IEEE Spectrum June, 2014 - 39

JpL/mSSS/NASA

to the moon would be enough to jump-start
the evolution of a self-sustaining robotic
industry. In time, he says, this approach
could lead to the robotic colonization, or
"robolonization," of the solar system.
This might sound outlandish, Metzger
says, but most of what we build in space
doesn't have to be as sophisticated as what
we send from Earth. Because launch mass
isn't a concern, he says, "we can build a
giant, clunky robot out of iron instead of
a small, lightweight one out of titanium."
Truly advanced components, such as computer chips, could be shipped in batches
and slotted into robots until they too could
be manufactured in space. One of the key
challenges, Metzger says, will be improving
reliability. Lunar dust has a habit of getting
into everything, and regular human repair
missions can't be expected.
RASSOR is not slated for launch, but
another NASA team is preparing a flightready version of what could become the
first equipment to extract and make resources on the moon: the Regolith and
Environment Science and Oxygen and
Lunar Volatile Extraction (RESOLVE) experiment. RESOLVE is currently an experiment without a spacecraft, but NASA hopes
to find a way to launch it on a rover as early
as 2019. It is designed to hunt for hydrogen,
which could possibly point the way to water
ice. While in operation, RESOLVE will also
attempt to make water, by heating lunar soil
to 900 °C to release oxygen and combining it with hydrogen carried in from Earth.
For any harnessing of space resources to
work, many experts say, the government
will need to play a big role, creating infrastructure much as it might build a mail system or a network of highways or any other
backbone of commerce. But that hasn't
stopped private companies from wading in.
One of these is Planetary Resources, which
is setting its sights on trips to near-Earth objects beginning in the early 2020s. On its first
forays the company will search not for platinum and other pricey metals-the typical
quarry of space | continued on Page 88
illustRation by

MCKIBILLO

What could PoSSibly go Wrong?

No Buck
Rogers,
No Bucks

business as usual could spell the
end of public support for space
exploration
all hopes for space will
come to nothing if the future
resembles the present, with
tight budgets and constantly
changing plans. "I've been
in the space business for
35 years," says Paul Spudis,
a scientist at the Lunar
and Planetary Institute, in
Houston. "I've never seen
such a screwed-up mess
as we now have."
NASA's current plans
call for sending humans to
Mars in the 2030s, but any
such trip is at least 60 years
away, argues Ralph McNutt,
a physicist at Johns Hopkins
University's Applied Physics
Laboratory, in Laurel, Md.
"The price tags have come
out to be so big that they're

just not palatable." But
Mars is easy for politicians
to support, he says: They
can advocate for the longterm goal without diverting
enough funds today to make
it happen.
Dithering could slowly
eat away at public support.
"I think the worst case would
be if we continue only with
these occasional piecemeal,
individual missions that are
kind of designed to be selfsustaining, like Conestoga
wagons full of all the supplies
you'll ever need," says
Mason Peck, a professor of
mechanical and aerospace
engineering at Cornell and
former chief technologist at
NASA. "I think that will limit
SPectrum.ieee.orG

|

the amount of science that
can be done and the amount
of human exploration that we
can do," Peck adds. "If that
persists, I think eventually
people will lose patience,
and there will be less and
less public support for space
exploration and science
generally. Then we'll never be
able to get off the planet in a
permanent way."
But even if the government
does push aggressively to
build space infrastructure, the
effort could still falter. A "killer
app" that would vastly change
the economic equation and
make space development
profitable still hasn't been
found. Scott Pace, director
of the Space Policy Institute
at George Washington
University, in Washington, D.C.,
phrases the problem like a
riddle: "What's the question,"
he asks, "for which space is
the answer?"
There are also practical
hurdles, such as the legality
of claiming asteroids and
lunar resources, says Henry
Hertzfeld, a professor of
space policy and international
affairs at George Washington
University. "Who has the
rights? Do we have to divide
them up, and if so, how?
These issues would have to
be addressed," Hertzfeld says.
And if we somehow
succeed in all our efforts,
there could be side effects.
For instance, we might
spoil pristine environments
of historical or scientific
significance. Picking the path
forward for space won't be
easy, but if we don't carefully
consider it, the choice could
be made for us. -R.C.

in thE REd: Is Mars too giant
a leap?

north american

|

jun 2014

|

39
http://SPectrum.ieee.orG
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Spectrum June, 2014
