Skip to main content
Move the World.

"It doesn't matter how much money Congress does or doesn't give NASA. This agency is not gonna get me off this planet.”

Jeff Greason, co-founder of XCOR, makes that declaration in this week’s Freethink episode. It’s not a knock on the people who work for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, most of whom are just as passionate about space exploration as Greason is. Rather, it’s a reflection of the commercial space industry’s skepticism that the agency is capable of opening up the space frontier.

Greason’s line struck a chord with me. I grew up an hour from Cape Canaveral in Central Florida, and the Space Shuttle’s double-sonic boom was a beloved tone from the soundtrack of my childhood. I’ve been to numerous NASA facilities, and I’ve even got patches and pins from the Apollo missions. But after spending the last several months working on Freethink’s New Space Race series, I’ve come to understand Greason’s argument. It’s not political, it’s practical.

And one really good way to understand it is to look at the last decade of NASA’s work.

Let’s go back to 2004, when the big plan was returning Americans to the moon

One year after the Space Shuttle Columbia disintegrated while re-entering Earth’s atmosphere (killing all seven crewmembers), President George W. Bush announced three goals intended to reinvigorate the U.S. space program: Finish construction of the International Space Station (ISS) by 2010; build an entirely new spacecraft and have it fly a manned mission by 2014; and return Americans to the surface of the moon by 2020.

bushnasa
President Bush with NASA Administrator Sean O'Keefe at the 2004 announcement (via NASA)

The moon mission--called Constellation--was intended to lay the groundwork for an eventual mission to Mars, while the Crew Exploration Vehicle (CEV) was intended to replace the retiring Shuttle and to provide NASA with a ship capable of exploring beyond Earth’s orbit.

Now let’s jump to 2010, when we decided we didn’t want to go to the moon anymore

What happened to those goals? Well, construction on the ISS finished in 2011. But the CEV was never built; right now, American astronauts get to the International Space Station by hitching a ride with the Russians. The Constellation program, meanwhile, was cancelled by President Obama in 2010. By that point, NASA had spent five years and $9 billion dollars on the moon mission, but a 2009 investigation by the Government Accountability Office found the agency was uncertain how much more time and money it would need to spend to complete the project.

The moon mission...was not just behind schedule and over budget, it didn’t really have a schedule or a budget.

In other words, it was not just behind schedule and over budget, it didn’t really have a schedule or a budget. With no end in sight and no upper limit to Constellation’s budget, the program was shuttered.

The new plan? Invest in commercial space companies, Mars, and...asteroids

The Obama administration shifted NASA’s budget away from Constellation and toward three others goals: Helping the commercial space sector develop launch capabilities, developing a path to Mars, and capturing an asteroid. While the administration has received plaudits from space enthusiasts for its decision to use private spacecraft to transport American crew members to the ISS (starting in 2017); and for establishing Mars as America’s long-term human exploration destination; the plan to capture an asteroid has been a mess.

spacexarticle
NASA will use private companies like SpaceX to send astronauts to space (via SpaceX)

Wait, why are we capturing an asteroid?

Well, the original--called the Asteroid Capture Mission, and announced in 2013--was to move an entire asteroid through space. But in March 2015, NASA said it would instead retrieve a boulder from an asteroid’s surface using an unmanned vehicle. That unmanned probe would then drag the boulder through space and put it in the moon’s orbit, where it could circle the moon the way the moon circles Earth. Once this Asteroid Redirect Mission advances to the stage where a boulder is orbiting the moon--tentatively around 2025--we’d send astronauts to visit the boulder and collect rock and water samples.

asteroidarticle
A rendering of NASA's probe securing a boulder (via NASA)

The problem is that we don’t really need those things. There are already lots of asteroid samples here on planet Earth. And while NASA argues that the ARM mission will help develop technology necessary for a manned Mars mission, like using new space suits, intercepting and maneuvering large objects, and extracting water from the ice on space rocks, the argument has fallen flat with the people who fund NASA (that would be Congress), as well as some really prominent people in the aerospace community.

Congress is probably going to kill the asteroid mission

While the asteroid mission’s cost is relatively small in the grand scheme of federal spending, it’s already--wait for it--behind schedule and over budget. NASA announced in July 2016 that the program would cost an additional $150 million--bringing the total to $1.4 billion--and pushed the unmanned vehicle’s launch date back by a year, to 2021.

But the program probably won’t make it to 2021. A House subcommittee began pushing to defund the asteroid program prior to NASA updating cost projections, and a Senate subcommittee joined them in September.

MIT’S Richard P. Binzel called the asteroid mission “a multibillion-dollar stunt.”

That might not be a bad thing. Way back in 2013, MIT’S Richard P. Binzel called the asteroid mission “a multibillion-dollar stunt.” NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, meanwhile, said that ARM wasn’t necessary for planetary defense or intended to expand scientific knowledge about space. It was basically just a thing NASA could do with a limited budget.

What is NASA’s role in 21st century space exploration?

Whether or not the asteroid mission continues, it’s clear that the commercial space industry can do things faster and cheaper than NASA.

Can NASA get to Mars before Elon Musk and SpaceX? Hard to say, particularly since the agency’s priorities have changed dramatically in just the last decade, and could change again under a new president (did we mention that some members of Congress aren’t sure NASA should be aiming for Mars at all?).

Can NASA complete its long-awaited Orion crew capsule without burning through an ungodly amount of money? The GAO seems to think that’s unlikely, as the Orion is already behind schedule and over-budget, not unlike the James Webb Space Telescope. (Space watchers have been raising concerns about the schedule and budget for Orion and its Space Launch System for years now, BTW.)

orionarticle
A mockup of Orion (via NASA)

In fact, there’s very little you can point to in NASA’s recent history that suggests it should be leading the 21st century space race. And some things--like the $20+ billion it’s spent on cancelled projects since 1992--suggest its role should actually be smaller.

Would changing the way NASA is managed--shifting power from the White House to Congress, for instance, and installing a director with a 10-year term--actually improve things? Or would it simply empower members of Congress to continue using NASA as a pork-delivery vehicle? And does consistency across presidential administrations provide any protection against poor project management? The aforementioned James Webb Space Telescope--long-delayed and many billions of dollars over-budget--has received numerous congressional reprieves, and still isn’t ready for operation. That alone suggests continuous fidelity to a given aerospace project isn’t a solve-all.

I’m not sure anyone knows exactly what needs to happen at NASA for it to play a meaningful role in 21st century space exploration. But Greason and others like him aren’t content to wait any longer. "I want a frontier in space,” he says in this week’s episode. “If that means I have to build it then I'm going to build it."

Up Next

Opinion
A Molecular Biologist Discusses the Morality of Genetic Engineering
A Molecular Biologist Discusses the Morality of Gene Editing
Opinion
A Molecular Biologist Discusses the Morality of Genetic Engineering
Molecular biologist Daisy Robinton speaks out on our moral imperative to solve some of humanity's greatest health threats.
By Daisy Robinton, Ph.D.

Molecular biologist Daisy Robinton speaks out on our moral imperative to solve some of humanity's greatest health threats.

Mysteries of Science
What Is Static Electricity? We May Finally Have an Answer.
Schematics showing the flow of electricity in two common static electricity experiences. Illustration by Teresa Stanton.
Mysteries of Science
What Is Static Electricity? We May Finally Have an Answer.
This model, created by doctoral students, provides a convincing explanation for a mystery that is thousands of years old - the cause of static electricity.

This model, created by doctoral students, provides a convincing explanation for a mystery that is thousands of years old - the cause of static electricity.

Superhuman
The Most Advanced Bionic Leg on the Planet & the Team Bringing it to Life
The Emerging Cyborg
Watch Now
Superhuman
The Most Advanced Bionic Leg on the Planet & the Team Bringing it to Life
Alec McMorris is testing one of the world’s most advanced prosthetics - an AI powered bionic leg.
Watch Now

Alec McMorris is testing one of the world’s most advanced prosthetics - an AI powered bionic leg. See how Dr. Tommaso Lenzi and the Bioengineering Lab at the University of Utah are revolutionizing life for people who require artificial limbs.

Dispatches
High Tech Archaeology Found a New Way to Screen for Vitamin D Deficiency
High Tech Archaeology Found a New Way to Screen for Vitamin D Deficiency
Dispatches
High Tech Archaeology Found a New Way to Screen for Vitamin D Deficiency
Vitamin D deficiency is an age-old problem, but new techniques from archaeology may be the key to catching it early.
By Megan Brickley

Vitamin D deficiency is an age-old problem, but new techniques from archaeology may be the key to catching it early.

Dispatches
Babies Sometimes Trigger Preterm Labor to Escape Infections
Babies Sometimes Trigger Preterm Labor to Escape Infections
Dispatches
Babies Sometimes Trigger Preterm Labor to Escape Infections
A new discovery upends what we thought we knew about premature births and could point the way to entirely new...

A new discovery upends what we thought we knew about premature births and could point the way to entirely new solutions to prevent them.

Dispatches
23andMe Can (Finally) Tell You about Your Genetic Cancer Risk
23andMe Can (Finally) Tell You about Your Genetic Cancer Risk
Dispatches
23andMe Can (Finally) Tell You about Your Genetic Cancer Risk
23andMe has won the right to tell you what your genes say about you. It's a landmark legal achievement that could...

23andMe has won the right to tell you what your genes say about you. It's a landmark legal achievement that could help usher in a new age of personalized medicine.

This Week in Ideas: Using Drones for Medicine, Fighting Zika, Re-Imagining Passwords
This Week in Ideas: Using Drones for Medicine, Fighting Zika, Re-Imagining Passwords
This Week in Ideas: Using Drones for Medicine, Fighting Zika, Re-Imagining Passwords
Reimagining how we get medicine to people, using genetically modified mosquitoes to fight Zika, and selfies as...
By Mike Riggs

Reimagining how we get medicine to people, using genetically modified mosquitoes to fight Zika, and selfies as passwords. These are the stories that got us talking.

A Lay Person's Guide to Biohacking
A Lay Person's Guide to Biohacking
A Lay Person's Guide to Biohacking
We're living in a golden age of people exploring high and low tech methods to optimize our bodies.
By Mike Riggs

We're living in a golden age of people exploring high and low tech methods to optimize our bodies.