ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Making the moon pay

Posted: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 7:55 PM by Alan Boyle


Odyssey Moon via X Prize
This artist's conception shows Odyssey Moon's lunar lander touching down.

Forty years ago, moon landings were exclusively the province of superpowers - but today, commercial ventures are trying to turn lunar missions into profitable businesses. Do such dreams represent one small step for high-tech entrepreneurship, or do they require an overly giant leap of faith?

Ramin Khadem, a veteran of the telecom satellite industry, thinks there's definitely money to be made on the moon. That's not surprising: As chairman of Odyssey Moon Limited, he's in charge of one of the ventures planning to deliver commercial payloads to the moon - not 40 years from now, but sometime in the next five years.

"The moon is almost like an eighth continent," Khadem told me. "It's within the planet Earth's own economic sphere ... Our approach has been to explore this eighth continent. Just as explorers went to the new world and found all sorts of great things, we think there are opportunities there."

The only problem is, we've known for the past 40 years that the "eighth continent" is within reach - but nothing has come of it. In fact, "Right Stuff" novelist Tom Wolfe argued around the time of this month's Apollo 11 anniversary that the fate of lunar travel was sealed once the moon race was won.

Today's NASA would never take the risks that NASA did in 1968 and 1969 by sending astronauts on just-barely-tested spacecraft to the moon - primarily because there's no longer any Cold War-scale reason to do so. Nothing has been done on the moon's surface, by humans or by robots, since 1972 (except for crashing).

So why should the economic equation be any different five years from now?

'The next stage'?
Khadem, who once served as chief financial officer for the Inmarsat telecom consortium, is feeling as if it could be deja vu all over again.

"I've been in the satellite business for many years," he said. "If you look back 40 years or so, the satellite business was in its infancy. Now, we've got a huge business at 34,000 kilometers in space - a multibillion-dollar business which is actually a huge benefit to mankind."

The benefits of the commercial satellite revolution - ranging from better weather forecasts to globe-girdling communication links - came "as the result of some risk taking" in Earth orbit, Khadem said.

"We think the moon itself is the next stage," he said.

Like 18 other teams, Odyssey Moon is working to put a rover on the moon by 2014 to win a big piece of the $30 million Google Lunar X Prize. But the venture is also lining up customers for lunar delivery services as well.

"We've got a number of customers already," Khadem said. "When we last put out an RFI (request for information), we got 27 responses, and there are a number of responses that are still outstanding."

Khadem estimated that Odyssey Moon had enough payload potential to fill up its first launch. "We can fill up the second launch as well, and we've only scratched the surface," he said.

If all those plans come to fruition, the prospects for profits are good. That's a big "if," however. Khadem said he recognized that rocket science is an inherently risky business. "The model that we know in the satellite business and telecom can be applied here," he said.

Just this month, Odyssey Moon announced that it was bringing a "dream team" of corporate partners into its venture, including banking specialists (Near Earth LLC), marketers (The Brand Union / WPP), insurance experts (Aon) and lawyers (Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy).

Odyssey Moon is working as well with other partners that have experience in the spacecraft business, such as NASA's Ames Research Center (which is developing the lunar lander); prime contractor MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates (the Canadian company behind the robotic arms on the space shuttles and the international space station); and Paragon Space Development (which is working on the lander and its thermal control system as well as a mini-greenhouse for the moon).

The moon market
Who are the customers? Khadem won't go much beyond generalities. "Our main business is simply carrying payload for customers, whoever they may be, and obviously for peaceful purposes of all kinds," he said.

A study conducted by Futron Corp. for the X Prize Foundation estimated that the 19 teams chasing the Google Lunar X Prize could serve a market of $1 billion or more in the next decade.

"We examined a wide range of markets that teams could address, both those that exist today and those that could be enabled by low-cost commercial lunar exploration," Futron senior analyst Jeff Foust was quoted as saying. "If one or more teams are able to win this prize competition, they will be able to serve markets potentially far larger than the prize purse."

For now, the primary payoff would come in the form of technology and scientific data: How will a gizmo designed for NASA's future moon missions actually work in the lunar environment? How much more can be learned about the moon's makeup, or about potential lunar resources? What kinds of observations can be made from the moon?

"Associated with this business there will be marketing and advertising," Khadem said. That could take the form of corporate logos plastered on the spacecraft. More ambitious schemes might call for setting up an exclusive video feed from the moon, for use in TV shows, movies or video games. You could let tourists take a spin around the lunar landscape via virtual reality. One company even says it will use a specially tracked rover to trace out advertising messages in moondirt (although the current launch prospects are uncertain).

If samples could be returned from the moon, that could open up yet another type of market. Apollo-vintage moondust and moon rocks are valuable commodities on Earth, strictly controlled by NASA, and even meteorites from the moon can sell for six figures, lunar scientist Paul Spudis noted last week on his "Once and Future Moon" blog.

Looking ahead
In the longer run, lunar operations could conceivably supply an outpost with raw materials ranging from solar power, drinkable water and breathable oxygen to building materials, as outlined in an essay written by Spudis and two other moon-watchers. And in the even longer run, some people suggest the moon could yield beamed energy or fusion fuel.

All this eventually gets back to the original question: If there are profit possibilities on the moon, why have they been neglected for all this time?

The biggest missing piece in the commercial moon puzzle is having a reliable, affordable launch vehicle that can reach the lunar surface. That challenge is something that the Google Lunar X Prize could well address.

California-based SpaceX, for example, is offering a 10 percent discount on launch costs for X Prize launches to the moon - a factor that the X Prize Foundation took into account when the rules for the challenge were written. "We tried to write it so that it was just barely winnable on a Falcon 1," said Will Pomerantz, the foundation's senior director for space prizes.

At least one X Prize competitor, Romania's ARCA team, is developing its own rocket for a future moon mission. The Helen launch vehicle, which is designed for launch from a high-altitude balloon platform, is due to be tested in August or September.

In their essay, Spudis and his colleagues argue that small steps leading to lunar settlement - including new breeds of reusable launch vehicles, new processes to take advantage of resources on the moon and new opportunities for private enterprise - could succeed where another Apollo-style giant leap just might fail:

"It is clear to us is that we are neither doing the right things in space nor are we are doing things right. Frankly, we do not think that it is possible to do much worse. The United States spends more money on space through our government than all other governments put together and we get less results on a dollar for dollar basis. Day by day more bad news about slipped schedules, enormous cost overruns, and lost capabilities make it into the news. It is beyond time to change the way that we conduct spaceflight, and if we choose to make this spaceport/settlement a reality, we will completely transform our aerospace industrial system. This rearrangement will save taxpayers billions of dollars while increasing our operational capabilities."

What do you think? Will commercial robots be on hand to greet the first astronauts returning to the moon, or will moon missions remain the exclusive domain of government space programs for the foreseeable future? Feel free to add your comments below.

More about the Apollo 11 anniversary:


Join the Cosmic Log corps by signing up as my Facebook friend or hooking up on Twitter. If you really want to be friendly, ask me about my upcoming book, "The Case for Pluto."  You can pre-order it from Amazon, Barnes & Noble or Borders.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Given time, every Sci-Fi vision of the 50s will come true...bet on it!
Those guys were projecting their visions forward way beyond our lifetimes...awesome foresight, eh?
"Making the moon pay"
--
it's a great idea... since the Moon hasn't nearly nothing... we can sell it... water, atmosphere, food, trees, gravity and much more! ...the only question is: "which currency the Moon should use to pay for?" :)
--
I think someone should come up with an ideal for a landing craft for people who would like a portion of the remains of a love one sent to the moon. I would love to have mind sent.. of course a portion of the moon would have to be set aside for this. Talk about making money!!!!!
My only regret is that things will not advance fast enough for me to travel to the moon as a tourist in my lifetime. At the time of our first landing, I felt certain that the dream would come true. However, as I enter my "golden years," groosly misused term (lol), I have had to recognize that I most likely will not live long enough to experience that dream. It will remain a great regret as far as traveling goes. How I would have loved to see the Earth from the surface of the moon!
When JFK acknowledged that there was a "space race" to be won, I took it as justification for all the science fiction I had been reading for years.  It was easy enough to compare that time with the Jules Verne stories from earlier in the century.  And to anticipate the future.

But real life intervened, and now I'm too old to hope that someone, someday, somehow, will be born, grow up, be educated and earn a living on the Moon planning the "Conquest of Mars."

Regrettably, the problems of Earth seem to be getting in the way of dreams, the dreams are becoming nightmares, and in truth "We are such stuff as dreams are made on."  I wonder what Shakespeare might say now?
I hope we don't just look at one direction - to the moon. A cost-effective means must be developed to get to the moon and return. Public enthusiasm is still critical. Much of humanity seems to be fasinated by the great shots from Hubble. Maybe the 1st goal should be a lunar telescope on the farside, which would require the added benefit of lunar-synchronous relay satellites. No more holding our collective breath while one of our craft goes behind the moon.
How about setting up data centers there? No terrorist threat!
"Given time, every Sci-Fi vision of the 50s will come true...bet on it!"

I like to tell people that we didn't get the flying cars, but the big, flat TVs arrived pretty much on time...
The Moon should be a proving ground for remote controlled human-analog robots that can be our agents for exploration and initial construction.  Those human-analog robots can also share development costs with the military for use on battle grounds of the future.

That way when money policy gets tight and the public demands an end to funding for keeping the moon program alive despite massive red ink, we will at least have developed something useful.
Please,

We've plundered and polluted our planet. We're very busy polluting the space around the earth with debris from rockets and satellites. And now we want to use the moon for our economic benefit.

Humanity seems more and more like a plague of locusts.

Don't get me wrong, I love space exploration, but we must avoid the way it seems to be heading. Once companies get involved, care for the environment always seems to come in second place. I hope the governments will do something about this, with strict regulations, but somehow I doubt it. It seems we're simply not ready yet to look beyond if we're not able to clean up our own mess.
I have a question - and forgive me if this sounds totally lame, but I am completely non-tech. Why aren't we converting the hulls of obsolete nuclear subs into space craft? These are crafts which are already designed to sustain human life in otherwise inhospitable environments and, stripped of their torpedo tubes, missile tubes and other unnecessary military equipment, they'd have tremendous load capacities. It does not seem cost efficient to spend billions of dollars to develop completely new deep space transport vehicles when we have these giant subs, which can certainly be broken down, launched into space via those big boosters the Russians have, and then reassembled in space, fitted with the necessary engines, manned by an international crew and then launched to Mars, for instance. Okay, have at me.
Where will the fuel come from to launch these missions once the oil, gas and coal runs out in a couple of decades?  If a new source of energy can be found and mined on the moon, that would be great.  In that sense, the moon would truly "pay" in a big way.

Otherwise, I have serious doubts about the future of space travel when there will not be fuel for cars, trucks and planes here on earth not to mention fuel for farming and other economic activities.
Amazing this author ranted on and on but just like the president the other day he didnt say anything. Is this what this nation is coming too? I feel sorry for you folks. Cut short the rhetoric and get right into the story spare us please!
No one else has a comment about the possibility of someone writing advertising messages in lunar soil? Drink Slurm! It's highly addictive! Seriously, I hate to crush anyone's capitalist dreams, but does anyone want the moon used as a billboard? That has possibilities, doesn't it? "Tonight's full moon is brought to you by Trojans!" How much would it cost to make the whole thing one big Coca-Cola sign? That, better than anything, I think, would demonstrate to any possible extra-terrestrial intelligence just whom they're dealing with here.
Anyone of these teams building anything like a Saturn V Booster ?  If not, then useful missions to the Moon will be Toy Efforts !  A company offering "Transport" doesn't mean the Mission will be profitable, so investment will probably be lacking ...
Interesting article Alan!  It would be nice if we could make the moon a profitable business venture, but getting things back and forth is way costly.  The beamed energy idea is interesting but how long before that could ever be made to work?  Still it's good to see business getting interested in doing business on the moon.
Flying cars are a reality now as well:

http://www.gizmowatch.com/entry/top-ten-flying-cars/
People worry today about things put in orbit falling from the sky. Imagine the worries when all sorts of private companies are re-entering the atmosphere after trips to the moon. Who is going to be in charge of coordinating it? Making sure they don't collide with a satellite or the space station.
I think some social forces will drive this more than technical gain.  Technically there doesn't seem to be much more advantage to a satellite beyond the geosynchronous orbits.  Socially the "eighth continent" is a huge thing:  a place where you can make a good idea work without having to retain a battalion of lawyers.  As the "Law of the Sea" gets fully implemented and our other networks of international accords expand, the eventual result will be the choking of initiative in all but the most socially elite.  A new frontier will be appealing for the exact same reasons the other frontiers were.
The thing I find interesting is that in the past most believed this type of grand project could only be accomplished by government and now most believe the government is the least capable of doing it in an efficient manor if at all.  This sure seems to have a very real meaning today.  As we move to the future let us not throw out the ambitions of the past with the problems of the past.  I believe this kind of stuff made us a great nation with the most important idea being we can accomplish anything - NOT redistributing the wealth.
Obama must be very proud of these guys. Note the Muslim Crescent on the proposed lunar lander. Don't remember any Christian Crosses, Fish symbols, Star of David on the NASA craft. Here comes Obamas relatives with their oil money taking the lead. China just thinks they are the new Super Power. LOL
The good news is someone has already created the service to launch a portion of human remains onto the lunar service.  My company, Celestis, Inc., at the request of NASA in 1999 made Dr. Eugene Shoemaker the first person "buried" on the moon.  We offer our Luna service to anyone interested and have contracts with Odyssey Moon, Astrobotic, and Next Giant Leap to fly on their commercial lunar missions.
Hype and Tripe....the ramblings of hucksters and tools of the AMIC (Aerospace Military Industrial Complex).  "keep the public funds flowing to keep humans alive and healthy in an environment of high energy radiation, near perfect vacuum, high velocity space grit and low to zero gravity."  (Not too much practical payoff for that back here on Earth.)

And lets not listen to all that stuff about Tang, Velcro, mini-computers, etc.  Hi-tech marches on in a thousand other ventures outside of NASA....it just doesn't have NASA's PR and spin machine.

The Moon/Mars advocates are either dreamers, or have ties (paid consultants, direct employees, etc.) to vested interests.

I love SciFi....have always been a fan of Star Trek.  But let's not confuse fiction and entertainment with useful expenditure of public resources (our taxes)....particularly in an age of enormous social, economic and environmental challenges...all with their own technological challenges.
I hope this is a reality soon, development of these programs would give me and many others promising, well paying jobs again in the aerospace indusrty.
I hope I live long enough to see a permanent manned outpost on the Moon. There is incredible wealth in our Solar system, just waiting to be picked up - on the Moon, Mars, the Asteroids, the moons of Jupiter, and even further out. NASA has lost the dream and is now operated solely as simply another bureaucratic sinecure for Washington DC cronies. Hopefully, private business will wee the profit to be made in space and get us back out there - without the idiocy inherent in government operations.

@Frank Glover: Thank heaven we didn't get the flying cars! Think about the drivers you see every day on the ground. Now imagine them overhead in a couple of tons of metal and highly-flammable fuel.
Luna, Selene,she is right there waiting. The Moon is a trove of mineral riches to be developed and a hostess of extraordinary challenges that will be met and overcome. The Moon is the steppingstone to Mars and the Asteroids. What we learn and accomplish near at hand will serve us in a more distant future. Can space travel and exploration ever be cost effective? Can you make money on the mineral trove of The Moon? All manner of metals are there often locked up with oxides, titanium, aluminum, magnesium, silicon, lately uranium and most important,thorium have been discovered. We know very well how to use these elements to fabricate all manner of useful things. Will there be a Moon Rush? When will freeboot prospectors and mineral consortiums take off to stake claims in the Far Procellarum or the cratered uplands of Fra Morro? A hundred years? As soon as a return on investment is in sight freebooters and NGOs will be out there mining, smelting, refining and selling the manifold products of The Moon. Just about everything we will need is already there. Carbon is noticeably absent as is nitrogen, a hitch for Lunar agriculture, but a way will be found to grow crops. The Moon is also a perfect place to store radioactive nuclear bi-products that currently hinder development of next-gen reactors here on Earth.The BIG ? is always going to be...how much does it cost?
What about valuable mineral deposits on the moon?  There are rare earth elements that are scarce here on earth; the majority of rare earth elements are primarily controlled by China here on earth; can the US find them on the moon and ship them back to earth?
Data Centers on the Moon....The only problem with this is .... the moon has no atmosphere, so electronics have to be hevily sheilded....Oh, and it costs 190k USD per pound to ship things to the moon(bad price here as well..and that price is a guess)Its a GREAT IDEA THO....You can make data centers that are covered/burined  in Lunar Soil, so it is protected....Radiation is a SERIOUS threat to any electronic componenets(oh and it casuses cancer in high doses), one good point, its really cold in the shade and computers LOVE nice cool conditions and Datacenters generate TONS Of heat!

Imagine,,,,,Datacenters on the moon, Sat Networks keep them connceted.....What an AMAZING IDEA...!!! Talk about Cloud Computing! Lunar Computing!
"It's within the planet Earth's own economic sphere."  Perhaps Khadem should grow marijuana for a change instead of just smoking it.  The simple reason why the moon hasn't been (and will not be) exploited is because it isn't economically feasible...period.  And Google's X Prize isn't going to change that.
So we'll get hotels on the moon for the rich and advertising in the sky for the rest of us? How predictable. And when we look up, instead of a beautiful moon we'll see tourist sites and marketing. Yeah, that's great. I'll be happy to die without seeing this. Humanity's lack of imagination never ceases to amaze me. If the real estate is bare, cover it up with development and make some money. Gene Roddenberry was right: until we can all get along here, we have no business going out there.
If we havent returned to the moon in nearly a half century we probably will never return.  Get used to the idea!          I hope we were even there to begin with.        
The only people who will benefit from the moon will speak Chinese.  Asteroids have a lot more cost effective benefits (metals etc. to mine).  We could build cycler stations (use slingshot orbits with two year cycles) that have gravity and nuclear power to go to Mars or the moon comfortably and safely if we were concerned about cost effectiveness.  The only thing the moon would be good for is military bases.  Everyone forgets that government involvement (Sematech) is what caused all this electronic chip development for example, or that capitalism isn't working very well right now either.
The future of humanity lies in space, not in some demented religious apocalypse. Those of us here reading and writing comments may not live to see it, but it will come.
Frank...don't forget Dick Tracy's wrist radio...what else are cell phones, et al?
Cannot imagine why the wrist band idea isn't part of the whole phenomenon.
Back in the early 20th century, someone made a silent film showing a cannon firing a spacecraft to the moon.
Looks like a cheap way to get your remains to their final resting place Mr. Goddard!!! And remember, if my mind remembers correctly, wasn't Iraq building one with that capability at one time. The technology IS OUT THERE!!!!
I know Dr. Khadem, and am impressed by the excellent people working on this effort. When Inmarsat began, it was as a service to humanity to enable ships at sea to send out SOS from anywhere. It morphed into a mega provider of global communications worth billions of dollars. The startup costs were daunting, but the payoff was wonderful. Congrats to the Google Prize for stimulating this worthy competition!
What we realy need to do is elevate space to a cabinet level agency and then split it between commercial application and scientific research. NASA can do the scientific research, including robotic explorers. Manned space flight should be left in the hands of entrepeneurs who are willing to take the risks for the gain. In the eighties we were told don't worry about all the foreign car and steel imports; we're going to move into the computer age. In the 1990s we were told don't worry about all the computer manufacturing moving overseas, we have information services. Now that the data and call centers and software development are being outsourced what do we have left? Let's not do the same to aerospace and space technologies.
The moon does not have an atmosphere to protect it from radiation and meteorite impacts. That needs to be considered before putting there a telescope or a lunar base.
"How about setting up data centers there? No terrorist threat!"

There is always a way, not hard to hack satellites, then just find the one contected to the data center and vowala lol.
Ben Bova's got a great hard sci-fi series about the settlement of the moon and the asteroid belts...

Seems like one of the biggest obstacles would be excess heat dissipation.  There's no atmosphere, nothing to conduct heat away from a settlement.  And pretty much anything you do that uses or generates energy also produces waste heat.  How are they looking at solving that problem?
"I think someone should come up with an idea for a landing craft for people who would like a portion of the remains of a love one sent to the moon."

I hear that Ralph Kramden might be interested.

Seriously...I remember watching the recent miniseries on our space program (Discovery Channel?), and I was flabbergasted at the risks we took, the stuff we just crossed our fingers and flew, and made history with in the process. And even if the space program hadn't been Proxmired, we still don't have the same perception of "acceptable risk" now that we did then. It's sad, really. No great thing was ever accomplished without risk, without cost.

Let's find some competent leadership for NASA, and give them the money they need to do space *right*. They'd still spend less in a year than our military spends in Afghanistan and Iraq in two weeks.
Why do we have to commercialize the moon?  Isn't it already 'paying off' doing its job -- maintaining the correct distance from the Earth to help balance gravitational forces regulating tidal cycles? Anything else would be cheap, tawdry exploitation of a natural resource.  Please don't get me wrong, I love space; I long for space travel and a vacation to the moon would be cool, but at what price?
From a Military point of view "The Moon is the High Ground".Who ever is in control of the Moon,will control the Earth!
The Moon (and Mars to an extent) will be a proving ground to show what we need to do to learn how to live on other planets.  We humans have been lucky that we haven't been turned into pulp by Near Earth Objects.  If we are to survive as a species, then we need to leave the planet and find other places for us to live.

I would also wonder about an observatory on the Moon.  NASA could have made some money off selling the pictures from the Hubble.  If there were observatories on the Moon, they could yield other fabulous pictures.
The Moons biggest commercial prize wasn't mentioned if it exist at all in great enough quantities and that is the mining of uranium ore. If Uranium is found in a great enough quantity then this would be the prize that would be more commercially viable in the immediate future then Helium III.

We tested nuclear fission type rockets for over 40 years, but couldn't use them because of the concerns of contaminating the earth's atmosphere, never mind that we had  operational  for over 50 years nuclear powered subs which didn't need to be refueled for over 25 years. We may be timid about having nuclear powered propulsion going though the earth's atmosphere but not so timid if used on the moon and other worlds. If a corporation has the incite to realize the potential of mining Uranium ore on the moon or asteroids and process it there then they would commercially open up human space travel to all parts of our solar system.
Small correction...
We only have six continents on our planet: Europe, Asia, Africa, North America, South America and Australia. So "eighth continent" should be "seventh continent"
# News:Today's NASA would never take the risk that NASA dit in 1968 and 1969 by sending astronauts on just-barely-tested spacecraft to the moon-primarily.

# Comment:Yes,respects........
We will have to commercialize and exploit Lunar resources in order to maintain a living presence there. And no doubt some of that will be gaudy and tawdry, just as Earthly cities are. Yet there is the opportunity to create extraordinary habitats and imaginative architectures that reflect the very best in human spirit. For the next hundred years,
The Moon will be under the control of governmental "scientablishment" bureaucracies, but at some point the availability of launch capacities will allow individuals, corporations and NGOs to make the trip. And it will only take one day from launch to landing. In time, space travelling vehicles (spaceships) will be built in space and not on the ground, and stay in space. Shuttles will transfer passengers and freight from the surface to a "spaceliner/freighter" for the transit. Lift off from the Lunar surface may well be accomplished via electromagnetic catapults, a concept thought off back in the 50's and likely to become reality as the the escape velocity is so low. Vacation on The Moon? It will happen. Slowly, slowly all things are accomplished. Mining, smelting and trading metals? As has just been said so-called rare earth metals of the Lanthanum series are not rare on The Moon and very valuable here on Earth, as are many other minerals. Will human exploitation ruin The Moon? Not likely as it is an icon of ruin already and has been ploughed, gouged, bombarded, and pulverized on a regular basis over the past several billions of years. It is certain we can build habitations on The Moon, scientific and engineering outposts. But can we build a society, a civilization that can sustain itself in cooperation and commerce with those here on Earth? Keep the blog rolling.  
To: Richard Wesley, Newark, New Jersey

To the idea of using subs as space craft. The reason why we can't do that boils down to pressure. Subs are designed to withstand crushing pressure from the environment around them. Space craft have be the designed exactly opposite. They have to withstand pressure from inside pushing out.

As to reasons to go to the moon. The most profitable concern should be the continued existence of human life. Right now we are on a small raft in a very big ocean. One small hole in that raft and we all die. If we could get a second raft (moon) or a third (mars). One hole would not mean the end of humanity. Yes it isn't dollars and cents, but what is actually worth more? A piece of paper with someones picture on it, or your great grand child?
Fortunately, the moon is off limits to mining, teraforming or using as a garbage dump. Its against international law, so all of your fears about us trashing the moon can be put to rest. No company would go against international law. I'm sure the price they would pay for that would be incredibly high.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=2012537

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google