[ad_1]
This article originally appeared on The conversation. The post contributed to the Space.com article Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights.
Ian whittaker, Senior Lecturer in Physics, Nottingham Trent University
Gareth Dorrian, Postdoctoral Fellow in Space Science, University of Birmingham
Donald Trump set bold goals for space exploration during his tenure – from crewed missions to the Moon and Mars to a space force. In contrast, his successor Joe Biden has been relatively discreet about space policy. So how is space exploration likely to change in the future?
It is clear that there will be change. Current NASA chief Jim Bridenstine has already announced he is stepping down. And we know that US human spaceflight policy rarely survives a change of presidency.
That said, the incredible success of SpaceX’s crewed launch to the International Space Station (ISS) means that the commercial crew program is likely to continue to operate – easing the burden on NASA. Indeed, the first operational flight of the Crew Dragon by the commercial company SpaceX is to be launched on November 15, with four astronauts bound for the ISS.
Under the Trump administration, NASA also committed to the return of astronauts to the moon in 2024 as part of the Artemis program. This is due for its first (unscrewed) test launch next year with Artemis-1. This builds on the Constellation program which was implemented by Republican President George W. Bush in 2005 but was later canceled by Democratic President Barack Obama due to its high cost and difficulty.
The only substantial clue as to the direction of a Biden presidency with regard to astronaut flights to the moon can be found in a Democratic Party document titled “Building a Stronger, Fairer Economy.” In one paragraph, Democrats say they “support NASA’s work to bring Americans back to the moon and beyond Mars, taking the next step in exploring our solar system.”
No details are offered on possible timelines. But, with international cooperation now a major feature of the Artemis program, it would be difficult for a new Biden administration to unilaterally withdraw from the project. For example, Canada, the European Space Agency, and Japan are all official partners in building the Lunar Gateway – a lunar orbiting outpost designed to support multiple surface expeditions.
The program is also rapidly advancing research, particularly in building materials, power supplies and food production. Once again this week, the European Space Agency awarded a contract to the British company Metalysis to develop techniques to simultaneously extract oxygen and metals from the lunar soil.
The Trump administration also pushed for a first crewed mission to Mars in the 2030s – a much more difficult task due to the distances involved. The long trip would expose the astronauts to high radiation exposure and psychological difficulties. Other huge challenges include weight restrictions and talk times.
An independent 2019 Science and Technology Policy Institute report said a crewed mission to Mars in the 2030s is currently unachievable. Biden is unlikely to try to resurrect this anytime soon.
One of the more questionable implementations of the Trump administration was the formation of Space Force – a branch of the armed forces forced into space. The move underscores that the United States views space as a potential war zone rather than a purely scientific arena. But American citizens aren’t too impressed with the Space Force, making fun of the logo and uniforms. Indeed, the program has a public approval rate of only 31%.
So, will it be scrapped? The dismantling of a branch of the armed forces has never been carried out in the United States before and there are undoubtedly many difficulties in returning this branch to the United States Air Force. It is therefore likely to remain, possibly with reduced concentration.
A new start for NASA?
Can we expect something new? Biden has already pledged to sign executive orders that will cancel most of the Trump administration’s work – in the same way that Trump canceled most of Obama’s work.
The biggest indication of the change is Bridenstine’s resignation. When he was appointed in 2018, it came as a kind of surprise to the scientific community – he had no scientific qualifications and had previously indicated that he had doubts about climate change (which he changed his mind about in accepting the post). Still, he turned out to be a capable NASA leader.
In resigning, he said he wanted to let someone with a “close relationship with the president” take over. Who it might be is still a question, and will largely depend on the new president himself. Most heads of NASA have at least a degree in engineering or physics, and in the past have run a space center. This makes Jody Singer (the director of the Marshall Space Flight Center), Mark Geyer (the director of the Johnson Space Center) or Dennis Andrucyk (the director of the Goddard Space Flight Center) potential candidates, as well as the current deputy administrator. James Morhard. However, it is believed that the field is wide open.
Biden has made it clear that tackling the climate emergency is a priority. While this is likely to focus on industrial pollution limits and renewable energy sources, it suggests that space policy could be more focused on Earth observation missions, such as the Geostationary Operational Environmental (GOES) program. Satellite).
We could potentially consider more satellites of this type; monitoring of oil spills, deforestation and carbon emissions. All of these possibilities are of course eclipsed by the financial crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. And, given that a sustainable source of money to support long-term projects like the Artemis program is critical to their success, it’s probably necessary to believe in it when we see it.
Whatever the changes, it seems likely that there will be less funding for space missions. But, despite this, many scientists will breathe a sigh of relief at the prospect of not having to fight the kind of anti-science tweets we’ve seen from Trump during his tenure on topics ranging from Covid-19 and vaccinations to climate change.
This article is republished from The conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read it original article.
Follow all of Expert Voices’ questions and discussions – and join the discussion – on Facebook and Twitter. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
[ad_2]
Source link