When vision and budget collide

Megaprojects US

NASA's plans to return to the moon and launch an Apollo-style mission to Mars have been hampered by the fact that they simply don't have enough money, raising the question of whether we should let financial constraints restrain human vision.

The Human Space Flight Plans Committee, formed by President Obama, stated in their report that without a significant boost in NASA's current budget, not only will it be impossible to return to the moon by the goal of 2020, but astronauts might not be able to go at all.

NASA's long term space exploration plan, outlined in 2004, has been to return to the moon by 2020, establishing a lunar outpost and using it as a launch pad for missions to Mars. However, to accomplish this, they will need at least another $3 billion a year on top of their current $18.69 billion budget.

Click image to enlarge

In the grand scheme of things, $3 billion is a drop in the ocean, an insignificant amount when measured against what we can learn from further space missions, not to mention the historic achievement of such feats, but in a world suffering from a financial downturn as well as calls for resources to be put towards projects such as health-care and climate change schemes, is it simply too much at this point in time?

Saying that though, America is currently investing trillions on mega-projects (schemes that cost more than $1 billion) that arguably aren't as important as space exploration, in this writer's opinion.

For example, do the Dallas Cowboys really need a new stadium? The new Cowboy Stadium completed in May cost $1.2 billion! That's almost half of NASA's much-needed funds right there, though I'm sure fans of the Dallas Cowboys would disagree...

This problem of too much vision, too little money isn't just affecting NASA. Countries the world over are trying figure out how they can cut their carbon emissions and save the planet without crippling their economies and it is this practice of pursuing goals that do not match allocated resources that would indicate we, as a planet, should step back and decide what truly needs the world's finances behind it. Healthcare or nuclear defense? Space exploration or oil pipelines? Bridges or stadiums?

One man though, has no doubts as to what we should do. Speaking recently to the LA Times, Apollo 11 veteran Buzz Aldrin said,

"When creatures of the Earth in two dozen years settle permanently on another planet, the leader who sent them will go down in history as greater than Julius Caesar, Queen Isabella, all those people," he said.

That would definitely look good on President Obama's C.V.

Like this article? Get the RSS feed: