Obama is giving NASA a green makeover

Gasp! Forward-thinking? :scared:

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2010/04/nasas-makeover/38815/

NASA's Makeover

Apr 13 2010, 1:26 PM ET


NASA's legacy of extending the idea of manifest destiny to space exploration may be fading into less flashy and more grounded research. A proposed budget makeover would sacrifice manned space flight, the jewel in NASA's crown, while boosting the agency's already substantial research on climate change.

In February, Obama proposed adding a net $6 billion to NASA's budget but killing one of its key projects: the Constellation rocket program. Under the Bush administration, NASA funneled billions of dollars into the program, with the goal of putting another man on the moon by 2020. The program had nostalgic appeal but was also behind schedule and over budget.

In cutting off Constellation's government funding, Obama hopes the private sector will develop its own rocket technology for human space exploration. But the New York Times reported yesterday that companies such as Boeing and Lockheed Martin are wary of taking on this role without sufficient government backing. Both companies made faulty bets on the commercial space business ten years ago and would require substantive risk-sharing in order to re-launch those projects in full.

Obama has been upfront with his NASA priorities, proposing to scrap the moon mission in order to free up education funds during his presidential campaign. Once submitted to Congress, the NASA portion of his budget quickly drew fire from lawmakers in Florida, Texas, and other NASA-reliant states.

But as the agency's rocket engineers are fretting, its earth scientists are prepping. NASA's earth science team would receive an extra $2.4 billion -- a 62 percent increase -- through 2015 to study changing temperatures, ice coverage, ozone depletion, and atmospheric carbon dioxide. Rather than launching new projects, NASA would revive missions that the Bush administration either stalled or canceled.

This focus on climate change would mark a decided shift in NASA's mission and serve as a reminder of the influence that each administration has on the nation's scientific direction. At the same time, Obama may face a tough crowd speaking at Cape Canaveral on Thursday, given that the base will shed about 9,000 jobs when the Constellation program ends.

tough crowd..where will all those people go?

brought into the 21st century or not. Would the new priorities be worth the money? Were the past priorities worth it?

I always thought the space program as we knew it spent money on things that didn't solve current earthly problems. But would studying changing temperatures, ice coverage, ozone depletion, and atmospheric carbon dioxide help here? Focusing on climate change? I think this is long overdue, as climate change is a problem that hasn't been addressed and has been mocked. I'm all for this expenditure of money for NASA. Maybe the naysayers will eventually learn something.

there will be new jobs for them in the green fields?

in order to save money, he'll throw out one of the best.....

FTL

help to address a 21st century issue, climate change. Doesn't sound like a bad thing to me, but I'm no scientist.

I grew up with the space program. My father was in it while it was still at Langley. I have seen firsthand what humanity is capable of, and how extending our reach outward touched the whole world.

And climate change study is not NASA's job. NASA provides support because of its unique equipment (And should still do so), but it is not NASA's core value. NASA's value is in exploration and showing us what we are capable of.

The moon missions to come were largely designed as training sessions for eventual presence on Mars. And something important about climate change here on Earth; if you want to know what comes next, go to Mars where it has already happened. These moves are shortsighted in the extreme.

And don't think for a minute that the impact is only the 9k jobs at the Cape. This carnage will spread like plague in the technical jobs market.

You're definitely one of our best, but I don't think you understand what a human loss this will be in the long run.

If he wants to divert money to education and better climate science, terrific, but that money in bushels could come out of the two biggest black holes we're dumping cash into, without hacking up NASA.

but it's in any current president's purview to change the parameters of the mission. That seems to be what Obama feels he needs to do. I do recognize the value of the space program and how it helped put the US on the map as far as our prestige and ability to push the limits. But the costs are astronomical. Given our current economy, I don't see revamping the aging space program as being too popular when there are so many other issues that need to be addressed.

And why can't climate change study be NASA's job? He's talking about throwing money at this newly realized problem we created, that will employ a whole lot of people. I think you're yelling the sky is falling when it really isn't. Ha. No pun intended.

I guess I'm saying this isn't necessarily a bad thing, and hope those who have jobs that might be at risk can transfer their skills to this new goal.

There will be those who will resist change. The fact is that President Obama has a great opportunity to redefine and revive the space program to bring it into the 21st century, which means even more forward thinking.