NASA spends about $5 billion per year on the station
7
–a quarter of its budget.
These funds could be essential to launch new initiatives.
8
In addition to this, the
decision to disengage from the ISS could also have been due to a rather delicate
and little-known reason concerning the consistency of discoveries and innovations. In 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) presented the report
ISS: Challenges to Increased Utilization May Affect Return on Investment
9
to the
House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, in which it reported on a
wide analysis of scientific returns on the experiments conducted on the
ISS. According to the report, research costs had not changed for nearly ten years,
while operational costs – the transport of astronauts and supplies – had continuously increased. In addition, despite NASA having entered into a partnership with
a non-profit organization, the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space
(CASIS), to increase the quality of scientific research, spending on research grants
and incentives had increased only by $15 million per year, and the situation had
not improved. Under the explicit admission of various NASA’s officials interviewed by the GAO, the agency had failed to identify new companies or institutes
interested in funding scientific research on the ISS, because the actual return from
investment had never been clearly demonstrated.
10
With such high costs and a scientific budget downsized compared to expectations of three decades ago, it was plausible that President Trump, bringing with
him positions and sensitivities very different from previous administrations, would
have taken more drastic decisions in line with his first initiatives as president. The
role of the US with its slogan America first has been confirmed by many of the
White House’s policies, suggesting an energetic repositioning of the nation in
which even the human exploration of space has to be reset according to new geopolitical goals. The most evident paradigm of this change could in fact be the ISS,
which – conceived in the nineties as an element of technological superiority
implemented through international cooperation – is considered obsolete not only
from a technical point of view but above all from a political one.
The partner countries of the ISS will be required to adapt as well. Igor Komarov,
the head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, said he was willing to discuss
with NASA an extension of the ISS until 2028, and also to evaluate the possibility
of detaching the Russian modules to make it an autonomous laboratory.
11
In
7
NASA Fiscal Year 2017 Appropriations.
8
NASA’S Management and Utilization of the International Space Station. 2018. Report N°
IG-18-021 of the NASA Office of the Inspector General.
9
United States Government Accountability Office. 2010. Testimony Before the Subcommittee
on Space, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives on
“International Space Station Challenges to Increased Utilization May Affect Return on
Investment”, Statement of Shelby S. Oakley Acting Director, Acquisition and Sourcing
Management. https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/671340.pdf.
10
Idem, p. 10.
11
https://spacenews.com/russia-and-its-modules-to-part-ways-with-iss-in-2024/.
Mars: Next Stop? 123
7
–a quarter of its budget.
These funds could be essential to launch new initiatives.
8
In addition to this, the
decision to disengage from the ISS could also have been due to a rather delicate
and little-known reason concerning the consistency of discoveries and innovations. In 2015, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) presented the report
ISS: Challenges to Increased Utilization May Affect Return on Investment
9
to the
House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, in which it reported on a
wide analysis of scientific returns on the experiments conducted on the
ISS. According to the report, research costs had not changed for nearly ten years,
while operational costs – the transport of astronauts and supplies – had continuously increased. In addition, despite NASA having entered into a partnership with
a non-profit organization, the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space
(CASIS), to increase the quality of scientific research, spending on research grants
and incentives had increased only by $15 million per year, and the situation had
not improved. Under the explicit admission of various NASA’s officials interviewed by the GAO, the agency had failed to identify new companies or institutes
interested in funding scientific research on the ISS, because the actual return from
investment had never been clearly demonstrated.
10
With such high costs and a scientific budget downsized compared to expectations of three decades ago, it was plausible that President Trump, bringing with
him positions and sensitivities very different from previous administrations, would
have taken more drastic decisions in line with his first initiatives as president. The
role of the US with its slogan America first has been confirmed by many of the
White House’s policies, suggesting an energetic repositioning of the nation in
which even the human exploration of space has to be reset according to new geopolitical goals. The most evident paradigm of this change could in fact be the ISS,
which – conceived in the nineties as an element of technological superiority
implemented through international cooperation – is considered obsolete not only
from a technical point of view but above all from a political one.
The partner countries of the ISS will be required to adapt as well. Igor Komarov,
the head of the Russian space agency Roscosmos, said he was willing to discuss
with NASA an extension of the ISS until 2028, and also to evaluate the possibility
of detaching the Russian modules to make it an autonomous laboratory.
11
In
7
NASA Fiscal Year 2017 Appropriations.
8
NASA’S Management and Utilization of the International Space Station. 2018. Report N°
IG-18-021 of the NASA Office of the Inspector General.
9
United States Government Accountability Office. 2010. Testimony Before the Subcommittee
on Space, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives on
“International Space Station Challenges to Increased Utilization May Affect Return on
Investment”, Statement of Shelby S. Oakley Acting Director, Acquisition and Sourcing
Management. https://www.gao.gov/assets/680/671340.pdf.
10
Idem, p. 10.
11
https://spacenews.com/russia-and-its-modules-to-part-ways-with-iss-in-2024/.
Mars: Next Stop? 123