Nevertheless, the imperative not to undermine the Franco-German axis prevailed. Lebeau resigned from CNES, and the French delegation at ESA agreed to
finance the space station program with a 28% contribution – less than Germany,
which contributed 41%, and more than Italy, which invested 20%.
Over the course of ten years, Europe spent more than $9.6 billion to participate
in the ISS program, covering about 9% of the over $100 billion budget needed to
build the station. Today, ESA still spends $0.6 billion per year to send European
astronauts onboard the ISS. On the other hand, NASA’s current expenditure for
the station is about $3 billion per year – a sixth of its total budget. Japan spends
more than $1 billion per year – a quarter of its space budget, after having invested
$3 billion in the development phase.
The ISS has undoubtedly represented a great opportunity for unpresented international collaboration in space. The economic fallout foreseen in the nineties
when debating the huge investments has not fully materialized. The US has in fact
achieved many of its strategic objectives, summarized as followed. The ISS has
become a true permanent research laboratory in space, investigating new technologies and microgravity effects on human beings. NASA has successfully managed a huge space program among several nations that were in conflict until a few
years earlier, and the partner countries have knowingly spent large financial
resources on a US-led initiative. Above all, the ISS has become an icon of space
exploration, helping to inspire younger generations and having a positive impact
on public opinion about space exploration worldwide.
Today however, global politics are drastically influencing the fate of the ISS,
and its operational life could be at stake by the middle of this decade. This will be
discussed extensively in the second part of the book.
50 Rocket Man: From The Space Shuttle to the International Space Station
finance the space station program with a 28% contribution – less than Germany,
which contributed 41%, and more than Italy, which invested 20%.
Over the course of ten years, Europe spent more than $9.6 billion to participate
in the ISS program, covering about 9% of the over $100 billion budget needed to
build the station. Today, ESA still spends $0.6 billion per year to send European
astronauts onboard the ISS. On the other hand, NASA’s current expenditure for
the station is about $3 billion per year – a sixth of its total budget. Japan spends
more than $1 billion per year – a quarter of its space budget, after having invested
$3 billion in the development phase.
The ISS has undoubtedly represented a great opportunity for unpresented international collaboration in space. The economic fallout foreseen in the nineties
when debating the huge investments has not fully materialized. The US has in fact
achieved many of its strategic objectives, summarized as followed. The ISS has
become a true permanent research laboratory in space, investigating new technologies and microgravity effects on human beings. NASA has successfully managed a huge space program among several nations that were in conflict until a few
years earlier, and the partner countries have knowingly spent large financial
resources on a US-led initiative. Above all, the ISS has become an icon of space
exploration, helping to inspire younger generations and having a positive impact
on public opinion about space exploration worldwide.
Today however, global politics are drastically influencing the fate of the ISS,
and its operational life could be at stake by the middle of this decade. This will be
discussed extensively in the second part of the book.
50 Rocket Man: From The Space Shuttle to the International Space Station