Should NASA Fund Asteroid Studies?

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is perhaps the most well known space agency in the world. Since its formation in 19581, it has pioneered in space science, yet is also renowned for its large budget. NASA has the highest budget of any space agency, $18.6 billion2 in 2015, the equivalent of every American paying $54 towards the agency3, meaning 0.14% of total GDP is spent on NASA3 . This money is spent on the ISS, sending astronauts, probes and satellites into space, astrophysics and planetary science research, maintaining and developing NASA’s space telescopes (the Wide Field Infrared Survey telescope searching for dark energy and exoplanets, the James Webb Space Telescope and the Hubble Space Telescope) and developing spacecraft2. Space exploration is an incredibly expensive process with one shuttle launch costing $450 million4 however NASA’s colossal budget benefits the USA greatly; the agency employs 18,000 people5 as astronauts, engineers, scientists and teachers and G. Scott Hubbard, former director of the NASA Ames Research Center estimates that every dollar spent on NASA returns $8 to the economy6.While this figure is an estimate, it demonstrates NASA’s worth and capacity for money making. NASA works on pioneering research and as its patents and licenses return to the US treasury, it

How would you like to explore a never-ending frontier filled with endless potential and possible benefits for humankind? When put this way, space exploration sounds like an enticing adventure. However, is it all that it’s chalked up to be? We’re here to answer that question. There’s a specific issue that we need to consider when referring to space exploration; should we continue to fund NASA? We acknowledge that some people may already have strong opinions on this, and we ask you to keep an open mind and try to avoid bias. After all, we’re discussing our future.

According to a pie chart called, “Federal Spending for United States - FY 2015” from the NASA Data Charts, the budget for space in 2015 is not a percentage significant enough to have its own section. Instead, it is a subsection of the heading Other Spendings, which is given 2% of the federal budget. Also, in the Neil deGrasse Tyson article, it is said that the American government only gives a 7/10 cent of a tax dollar to space exploration (Tyson 2). He gives a brilliant resolution by saying, “ I’d prefer that it were more, perhaps 2 cents on the dollar.” even though we used to “. . . peak NASA spending amounted to no more than 4 cents on the tax dollar”. One of the most important technological advance was the invention of the Hubble Space

While many people support funding NASA and agree with the organization’s goals, there a good number of people who do not. A common reason for this is that they believe that the space program should focus on discovering things that can benefit us immediately, not in the future. This is a valid argument because there

NASA is a key player in our technological growth. It leads in innovating technology development in both public and private industries across the board from aviation to zoology. In add-on, increasing the space program funding may increase our defense. As it will be exceedingly important that America innovates its space program for defense, from telecommunication to aviation. Likewise, what if an asteroid comes in our proximity and threatens our existence?, we ought to have something

“One small step for man, one giant step for mankind” - Neil Armstrong. Humans have been fascinated by stars and planets from the beginning of time.The human race has made some amazing discoveries; from drawings on cave walls, to putting somebody in space. Discoveries in space include finding new planets, technology, and theories. In recent years, there have been less discoveries due to a cut in NASA’s budget. This is because instead of the money going to NASA, the money goes to other organizations. The U.S should increase NASA’s budget because it helps find planets that could support life, creates more everyday objects, and gives ideas of how the earth might end.

“There is perhaps no better a demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world.” Carl Sagan said this after seeing a picture of the Earth taken from the Voyager 1. In the image there is a tiny little speck that is barely noticeable unless it is pointed out. That little speck is our planet.Government spending on NASA has helped to achieve this and it allows us to see things about our universe that we would have never have had been able to see before. NASA funding can be beneficial because it shows us things about our universe that we have never known and things we would have never thought to explore.This is what NASA is trying to accomplish. However NASA funding can be detrimental because it costs more and more each year and it pushes us into even more debt than what we are already in. This can contribute to the downfall of the economy and the nation as a whole because of the increase in spending, and will lead to cuts in other more crucial parts of the government and the economy where the money would be better spent. Government funding for NASA is a benefit to society but, it is also a detriment to society as well.

Some may say that funding NASA is a waste of money. There are many problems that people experience that need more immediate attention. Some individuals in the United States experience homelessness, hunger, health issues, and a lack of insurance. It is pretty obvious that the

Although it may seem that we do not have problems in space, we actually do, asteroids are coming earlier than ever before in the chart Known Near-earth Asteroids claims that in 1986 there were barely 2000 NEAs and in 2013 there was over 12000! This shows that we need to prepare for bigger asteroids that could come at anytime! Imagine how that chart could go up in the next decade. NASA should fund asteroid studies because they could come up with a way to defend our earth from big asteroids.

NASA and space have been talked about ever since the first moon launch when that ended, people started to question why space programs are still being funded? Some think that the funding should stop and others believe that it should continue. The government uses taxpayers money just to see an expensive rocket go up into the sky then blow up wasting billions of dollars, then repeating the whole process again. Researchers think that the money used for rockets should be invested in oceans or be privatized because it would cost less money while also being beneficial to the country.

To begin with, funding for NASA has dramatically been reduced compared to the 1960s during the Space Race (Budget of NASA 1). In 1966, where the funding for NASA peaked, the United States government gave NASA almost 6 billion dollars which is about 37 billion dollars today (1). This was equal to about 4.4% of the United States annual budget (1). The last official record of the NASA budget was in 2012, a little over 18 billion dollars (1). This still sounds like a lot of money, which it is, but the cut has reduced the budget by a third of what it used to be (1). NASA has had to turn towards smaller, single purpose satellites and probes (Butler 59). This is a good and bad

We should keep on funding space research for exploration because there can be many new things that we can discover that can impact us all greatly. In “Why we Shouldn’t Go to Mars” by Gregg Easterbrook, “Remarks at the Dedication of the Aerospace Medical Health Center” by John F. Kennedy and Political Cartoon it is evident that we should continue investing and funding the space programs for more exploration to discover new things. There are many decisions and choices

We should fund asteroid studies because we can get resource money and protection. With resources we can build new inventions and help out the world and be able to do all kinds of different things. Money we can sell some of the resources and have more projects for space and more also get us out of dent and help us all. Protection more we study them more we know about them more we know we can use against asteroids and pull them away from hitting earth or capture them to for more studies. This why NASA should fund asteroid studies to make earth a better place. This could be a big step for NASA and the government and if they do this it will be big step for earth.

The Earth is nearing depletion of its natural resources at a time when human beings are rapidly expanding the frontiers of space. The resources which may exist on asteroids could have enormous potential for aiding and enhancing human space exploration as well as life on Earth. With the possibly limitless opportunities that exist, it is clear that asteroids are the next step for human existence in space. The resources of the Earth are not infinite, in fact, some are depletable within the next several decades. Once high grade reserves are used up, low grades ores will have to be used. These effects of using low grade ores on the environment and society were discussed in the article “Asteroid Exploration and Utilization” by George Botbyl as a cycle of negative consequences which build upon each other. In order to protect Earth, the next 25 years must bring a new era in space development. Even presidential policy confirms that the United States of America is committed to the establishment of a permanent human presence in space.

Asteroids will provide the means to transform future human space exploration and operations in to large scale activities. They will first provide a rich source of minerals and material for initial economic expansion and concurrently providing platforms for operations and manufacturing. Eventually, asteroids could be used as space vehicles to move humans across and possibly beyond the solar system effectively becoming mobile bases of operations and even space colonies. The only significant limitations for this future growth are technological capability and legal ambiguity for large scale human space activity. For any space activity to overcome its limitations and get off the ground, the activity must generate a great deal of interest.