On May 30, SpaceX launched their Crew Dragon spacecraft. With the American space program ending in 2011, there was considerable buzz as 10 million people tuned in to watch the live stream of the launch. And many more traveled to Florida to witness the launch in person.
For example, Dr. James Lilley traveled from Claremont, Calif. to Cape Canaveral, Florida, a trip over 2,500 miles long.
“I grew up with a love of space flight since I was 3 years old, watching men walk on the moon,” he explained when asked why he went so far. “I never had the resources to go to Florida when I was younger [and] seeing a large rocket launch like a space shuttle … was always of interest to me.”
And Dr. Lilley is not alone. In fact, the New York Times estimated that over 150,000 people came out to watch the launch in person.
Indeed, this launch garnered the attention of so many because it was the rejuvenation of the American space exploration program. But, instead of relying solely on NASA, America has decided to hand over the reins to SpaceX, a private company founded by tech entrepreneur Elon Musk.
With this change, many begin to wonder what the future of space might look like.
“The private-public partnership in space transportation can improve innovation and accelerate the pace of progress,” Dr. Lilley said. “[Some people will] worry that corporations may put corporate profit interests ahead of national security interests.”
Indeed, these worries are warranted. For example, SpaceX’s rideshare program charges at least 1 million dollars per payload. And each seat on a space flight costs 55 million dollars, according to Business Insider. While certainly lower than Russia’s asking price of 90 million on the Soyuz, a spacecraft American astronauts have been using since 2011, it is still evident that SpaceX looks to turn a profit.
In fact, CNBC reports that SpaceX revenue reached 2 billion dollars in 2018 and that number can only rise with its recent success.
With their new project Starlink, which looks to provide internet to new areas, and their continuation of launching satellites and payloads to the international space station, space has effectively become another source of income for Musk.
It seems that the technological development SpaceX makes is no longer for the curiosity of mankind or placing America back on the moon. It seems that any technological development will be merely for profit. And that’s not unexpected or incorrect. As a private company, profit comes first such that operations can continue.
But what troubles me is that NASA has handed the reins over to SpaceX. I believe that NASA embodied the pure curiosity humans had for space. But as they begin to offload some of their work onto SpaceX, I can’t help but start to doubt our purposes for exploring space.
Looking ahead, it seems that space will ultimately become fully commercialized. With other organizations like Blue Origin and Virgin Atlantic looking to accomplish similar goals to SpaceX, I believe that we will soon reach a point where NASA will no longer have as much jurisdiction over space as they did in 2011. Instead, for better or worse, these private companies will be at the forefront of our exploration of space, whether they be rapidly advancing technology or exclusively prioritizing profits.
4 Comments
If NASA had built recoverable rockets, built a base on the Moon and another on Mars, and designed a rocket twice as powerful as Saturn V, Elon Musk would never have created SpaceX.
Elon created SpaceX precisely because NASA wasn’t moving fast enough. He wanted to restart the space race. And I think he did.
Now that SpaceX is well established I’m not afraid that things will stagnate as they have been over the past 25 years. On the contrary. Things will accelerate… Quickly.
We will never have dreamed of what will happen in the next 20 years. All because the private sector has entered the race. The future looks bright.
You make some really good points. And I’ll address some of them. To answer your question, I think the fact that we both know Elon Musk won’t accept that offer casts doubt on the private sector’s dedication to the technological advancement of space. And that’s where I’m troubled; because these companies aren’t wholly dedicated to the advancement of space technology. Because I’d argue that it is possible to advance technology without profits. During the space race in the 20th century, NASA wasn’t making a profit on a margin even comparable to Musk. They weren’t driving Lamborghinis or living in mansions. I think that NASA’s ability during that time to advance technology rapidly without turning a profit is a vital example that proves that tech and profits are not mutually exclusive. And your final point on the future looking bright. I also have trouble with this because private companies have often looked to create monopolies. For example, we can look at Tencent which has a firm grasp on many super popular games. The same situation can happen with SpaceX once they continue down their path. The future looks grim in my opinion because of how these private companies will have the most jurisdiction in space and they will be able to choke out competition and prioritize profits.
I understand that you have a certain apprehension about the new reality that is taking hold. But in my opinion you put Elon Musk in the same basket as all the other billionaires, which is far from the case.
If we replace Elon Musk with Jeff Bezos, then I agree with you, that would be very dangerous. Bezos is addicted to money and always wants more. He is an individual who needs to be closely monitored.
Musk, for his part, works for humanity (I’m serious) and is willing to spend his entire fortune to achieve his goals. He has done it before, and he is ready to do it again. Not long ago Musk announced that he would get rid of most of his possessions. And it wasn’t just words in the air: https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/elon-musk-now-homes-for-sale
I don’t know any other billionaire who doesn’t own a house.
For Musk money is a means, not an end.
“Instead, for better or worse, these private companies will be at the forefront of our exploration of space, whether they be rapidly advancing technology or exclusively prioritizing profits.”
Sorry but it’s impossible to advance technology without profits.
NASA doesn’t need profit because they receive $22.6 billion from the taxpayers this year.
Maybe the government should offer SpaceX $22.6 billion per year on the condition that they do not make a profit. How do you feel about that? I know Musk would be against this idea because he will soon make more money than NASA’s budget.
If NASA had developed the same technologies as SpaceX 25 years earlier, it would no longer have to depend on the government. Instead of costing taxpayers $22 billion a year, NASA would bring money back to the government.
That’s the difference between the public and the private.