1 hour ago
4
As an 8-year-old kid, the Apollo 11 moon landing inspired me to become an astronaut. I was fortunate to realize that dream and enjoyed a 15-year spaceflight career with NASA. After the success of the Artemis II mission earlier this year, NASA is looking to return again to the surface of the moon. Why?
Aren’t we redoing what we did over 50 years ago? Why a lunar base? Why not go directly to Mars? One could even argue that Artemis II was not as eventful as Apollo 8, since that crew orbited the moon 10 times.
Legitimate questions. But what most Americans fail to realize is that the race to get back to the moon is existential. Our national security is at stake.
During the Apollo missions, the nation understood how important the space race was. America and the Soviet Union were in a Cold War that would determine the planet’s future, and beating the Communists to the moon played a pivotal role in establishing Western dominance.
At its peak, the agency received more than 4% of US spending. Today, it receives a measly 0.33%. But the moon’s role is just as crucial today as it was 50 years ago.
It’s imperative that we establish a lunar base. There are scientific reasons for this, but there’s also a strategic reason: Helium-3 (He-3).
This vital element is not only ideal fusion-reactor fuel but will also be critical to the future of quantum computing. Both of those technologies will prove essential to the future of American security.
He-3 does not exist in significant quantities on Earth. And we can’t create much of it either. But it can be found in abundance on the moon.
The United States and other countries are signatories to the Outer Space Treaty. This agreement treats the moon much like Antarctica. It stipulates that no country can claim or own the moon. But the treaty does allow for research and removal of material.
This is where nuclear reactors come in. Besides providing reliable, continuous electrical power, lunar reactors allow the establishment of a safety keep-out zone.
These keep-out zones offer a workaround to the prohibitions on land ownership on the moon: As operational areas, they would allow the United States to take full advantage of the areas where we place the reactors, for the purpose of, say, collecting He-3.
Other countries have already begun pursuing this strategy. Thus, America must maintain its lead in human spaceflight.
The good news: Our trajectory is promising. SpaceX is making great strides with its Starship program, a reusable super-heavy-lift launcher.
A version of this rocket will eventually be an HSF lander. Blue Origin — despite its recent setback when its New Glenn rocket exploded — is competing in the same market and making progress as well. One or both of these landers will soon be tested in low-earth orbit as part of Artemis III.
Private partnerships promise to accelerate progress toward the moon. These companies are nimble and able to develop technologies and pivot quickly. They complement NASA’s excellence in space operations and technical expertise.
What we learn in our lunar missions will accelerate our path to Mars and all of its resources. The moon is only three to four days away. Mars is six to eight months away, at closest approach.
Thus, the moon is the ideal place to develop and test hardware such as habitats, rovers, and spacesuits in low-gravity, dusty environments with big temperature swings. It will also provide a key training ground for astronauts.
America’s human spaceflight future is bright. As more Americans recognize the political imperative to return to the moon, so too will the nation’s leaders. This, combined with the power of commercial partnerships and NASA’s expertise, will secure our path to the stars.
Leroy Chiao is a former NASA astronaut and International Space Station commander. He is the author of “Dinner with an Astronaut.” A veteran of four space missions, he has logged over 229 days in space.
English (US)