Request for more space cooperation, us policy prevents any bilateral exchange

Cooperation with China inevitable – plan is the final push towards full cooperation that we need

WASHINGTON— Space exploration officials from more than 30 countries met in Washington, D.C. recently to discuss how to advance the exploration and utilization of space. The meeting was organized by the U.S. State Department which, for the first time, invited officials from China's space agency, highlighting the possibility of cooperation in space exploration. Cooperation between the U.S. space agency, NASA, and China's space agency was banned by Congress in 2011. However, signs are emerging that this policy may change. At the International Space Exploration Forum, held January 9, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns invited all countries to participate in space exploration. “Now is the time to come together to make space exploration a shared global priority, to unlock the mysteries of the universe, and to accelerate human progress here on Earth,” said Burns. Xu Dazhe, head of the China's National Space Administration, attended the meeting. China Daily quoted Dazhe as saying his participation was a signal that China is willing to cooperate with other countries in exploring space. Scott Pace, who heads the Space Policy Institute and is a professor of international affairs at George Washington University, said the Chinese were specifically invited to be part of the international discussion, but warned against excessive optimism. “There really hasn’t been a political breakthrough that would then lead to large, symbolic, direct cooperative activity. There are, however a number of small opportunities that I think we can and should be able to pursue,” said Pace. Pace pointed out that during the Cold War, the U.S. cooperated with the Soviet Union on some aspects of space exploration. “It was in very specific scientific areas: earth science, solar physics, some biometrical data. And I think similar levels of cooperation can certainly occur with China today, and probably should,” Pace continued. Also present at the meeting were countries not usually associated with space exploration - like Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria. Pace said many countries use space for practical purposes, such as navigation or communications, but they should now be more ambitious. “The moon is emerging, I think, as a consensus technical focus, because it provides opportunities for countries at all levels of space development - from the very largest to very modest,” said Pace. Because the Space Station is an international facility and its operational life has been extended until 2024, Pace said China may be invited to participate in experiments on board. The next place where one might see cooperation with China would be on the moon, given that missions to Mars or asteroids are too difficult and expensive, even for the U.S. and Russia.

Space Investment Bank

Repealing the Wolf Act and creating the Space Development Investment Bank with China results in Space colonization and exploration

Beldavs December 7, 2015 (Vid Beldavs has been engaged in thinking about space industrial development since he taught the first college class in the US on the topic in 1977 at Coe College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa on executive leave from his duties as business trends advisor (corporate futurist) for Cummins, Inc. Vid now works for the FOTONIKA-LV photonics research center of the University of Latvia; “Prospects for US-China space cooperation” Published: Monday, December 7, 2015; http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2878/1)

The Obama Administration has apparently decided that with nothing to lose politically, it intends to make strategic and sometimes bold foreign policy moves before leaving office, in spite of obstructionist roadblocks: normalizing relations with Cuba, negotiating a nuclear treaty with Iran, and talking with the Chinese about space among them. It is ironic that “talking” has become a bold policy move. – Joan Johnson-Freese in “Found in Space: Cooperation” Congressman John Culberson, who is opposed to dialogue with China in the peaceful uses of outer space, responded to a request for information from Space Policy Online about the first US-China Civil Space Dialogue held September 28, 2015 in Beijing by affirming his role enabled by the so-called “Wolf Amendment.” He said, “I intend to vigorously enforce the longstanding prohibitions designed to protect America’s space program.” NASA responded to Rep. Culberson that they had acted within the law. However, NASA had not informed him about the meeting and its contents. Clearly, this is a separation of powers issue where the Executive Branch has the responsibility of pursuing foreign policy and does not have to ask permission of the House Appropriations Committee to engage in dialogue with China. The US State Department, in a statement, described the topics discussed with China: At the inaugural meeting, U.S. and Chinese officials exchanged information on respective space policies. They conducted discussions on further collaboration related to space debris and the long-term sustainability of outer space activities. Both sides also exchanged views on issues related to satellite collision avoidance. The two sides summarized information on national plans related to space exploration and discussed the next multilateral meeting of the International Space Exploration Forum. The two sides discussed ways to cooperate further on civil Earth observation activities, space sciences, space weather, and civil Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). Rep. Culbertson and his colleagues appear to see the US as so far ahead of all others in space that collaboration offers little benefit and has substantial dangers of theft of American know-how and technology developed at very high cost to the American taxpayer. The first International Space Exploration Forum (ISEF) was organized by the State Department in January 2014, with the attendance of over 30 countries including several developing countries as well as China. It follows the dialogue begun by the European Commission and the European Space Agency (ESA) in November 2011 in Italy. ISEF was billed as the first ministerial level international conference to promote international collaboration in space exploration and to the application of space science and space technologies to address problems on Earth and to promote economic advancement. William Burns, Deputy Secretary of State at the time, stated in his keynote remarks: Now is the time to come together to make space exploration a shared global priority, to unlock the mysteries of the universe, and to accelerate human progress here on earth. I am confident that we will advance further, faster, if we work collectively. The US-China Civil Space Dialogue can be seen as part of a process of building international collaboration in which the ISEF conference is a point of focus. Japan has agreed to host the next ISEF Conference in 2016 or possibly 2017. No doubt much will depend on continued progress with the US-China Civil Space Dialogue, with the next meeting planned for 2016 in Washington, DC. The ISEF process indicates that the Obama Administration has a major commitment to space, with the US playing a leadership role in broadening collaboration beyond the established players, notably through engagement with developing countries and China. ISEF points to a major role for international collaboration to advance space exploration and to the application of space technologies to address critical problems on Earth and to accelerate economic advancement. Rep. Culbertson and his colleagues appear to see the US as so far ahead of all others in space that collaboration offers little benefit and has substantial dangers of theft of American know-how and technology developed at very high cost to the American taxpayer. Perhaps a context from which to view these concerns is the US-USSR collaboration in space. In the early 1960s, President Kennedy and Soviet leader Khrushchev seriously contemplated a joint mission to the Moon in part due to the high cost of space. Kennedy’s death, Khrushchev’ s removal from power and intensification of the Vietnam conflict eliminated a joint Moon mission as an option (see “Murdering Apollo: John F. Kennedy and the retreat from the lunar goal (part 2)”, The Space Review, November 6, 2006). However, the Apollo-Soyuz mission followed. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, partnership between NASA and Roscosmos expanded and led to the achievement of the International Space Station (ISS), a remarkable achievement in collaboration between the US and Russia involving 16 other international partners. Notwithstanding strained relations between the US and Russia today, collaboration on ISS continues and is expected to be expected to be extended to 2024 and beyond. However, there is no provision to include China in ISS. What comes next? By an overwhelming margin, Congress passed the “US Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act,” whose intent is to stimulate commercial space development including mining the Moon and asteroids. This is a major step forward and demonstrates the commitment of the Obama Administration and of Congress to commercial development of space. With the law now in place, the space industry is expected to see the following: Simplification and Improvement in licensing procedures for space launch by private parties; Government support for commercial space development through the renamed Office of Space Commerce, a unit of the US Department of Commerce; Clarification of issues relating to transport of astronauts via commercial crew vehicles; Extension of the life of ISS to 2024 and affirmation of policies regarding governance of the ISS National Laboratory; and Clarification of rights to explore and collect space resources. While the law entitles the US citizen to “possess, own, transport, use, and sell the asteroid resource or space resource obtained in accordance with applicable law,” it does not confer exclusive rights to do so and, in fact, acknowledges that the provisions of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 prohibits this: SEC. 403. DISCLAIMER OF EXTRATERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY It is the sense of Congress that by the enactment of this Act, the United States does not thereby assert sovereignty or sovereign or exclusive rights or jurisdiction over, or the ownership of, any celestial body. The law’s limitations Exclusive mining rights will need to be defined within an international regime that governs territory, such as the Moon, to which sovereign rights do not apply under the Outer Space Treaty. Insofar as lunar water has been identified as a possible resource to reduce the costs of reaching Mars, this issue will need to be resolved before the lunar water can be mined. China is among the states that show interest in lunar water. This legislation cannot guarantee US companies superior technology or exclusive mining rights or use of shared infrastructure in cislunar space that can reduce communications, transportation and operating costs. No country or company has mined the Moon or an asteroid, or has had industrial operations of any kind in space. Mining technologies may, in fact, be more advanced in countries such as Australia and Canada than in the US. In fact, space mining conferences held in Australia and in Canada have attracted significant attendance by mining companies and the equipment industries that serve them. Notwithstanding the ambitious plans of Deep Space Industries and Planetary Resources, it is not at all clear that they will possess superior technology for space mining to other potential competitors including from China, India, Japan, Korea, Russia, or the EU. No one has yet processed materials in space other than lab-scale experiments. China and India, which have both mounted large-scale industrial projects, may have a body of industrial process know-how that is already competitive with US capabilities to process asteroid or lunar materials into products. There are multiple other aspects of industrial development in space where knowledge and technologies exist somewhere in the world where the US may not have an inherent competitive advantage. The future that is being created through the new law will create more competitive opportunities for US commercial space companies. But, this legislation cannot guarantee them superior technology or exclusive mining rights or use of shared infrastructure in cislunar space that can reduce communications, transportation and operating costs. The Wolf Amendment is counter to US national interests Clearly sensitive technologies need to be protected. But, protecting US intellectual property is not known to be a domain where the House Appropriations Committee of the US Congress has recognized expertise or where it has been invested with any specific authority. Additionally, NASA is a relatively tiny domain in the vast territory of advanced technology under development by the US. The Wolf Amendment, in fact, offers no protection of American technology but instead empowers members of a Congressional committee with no relevant expertise or authority to play a foreign policy role. Congressman Culbertson clearly recognizes that space technology is key to addressing major challenges facing not only the US, but the entire world community. To bar the United States from participation in global initiatives in the peaceful uses of outer space because China is also involved is, at best, is an overemotional response to the potential for illicit technology transfer with a totally inappropriate instrument. Far more relevant to US national interests would be for Rep. Culbertson to support developing more effective strategies to advance US commercial interests in space. Otherwise, the Chinese, not bounded by ineffective legislation, will eat our lunch. No one has yet developed the technologies for ISRU whether on the Moon, the asteroids, Mars, or beyond. Yet ISRU technologies are central to the whole idea of asteroid and lunar mining. If the Chinese can work with everyone else on the planet, but the US can only work with a short list as approved by the Appropriations Committee, it should be expected that the Chinese, drawing on the knowledge base of the entire world, will advance more quickly. We have no lead in ISRU, and our lead in other domains of space technology may not be particularly relevant to this challenge. It is time for Congress to wake up to the emerging commercial space future and work to fully unleash our commercial space potential rather than complaining about a very high level meeting in Beijing where common challenges in the peaceful uses of outer space were discussed with NASA experts present. How to enhance American commercial space potential through international collaboration To fully unleash US (and other participating countries’) commercial space potential, the following challenges need to be addressed: Negotiation of internationally recognized policies to govern commercial activities in space, including mining rights on the Moon and other policies required to conduct commercial activity beyond Earth orbit. Development of technologies that enable cost-effective ISRU operations with the goal to achieve major reductions in costs. Development of infrastructure that contributes to reduced risk and costs of activities in space including communications, energy, logistics, and transport facilities, and potentially other services that enable sustained operations in space at lower cost and risk. Development of sources of financing for space exploration and long-term industrial and commercial development in space that leverage partnership between public and private investment and make possible projects with long planning horizons and extended time to positive cash flow. Development of markets for ISRU production, space manufacturing, and related research and innovation, support services, and commercial activities through public-private partnerships, infrastructure investment by governments, and investment schemes that address value chain development and not just individual products. Build broad public support through global celebration of major space accomplishments like Sputnik, the Apollo Moon landing, the launch of ISS and other events. Open opportunities for research and development not only in existing major spacefaring powers but also for smaller countries and developing countries as well as for universities. Place particular emphasis on opening opportunities for entrepreneurial action by small business. Reach out to schools and communities with opportunities to take part. The next International Space Exploration Forum planned offers the opportunity to begin to address the international challenges to commercial space development that are shared by all parties. Appropriately, the high-level ISEF conference includes ministerial level participation along with space agencies and related industry and academia. Particularly important will be the participation of China. China appears to be an excellent potential global partner, together with the US and the EU, to lead a global campaign to open the space frontier to peaceful commercial development for the benefit of all humanity. China is a country with which the US has very extensive commercial, academic, financial, cultural and strategic ties. GE, IBM, Caterpillar, and numerous other major US corporations have extensive R&D operations in China. But the US has no legacy of collaboration with China in space in space, even dating back to the International Geophysical Year in 1957 where China chose to not participate due to its perception of US meddling. China was not invited to participate in ISS. And the Wolf Amendment seeks to even prevent dialogue with China on the peaceful uses of outer space. China is both a developing country and a rapidly growing advanced industrial economy with significant financial, industrial, and knowledge resources. China also has a profound understanding of economic development and the role of education, research, innovation, and technology commercialization as evidenced by its sustained, rapid economic development. China appears to be an excellent potential global partner, together with the US and the EU, to lead a global campaign to open the space frontier to peaceful commercial development for the benefit of all humanity. US-China-EU Strategic Space Partnership Such a partnership can be founded on the basis of a space development investment bank (SDIB). Recently, China took the lead in the formation of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) with a proposed capitalization of $100 billion that includes expressed interest by 57 nations, including primarily developing states in the Asia-Pacific region but also the majority of EU member states. The US, Canada, and Japan have declined to participate in AIIB. What if the US, the EU, and China worked out a structure for SDIB that would promote accelerated commercial development of space? Capitalized at, say, $100 billion, SDIB could provide the long-term financing for infrastructure such as a lunar power utility whose role would be to supply power initially to exploration activities and, later, to ISRU development. Other projects could include space hubs for transportation, logistics management, refueling, and no doubt tourist and recreational facilities. Insofar as SDIB would fund projects that enable or encourage national space initiatives, the capitalization of the bank would be on call to spend as the investment committee chooses to serve the global interest of advancing development of a robust space economy that brings benefits to all member states. SDIB could leverage funding by governments as well as by private sources of capital. Funding by itself, however, cannot open the space frontier. Needed are appropriate government policies, enabling technologies, and strategic direction that lead to the development of a growing array of markets for space businesses. A self-sustaining space economy is one where investment generates positive returns. The breakthrough to a self-sustaining space economy would mark a historical inflection point where investment in space is businesses will start to see exponential growth. Russia, as one of the pioneers in space development, can contribute its extensive capabilities to advance human prospects in space. The European Union, its member states, and the European Space Agency are other vital elements of a global campaign to open the space frontier for all mankind. Japan, the host of the next ISEF conference, has made significant advances in space development and, along with India and South Korea, are vital to the success of an international effort to develop a self-sustaining space economy. A self-sustaining space economy is one where investment generates positive returns. The breakthrough to a self-sustaining space economy would mark a historical inflection point where investment in space is businesses will start to see exponential growth. Achieving that breakthrough is in the interests of all participating states insofar as that will mark the point at which significant gains in the benefits of space to all of Earth’s people will exceed the investment required to achieve them. To engage China as a strategic partner in the opening of the space frontier the following actions are needed: The Wolf Amendment needs to be annulled. The Administration needs to take steps to engage China in space collaboration. In the longer term this would include measures such as the Space Development Investment Bank. Immediate steps would include collaboration on remote sensing for disaster relief, space debris research, and space situation awareness. Appropriate steps in the intermediate term would include measures such as opening ISS and its successor facilities to China. The International Lunar Decade could provide a unifying framework for international collaboration in space development through 2030.

Spillover Regulations

US is key to get the ball rolling on international space regulations – once it starts, others will follow suit

Grego and Wright 2010

Laura Grego: a senior scientist in the Global Security Program of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and David Wright: a senior scientist and co-director of the UCS Global Security Program. “Securing the Skies Ten Steps the United States Should Take to Improve the Security and Sustainability of Space” Union of concerned scientists November 2010. Website. Accessed 6-27-16. http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/legacy/assets/documents/nwgs/securing-the-skies-full-report-1.pdf

Achieving the long-term goals listed above requires serious and sustained engagement among all space actors. Given the United States’ preeminence in space and its recent opposition to negotiations on space issues, it should assume a major collaborative role. It needs either to initiate efforts or to respond constructively to others’ initiatives so that progress can be made. The Obama administration has signaled that it is open to discussions, though not to negotiations, on space security issues at the CD. However, making progress at the CD or another forum requires more than just openness to the process; it also requires active commitment by the United States and other nations to find a way forward. By initiating multilateral discussions or stating its commitment to engaging in them, the United States would show that it is serious about trying to find mutually beneficial solutions to outstanding space security issues. These gestures alone could have important initial effects, such as the building of contacts and the establishment of better channels of communication among appropriate U.S. individuals and their counterparts in other space-faring nations. U.S. participation would also compel these countries and other interested parties to develop the necessary national expertise on space security—diplomatic, technical, legal, and economic—that dissipated, if it existed at all, during the many years’ absence of substantive discussions. Raising the priority of space security and prompting governments to develop nuanced policies would give important domestic stakeholders, who previously may not have been weighing in, a voice in their country’s policy discussions. This would be true not only in the United States but elsewhere as well.

Private Sector Spillover

The Wolf Act obscure language causes a restrictive fear for industry leaders

Kohler in 2015 (HANNAH KOHLER Georgetown Law, J.D. expected 2015; B.A. Penn State 2012; “The Eagle and the Hare: U.S.–Chinese Relations, the Wolf Amendment, and the Future of International Cooperation in Space” THE GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL Vol. 103:1135. Published: 2015 PG: 1159 – 1160 ; http://georgetownlawjournal.org/files/2015/04/Kohler-TheEagleandtheHare.pdf)

Since its inception, the Wolf Amendment has restricted the use of funds in “hosting... official Chinese visitors.”124 It may be that Wolf and the Appropriations Committee have simply considered this limitation enough to prevent abuse of the provision; Wolf has occasionally suggested as much.125 The problem with this assumption is that “official” is never addressed or defined in the Amendment,126 and thus cannot be facially assumed to refer only to citizens representing the Chinese government. Merriam-Webster defines the adjective “official” to be “of or relating to the job or work of someone in a position of authority.”127 Although this covers representatives of the Chinese government, it may also fairly be said to extend to other prominent members of the scientific community (in the sense of an “official visitor”) or members with sufficient standing and authority in any public organization, even reporters working for an official Chinese news agency.128 If Congress wishes to curtail broadly restrictive overapplication of the Amendment through reliance on the “official” language, it should make this clear by including an internal definition of “official” in the text of the 2016 Appropriations Act, making explicit exactly who is being barred from attending events funded by NASA. Until such a definition is agreed upon, both the intention and the effects of the 2014 wording change will be frustratingly obfuscating, and it is likely that industry leaders will continue to interpret the provision broadly (that is, restrictively) for fear of crossing Congress and becoming subject to sanctions under the Antideficiency Act

The Wolf amendment should be overturned now- the longer it’s in place, the more we miss out on opportunities for cooperation with China- this is key to effective space exploration

HANNAH KOHLER in 2015, Georgetown Law, J.D. expected 2015; B.A. Penn State 2012, The Eagle and the Hare: U.S.–Chinese Relations, the Wolf Amendment, and the Future of International Cooperation in Space, THE GEORGETOWN LAW JOURNAL, http://georgetownlawjournal.org/files/2015/04/Kohler-TheEagleandtheHare.pdf

However the 2014–2015 Wolf Amendments are interpreted, they will still have resounding effects for U.S.–China space-industry relations. Although a complete ban of all visitors of Chinese nationality would be an almost unthinkably direct political affront, even the blanket ban on CNSA–NASA cooperation that is the facial purpose of the statute will have repercussions. The moratorium on bi- or multilateral industry communications created by the 2013 Appropriations Act will severely constrain information transfer between both space agencies, effectively blinding NASA to the Chinese space program’s current endeavors as well as the reverse (although considering how closed-mouthed CNSA is about even public projects, it is likely that this effect will hit NASA harder than China). Additionally, such a measure could cause the already tenuous trust developed with the CNSA to deteriorate. Blocking the United States and NASA from cooperating with one of the major space powers of the world—a country with demonstrated ambition and an increasing capability to achieve dominance in space—may hobble us beyond recovery, at least for the next generation of space advancements. Space exploration is no longer the province of individual nations operating alone, and international cooperation is both widespread and necessary. Just as the international sharing of such sensitive and cutting-edge technology is a valid national security concern, so too should be rejecting the contributions of a major developing power, especially considering the relative political stagnation of space exploration in the United States and the burgeoning enthusiasm for it in China. Although it is impossible to predict what the future will hold for the space explorers of tomorrow, it seems fully necessary to initiate cautious, but optimistic, cooperation with China in space: inviting them as a party to the ISS, certainly, and potentially opening the door for future joint—or even bilateral— projects. The Hughes/Loral debacle limited the U.S. communications-satellite industry for decades,130 and its consequences have only recently been corrected in part; Congress must take care not to make the same mistakes with regard to other U.S. investments in space. Isolating NASA from a country that is both a space superpower and one of the largest economies in the world will only hurt the United States in the long run. China has a long history of self-sufficiency in space, and it is demonstrably capable of overcoming the challenges posed by having to reinvent the wheel (or, as it may be, the rocket) because its global neighbors have historically been too afraid of its military capabilities and ambitions to share what they know. Would a free flow of technology—if not launching systems or ballistic information, then at least those many nonmilitary elements of space travel, exploration, and study—truly hurt the United States? Or would it pique the desire of the Chinese citizens to be free from their repressive government and experience the freedom of a democratic society? If NASA is truly the pinnacle of American ingenuity, courage, optimism, and grace, then (sensibly) open communication between the scientists and engineers in the CNSA can only inspire the latter to demand better for themselves, their country, and their space program. The national security and morality concerns expressed by Mr. Wolf and others are unquestionably valid. Even viewing the future through rose-colored glasses, it is inevitable that there will be espionage, military developments, and political statements in any international community, much less one as technologically irresistible as space. If the Wolf Amendment persists beyond its creator’s retirement, so be it; but Congress, NASA, and members of the international space community must be careful in how they construe its provisions. The U.S. Congress must not permit jingoistic fear to deprive the nation of the opportunity to connect with China in such a burgeoning and politically hopeful sphere. For now, the Wolf Amendment seems intended to prohibit official visitors only, and not to prevent Chinese scientists and researchers who desire true collaboration from sharing their discoveries with the United States and vice versa. As the Jade Rabbit rover tweeted on the eve of its first lunar night, “I’ve only encountered a little problem while on my own adventure.”131 It is hopeful to believe that the Wolf Amendment, too, is just a “little problem” on the way to truly global cooperation in space.

Removing trade restrictions will be key to US-Sino space cooperation

Grego and Wright 2010

Laura Grego: a senior scientist in the Global Security Program of the Union of Concerned Scientists, and David Wright: a senior scientist and co-director of the UCS Global Security Program. “Securing the Skies Ten Steps the United States Should Take to Improve the Security and Sustainability of Space” Union of concerned scientists November 2010. Website. Accessed 6-27-16. http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/legacy/assets/documents/nwgs/securing-the-skies-full-report-1.pdf

Over the past decade, these restrictions have impeded U.S. participation in legitimate space-related commerce, cooperation, and scientific collaborations while having a questionable impact on preventing the spread of sensitive space technologies.34 Current restrictions grew out of a view of space strongly dominated by military considerations and driven primarily by concern about China. But this approach is widely viewed as counterproductive to long-term U.S. interests, in part because of the deleterious effect it has had on the U.S. satellite industry. Because the problem is complex and entrenched, it will take a sustained effort by the White House and Congress to solve it. Resolution also requires the administration to reframe space issues in a way that balances the military, commercial, and civil uses of space and that recognizes the benefits of cooperation. In an effort to ensure that export regulations on space technology and related legislation are best meeting U.S. needs, the administration has begun to systematically review and modify these rules.35 Its efforts have already led to some changes, including the announcement in June 2010 that the White House had created a new independent agency, under a cabinet-level board of directors reporting to the president, for overseeing all military and dual-use export licensing activities (Tiron 2010). The administration should make it a priority to keep up the momentum behind such efforts. While restriction of some sensitive technology is in the U.S. national interest, the nation’s current export controls on space technology are not appropriate. They are arguably so broad that they interfere with commerce and collaboration that is not sensitive. Engagement and cooperation between space-faring countries can form the basis of a stable and secure space regime. Such activity fosters important contacts and relationships, provides a foundation that can support transparency and information exchange, and builds confidence in each actor’s stated intentions. Commercial and civil space cooperation is especially important, as operating costs are high; partners can share the burdens of development and then later the benefits of an open market. However, current export restrictions are problematic, particularly in the case of China, which has the third-largest share of satellites. The United States has a special set of restrictions that makes cooperation between the United States and China very difficult to pursue, even on matters of mutual interest. Although China had successfully completed three piloted space missions through the end of 2009, it is the only major space-faring country that has not been invited to participate in the International Space Station. China sees its exclusion as a sign of mistrust and disrespect, which will complicate diplomacy and encourage Chinese decision makers to plan for an independent future in space—in which all countries would be less bound by international norms and less likely to coordinate activities.

A2 Mistakes prevent private sector: past mistakes don’t prevent future development

Wall Street Journal 2014 (Wall Street Journal is an acclaimed newspaper; “Inevitable Space Failures” Published: Nov. 2, 2014 7:02 p.m. ET; http://www.wsj.com/articles/inevitable-space-failures-1414972928)

One of the late Peter Drucker’s management principles was that in order to benefit from an employee’s strengths you had to accept some weaknesses. It’s similar with any human endeavor, not least on the frontiers of space exploration: To get success, you have to accept the inevitable failures. That’s important to keep in mind after a pair of accidents last week involving private commercial space ventures. On Tuesday an unmanned Orbital Sciences Corp. cargo rocket destined for the international space station exploded 15 seconds after launch. Then on Friday a Virgin Galactic LLC rocket ship broke apart miles above the earth, killing one of its pilots and seriously injuring the other. The weekend prints were full of pessimistic speculation about what went wrong and how it would set back private space exploration and tourism. Investors might balk, potential passengers might flee, regulators might crack down. Richard Branson, the entrepreneur behind Virgin Galactic, had the better take when he said the company would explore what happened and that “we’re not going to push on blindly.” But he added that the early days of aviation also endured many crashes. Air travel is now safer than driving a car. We’d add that the Wright brothers were lucky they were first able to fail in obscurity a century ago or they might never have taken flight. Let’s hope Mr. Branson’s spirit prevails, not least at the National Transportation Safety Board, which is investigating the crash of Virgin’s SpaceShipTwo experimental rocket. NASA has had more than its share of disasters, and private space exploration can’t be expected to be risk- or crash-free. The U.S. needs private space exploration in part because NASA has become more bureaucratic and risk averse since its early glory days. Entrepreneurs need the freedom to fail in space so they can eventually succeed.

Specific Cooperation Scenario – Lunar Mining

US and china are interested in lunar water mining, China will be better at processing it

Beldavs 15 (Vid Beldavs; Futurist with 25 + years experience in business strategy, business development, project management, technology transfer, international business, management consulting, government contracting, policy research, systems development, fund-raising, startup management and other activities for large business, think tanks, and government agencies, 12/07/15, TheSpaceReview, “Prospects for US-China space cooperation”, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2878/1)

By an overwhelming margin, Congress passed the “US Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act,” whose intent is to stimulate commercial space development including mining the Moon and asteroids. This is a major step forward and demonstrates the commitment of the Obama Administration and of Congress to commercial development of space. With the law now in place, the space industry is expected to see the following: Simplification and Improvement in licensing procedures for space launch by private parties; Government support for commercial space development through the renamed Office of Space Commerce, a unit of the US Department of Commerce; Clarification of issues relating to transport of astronauts via commercial crew vehicles; Extension of the life of ISS to 2024 and affirmation of policies regarding governance of the ISS National Laboratory; and Clarification of rights to explore and collect space resources. While the law entitles the US citizen to “possess, own, transport, use, and sell the asteroid resource or space resource obtained in accordance with applicable law,” it does not confer exclusive rights to do so and, in fact, acknowledges that the provisions of the Outer Space Treaty of 1967 prohibits this: SEC. 403. DISCLAIMER OF EXTRATERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY It is the sense of Congress that by the enactment of this Act, the United States does not thereby assert sovereignty or sovereign or exclusive rights or jurisdiction over, or the ownership of, any celestial body. The law’s limitations Exclusive mining rights will need to be defined within an international regime that governs territory, such as the Moon, to which sovereign rights do not apply under the Outer Space Treaty. Insofar as lunar water has been identified as a possible resource to reduce the costs of reaching Mars, this issue will need to be resolved before the lunar water can be mined. China is among the states that show interest in lunar water. This legislation cannot guarantee US companies superior technology or exclusive mining rights or use of shared infrastructure in cislunar space that can reduce communications, transportation and operating costs. No country or company has mined the Moon or an asteroid, or has had industrial operations of any kind in space. Mining technologies may, in fact, be more advanced in countries such as Australia and Canada than in the US. In fact, space mining conferences held in Australia and in Canada have attracted significant attendance by mining companies and the equipment industries that serve them. Notwithstanding the ambitious plans of Deep Space Industries and Planetary Resources, it is not at all clear that they will possess superior technology for space mining to other potential competitors including from China, India, Japan, Korea, Russia, or the EU. No one has yet processed materials in space other than lab-scale experiments. China and India, which have both mounted large-scale industrial projects, may have a body of industrial process know-how that is already competitive with US capabilities to process asteroid or lunar materials into products. There are multiple other aspects of industrial development in space where knowledge and technologies exist somewhere in the world where the US may not have an inherent competitive advantage. The future that is being created through the new law will create more competitive opportunities for US commercial space companies. But, this legislation cannot guarantee them superior technology or exclusive mining rights or use of shared infrastructure in cislunar space that can reduce communications, transportation and operating costs.

Used as fuel to refill on the push to Mars, drinking water, made into air, and cost effective

Wall 14 (Mike Wall; Ph.D. in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology from the University of Sydney and senior writer for space.com, 10/09/14, “NASA Is Studying How to Mine the Moon for Water”, http://www.space.com/27388-nasa-moon-mining-missions-water.html)

There's a lot of water on the moon, and NASA wants to learn how to mine it. Space agency scientists are developing two separate mission concepts to assess, and learn how to exploit, stores of water ice on the moon and other lunar resources. The projects — called Lunar Flashlight and the Resource Prospector Mission — are notionally targeted to blast off in 2017 and 2018, respectively, and aim to help humanity extend its footprint out into the solar system. "If you're going to have humans on the moon and you need water for drinking, breathing, rocket fuel, anything you want, it's much, much cheaper to live off the land than it is to bring everything with you," said Lunar Flashlight principal investigator Barbara Cohen, of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama. [How to Build a Lunar Colony (Infographic)] It's therefore important to "understand the inventory of volatiles across the whole moon and their purity, and their accessibility in particular," Cohen said in July during a presentation at the NASA Exploration Science Forum, a conference organized by the Solar System Exploration Research Virtual Institute at the agency's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, California. Solar sailing to the moon Lunar Flashlight is working toward a possible launch date in December 2017, when it would blast off on the first test flight of NASA's Space Launch System megarocket, along with several other piggybacking payloads. Lunar Flashlight is a CubeSat mission, meaning the body of the spacecraft is tiny — about the size of a cereal box, Cohen said. But after it's deployed in space, the probe would get much bigger by unfurling an 860-square-foot (80 square meters) solar sail. [Photos: Solar Sail Evolution for Space Travel] The spacecraft would then cruise toward the moon on a circuitous route, propelled along by the photons streaming from the sun. Lunar Flashlight would start orbiting the moon about six months after its launch, then spend another year spiraling down to get about 12 miles (20 kilometers) from the lunar surface. The probe would then make about 80 passes around the moon at this low altitude, measuring and mapping deposits of water ice in permanently shadowed craters near the lunar poles. It would do this science work with the aid of its solar sail. "We're going to use it as a mirror," Cohen said. "We're going to take the sunlight, bounce it off the solar sail into the permanently shadowed regions, and we're going to use a passive infrared spectrometer to collect the light from the permanently shadowed regions in wavelengths that are indicative of water frost." Lunar Flashlight aims to find water ice that would be accessible to future explorers, be they human or robotic. "What we're looking for is water right at the surface," Cohen said. "Could humans or their vehicles go into a permanently shadowed region and just scoop up the regolith and use what's at the surface to be able to extract water ice?" Such deposits could provide drinking water for potential manned lunar outposts. And moon water could also be split into its constituent hydrogen and oxygen — prime components of rocket fuel, which could then spur and support exploration even farther afield, advocates of moon mining say. While Lunar Flashlight would eye the moon from above, the Resource Prospector Mission (RPM) plans to send a rover onto the lunar surface to get an up-close look. This rover would land at a yet-to-be-determined polar site and map surface and subsurface concentrations of hydrogen at two different locations, which would ideally be separated by at least 0.6 miles (1 km). RPM would use a neutron spectrometer to measure water concentrations up to 3.3 feet (1 m) underground and a near-infrared spectrometer to make its surface measurements. The solar-powered rover would roll into permananently shadowed regions, relying on batteries to keep working in the dark. It would likely have an operational lifetime of about one week on the lunar surface, mission officials have said. Like Lunar Flashlight, RPM is geared to help enable future exploitation of water ice on the moon. "How is the water ice distributed in the soil?" RPM project scientist Tony Colaprete of NASA Ames said at the Exploration Science Forum event. "That's really what Resource Prospector is fundamentally about, is identifying, locating the 'ore' and understanding how to excavate it — how to get at it — and what does that cost in terms of energy." The rover would also be equipped with a drill, allowing it to take samples from up to 3.3 feet (1 m) deep, Colaprete said. Collected samples would be heated up in an oven, and the volatile materials such as water liberated by this process would be identified and quantified. RPM also plans to extract oxygen from lunar dirt in a demonstration of in-situ resource utilization (ISRU). (This oxygen can be combined with hydrogen carried onboard to create water.) "We need to take the first steps in demonstrating off of this world utilization of material," Colaprete said. "There's a lot of technology demonstration in here that's not just applicable to the moon; it's applicable to any mission, to any surface where you want to manipulate materials." Mars is one such place. Indeed, NASA is also planning to conduct an ISRU experiment on the Red Planet in the coming years. In July, agency officials announced that its next Mars rover, slated to blast off in 2020, will carry an instrument that will generate oxygen from the carbon-dioxide-rich Martian atmosphere. More missions coming? NASA isn't the only entity eyeing the moon's resources. A number of private firms, including Moon Express and Shackleton Energy Co., also aim to mine and process lunar water. If Lunar Flashlight and RPM get off the ground — both missions are still in the concept phase and have yet to be officially approved by NASA — they could bring such dreams closer to reality, by providing a better understanding of the quantity, distribution and composition of water on the moon, Cohen said. "This is a very broad strategic knowledge gap," she said. "We're taking a very, very small bite out of it. Resource Prospector is taking another bite out of it. There's probably many, many missions to come that are going to address this."]

Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2014
2014 -> For want of a nail
2014 -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014
2014 -> Ihbb asian Championships 2014 middle school bowl Round 4 First Quarter
2014 -> Ihbb european Championships 2014 Bowl Round 4 First Quarter
2014 -> International History Bee and Bowl 2013-14 Asian Division Question Set Bowl Round Six
2014 -> United states patent and trademark office
2014 -> Coffs harbour eisteddfod vocal syllabus
2014 -> Listen News Programs Schedule pledge now
2014 -> Slow club announce third album complete surrender

Download 1.11 Mb.

Share with your friends: