This article was originally published Conversation. The publication contributed to an article on Space.com Expert voices: op-ed and insight.
Ian Whittaker, Senior Lecturer in Physics, Nottingham Trent University
Gareth Dorian, Birmingham University of Space Science, Post Doctoral Research Fellow
During his time in office, Donald Trump set bold goals for space exploration – from crew missions to space forces to the moon and Mars. In contrast, his successor Joe Biden was relatively quiet on space policy. So how is space research likely to move forward?
It is clear that change will come. The current head of NASA, Jim Bridenstein, has already announced that he is stepping down. And we know that U.S. human space policy rarely avoids a change of presidency.
That said, the surprising success of the launch of Crude SpaceX at the International Space Station (ISS), however, means that the commercial crew program is likely to continue due to NASA’s load. Indeed, Crew Dragon’s first operational flight by commercial company SpaceX is set to launch on November 15, with four astronauts bound for the ISS.
During the Trump administration, NASA also committed to the return of astronauts to the moon in 2024 under the Artemis program. The first test with Artemis-1 next year is for its launch (hidden). The constellation forms the program that was implemented by Republican President George W. Bush in 2005 but was later canceled by Democratic President Barack Obama due to its high cost and difficulty.
The only key clue to Biden’s presidential direction regarding astronaut flights to the moon can be found in the Democratic Party’s “Building a Stronger, Fire Economy” document. In a paragraph, Democrats said they “support NASA’s work to get Americans to return to the moon and move on to Mars, taking the next step in exploring our solar system.”
No details are provided on possible timelines. But, international cooperation will now make it difficult for a newly formed biden administrator to withdraw from a unilateral project, a key feature of the Artemis program. Canada, the European Space Agency and Japan, for example, are all formal formal partners in the construction of the lunar gateway – designed to support a number of missions to the lunar orbit.
The program is rapidly advancing research, particularly in the area of building materials, power supplies, and food production. Just this week, the European Space Agency contracted the British company Metallisis to simultaneously develop technologies to extract oxygen and metals from the lunar surface.
The Trump administration also pushed for the first crew mission to Mars in the 2030s – a more difficult task due to the distance involved. Longer journeys will put astronauts at risk of exposure to rad radiation and mental difficulties. Other huge challenges include weight controls and communication time.
An independent report by the Institute for Science and Technology Policy in 2019 states that a crew Mars mission in the 2030s is currently impossible. It is possible that Biden will try to revive this soon.
One of the more questionable implementations by the Trump administration was the creation of a space force – a branch of the armed forces pushed into space. The move highlights that U.S. Sees space as a potential battlefield rather than a field of purely scientific adventure. But U.S. citizens aren’t too impressed with the space force, mocking the logo and the uniform. Indeed, the program’s public approval rating is only 31%.
So will he be fired? U.S. The disbandment of the Armed Forces has not been carried out in the past, and the U.S. Air Force has undoubtedly many difficulties in re-establishing this back. So it is possible, with less focus, to stay.
A new beginning for NASA?
Can we expect anything new? Biden has already promised to sign executive orders that would undo most of the work of the Trump administration – in the same way that Trump dismissed most of Obama’s work.
The biggest sign of change is the descent of Bridenstein. When he was appointed in 2018, it came as a surprise to the scientific community – he had no scientific qualifications and had previously indicated that he was skeptical about climate change (which he changed his mind when accepting the role). Was). Yet he has proven to be a competent leader of NASA.
Leaving the post, he said he wanted to let someone with a “close relationship with the president” take responsibility. Who this could be is still a question and it will largely depend on the new president. Most NASA heads have at least a degree in engineering or physics and, in the past, have headed the space center. This makes Jodi Singer (director of the Marshall Space Flight Center), Mark Geer (director of the Johnson Space Center) or Dennis Andrusic (director of the Goddard Space Flight Center), as well as current deputy administrator James Mohardt. However, the area is considered to be largely open.
Biden has made it clear that tackling the climate crisis is a priority. While this is likely to focus on industrial pollution limits and renewable energy sources, it suggests that space policy may be more focused on Earth observation missions such as the GEOS (Geostationary Operation Parental Environmental Satellite) program.
Perhaps we can see more satellites of this type; Monitoring oil spills, deforestation and carbon emissions. All of these possibilities have, of course, been overshadowed by the financial crisis caused by the COVID-19 epidemic. And, although the constant source of money to support long-term projects such as the Artemis program is critical to their success, it is probably a case of believing it when we look at it.
Whatever the changes, it seems likely that there may be less funding for space missions. But even so, many scientists will be relieved that many contestants will not fight the kind of anti-science tweets from Trump during his tenure on Covid-1 and vaccination issues. Climate change.
This article is republished Conversation Under the Creative Commons license. Read on Original article.
Follow all the issues and controversies of Expert Voices on Facebook and Twitter and be a part of that discussion. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the publisher.
