Space Travel Costs vs. World Needs: Should We Spend Money on Tourist Flights Beyond Earth?
Titans of Industry Clash Over the Future of Space Tourism
The much-publicized space flight conducted by Blue Origin last week, featuring a star-studded, all-female crew, elicited more controversy than acclaim. However, the broader question remains: Is the space tourism industry as a whole merely a frivolous pastime for the wealthy, or can it contribute positively to humanity's progress?
Chris Bosquillon, a consultant at SAY Space, presents a vigorous argument in favor of the latter. He posits that space tourism could propel advancements in propulsion systems, fuel the development of reusable launch vehicles, and foster starry-eyed innovators who dream of new frontiers. By reducing costs for scientific missions and generating valuable cash flow for exploration, the industry could drive technological breakthroughs that extend far beyond the realm of recreational travel.
Infrastructure vital to commercial space, such as launch facilities and vehicles, will receive investment from the space tourism sector. New industries could arise, fueling a global space economy that extends to Earth's orbit, cislunar space, the moon, and beyond. Moreover, expanding access to space for leisure purposes may engender greater public interest in science and exploration.
Some argue that critics of space tourism overlook the environmental impact of other luxury industries, such as private jets, yachts, and cruises, which have long polluted the environment with little to no technological advancement. Singling out space tourism for its environmental costs, they contend, is inconsistent and short-sighted.
However, Andy Blackmore, picture editor at City AM, passionately disputes this line of reasoning. He points out that a single space flight emits more carbon dioxide than one billion individuals will generate in their lifetime. An 11-minute space trip, for example, produces no less than 75 tons of carbon per passenger when indirect emissions are taken into account, with the actual figure likely closer to 250-1000 tons.
Bearing these staggering environmental costs in mind, Blackmore questions whether society has the luxury of time for space tourism. Instead, he suggests, investments in frontier technologies like space tourism might be better redirected to efforts aimed at solving pressing global challenges, such as climate change and environmental degradation.
So, can bold investments in emerging technologies like space tourism serve the greater good, or should humanity remain focused on more immediate concerns? This debate, it seems, is far from settled.
Sources: 1) 2022 World Inequality Report, 2) Various studies on the environmental impact of space tourism and luxury travel.
- Chris Bosquillon, a consultant at SAY Space, believes space tourism could lead to advancements in propulsion systems and reusable launch vehicles, possibly resulting in technological breakthroughs stretching beyond recreational travel.
- The space tourism sector is expected to invest in crucial infrastructure for commercial space, such as launch facilities and vehicles, potentially sparking the growth of a global space economy.
- Despite the potential benefits, Andy Blackmore, picture editor at City AM, disputes the idea of investing in space tourism due to its high carbon footprint, with a single space flight emitting more carbon dioxide than one billion individuals would generate in their lifetimes.
- As society grapples with pressing global challenges like climate change and environmental degradation, the debate over whether investments in emerging technologies like space tourism serve the greater good or not remains unresolved.
