Helium-3, enough to power the Earth for thousands of years.7 It has been estimated that one metric ton of Helium-3 could be worth nearly $1.5 billion - more than 120 times the value of gold.

In a New York Times article of 1995, science writer Lawrence Joseph said that "If we ignore the potential of this remarkable fuel; the nation could slip behind in the race for control of the global economy". Joseph asks, "Will the Moon become the Persian Gulf of the 21st Century?" meaning that if the US can get a monopoly on Helium-3 it wouldn't have to worry about the Gulf States and their oil.

The US could tell the world what the price of energy would be - or deny them its accessibility.

For more Information see:

References
1. Project Prometheus: NASA site - http://spacescience.nasa.gov/missions/prometheus.htm
2. Nuclear Fission based propulsion: NASA site - http://spacescience.nasa.gov/missions/fissiontech.pdf
3. 1964 US Military satellite accident - http://www.earthisland.org/eijournal/new_articles.cfm?articleID=210&journalID=474
4. 1978 Cosmos 954 satellite accident - http://www.earthisland.org/eijournal/fall97/wr_fall97plutonium.html
5. US Department Defense annual report on the military power of the people's republic of China: June 2000 - http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2000/china06222000.htm
6. 'Bush moves towards Star Wars Missile Defence': Reuters - 2 February 2004 - http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_5-2-2004_pg4_8
7. 'Moons helium-3 could power the earth': Space.com - 30 June 2000 - http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html

img

privacy statement | Sitemap