What should the future of our space program be?
The National Research Council had unpleasant medicine for NASA in its just-released report on the vision and direction of the agency.
A panel of 12 independent experts concluded, among other things, that the program lacks clear direction from the White House and Congress about what its goals should be, and that NASA cannot do everything it aims to without more money. More cash is an unlikely prospect in the current economic climate, the panel also said. So the government and the agency have to decide what they want NASA to focus on.
So what should NASA's mission be? Do scientists and the public care about sending astronauts to an asteroid by 2025? Is it realistic to send astronauts to Mars in the 2030s? Are we focusing too much on Mars? Opinions on that vary, as our article noted.
Here's an interview with space exploration enthusiast Bill Nye (of “Science Guy” fame), the chief executive of The Planetary Society.
Of the NRC report: “Everyone would agree with it,” Nye said. “The thing is, what to do next? That gets into the difficulty of politics.” He said it’s no easy matter to reorganize NASA.
“If you had a corporation and you wanted to move 1,500 jobs from Jackson, Miss., Orlando, Fla., you’d just do it. You’d just say 'I’m moving the jobs,'" he said. "But you can’t do that with NASA or government infrastructure because there’s congressmen and senators who will fight you about it to protect their people. … It’s a different management challenge.”
What NASA should be: "The report, to me, is getting to an old problem of what we want to do. I believe, as a country, we want to move NASA from [being] an engineering organization to a science organization, and this is going to take years, decades. Now, through investment, we have companies emerging that are exploring space on their own and will ultimately lower the cost of access to low-Earth orbit, which will free up NASA to go to these new and exciting places.”
More money -- or focused vision? Leaving aside the feasibility of snagging more money, Nye thinks the space program is worth every bit of what we spend on it. (He’s applied to be an astronaut in the past and so did Bruce Betts, Planetary Society director of projects. Obviously, he said, “We’re advocates.”)
"We -- people from my pedigree -- we always want to invest more in NASA. I strongly feel that every dollar spent on space exploration pays back twice, at least," he said.
He’s not talking about Tang: Without the space program, “We wouldn't have the Internet, we wouldn’t have smartphones,” he said. And, he added, “Space brings out the best in us, and at the same time its humbling. The more you learn about our place in space, the more you realize we’re probably not that unusual, we’re not that special.
"The cost of planetary science is so low compared to the cost, for example, of the International Space Station. We have a tendency to not embrace it to the extent that we at the Planetary Society think we should.”
So what should NASA do? Nye believes NASA’s focus should be on two deep questions that all of us wonder about: Where did we come from? And are we alone? "Those two questions drive all of us as humans. Everyone has asked those questions. Since you were a little kid you’ve asked those questions," he said.
-- Rosie Mestel, Los Angeles TimesCopyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun