I was suppose to be in DC this week, helping to sell President Obama's new ambitious human space program. Yes, thats right, it is human, it is ambitious, and its very cool. Unfortunately, the weather didn't cooperate. That has me rather annoyed
In addition, I am getting rather sick and tired of the teabaggers (or the space equivalent to teabaggers) that have invaded some of the space blogs (and there are a ton). So, instead, I thought I'd tell you why I support the new NASA plan (although I will admit it is a work in progress).
In case you haven't seen it, there is a report over at the Wall Street Journal. The title of the article is White House Decides to Outsource NASA Work. However, I feel the article probably should've been White House Decides to Privatize NASA work. Or a better title would've been White House Decides to use NASA to Launch a New Industry
I am starting a short mini-series of blog entries, talking about the White House's Review of Human Space Flight Plans Committee. The point of this mini-series is to advocate action for a specific plan going forward, for NASA and US human spaceflight policy. The main issues I plan to address in this series of diaries is
1. We, (Democrats/liberals/progressives) should embrace human space development.
2. We should embrace space commercialization, particularly as it relates to all earth to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) transportation.
3. We should reject any and all plans that continue to utilize the Space Shuttle, its assets, its workforce, or any derivatives there of.
At the end of this, I hope to have you convinced to pursue action, in multiple forms.
But before I get into the details to convince you, I need to give you the background, so you know what President Obama is considering.
Forty years ago, NASA made dreams come true, as humans stepped foot for the first time on the moon. What has impressed me is hearing over and over the praises of former NASA directors who recall the importance each member of the team, which was in the hundreds if not thousands, had in making the mission a reality. Indeed, it's a perfect example of the power we have as a nation—when we realize that we're not in it alone.
Tough challenges require team work. And as we look ahead at the challenges we face as a nation—the economy, health reform, immigration, etc.—there's a lot we can learn from the thousands of nameless laborers who helped Neil Armstrong take that giant leap.
President Obama has done an excellent job in returning our country's focus back on to "We The People," shifting it from what I would argue has been the mantra of American life during the housing boom of this past decade, a culture that cried in its rush for individual prosperity, "Me The People."
The moon landing, more than anything, brought America together during a tumultuous time. It lifted up our founding values of community and opportunity, reminding us that no dream was too big when we all come together. Perhaps, in this new era, our sea of Tranquility can be realized in the dreams for a fair and just economy, in a world that respects the dignity and rights of all, in a future that doesn't rely on fuels that hurt our own beautiful planet. When three astronauts looked down upon our small green and blue rock forty years ago this week, they realized how much we truly were connected, how we were all in it together. Our job is to carry this knowledge forward, as we work toward finding solutions that bring security, mobility, opportunity, and all our other treasured national values within the reach of every person who calls our own rock home.
Forty years ago this week an event occurred that changed the history of mankind forever.
An event so monumental that the memory lingers on, even though the venue where the event took place has been, shall we say, "repurposed".
But we're not here to talk about the time that Minnesota Twins Manager Billy Martin appeared on the cover of Sports Illustrated.
Instead, let's talk space.
NASA is forever trying to interest the world in space exploration...and forever struggling to come up with the money to get things done.
Well, I'm not a scientist, nor an engineer, and I don't assemble rocket vehicles...but I am a fake consultant, and if NASA took my advice, I'd bet my fake paycheck that money would be a lot less of a problem.
Tomorrow is the 40th anniversary of the landing on the Moon in 1969. Neil Armstrong ("One small step for a man... one giant leap for mankind") ad Buzz Aldrin planted the flag and put out a plaque marking the landing which, in under a decade, had been the result of spending $183 Billion Bucks and upping the confrontation with the Russians, who had achieved the original advance in space by putting up Sputnik and sending two different cosmonauts on full orbits around the Earth.
It appears Senator Shelby has shaken down the Obama administration to the tune of $350 million dollars, from the American Recovery & Reivestment Act (IE the stimulus bill)
It now seems likely that NASA will delay the Moon base it had been directed to construct by the Bush administration:
NASA will probably not build an outpost on the moon as originally planned, the agency's acting administrator, Chris Scolese, told lawmakers on Wednesday. His comments also hinted that the agency is open to putting more emphasis on human missions to destinations like Mars or a near-Earth asteroid.
As a believer in the value of space exploration, I find this announcement a little sad. However, it also has the potential to be a positive, since it could help re-order our priorities away from exploration for its own sake and toward improving our space-based infrastructure. We do eventually need a Moon base, but we need that base to be useful rather than just reprising our exploratory glory days.
Vast space to continually, and slowly, expand the plants, as per our needs, over years and decades.
The ability to collect solar energy every hour of every day, as long two power plant centers are placed on opposite sides of the Moon.
With a proper satellite component, the system as a whole would have the ability to send this energy back to anywhere on Earth, anytime of day.
In other words, once such a series of power plants was in place, they could provide the entire Earth with cheap, 100% renewable, carbon neutral electricity, no matter the weather or time of day, for the entire existence of our species.
Not bad. Also, unfortunately, not tomorrow, given the expense and technological problems. However, there are steps we can be taking to build the space infrastructure that would make such an incredibly useful Moon base feasible in as little time as twenty years. Instead of a Moon-base, or a series of manned missions to Mars or Ceres, there are three key aspects of space infrastructure that should be receiving our most far-reaching space funding.
As a lover of both polls and space travel, I wanted to move off-topic for a moment and let people know that the greatest poll of all time will go into the field at 10:48 p.m. eastern, on Thursday, March 5th. It is a new sattelite called The Kepler mission, which is NASA's first major attempt to find Earth-like planets around stars other than our own. By continually monitoring the light produced by 100,000 stars in a distant area of the galaxy, and by utilizing the transit method of extrasolar planet detection, functionally it is a poll that will provide us with a statistically sound sampling of solar systems in our galaxy. Specifically, the Kepler mission aims to accomplish all of the following:
Determine how many terrestrial and larger planets there are in or near the habitable zone of a wide variety of spectral types of stars
Determine the range of sizes and shapes of the orbits of these planets
Estimate how many planets there are in multiple-star systems
Determine the range of orbit size, brightness, size, mass and density of short-period giant planets
Identify additional members of each discovered planetary system using other techniques
Determine the properties of those stars that harbor planetary systems
While Kepler will not be monitoring stars within even 1,000 light years of our own, and thus won't be detecting any Earth-like planets with which we could ever hope to communicate, it will let us know what we can expect to find in all solar systems other than our own, including those systems closest to us. This makes it, in my opinion, the greatest poll of all-time.
After Kepler, the search for nearby exoplanets will really heat up with projects like The James Webb Space Telescope and the EU's Darwin Mission. It honestly seems possible that we will know, within the next twenty years, whether or not there are Earth-like planets in any neighboring solar systems. If there are intelligent civilizations on any of those planets, it is unlikely that any of us will be alive to take part in conversations with that civilization. Still, this is an amazing feat, and at least one reason to be excited about the future.
Somewhere in America, a man loses the job he has held for more than thirty years. Somewhere in America, a woman cleans out the office she had occupied for close to a decade. Elsewhere in the United States, a teen unsuccessfully tries to find work. He knows he needs to help his Mom and Dad; each toiled in the factory that closed just down the street. A young woman searches for a professional position, just as she has for the two years since she graduated form the University. Each of these individuals is not startled by the headline, Economy Shed 598,000 Jobs in January. All ask, where have the "experts," Economists, and elected officials been?
The Case for Becoming a Spacefaring Society:
Proposals for an Integrated US Space Policy by Jonathan Goff and Ferris Valyn
Throughout history, mankind has learned to master the environments around itself-developing new technologies to harness the elements to better our lives, improve our health and wellbeing, protect ourselves from others, and learn more about our position in the universe. In the past, mastering new environments, such as the developing of seafaring or aeronautics, has lead directly to substantial benefits for those nations which have chosen to take the lead.
While we have started to explore the next great environment-outer space and the planetary bodies of our solar system-such exploration by itself will not lead to a spacefaring society. The development of a truly spacefaring society-one that can master and tame this new environment, and harness its resources-is a more compelling vision than exploration alone, one that holds the potential for far greater benefits to our nation.
We strongly urge the new administration to make the development of a spacefaring society the focus of our nation's space policy.
From various news reports, it appears that President-elect Obama is beginning his final selection for NASA administrator. While I don’t have any specific names, I do have a few suggestions as to the qualities that the next NASA administrator should have.
President-elect Barack Obama will probably tear down long-standing barriers between the U.S.'s civilian and military space programs to speed up a mission to the moon amid the prospect of a new space race with China.
Obama's transition team is considering a collaboration between the Defense Department and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration because military rockets may be cheaper and ready sooner than the space agency's planned launch vehicle, which isn't slated to fly until 2015, according to people who've discussed the idea with the Obama team.(...)
To boost cooperation between NASA and the Pentagon, Obama has promised to revive the National Aeronautics and Space Council, which oversaw the entire space arena for four presidents, most actively from 1958 to 1973.
As someone who is interested in both the military budget and NASA, I am of two minds on this. First, increased co-operation between our two space programs, one with a budget of $22 billion (the military) and one with a budget of $18 billion (NASA), is an exciting prospect that could reduce redundancy and create a truly amazing space program. If it results in a faster return to U.S.-led manned space travel, great. If it helps speed up the moon base, fantastic. Overall, increased co-operation between the two agencies could also greatly improve our satellite infrastructure, and might even help push us down the path toward more advanced space programs, including space-based solar energy or even a space elevator. The potential of a unified, $40 billion space program makes my mouth water.
Second, this is potentially a disturbing increase of military authority over the space program. The proposal would scrap NASA rocket program, and put the new launch vehicle under military leadership. Further, given that Obama is currently keeping 160 of Bush's 250 political appointees in place at the Pentagon, so it wouldn't be just increasing the Pentagon's power over the space program, but increasing Bush appointees authority over the space program. Given that the militarization of space is a stated goal of neo-conservatives, and was called for in the Project for a New American Century's infamous Bush campaign policy document, breaking down the barriers between the Pentagon and NASA could take a disturbing turn for the worse.
Yesterday, Dr. Peter Diamandis, the man behind the X Prize, posted an essay over at huffingtonpost, entitled Re-establishing NASA's Leadership. In it, he offers a list of 7 ways to help reform NASA, so that it can better lead in the pursuit of space development.
Here is the list
1. Engage the Private Community
2. Use Risk as a Tool
3. Attract and Retain the Best Workers
4. Help America Benefit from the Global Space Community
5. Take the Lead Where Only NASA Can
6. Leverage Incentive Prizes
7. Inspire the Nation, and the World
Join me over the fold, to read my thoughts on his comments.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says negotiators are discussing a new plan to save General Motors and Chrysler LLC. Reid, D-Nev., wouldn't give details but said it would be different than the plan passed by the House on Wednesday night or the alternative put forward today by Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker - which would place stricter demands on automakers and the UAW.
Right now, it is not believed that Reid and Senate Democrats have the 60 votes needed to end debate and approve the legislation as written. Reid said another senator had offered the new proposal but didn't say who.
But, he said, if negotiators are able to work out the proposal "the bill would overwhelmingly pass the Senate," perhaps as early as Thursday night, and then be sent to the House for consideration.
Obviously, the devil is in the details, which are currently not available. However, we have already given a lot away, so I am wary of what further concessions have been made.
NASA administrator Mike Griffin is not cooperating with President-elect Barack Obama's transition team, is obstructing its efforts to get information and has told its leader that she is "not qualified" to judge his rocket program, the Orlando Sentinel has learned.
In a heated 40-minute conversation last week with Lori Garver, a former NASA associate administrator who heads the space transition team, a red-faced Griffin demanded to speak directly to Obama, according to witnesses.
In addition, Griffin is scripting NASA employees and civilian contractors on what they can tell the transition team and has warned aerospace executives not to criticize the agency's moon program, sources said.
Warning people not to criticize certain governmental programs, restricting the flow of information, and calling the new administration "not qualified." Delightful. Time to fire Griffin. Obviously, this is a prime and particularly gratuitous example of why personnel matter: some personnel simply don't follow executive policy. Also, last year at Netroots Nation I made the case for why the netroots should care about space policy. You can read it here.
Also, the most recent poll in for the Democratic primary shows Attorney General Lisa Madigan at 32%, Illinois Veteran's Affairs head Tammy Duckworth at 18%, Representative Jesse Jackson Jr. at 11%, and Schakowsky at 10%. Jackson has fallen from a large lead two weeks ago, after he was identified as "Senate Candidate #5" in the Blagojevich investigation. He has not, however, been accused of any wrongdoing and is not under investigation.
In the increasingly heated battle for Secretary of the Interior, Raul Grialva (excellent choice, endorsed by over 100 environmental orgs) and Mike Thompson (bad choice, corporate Blue Dog) both appear to be out:
Last week, California Rep. Mike Thompson, D, and Arizona Rep. Raul M. Grijalva were considered top contenders, but sources close the transition say that "problems and concerns" have arisen with both candidates. New names emerging this week to fill the Interior slot include two former assistant secretaries of the Interior in the Clinton administration: Kevin Gover, now director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of the American Indian, and John Berry, now director of the National Zoo.
Looks like a compromise choice will be made. At least such an appointment will have loads of experience, and not suck.
However, can I just say that I do not enjoy having to cheer for my conference in addition to cheering for my team? I already expend enough emotional energy supporting Syracuse, that having to support the other 15 teams in the Big East when they play non-conference games is simply exhausting. Further, the other teams in the Big East are Syracuse's main rivals, so why should I even cheer for them at all when they are playing non-conference opponents? I don't get this aspect of sports fandom. Why do the teams you cheer against for most of the year suddenly become teams you support just because they represent your conference or division in the playoffs? Doesn't make any sense to me.
This is an open thread, too. Let those thoughts in your head seep out into the Internet in comment form.
Space policy made a pretty decent splash at Netroots Nation. We had an excellent panel on space policy, and an excellent platform meeting. For those of you who don't remember, we had Andrew Hoppin moderating, and Chris Bowers, Lori Garver, Patricia Grace Smith, and George Whitesides all speaking. You can about the panelists here.
One of the four panels I am on at Netroots Nation focuses on developing a progressive space policy (it is today at 3:00 p.m. central time). On this panel, I have been specifically tasked with explaining why the netroots should care about space policy. Now, personally I think the netroots is geeky enough that many of us already do care about space policy, at least in so much as how it relates to the shaky alliance between the rebel cylons and the humans.
Still, since I am never one to turn down an easy task, in the extended entry I offer three reasons why the progressive movement should take space policy seriously.
I figured now would be a good time to remind everyone (again) about some upcoming space events, that would be worth going to. We have a couple of major events this week, as well as future events upcoming. I promise reports to any and all I attend, and I suggest that you attend as well
However, today I want to talk about something that, Senator Obama can do, which doesn't require massive new spending, but would show an openness to the idea of manned spaceflight, and would fit well within his comments and concerns about having a coherent space policy. Senator Obama, please bring back the National Space Council.
