Opinion

Space robots a better solution

by Paul Hensarling

President Bush wants America to put a manned base on the Moon by 2015 and send a manned expedition to Mars sometime after that. The endless frontier of space is indeed worthy of our exploration. That being said, the money being spent on space could be better spent on something besides these two missions.

Compared to spending enormous amounts of money on such missions, sending robots would be much more cost-effective -- more bang for the buck, so to speak. The current Mars Exploration Rover Mission consists of two different robots, with one, Spirit, already doing geological work on the surface of Mars. The other robot, Opportunity, is due on the red planet Jan. 24.

Several of these robots cost only a fraction of one manned mission and can supply scientists with just as much valuable data, short of the collection of physical samples. And even this may soon be possible with robots. With most Mars missions ending in failure, these relatively cheap robots can be launched in greater numbers to ensure that some will get there and have a successful mission. One manned mission ending in failure would have an enormous price. Budget restrictions might prevent a second chance.

The best route for keeping our space program progressing is to keep updating our Hubble space telescope. It has already given us tremendous amounts of data about the universe. It is very important to keep the Hubble functioning smoothly for as long as possible. There is also the International Space Station, on which a huge amount of research remains to be conducted. Living in space for extended periods is not easy on humans. The ISS should expand and be tested further. Again, this can be done for a fraction of the cost of developing a moon base or a Mars expedition.

Bush wants to fund the National Aeronautics and Space Administration with $1 billion. That doesn't even approach the necessary funds for a moon landing or manned mission to Mars. Bush is playing to the masses for the election year rather than making a serious attempt to fund the exploration of space. Where's the rest of the money his plans require?

Given the current budget deficit, Congress probably won't warm up to any trillion-dollar moon base and/or Mars expedition. And we do need to take care of terrestrial concerns, both economic and social. The little money NASA will get for the necessary exploration of space has better uses than a moon base or putting a man on Mars. There are higher priorities to be found in the stars.

Hensarling is an editorial writer for The Daily Cougar. He can be reached at dccampus@mail.uh.edu.