[FPSPACE] FW: [lunar-update] Return to the Moon: Exploration,
Enterprise, and Energy in
the Human Settlement of Space (Hardcover) by HarrisonH. Schmitt
ljk4 at msn.com
Fri Dec 9 10:44:23 EST 2005
>From: "Larry Kellogg" <larry.kellogg at sbcglobal.net>
>To: <lunar-update at news.altair.com>
>Subject: [lunar-update] Return to the Moon: Exploration, Enterprise,and
>Energy in the Human Settlement of Space (Hardcover) by HarrisonH. Schmitt
>Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 13:22:55 -0800
>Ron Wells reminded me that Harrison H. Schmitt's new book is available on
>Amazon.com and I told him I had already ordered it and it was being
>delivered as we speak.
>Return to the Moon: Exploration, Enterprise, and Energy in the Human
>Settlement of Space (Hardcover)
>by Harrison H. Schmitt
>The Moon is not just a "local" destination, argues former NASA Astronaut
>Harrison Schmitt. As a destination, the Moon presents us with a goal that
>tests our resourcefulness and determination. How much are we willing to
>spend to re-establish ourselves as space-farers? Return to the Moon
>that we begin planning, and now, for the establishment of human outposts on
>the Moon not just as an exercise in technology and discovery, and not
>as a way of fulfilling our destiny as explorers and pioneers. Schmitt,
>having himself traveled to and literally walked on the Moon, is no stranger
>to technology, discovery, and a sense of our destiny as explorers; but in
>this book he focuses on a return to the moon as a business proposition.
>About the Author
>Harrison Schmitt is, as of this date, the 12th and last human to have
>stepped on the Moon. As an astronaut, pilot, geologist, academic,
>businessman, and United States Senator, he has had a distinguished career
>science and technology practice and policy. Schmitt was the first scientist
>to go into space specifically to explore the Moon as the Lunar Module Pilot
>and field geologist on the last Lunar Mission, Apollo 17. He is active in
>private and government sponsored research into a return to the Moon, and in
>fusion technologies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he is
>Adjunct Professor of Engineering. In his role as a Senator (R-NM,
>he was chairman of the Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Science,
>Technology, and Space.
>Ron knows Jack Schmitt and has worked with the Apollo 17 images.
>He wrote a review of the book for Amazon.com which you can read there along
>with another review by William Franklin.
>I have copied a bit longer review from Ron below.
>I'll let you know my thoughts when I get my copy. - LRK -
>You might ask, why so enthusiastic about another book on going back to the
>Glad you asked.
>Over the years to this lunar-update list I have mentioned books like "THE
>MOON - Resources, Future Development and Colonization" by David Schrunk,
>Burton Sharpe, Bonnie Cooper and Madhu Thangavelu and the book by Peter
>Eckart, "the Lunar Base Handbook" and the web references to Jack Schmitt's
>teaching at the University of Wisconsin Fusion Technology.
>These reference showed us just what would be required to set up camp on the
>Moon and how to go about utilizing the resources there.
>At the same time the Lunar Prospector mission was being proposed, so also
>was a plan for going back to the Moon by Harrison H. Schmitt.
>Back then one was not really being heard about putting us back on the Moon
>A cheap mission like Lunar Prospector would only be one step in preparing
>for a return. What Jack was pushing for was a way to get us out of the
>energy crises that has us now at $60 plus a barrel for oil.
>There needs to be a good reason to go back to the Moon, more than just what
>science from a spacecraft can provide.
>If you can turn a profit by utilizing the resources from space and help us
>here back on Earth, then it will happen.
>That will take some sound engineering, some excitement from investors, and
>the support of the general public who are already spending millions of
>dollars on sports heros.
>I think what Jack is talking about in his book may well be of interest to
>you who have been looking up with me.
>Web Site http://lkellogg.vttoth.com/LarryRussellKellogg/
>Blog Spot http://kelloggserialreports.blogspot.com/
>RSS link http://kelloggserialreports.blogspot.com/atom.xml
>News ltr https://news.altair.com/mailman/listinfo/lunar-update
>Book review by Ron Wells - LRK -
>Harrison H. (Jack) Schmitt was the last of 12 humans to set foot on the
>during the Apollo 17 mission in December, 1972, and the only scientist, a
>geologist with extensive field experience. Had NASA not sent Jack to the
>Moon, his contributions to the Apollo program would still have been
>because largely through his efforts the other Apollo astronauts received
>training in field geology. But fortunately, he was sent, and those readers
>who may have perused the on-line "Apollo Lunar Surface Journal"
>(http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj) know that Jack's professional background was
>indispensable for his 3-day exploration of the Valley of Taurus-Littrow.
>That value was particularly manifested by his discovery of the orange soil
>at Shorty Crater, Station 4, on the 2nd day of the mission, and his
>on-the-spot field analysis of the origin of the house-sized broken boulder
>on the slopes of the North Massif at Station 6 on the 3rd day. Now, 33
>after his mission, Jack has written "Return to the Moon", an astonishing
>book in the breadth covered by the 14 chapters with notes & references at
>the end of each. No one interested in the practical application of going
>back to the Moon and on to Mars can afford to miss reading this exposition.
>The book is an outgrowth of course lectures that Jack gave at the
>of Wisconsin-Madison over several years, the last series in the Spring of
>2004, but brought up to date and expanded considerably. His students must
>have really enjoyed attending those classes because he is a great lecturer!
>The basic premise, of course, is the establishment of a permanent lunar
>mining colony to process and ship Helium-3 (He-3) back to the Earth to fuel
>fusion reactors as a private commercial enterprise. Jack explains how these
>mostly pollution-free fusion reactions work and their significance to the
>But the book covers much more than He-3 mining. It essentially spans the
>entire period of U.S. space exploration from Eisenhower's establishment of
>NASA and his order to construct the Saturn V heavy booster through today's
>problems faced by Mike Griffin, the current NASA Administrator. And Jack
>pulls no punches. Chapters 9 and 10 are a Tour de Force. Chpt 9 treats the
>lessons Apollo taught us, and where we went wrong in the post-Apollo
>Chpt. 10 is an annotated collection of lengthy emails with the current
>House's first Administration (primarily the OMB) on how NASA should be
>restructured and why. He points out that NASA and the U.S. public in
>have become too risk adverse, which can lead to stagnation and ultimately
>stopping space exploration altogether. He also takes NASA to task for
>ignored biomedical research on humans in space as a seriously funded
>endeavor with the National Institutes of Health and the Food and Drug
>Administration. He explains in detail the kinds of experiments that were
>done and their significance, but that NASA basically took an "air sickness"
>approach to any problems that astronauts manifested (when they admitted to
>having problems). He also discusses what kind of medical problems need
>further examination. Jack even advocates that he and his remaining fellow
>Moon walkers should be subject to thorough targeted autopsies because
>is known of the effects of breathing in Moon dust laden with glass! Such
>effects need to be clearly defined before establishing a lunar settlement.
>The core financial analysis of returning to the Moon uses 6 models: (1)
>All-US Govt; (2) Multilateral (i.e., ISS approach); (3) Intelsat model; (4)
>private/Govt partnership; (5) private/Govt-funded Research, Test,
>Development & Evaluation partnership; and (6) all-private. These are not
>simple calculations, but rather detailed cost estimates of the various
>components needed to guarantee a successful return to the Moon with
>justifications for each choice. The most efficient and cheapest method
>out to be (6), with (5) reasonably close behind. The worst model was, of
>course, the International Space Station (ISS) approach, followed by the
>all-US Govt approach.
>People who run businesses will enjoy the business acumen that Jack displays
>in these computations and throughout the book. In addition to the cost
>analyses, he covers legal issues, managerial problems, and how big projects
>such as a return to the Moon should be organized. Once a commercially
>lunar colony has been established, the economic returns governed by the
>colony products and the worldwide distribution of power on Earth will serve
>to form a more stable civilization, one view of humankind's manifest
>that ought not be overlooked.
>There are a number of books on the market today advocating colonization of
>the Moon and travel to Mars, in fact there is another one on Amazon.com
>the same principal title as Jack's book. But Jack is the only author who
>truly say: "been there, done that". His book not only proves that, but
>drawing on that experience also justifies his privilege to have walked on
>University of California, retired
> Science and Exploration; Speech by Michael Griffin to the American
>Date Released: Wednesday, December 7, 2005
>Source: NASA HQ http://www.nasa.gov/home/index.html?skipIntro=1
>6 Dec 2005
>I'm here today to talk about what science at NASA means to U.S. leadership
>in space exploration, and in the world at large. I will also address
>specific components of our Science Mission Directorate plans, and discuss
>the opportunities in science that we expect to result from both our new
>exploration plan and our ongoing decadal research plans.
>To begin, I think that some perspective on the role of science in our
>national life might be in order. We are all here in San Francisco this
>evening because we believe that what we do is important, not only to our
>specific disciplines, but also to society at large. It is our good fortune
>to live in a society that invests in and greatly values scientific
>achievement. Indeed, most of us have grown up in a world in which we take
>for granted that the United States government will invest significant
>taxpayers' resources in scientific research. But this has not always been
>the case; prior to World War II, government investment in scientific
>research was miniscule.
>But the contributions of science and technology to the war effort prompted
>President Roosevelt to request a report from Dr. Vannevar Bush, the
>of the Office of Scientific Research, on how scientific expertise could be
>used in the post-war world. Bush's report, Science: The Endless Frontier,
>provided the framework for much of the federal backing of scientific
>research of which many of us have been or currently are the beneficiaries.
>In his report, Bush wrote, "It is in keeping also with basic U.S. policy
>that the government should foster the opening of new frontiers and this is
>the modern way to do it." I think Dr. Bush got it exactly right.
>America's space program is a prime example of a successful national
>investment in opening new frontiers that became possible precisely because
>our leaders thought about scientific advancement in this new context. Today
>we conduct bold and rewarding, but costly, scientific activities in space
>today because our leaders two generations ago viewed American preeminence
>all aspects of space exploration as essential to maintaining world
>leadership. It was in this same spirit that, nearly two years ago,
>Bush announced the Vision for Space Exploration, noting its implementation
>would advance America's economic, scientific and security interests.
>In this sense, science is the beneficiary of our commitment to seek out and
>explore new frontiers. While exploration has historically spurred
>technological innovation and commercial enterprise, it has also led to the
>flowering of scientific activity. I have high hopes for the scientific
>progress we will achieve as we pursue the Vision for Space Exploration.
>Through space exploration and related scientific activities, we can project
>humankind's vantage point into space, both virtually and physically with
>robots and humans. From space and in space, our scientific initiatives
>encompass questions as practical as tomorrow's weather and as profound as
>the origin and nature of the Universe.
> >From space, we can view the Earth as a planet ? one member of a solar
>governed by a typical main-sequence star midway through its life cycle. We
>can view the Earth's relationship with the Sun, shaped not just by gravity,
>but by the solar wind, solar radiation, and the Earth's own magnetic field
>and atmosphere. And we can view the Earth in its entirety, seeing the
>interconnectedness of the oceans, atmosphere, continents, ice sheets and
>life itself. We can observe and track global-scale changes, and perceive
>regional changes in their global context. We can observe the role that
>civilization increasingly plays as a force of change. Earth science at NASA
>is Earth system science, the study of Planet Earth as dynamic system of
>diverse components interacting in complex ways. We are learning to trace
>cause to effect, to connect variation with response, and vastly improve
>national capabilities to predict climate, weather, and natural hazards.
>Thus, NASA research is also an essential part of national and international
>efforts to employ Earth science and observation in service to society.
>In space, we are extending our virtual presence via robotic missions to
>other planets and their moons, to asteroids and comets, and to the Kuiper
>Belt. We are in the midst of a full-scale investigation of Mars, with one
>more missions launching every twenty-six months. We are directing more of
>our attention to the moons of the giant planets as we see intriguing signs
>of both water and dynamism on their surfaces, knowing that on Earth, where
>there is water and energy there is also life. We are progressing from
>observers to rovers to sample return missions, each step bringing us closer
>to our principal goals: to understand whether life does or did exist
>elsewhere in the Solar System, and to prepare for human expeditions to
>The human exploration of space will benefit from the scientific research
>that we conduct in support of the Vision. The selection of lunar and
>landing sites, the development of techniques for operations in differing
>radiation environments and atmospheres, and the exploitation of the
>points are examples of the productive interactions we anticipate between
>science and exploration as each is pursued for its own purposes.
>But having painted this picture, let me make a second point about the space
>frontier, which is that in fact we have barely entered it. To gain some
>historical perspective on the matter, consider that the great European
>voyages of maritime discovery began in the early 15th Century with the
>founding, by Prince Henry the Navigator, of the School of Oceanic
>in Sagres, Portugal in 1418. Though he never went to sea himself, Prince
>Henry sponsored a long series of voyages of exploration down the coast of
>Africa, in search of a seagoing path to the Orient.
>Henry's vision for ocean exploration was "a journey, not a race." In 1420
>the Madeira Islands were discovered by Joao Zarco. In 1434, after no less
>than fourteen expeditions had failed ? many of them simply never returning
>Henry's man Gil Eannes finally made it through the treacherous waters off
>Cape Bojador, on the coast of Africa south of the Canary Islands, and
>returned alive. Portuguese explorers rounded the western bulge of Africa in
>1460, the year of Henry's death. And the southern tip of Africa, the Cape
>Good Hope, was finally reached by Bartolomeu Dias in 1488. Vasco da Gama
>reached India in 1498. By the time Columbus sailed westward in search of a
>shorter, easier path to Asia, European maritime exploration had been firmly
>underway for almost 75 years. Yet today, we think of the 1492 voyage of the
>Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria as the beginning of everything. That
>hardly the case.
>The space age, for all its achievements, is less than fifty years old, and
>is just getting underway. To date, twelve human beings have explored the
>surface of the moon for a total time of less than one man-month; it is now
>my job to make that number grow by leaps and bounds. Our initial scientific
>reconnaissance of the solar system is still incomplete, with NASA planning
>to launch the New Horizons mission next month to conduct the first robotic
>exploration of Pluto. We have also barely scratched the surface when it
>comes to understanding the extent and nature of extra-solar planets. In
>ten years, more than 150 planets beyond our solar system have been
>discovered, and there are indications that at least one has the same rocky
>characteristics as our home planet. And as this audience knows quite well,
>we have only begun to tap the potential of Earth observing, weather, and
>other remote sensing satellites.
>Continuing on the theme that we are just at the dawn of the true space age,
>let me point out that in a matter of years, people around the globe will be
>able to look up at a new moon, and with the aid of a good telescope, be
>to see the glimmering lights of a research station on the lunar surface. At
>this research station, pioneering astronauts will be learning how to obtain
>oxygen from the lunar regolith. They will be deploying antennas on the back
>side of the moon, linked in phase to form the largest radio telescope ever
>built, free of radio noise from Earth. They will be engaged in geological
>exploration of the moon, finally establishing the origins of our Earth-moon
>system. And other astronauts, in Earth orbit, will be readying a 500 ton
>spaceship for mankind's first voyage to Mars.
>This is the direction for our space program that two successive Congresses
>have endorsed, and that, according to a very recent Gallup Poll,
>three-quarters of our citizens "support", or "strongly support". This
>support is found roughly in equal proportions across the political
>and between the genders. This is the kind of support that will fuel many of
>our space science initiatives in the future. And we are just at the
>Having said this, I am aware that many in the science community have
>questioned NASA's commitment to science, and believe their own work to be
>gravely threatened by the Vision for Space Exploration. Let me speak
>directly to this point. I have frequently stated my belief that exploration
>will be a boon for science in the long-term. I have also said on many
>occasions that it is not our desire to sacrifice present-day scientific
>efforts for the sake of future benefits to be derived from exploration. We
>who run NASA today are doing our very best to preserve these efforts in the
>face of, frankly, some daunting fiscal realities. But we also must avoid
>setting unrealistic expectations. NASA's $5.4 billion investment in its
>Earth and space science portfolio is almost the size of the entire National
>Science Foundation, and this robust portfolio has grown at a rate
>significantly greater than has NASA's top line budget over the past decade.
>Such growth cannot logically be supported within an overall portfolio that
>is at best fixed in constant dollars.
>But we must also acknowledge the plain fact that we cannot do everything
>that was on our plate when I assumed office. All of you know many reasons
>why this is so. NASA can only move forward on our fundamental missions of
>exploration, science and aeronautics at the pace that available resources
>will allow, so it is important to be as efficient as possible in allocating
>these resources. To this end, we have made several changes in recent
>and I would like to discuss some of these changes with you tonight.
>First, we are reconstituting the organization the Science Mission
>Directorate into separate offices for Earth science, heliophysics,
>science and physics and astronomy.
>Second, Mary is defining an executable science program across each of these
>portfolios in Earth and space science. She is conducting a rigorous review
>of each flight project now in formulation and development, and establishing
>gates through which each program must pass in order to proceed from
>formulation to development. This process requires balancing technical
>performance against cost, evaluating the management team that is in place,
>and rigorously identifying risks and defining plans to mitigate them. We
>very much need better cost discipline in the large assignment missions, as
>cost growth inhibits the future of the smaller, but incredibly prolific,
>Third, we are returning to NASA's classical approach to science management,
>including relying on outside bodies for strategic advice on the ranking of
>missions by priority. In each of the four major elements of our research
>portfolio, we will establish priorities through dialog with the science
>community, based on the budget realities we face. The decadal surveys of
>National Research Council have proven essential to this process in the
>and we will continue to rely on them as authoritative sources of science
>community priorities. We also will engage in more frequent venues for
>with the science community, such as professional society conferences like
>these. For tactical level advice we will engage the science community in
>workshops that help us to implement successful programs by balancing
>detailed technical requirements, cost and schedule. A principle source of
>advice at this level is the NASA Advisory Council, which has just been
>reconstituted. The NAC has five committees, including a five-member science
>committee with many subcommittees. I believe the latter group's advice will
>be very helpful to the agency.
>Many of you are interested in our plans for Earth science. While it is true
>this activity does not get the media attention that human spaceflight and
>planetary exploration receive, I can assure you it is an important activity
>that we are determined to continue well beyond the completion of the Earth
>I believe most of you know that I have significantly re-emphasized Earth
>science since rejoining NASA earlier this year. Our Earth science programs
>are essential to the accomplishment of three initiatives begun by President
>Bush: The Climate Change Research program, the Global Earth Observation
>System and the Oceans Action Plan. We recognize that through our
>contributions to these initiatives, NASA is providing researchers around
>world with unprecedented access to diverse data about the Earth system.
>is being done at a time when there are huge societally relevant questions
>about global changes that require the view from space.
>One need look no further than NASA's contributions to this season's
>hurricane predictions to recognize that we are getting tremendous value out
>of our Earth observation satellites. Indeed, as a result of NASA's
>development and deployment in the past decade of the Tropical Rainfall
>Measuring Mission (TRMM), the Aqua satellite and the Quickscat sea winds
>measurement instrument, our colleagues at the National Weather Service are
>now able to predict the formation of tropical storms nine days instead of
>seven days out, and predict landfall within 400 miles of coastline instead
>of 800. Such advances allow significant improvement in the marshalling of
>resources to deal with the inevitable property destruction of, and better
>warning to people likely to be affected by, major hurricanes.
>At NASA's request, the National Research Council has undertaken its first
>decadal survey for Earth science and applications from space. Our
>at NOAA and the U.S. Geological Survey are co-sponsors of this effort,
>results should be available by the end of next year. We will use these
>results to create a profile with an optimal mix of systematic and
>exploratory missions, technology development, and research programs to
>implement the survey's priorities and the presidential initiatives I
>Turning to the sun, NASA's heliophysics program is helping us to gain a
>better understanding of the sun, and the sun's interaction with Earth,
>planetary environments, and interplanetary space itself. We have used a
>strategy of deploying frequent, smaller missions within this vast system to
>form a distributed Great Observatory that is truly greater than the sum of
>its parts. Next year, we are poised to reap the rewards of several years of
>In 2006, we will launch STEREO, a mission to track the evolution of solar
>disturbances from the sun's surface to Earth's orbit; the five-satellite
>THEMIS mission to determine the causes of space weather reconfigurations of
>Earth's near space environment; and the AIM small explorer satellite that
>will examine the formation of the highest altitude clouds in Earth's
>atmosphere in response to external and internal forcing functions. Also
>year, we look forward to deployment of the NASA CINDI and TWINS instruments
>on two DoD missions, and to providing instrumentation for Japan's Solar-B
>mission that will resolve magnetic fields on the sun's surface and how they
>interact with the sun's outer atmosphere.
>Similarly, our planetary program is guided by the decadal surveys we have
>hand, and we will proceed with our planetary mission priorities as quickly
>as our budget will allow. One area pinpointed for further attention is the
>Moon. As we plan to return to the Moon to open up the next great era of
>space exploration, I'd like to mention a few of the new vistas a more
>extensive focus on lunar exploration will provide. Paul Spudis, my former
>colleague at Johns Hopkins University's Applied Physics Laboratory, has
>written extensively on the subject, including a Scientific American article
>from December 2003 that I commend to your attention. In the article, Paul
>notes that scientists still have many unanswered questions about the Moon's
>history, composition and internal structure, whose understanding may also
>illuminate the history of all the rocky planets in the inner solar system.
>Paul also wrote of the importance of determining whether significant
>water ice do in fact exist in lunar polar areas. If confirmed, such a
>discovery would offer the hope that a lunar base would have a source of
>water for life support as well as for rocket fuel.
>We're looking at a number of promising lunar science targets in our Robotic
>Lunar Exploration Program, an activity that links our Exploration and
>Science Mission Directorates. Their collaboration began with the Lunar
>Reconnaissance Orbiter now in development for launch in 2008. The Science
>Mission Directorate managed the selection process for the Lunar
>Reconnaissance Orbiter instruments, and will play a Program and Project
>Scientist role in spacecraft development managed by the Exploration Systems
>Of course, we're also interested in outer planet exploration which
>represents some of the most challenging scientific missions NASA carries
>out. I already mentioned the New Horizons mission set to launch next month.
>We're in the preliminary design phase for the Juno mission that will
>investigate whether an icy rock core exists at the center of Jupiter, and
>NASA hopes to conduct future missions to investigate the potential of life
>at Europa, Titan, and other compelling targets for outer planet
>Again, these missions represent some of the most technically challenging
>science missions for NASA over the next decade. And I'm also very intrigued
>by Ed Lu and Rusty Schweickart's ideas about nudging large near-Earth
>asteroids before they can pose a threat to humanity. We will most certainly
>continue our work to discover large asteroids close to the Earth.
>It is important to note that we cannot accomplish all our goals for science
>and exploration on our own. We're very fortunate to have strong
>with a number of spacefaring countries. Today, 29 of NASA's 53 ongoing
>planetary, astronomy and Earth-observing satellites and spacecraft missions
>include international participation, with NASA involved in 13 operating
>science missions led by our international partners. As I've said on
>occasions, I am looking forward to the opportunity to enlarge and extend
>In closing, please allow me to offer a few thoughts on what we might
>in science if we move ahead with purpose and dispatch with our space
>By 2020 we will be surveying our portion of the galaxy to create a census
>extra-solar planets, and using the next generation of space telescopes to
>study the origin and destiny of the universe. We will be probing the
>surface and subsurface for resources that will enable human exploration,
>to answer questions about the past and present habitability of Mars.
>Together with our partners we will have created a global Earth observing
>system that includes sentinel satellites in higher orbits communicating
>active remote sensing systems in lower orbits. These systems will provide
>both real time information for hazard warning and management and the long
>term data records required to understand and predict global change.
>All of these advances will come about because of the hard work and
>commitment of our diverse community, which I believe has its greatest
>successes when we allow the pursuit of exploration and scientific progress
>to complement each other.
>I thank you for your hospitality today, and again extend my heartfelt
>to all of you for your commitment to regaining the initiative that has
>driven our past successes.
>WHAT THE MIND CAN CONCEIVE, AND BELIEVE, IT WILL ACHIEVE - LRK
>This is the lunar-update at news.altair.com
>This list is a moderated list. The moderator is Larry Kellogg
>(larry.kellogg at sbcglobal.net
>Please send suggestions for postings directly to Larry.
>Larry's blog site, is:
>General information about the mailing list is at:
>lunar-update mailing list, moderated by Larry Kellogg
>To unsubscribe or change your options please visit:
>Forwarded by GNU Mailman at Altair Engineering, Inc. http://www.altair.com/
More information about the FPSPACE