Regolith
Stepping foot on Moon dust is worth a giant leap by humankind.
A note before proceeding:
Regolith is defined as the loose soil of a planetary object and is primarily used to describe Moon dust and sometimes extended to that of Mars. Despite the novelty of Moon rocks, they serve no resourceful value on Earth. But access and possession of regolith represents human survival, achievement, and scientific innovation. Regolith is our key to success as a species.
Photo taken during the Apollo 11 Moon mission with an overlay of the Artemis logo and text “REGOLITH” | Image: Bailey Heller
NASA And The Moon
In 1969, two American astronauts traveled to the Moon on the most powerful rocket ever made and left permanent footprints in the Moon’s untouched regolith. In 1972, the last humans to ever step foot on the Moon boarded their lunar lander in hopes that they would not be the last. Almost 50 years later, NASA is planning their return mission to the Moon: Artemis. The United States space program has promised to send the first woman and person of color to the Moon.
So, to put it bluntly, what took them so long? Regolith is expensive. Or, more specifically, reaching regolith is expensive. The NASA program, Apollo --which brought all 12 astronauts to the Moon-- cost $283 billion (price adjusted for inflation). Last year (2020), NASA’s federal budget designated for “exploration” was $6 billion (planetary.org).
A photo from NASA’s 2020 Artemis Generation Spacesuit Event where an astronaut candidate showcased the new technology. | Image: NASA HQ PHOTO
The Space Race
The 1960s exhibited the height of the US - Soviet Union Cold War, where each nation threatened the other by developing advanced weapons, militaries, and technologies. In the midst of this political unrest, rocketry (and missile development) became a focus as the nations tried to one-up the other with historic achievement. This Space Race escalated as the Soviet Union was first to put a satellite in orbit (Sputnik 1), an animal in orbit (Laika the dog), and a human in space (Yuri Gagarin). The United States found it of utmost importance that they be the first to reach the Moon. And sure enough, Niel Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin “won” the Space Race by achieving the grand prize of placing the American flag in the sea of regolith.
The Soviet Union canceled their space efforts to reach the Moon and the Apollo missions continued into 1972 when the last humans to touch the Moon brought back 243 pounds of pristine regolith (NASA.gov). Before taking off, the astronauts left a plaque that read:
“Here man completed his first exploration of the Moon, December 1972 A.D. May the spirit of peace in which he came be reflected in the lives of all mankind.”
-NASA space agency
In 1975, NASA and the Soviet Union space program joined together to undergo the Apollo-Soyuz mission where an American and a Soviet spacecraft docked together and the American astronauts shook hands with the Soviet cosmonauts in orbit around the Earth (astronomy.com). This act of peace brought an end to the valiantly fought Space Race.
Apollo-Soyuz Docking: July 17, 1975 | NASA Video, YouTube
NASA’s Budget Drops
After the orbital gesture of peace between the Nations, the Cold War still continued. NASA saw an incredible drop in funding going from about five percent of the federal budget down to a meek one percent (nature.com). Despite this hindrance, the United States space agency was still able to reach countless scientific breakthroughs and carry out groundbreaking missions. The space shuttle program started in the early 80s and was NASA’s primary focus during its lifetime. But ultimately, the missions became too routine and unimpressive to congress and it came to a close in 2011, punctuated by the drop of NASA’s funding down to half a percent of the United States federal budget. Currently, the organization’s focus has shifted toward the International Space Station and the Mars rovers. The Artemis mission did not increase NASA’s budget --it has only stretched it more thin.
What Makes Regolith so Valuable?
By bringing Moon rocks back on the Apollo missions, humans have unlocked many discoveries and have learned about the history of the Moon and Earth. But Regolith’s value is not primarily derived by its physicality --it represents the achievements, advancement, and innovation of humankind. Returning to Earth’s only natural satellite is not simply a political statement or silly proof of our animalistic superiority. Human presence on the Moon allows for research and development of human civilization.
Laura M. Delgado, a grad student at George Washington University’s Space Policy Institute, details the inherent value of the NASA program in her piece, When inspiration fails to inspire: A change of strategy for the US space program. Delgado expresses the extent to which NASA’s achievements have impacted every aspect of our daily lives “through satellite platforms in the commercial and civil sectors – from the GPS-enabled devices on most cell phones,... [to] the speedy internet connections securing banking transactions... To ask the value of space seems unnecessary, yet we still do.” (Delgado). Exploration and technological innovation in space are inarguably some of the most impactful aspects of the digital age we are living in. Regolith stands for human survival through development. The peaceful nature of space exploration is practically utopian in its prospects.
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth is
NASA’s funding has become less important to the United States congress. When the House of Representatives draft their yearly budget for any government organization, they consider the historical trend of government spending and the values of the voters in their state. And since the historical norm insists budget cuts, voter approval and demand is NASA’s only hope for elevated financial support. But the average American taxpayer still sees “the budget of the space program as an expensive luxury.” To most, NASA’s “important role in society remains a complete mystery.” (Delgado). It can only be for a lack of knowledge that an American can see NASA as a waste of funding. This is not to say it deserves an expendable allowance, but raising NASA’s share of the federal budget should be seen as a secure and lucrative investment.
Public Presidential support of the United States space program has been prevalent and bipartisan. All presidents since the 70’s were able to witness the Moon landing live, and thus they have an ingrained “inspirational value” associated with space exploration. In the discussion of NASA funding, this “inspirational” approach to maintaining support for our space agency is no longer seen as sustainable. In Delgado’s analysis of this approach, she states, “The simple fact is that the cold war generation, which grew up with the Soviet fear and witnessed the powerful rebirth of the scientific spirit that led to the Moon landings, is not the generation that policy makers are eager to inspire today.” (Delgado). Even though United States presidents and policymakers might hold space exploration with high regard, the desire to appeal to voters and be reelected outweighs any personal bias they may hold.
So this leads us to the Artemis program. President Trump and Vice President Pence oversaw the establishment of this program in 2017 and flaunted its purpose: A return trip to the Moon by 2024 (this time with a woman). But it's important to note that NASA is used to empty governmental support. The Artemis program is rising from the ashes of the Constellation program, which was founded under the Bush administration and later canceled by the Obama administration. When announced, it was easy to mistake this presidential promise as a newfound hope for NASA in the form of an increased budget, but this is an incorrect assumption. NASA’s funding did not increase that fiscal year, and they soon wrote off the possibility of reaching the Moon by 2024 altogether (CBSnews.com).
The Biden administration has expressed their endorsement in the Artemis program and has proposed a NASA budget that would increase their 2021 budget by 6.6% (CBSnews.com). But even current NASA Administrator, Bill Nelson, has stated that while this support is needed, he does not trust it will come to fruition. Liberal budgets are common for NASA’s white house budgets but congress gets the final say. Nelson said “I know the goal is 2024. But I think we have to be brutally realistic, that history would tell us, because space development is so hard, that there could be delays to that schedule.” The underlying tone of this quote is that money is the determining factor for the program. While NASA appreciates the presidential support, they are weary of what benefit it will serve them.
The Missing $3 Billion
In 2020, NASA submitted their yearly budget proposal to congress with one request being a $3.3 billion allocation toward the development of the lunar lander, which will land the next two human missions to the Moon. Congress only granted $850 million (theverge.com). (NASA’s STEM educational reachout program was also completely dissolved from their budget). NASA made it clear that the lunar lander was one of the most vital aspects of the Artemis mission and without these funds, it would be in great jeopardy. So what can a government organization do if they don’t have enough money to do something themselves? They pay someone else to do it.
SpaceX and Commercialized Space
In early April 2021, NASA announced that it would be contracting the privatized rocketry company, SpaceX, to develop a lunar lander to land the next humans on the Moon. As a SpaceX stan myself, I was elated with this news. SpaceX has made a reputation for itself as the most ambitious and successful space company in the world. This summer, SpaceX aims to launch their “Super Heavy” rocket booster which, if successful, will be the strongest rocket to date (surpassing the Saturn V). This contract was announced by most media outlets as a cause for celebration. This contract funds American jobs and promotes technical innovation in the private sector. But there is a limit to reliance on private business.
Eleni Panagiotarakou, a researcher at Concordia University’s Humanities and Social Sciences Communications school, wrote on the topic of privatized space programs and their effect on NASA in their piece On the problem of astronomy and popular prejudices: the case of ancient astronomers and NASA funding. Panagiotarakou discusses the argument of politically liberatarian citizens who believe NASA should be defunded. Libertarians view SpaceX and other private space agencies as more beneficial to the US economy, but Panagiotarakou argues “a feasible space program needs the unlimited financial resources of a wealthy nation-state.” Private businesses follow money over discovery so reliance on them beyond specialized missions opposes NASA’s altruistic “for all mankind” approach.
A rendering of a theoretical SpaceX rocket that could bring astronauts to the Moon. Its shape is inspired by SpaceX’s Starship, which’s development convinced NASA to select the company. | Image: SpaceX
Our Future is Covered in Regolith
The Artemis mission is a remarkable endeavor that will inspire millions of people beyond the confines of our national border. While not impossible, the mission will most likely not be canceled. But by looking at NASA’s history, the mission is highly susceptible to setbacks and delays along with significant cuts in ambition and long term goals. Space exploration is a priceless tool for humankind to thrive in this universe. As we face climate change and its many societal impacts, a solid government-led space agency in the United States can bring innovation and practical problem solving to our greatest threats. So when you look up at the Moon, you might just see a bunch of regolith, but look forward to a future where someone can look down at the Moon.
Bibliography
Panagiotarakou, E. On the problem of astronomy and popular prejudices: the case of ancient astronomers and
NASA funding. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 7, 75 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-00570-3
Delgado, L. When inspiration fails to inspire: A change of strategy for the US space program. Volume 37,
Part 3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2016.11.007.
Betz, Eric. “Apollo-Soyuz Mission: When the Space Race Ended.” Astronomy.com, 21 July 2020,
https://astronomy.com/news/2020/07/apollo-soyuz-mission-when-the-space-race-ended
Glaze, Lori. “Apollo 17 In Depth.” NASA.gov, NASA, 9 Apr. 2019,
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/missions/apollo-17/in-depth/
Harwood, William. “NASA Chief Says Budget Keeps Artemis Moon Program on Track.” CBS News, CBS
Interactive, 28 May 2021, www.cbsnews.com/news/artemis-moon-program-nasa-budget/.
Planetary.org. “How Much Did the Apollo Program Cost?” The Planetary Society, 2020,
Planetary.org. “NASA's FY 2020 Budget.” The Planetary Society, 2020,
Roulette, Joey. “NASA Suspends SpaceX's $2.9 Billion Moon Lander Contract after Rivals Protest.” The
Verge, 30 Apr. 2021,
www.theverge.com/2021/4/30/22412771/nasa-spacex-hls-moon-lander-blue-origin-protest.