During an interview on "Fox News Sunday" this week, Governor Mitt Romney once again criticized Newt Gingrich for his support of lunar colonies, citing that as an example of Gingrich being "zany."
First, "zany" seems an interesting word to use. Beyond that, however, Gov. Romney argues the federal government has no money for such a project. The fact is that the NASA budget in its entirety is a fraction of one percent of the federal budget. Adding a lunar base program over a few years could be accomplished while holding NASA's share of federal spending to one percent of the yearly total, especially given the bloated federal budgets coming up. That may or may not be a good idea, but it doesn't necessarily seem zany.
The above scenario also assumes the U. S. taxpayer would foot the entire bill. If NASA were the lead agency in an international lunar base program, the cost would be shared by the partner nations. Or, if it were done by a public/private consortium, to expand the economy beyond Earth while also pursuing breakthroughs in science and technology, the cost of the effort would be shared by the private partners and ultimately be covered by increased economic activity. Again, Gov. Romney may not be attracted to the idea, but that doesn't mean a case for it cannot be made.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
There's a big difference between a simple lunar base (which is certainly affordable within NASA's current budget after the SLS and MPCV are completed and could consist of just a few habitat modules) and a lunar colony.
However, once a permanent base is on the Moon producing water, air, and fuel then colonization through private commercial enterprises will be inevitable and will probably happen much quicker than most people think.
Post a Comment