Explore Rice

7/15/2005 12:06:00 AM

White House, we have a problem: Administration's vision for space questioned

NASA's launch of Discovery has been hailed as a milestone in the resumption of America's shuttle program.  However, the shuttle is among the programs slated to be pared down or eliminated under the the Bush Administration's "Vision for Space Exploration." The former director of Johnson Space Center and former White House science advisor, both now senior Fellows at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy, warn that the Bush plans could substantially harm the space station, arguably the largest cooperative scientific and technological program in history, and the entire U.S. space program.

---------------------

In a study commissioned by the Academy of Arts and Sciences, George Abbey and Neal Lane, Senior Fellows of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University, point to a number of barriers that seriously hinder U.S. progress in space research and exploration, diminishing U.S. competitiveness in the commercial space industry, our national security and America's leadership role in education and advancements in science and technology.

In a recent interview, Abbey outlines some of the serious problems facing the U.S. space program today and what steps should be taken to resolve them.

Q. How significant is the commercial space industry and why has America's competitiveness declined in that regard?

A.   A global commercial space industry has emerged primarily in the area of communications satellites and has supported tremendous technological advances. Our use of cell phones and computers, for example, depend on global communication satellites, whose industry revenues reached $12 billion in 1998.   In 2002, U.S. economic activity related to the total commercial space industry totaled over $95 billion and was responsible for $23 billion in employee earnings.

But the U.S. share of global satellites dropped to 36 percent in 2002, from 64 percent in 1998. This severe decline is linked to our current policy on export controls.

Since 1999, control over the sale of communication satellites and satellite technology has become so rigid that the licensing process is very cumbersome, ambiguous and time consuming even for our allies. It is now much more difficult for U.S. companies to export their satellites, satellite components or sell their launchers to companies overseas.   Even technical discussions between a U.S. seller and a buyer from abroad requires permission from the State Department.

As a result, Europeans have begun to develop competing technologies, and they are gaining a larger market share. U.S. companies, which were once highly sought after for their superior technology, now find themselves at a serious competitive disadvantage.

Q. Do these restrictions affect America's leadership in space in other ways?

A. These policies also affect U.S. space science, engineering and technology. Given the projected shortfall in scientists and engineers in the U.S., we've become increasingly dependent on foreign-born men and women who are interested in these fields and want to study and work here. Yet, foreign students and researchers, for example, often face restricted access to space science laboratories and projects.

These restrictions also inhibit international collaboration. The International Space Station, for example, has necessarily relied on a free flow of information among the partners.   Based on current policies and practices, there are discussions underway about retroactively invoking rules to make it difficult to continue that exchange of information and knowledge.

America's leadership role in space – human exploration, space science research or commercial space activities – is dependent in a large degree on international cooperation, but the degree of cooperation needed will not be possible under current export controls and other restrictive policies.

Q. How will President Bush's plan for manned missions to the Moon and Mars affect other aspects of America's space program?

A.   The Administration's budget projections combined with their priorities toward human exploration present a serious obstacle to NASA's research programs. These programs have been fundamental to the fields of astronomy, astrophysics, planetary and earth sciences, as well as the physical and biological sciences. The improvements in today's modern operating rooms and hospitals, for example, are the result of techniques and experimentations developed to monitor the medical well-being of the astronauts in space.

An extraordinary record of research and discovery has been accumulated by way of space- and earth-based telescopes and earth-observation satellites, which provide images and data on many aspects of the Earth's atmosphere, oceans and land, including information related to global warming and weather forecasting.

We also have come to depend on technology realized from our investment in space programs. And, we often forget that the first "A" in NASA stands for Aeronautics. Over and above the advancements in computers and communication systems that have come out of our space program and become commonplace in our lives are a number of advancements in our commercial and military aircrafts.  

President Bush's "Vision for Space Exploration" raises serious questions about the future commitment of the U.S. to scientific and technological research and is likely to result in substantial harm to the U.S. space program.   It is clear from the 2006 budget, space science is being given low priority.

The Administration's new program is not focused on science, but on human exploration. However, even with dramatic cuts in the science programs and Earth-observation satellites for weather and climate forecasting, the remaining monies will not be enough to support manned missions to the Moon and eventually to Mars.

Q. What needs to be done to address these challenges?  

A. The ability of the U.S. to undertake major cooperative endeavors in space-related research and human exploration depends on a revision of American export controls and other overly restrictive policies – identifying which processes and activities are important to our national security interests and which should be regulated and controlled.

To encourage young men and women to pursue studies in the sciences and engineering, we should give serious consideration to implementing a program similar to the National Defense Education Act of 1958.

Scientific research, including that which involves robotic and manned missions, should be among NASA's highest priorities. I believe that human exploration is important and has to continue, but not at the expense of science programs.

The U.S. should reconsider the decision to deorbit the Hubble Space Telescope and discontinue the Space Shuttle in 2010, each of which represents significant and productive investments by the U.S. in science and technology and are key elements to supporting our commitments to our international partners. Our intentions with regard to future international cooperation in space, the future of the U.S. manned flight programs and support of the International Space Station should not be in question.

America's space program should be based on a sound and progressive policy, one that honors commitments, is based on realistic plans and budgets and recognizes the international character of all endeavors in today's world.

A former director of the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Abbey was a member of the operations team awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for its role in the Apollo 13 mission.   Currently, he is the Baker Botts Senior Fellow in Space Policy at the Baker Institute for Public Policy where he facilitates discussions on the future of space policy in the U.S.

Neal Lane, who served as President Clinton's chief science advisor and as director of the National Science Foundation, is Rice's Malcolm Gillis University Professor and a Senior Fellow of the Baker Institute where he is concerned with science and technology policy. A Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Lane serves as a member of the Academy's council and its committee on international security studies.

The full text of their study, "United States Space Policy: Challenges and Opportunities" is available at http://www.amacad.org/projects/space.asp .

For more informatio on this research, contact B.J. Almond in the Office of News and Media Relations at balmond@rice.edu.