Will Government-Sponsored Space Prizes Fly?

The Ansari X Prize demonstrated that privately-funded prizes can be effective; is the same true for government-sponsored prizes?

The major news services haven’t picked up the story yet, but Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) has already thrown down the gauntlet for the next great space contest: a $100-million government-sponsored space prize.

On October 8, Rohrabacher submitted the “Space and Aeronautics Prize Act” (HR 5336) to the U.S. House of Representatives. This legislation calls for the formation of a “Space and Aeronautics Prize” valued at up to $100 million. To claim the prize, a private group must fly a three-person spaceship of their own design to an altitude of 400 kilometers, complete three revolutions around Earth orbit, and return safely.

The success of the Paul Allen/Burt Rutan team in flying a privately-funded spaceship just beyond the atmosphere, thus clinching the $10 million Ansari X Prize, brought a surge of new respect for the concept of space exploration prizes. Soon after completion of the X Prize competition, a billionaire named Robert Bigelow announced a $50-million privately-funded “America’s Space Prize” for the first group to fly a private ship to Earth orbit twice within two months. Now, Rep. Rohrabacher is upping the ante with an even more ambitious government-funded competition.

The Space and Aeronautics Prize Act proposes much more than a $100 million contest, however. The Act mandates formation of a National Endowment for Space and Aeronautics, tasked with the following objectives:

- Awarding cash prizes for private space development, in conjunction with, or independent of, NASA;

- Creating standards for “tasteful advertising of commercial products and services” in conjunction with private space efforts or NASA’s efforts; and

- Encouraging private gifts of real and personal property to support the efforts of private space developers and/or NASA.

Congressman Rohrabacher seems confident this legislation is perfectly timed to give a significant boost to the fledgling private space industry. In his speech announcing the bill before the House of Representatives, Rohrabacher said, “I am convinced a new generation of space entrepreneurs is ready to make their mark in contributing to low Earth orbit development, as well as returning to the Moon.”

The bill has virtually no chance of passing in this Congress because the House and Senate will convene this week for only a brief “lame duck” session before final adjournment. However, does legislation like Space and Aeronautics Prize Act have a chance of surviving both houses of Congress and becoming law in the near future?

Unlike the privately funded X Prize, the Space and Aeronautics Prize relies primarily on taxpayer dollars for funding. Even NASA’s Centennial Challenges prize program, while technically “government-sponsored,” derives its funding from the existing NASA budget. Some types of prizes, like the Space Settlement Initiative proposed by Alan Wasser, would cost the taxpayer nothing because incentives readily available in space (such as land claim recognition on the Moon) act as the financial lure for private space development efforts. Since a government-sponsored cash prize must tap the public coffer one way or another, though, monetary prizes are a much more difficult sell in Congress.

Efforts to pass government-sponsored monetary incentives for private space development have an abysmal track record in Congress. During the 1990’s, for example, a series of bills were introduced by Congressman Bob Walker (then chairman of the House Science Committee) designed to provide very substantial tax breaks for private sector “space corporations” as well as for investors who purchased stock in such companies.

The first, the “Space Transportation Services Purchase Act” of 1993 (also known as the Omnibus Space Commercialization Act), included a substantial section providing significant tax deductions for space businesses and investors. This bill died at the end of the 103rd Congress in December 1994 due to inaction by the House. The tax incentives section of that bill was reintroduced by Walker in June 1995 as the “Space Business Incentives Act”. This version of the legislation died in the House Ways and Means Committee at the end of the 104th Congress. Then, in 1996, a subsequent bill by Walker, the “Space Commercialization Promotion Act,” achieved approval by the House, but then died after being sent to the Senate for consideration.

Compared to the 1990’s, the financial picture today is much grimmer. Now the country is at war and we have a record budget deficit and mounting national debt. How will most Congressmen and Senators feel about setting aside $100 million for a space prize when there does not seem to be enough money to simply balance the budget?

In Recommendation 5-2 of their June 2004 report, the Aldridge Commission implored Congress to authorize the funding of large cash prizes for private achievements in space: to establish “significant monetary prizes for the accomplishment of space missions and/or technology developments.” Whether such government-sponsored contests come to pass, however, is more a matter for you and I, as constituents, to decide. Without grassroots commitment to the concept of government-sponsored space prizes, the Space and Aeronautics Prize Act (and future proposals like it) will die in committee just like the tax incentive bills of the 1990’s.

Where to begin, then? First, everyone interested in seeing private space development happen should take the time to read and understand the Space and Aeronautics Prize Act. Then, of course, express your support of the legislation to your Congressman and Senators. This is surprisingly easy to do. The Space Settlement Institute’s website (www.space-settlement-institute.org) includes a Write to Congress link where anyone can locate the email address and mailing address of their representatives in Congress and quickly fire off an email or letter. The phone number for the U.S. Capitol switchboard is also provided on that page for those who want to call their representatives directly.

For the Space and Aeronautics Prize Act to stand a chance of becoming law, space advocates across the nation will need to stand up and loudly voice their support. Large numbers of citizens calling, writing, and emailing their Congressmen and Senators is the only way Congress will ever give this legislation serious consideration.

Douglas O. Jobes (douglas.jobes@space-settlement-institute.org) is president of The Space Settlement Institute.

Will We Never Return to the Moon?

I vividly remember watching Neil Armstrong stepping onto the surface of the moon. It was very late night for an eight year old, but my father said I would be telling my grandchildren about watching the first man walk on the moon. By early the next morning, Miss Baird freshly decorated our entire classroom (It was a summertime art program) in an Apollo theme, with “A SMALL STEP FOR A MAN, A GIANT LEAP FOR MANKIND” proudly appearing in block letters over the front chalk board. It seemed that we were accelerating toward a bright future in the heavens. Yet, humans have not set foot on the moon since 1972. Has mankind simply stumbled after such a great leap, or have we put the tools to reach for the stars outside of our collective grasp?

One Scenario for the Development of the Moon

The technology presently exists for individuals or corporations to profit from the resources on the moon. The flat lowlands, or "mare" regions formed about 4 billion years ago when immense asteroid impacts fractured the crust, allowing the lavas from 200 miles deep to erupt forming vast seas of lava. The resulting lava seas, which were rich in iron and magnesium, mixed with predominantly aluminum silicates. The result, after billions of years of pounding by meteorites, micrometeorites and solar and cosmic radiation is a powder 2 to 10 meters deep in the lowlands, and 100s to 1000s of meters (kilometers) in the highlands.

This regolith layer contains minerals containing aluminum, calcium, iron, magnesium and a remarkably high content of titanium. These and other abundant minerals can be the building blocks for ceramics, glass and fiberglass, which can be used in refining and producing metals for structures, tools and export. The absence of an atmosphere makes solar energy abundant, especially at the poles, where ice has recently been discovered.

Profitable lunar operations would be characterized by a high initial cost, followed by very low operating costs. The present $10,000 per pound maximum cost for exporting materials from the earth’s surface obviously inhibits immediate large-scale lunar activities. Yet, lunar operations could begin with small-scale production of ceramics and metals for structures and tools. A solar panel powered refinery using electrolysis in a vacuum could separate materials depending upon the temperature, while producing copious amounts of oxygen. Ceramic refractory can be manufactured using the same process. These start-up operations would additionally need to include the capacity to shuttle to a lunar orbiting platform, given the inability of humans to be indefinitely subjected to low gravity.

Once the lunar base takes root, materials for the construction of additional facilities can be exported to the lunar orbiter and production capabilities will increase, as the base begins to flower. Centrifuges to mimic 1g environments can be constructed on the surface and in orbit, to enable long-term habitation by humans and their sources of food. Aluminum oxide powered rockets can be fabricated for transport to and from the lunar surface. Semiconductors abundant in regolith can be used to construct photovoltaic cells. A magnetic accelerator can be employed to eject a steady flow of materials into orbit for collection by an orbiting facility. Surface operations would continually focus on collection of materials for export to the orbiter and exploration for potentially large quantities of pure materials.

The orbiting facility will evolve into a semi-refined material collection, manufacturing and transportation hub. The refined products can contribute to the expansion of the orbital structure, to fabricate transport vehicles, tools, etc. and for export back to the surface. It will have the advantage of continuous solar energy for power and thermal applications. Product from the surface may be used as raw material to fabricate increasingly larger scale electrolysis refineries. Eventually, large quantities of high margin product like titanium can be exported back to earth for commercial sale.

The Right Tools to Develop the Moon

Economic development using only available raw materials located in an undeveloped environment was once central to the national consciousness in the United States. European monarchies made initial capital outlays to explore the west. However, expenditure by national governments did not develop the new world. Economic innovations such as the corporate form enabled almost any entrepreneur to access sufficient capital to finance journeys for commercial benefit. The great fortunes that ensued coincided with aggregate increased longevity, greater knowledge and technical innovations that greatly added to the quality of life of many.

In America, the lesson of permitting the free access to capital became central to our national consciousness. In fact, the Massachusetts Bay colony was founded upon an egalitarian system for the distribution of economic benefit. The colony foundered and nearly winked out of existence, until Governor Bradford suspended the provisions of the Mayflower charter that required turning over all the colonist’s production into a common store. Instead the Governor gave a plot of land to each family to work and manage. The year following resulted in such abundance, that the colonists offered a feast to thank the Lord for the abundance He awarded. Our national day of Thanksgiving is still celebrated today.

Sadly, the mostly unrestrained entepreneurism that forged the expansion and construction of the United States has been a target for many who seek to provide for even greater good. Yet, nearly every attempt to legislate egalitarian ideals has resulted in the restriction of the free access to capital for entrepreneurs. The inevitable result is lost opportunity and economic stagnation.

So, has mankind stumbled or stagnated, when it comes to reaching toward the moon? What follows may surprise you. As you read the following selected quotes from the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies of 1967, you should ask yourself whether you would place the extremely high risk portion of you investments in an environment where there is no private property, where there is no privacy and where disputes are resolved by the U.N.:

Article I

The exploration and use of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries, irrespective of their degree of economic or scientific development, and shall be the province of all mankind.

Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on a basis of equality and in accordance with international law, and there shall be free access to all areas of celestial bodies.

There shall be freedom of scientific investigation in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, and States shall facilitate and encourage international co-operation in such investigation. Article II

Outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means.

* * *

Article XI

In order to promote international co-operation in the peaceful exploration and use of outer space, States Parties to the Treaty conducting activities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, agree to inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations as well as the public and the international scientific community, to the greatest extent feasible and practicable, of the nature, conduct, locations and results of such activities. On receiving the said information, the Secretary-General of the United Nations should be prepared to disseminate it immediately and effectively.

Article XII

All stations, installations, equipment and space vehicles on the Moon and other celestial bodies shall be open to representatives of other States Parties to the Treatyon a basis of reciprocity. Such representatives shall give reasonable advance notice of a projected visit, in order that appropriate consultations may be held and that maximum precautions may be taken to assure safety and to avoid interference with normal operations in the facility to be visited.

Article XVI

Any State Party to the Treaty may give notice of its withdrawal from the Treaty one year after its entry into force by written notification to the Depositary Governments. Such withdrawal shall take effect one year from the date of receipt of this notification.

http://www.state.gov/t/ac/trt/5181.htm#treaty

Epilog

The solution for stimulating a stagnating reach for the stars should be obvious to our policy makers. Massive and inefficient expenditures by central governments may be the right formula for proving that great feats of exploration can work. It worked for the discovery of the New World. However, for sustained economic activity in undeveloped areas to take root, entrepreneurs need free access to capital. This includes private property. Without it, the Massachusetts Bay Colony would been nothing more than a historical footnote.

The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies of 1967 is toxic to the exploration and economic development in the heavens. Our withdrawal from this treaty will be the first step toward equipping American entrepreneurs with the tools they need to reach for the stars.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.