[ad_1]
That was always going to be expensive, but NASA's first cost estimate for the agency's push toward the land of humans on the moon of 2024 here is finally here – and it's surprisingly cheap.
During a interview with CNN Jim Bridenstine, NASA Administrator, presented today (June 14th) his first concrete estimate budget to the current lunar aspirations of the agency, a program dubbed the Artemis program. This plan includes the recruitment of commercial companies and international partners, the construction of a lunar space station, the landing of humans at the South Pole of the Moon by 2024 and the definition of the project as a whole. practice for Mars.
"For the whole program, to get a sustainable presence on the moon, we expect a budget of between $ 20 billion and $ 30 billion," Bridenstine told CNN. He explained that the estimate represented an additional amount, higher than what the agency has already spent for SLS rocket and Orion Capsule he intends to use it for the program.
Related: Can NASA really put astronauts on the Moon in 2024?
Bridenstine also said that the estimate was money in addition to the current budget of the agency. Throughout his attempts to sell his agency, Congress and the public on the Artemis plan, he has repeatedly promised that the thrust of the moon landing will be funded separately and will not draw money from other activities of the agency.
Last month, President Donald Trump asked Congress to allocate an additional $ 1.6 billion to NASA to fund the Artemis program during the 2020 fiscal year, which starts on 1 October. But this demand, which the Congress has not yet assessed, always included a warning from Bridenstine that it would only be the beginning of the considerable budgetary increases necessary for the program.
Until today, Bridenstine had refused to provide a total budget estimate for the Artemis program, although he has publicly denied rumors that NASA would charge $ 8 billion a year for five years to fund the moon's surge. (If the total program actually reaches $ 30 billion and NASA gets $ 1.6 billion by 2020, there would be $ 7 billion a year for each of the remaining four years of the program.)
In comparison, The latest NASA sunburn, the never-ending Constellation program, was announced at an estimated cost of $ 104 billion in 2005. The Apollo program cost $ 25 billion – but it was in 1960s dollars.
More recently, it was felt that the International Space Station had cost about $ 100 billion. Even the Hubble Space Telescope, between its construction, launch and service in orbit, would have cost more than $ 10 billion on his life to this day.
But returning humans to the Moon more permanently than Apollo is worth it, said Bridenstine.
"Consider it a short-term investment to have a sustainable program on the moon, where we will finally keep our eyes on Mars," Bridenstine told CNN. "How can we learn to live and work on another world, namely the moon, then go to Mars and do it in a way [so that]When this is over, will the American people have a program they can be very proud of in the long run? "
Email Meghan Bartels at [email protected] or follow her. @meghanbartels. follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook.
[ad_2]
Source link