y is space travel so expensive

BREAKING: Julian Assange to walk free after pleading guilty to disclosing a trove of classified documents

How much does space travel cost?

Spaceflight has traditionally been a government-led activity — and it's never been cheap. But the stratospheric cost of putting people and payloads into space is finally starting to fall, thanks in part to the rise of SpaceX and other private spaceflight companies.

Here’s a look at what it costs to go to space, whether it’s another satellite that needs to be placed in orbit or an adventurous billionaire looking for a joyride around the moon .

Sending up a satellite

Using its 230-foot-tall Falcon 9, SpaceX charges $62 million to send into orbit commercial satellites weighing up to 50,000 pounds. The closest American competitor is the United Launch Alliance Atlas V, which starts at $73 million for a 41,000-pound payload .

Science Sign Up for the Daily MACH Newsletter

Those are just starting prices; government agencies typically pay more for a long list of extra services. The Air Force, for example, is paying SpaceX $96.5 million to launch a GPS satellite in 2019 .

Flying to the International Space Station

Since NASA mothballed its space shuttles in 2011, NASA has relied on the Russian Soyuz spacecraft to get astronauts to the ISS. Russia has been steadily raising the price of Soyuz seats, reaching $82 million each in 2015. The agency last purchased Soyuz seats for $75 million apiece in 2017.

NASA hopes to end its reliance on Russia in 2019, when SpaceX's Crew Dragon and Boeing's Starliner capsules begin “taxi” flights to the ISS. Seats on those spacecraft are expected to cost about $58 million .

How much would I have to pay for a flight into space?

Depending on where you're going, a ticket could set you back anywhere from $250,000 to tens of millions of dollars.

If you're looking simply to cross the 62-mile-high Karman line that marks the boundary between the upper atmosphere and outer space, Virgin Galactic says it will take you there for $250,000. The company says about 650 people already have tickets for the suborbital flights, to be made aboard a winged vehicle called SpaceShipTwo. A date for customer flights has yet to be announced.

Jeff Bezos’ rocket company, Blue Origin, plans something similar — sending space tourists on brief suborbital flights using its New Shepard rocket system. The company has yet to set ticket prices or say when paid flights might begin.

Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin passengers will join the fewer than a dozen private citizens who have funded their own trips into space. From 2001 to 2009, the Vienna, Virginia-based firm Space Adventures worked with Russia’s space agency to send eight people to the ISS on flights lasting 10 or more days.

Space A colossal elevator to space could be going up sooner than you ever imagined

The world's first private astronaut, a wealthy American engineer named Dennis Tito, reportedly paid $20 million to spend eight days in space in 2001. More recently, Guy Laliberté, the co-founder of Cirque du Soleil, shelled out $35 million for an ISS trip in 2009 . Space Adventures still advertises Soyuz flights and plans to start booking trips to the ISS aboard Boeing’s Starliner.

In September 2018, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk announced that Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa would ride the company’s yet-to-be-built Big Falcon Rocket on a trip around the moon. Neither Musk nor Maezawa, who said he would take along seven artists, would discuss the mission’s cost.

What about other rockets?

Small satellites may qualify for a free ride to space through NASA’s Educational Launch of Nanosatellites program, which helps universities and research groups fly standardized satellites called CubeSats aboard rockets as secondary payloads.

If your satellite can’t hitch a free ride, you can book a NASA sounding rocket to the edge of space for as little as $1 million . For orbital flights of payloads weighing less than 500 pounds, Los Angeles-based Rocket Lab offers launches of its Electron rocket from New Zealand for about $5 million .

From there, the price goes up steeply. Northrop Grumman's Pegasus rocket, which is air-launched from the belly of a jumbo jet, can place 1,000 pounds in orbit for about $40 million . Stratolaunch, a new venture bankrolled by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, plans to launch Pegasus rockets from its own colossal airplane before offering an expanded line of rockets capable of carrying up to 13,000 pounds. The company has yet to disclose prices.

NASA is developing its Space Launch System, which will carry astronauts to the moon and Mars. The rocket’s per-launch cost has not been disclosed, but the agency now spends at least $2 billion per year on the project. The maiden flight isn’t expected until 2020.

WANT MORE STORIES ABOUT SPACE TRAVEL?

• NASA solar probe to go where no spacecraft has gone before
• Space shuttle relic to be resurrected as deep-space habitat
• The animals that paved the way for humans in space

FOLLOW NBC NEWS MACH ON TWITTER , FACEBOOK , AND INSTAGRAM .

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The Future of Space Tourism Is Now. Well, Not Quite.

From zero-pressure balloon trips to astronaut boot camps, reservations for getting off the planet — or pretending to — are skyrocketing. The prices, however, are still out of this world.

By Debra Kamin

Ilida Alvarez has dreamed of traveling to space since she was a child. But Ms. Alvarez, a legal-mediation firm owner, is afraid of flying, and she isn’t a billionaire — two facts that she was sure, until just a few weeks ago, would keep her fantasy as out of reach as the stars. She was wrong.

Ms. Alvarez, 46, and her husband, Rafael Landestoy, recently booked a flight on a 10-person pressurized capsule that — attached to a massive helium-filled balloon — will gently float to 100,000 feet while passengers sip champagne and recline in ergonomic chairs. The reservation required a $500 deposit; the flight itself will cost $50,000 and last six to 12 hours.

“I feel like it was tailor-made for the chickens like me who don’t want to get on a rocket,” said Ms. Alvarez, whose flight, organized by a company called World View , is scheduled to depart from the Grand Canyon in 2024.

Less than a year after Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson kicked off a commercial space race by blasting into the upper atmosphere within weeks of each other last summer, the global space tourism market is skyrocketing, with dozens of companies now offering reservations for everything from zero-pressure balloon trips to astronaut boot camps and simulated zero-gravity flights. But don’t don your spacesuit just yet. While the financial services company UBS estimates the space travel market will be worth $3 billion by 2030, the Federal Aviation Administration has yet to approve most out-of-this-world trips, and construction has not started on the first space hotel. And while access and options — not to mention launchpads — are burgeoning, space tourism remains astronomically expensive for most.

First, what counts as space travel?

Sixty miles (about 100 kilometers) above our heads lies the Kármán line, the widely accepted aeronautical boundary of the earth’s atmosphere. It’s the boundary used by the Féderátion Aéronautique Internationale, which certifies and controls global astronautical records. But many organizations in the United States, including the F.A.A. and NASA, define everything above 50 miles to be space.

Much of the attention has been focused on a trio of billionaire-led rocket companies: Mr. Bezos’ Blue Origin , whose passengers have included William Shatner; Mr. Branson’s Virgin Galactic , where tickets for a suborbital spaceflight start at $450,000; and Elon Musk’s SpaceX , which in September launched an all-civilian spaceflight, with no trained astronauts on board. Mr. Branson’s inaugural Virgin Galactic flight in 2021 reached about 53 miles, while Blue Origin flies above the 62-mile mark. Both are eclipsed by SpaceX, whose rockets charge far deeper in to the cosmos, reaching more than 120 miles above Earth.

Balloons, like those operated by World View, don’t go nearly as high. But even at their maximum altitude of 18 or 19 miles, operators say they float high enough to show travelers the curvature of the planet, and give them a chance to experience the overview effect — an intense perspective shift that many astronauts say kicks in when you view Earth from above.

Now, how to get there …

Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, which are both licensed for passenger space travel by the F.A.A., are open for ticket sales. (Blue Origin remains mum on pricing.) Both companies currently have hundreds or even thousands of earthlings on their wait lists for a whirl to the edge of space. SpaceX charges tens of millions of dollars for its further-reaching flights and is building a new facility in Texas that is currently under F.A.A. review.

Craig Curran is a major space enthusiast — he’s held a reserved seat on a Virgin Galactic flight since 2011 — and the owner of Deprez Travel in Rochester, N.Y. The travel agency has a special space travel arm, Galactic Experiences by Deprez , through which Mr. Curran sells everything from rocket launch tickets to astronaut training.

Sales in the space tourism space, Mr. Curran acknowledges, “are reasonably difficult to make,” and mostly come from peer-to-peer networking. “You can imagine that people who spend $450,000 to go to space probably operate in circles that are not the same as yours and mine,” he said.

Some of Mr. Curran’s most popular offerings include flights where you can experience the same stomach-dropping feeling of zero gravity that astronauts feel in space, which he arranges for clients via chartered, specialized Boeing 727s that are flown in parabolic arcs to mimic being in space. Operators including Zero G also offer the service; the cost is around $8,200.

You can almost count the number of completed space tourist launches on one hand — Blue Origin has had four; SpaceX, two. Virgin Galactic, meanwhile, on Thursday announced the launch of its commercial passenger service, previously scheduled for late 2022, was delayed until early 2023. Many of those on waiting lists are biding their time before blastoff by signing up for training. Axiom Space, which contracts with SpaceX, currently offers NASA-partnered training at Houston’s Johnson Space Center. Virgin Galactic, which already offers a “customized Future Astronaut Readiness program” at its Spaceport America facility in New Mexico, is also partnering with NASA to build a training program for private astronauts.

Would-be space tourists should not expect the rigor that NASA astronauts face. Training for Virgin Galactic’s three-hour trips is included in the cost of a ticket and lasts a handful of days; it includes pilot briefings and being “fitted for your bespoke Under Armour spacesuit and boots,” according to its website.

Not ready for a rocket? Balloon rides offer a less hair-raising celestial experience.

“We go to space at 12 miles an hour, which means that it’s very smooth and very gentle. You’re not rocketing away from earth,” said Jane Poynter, a co-founder and co-chief executive of Space Perspective , which is readying its own touristic balloon spaceship, Spaceship Neptune. If all goes according to plan, voyages are scheduled to begin departing from Florida in 2024, at a cost of $125,000 per person. That’s a fraction of the price tag for Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, but still more than double the average annual salary of an American worker.

Neither Space Perspective nor World View has the required approval yet from the F.A.A. to operate flights.

Unique implications

Whether a capsule or a rocket is your transport, the travel insurance company battleface launched a civilian space insurance plan in late 2021, a direct response, said chief executive Sasha Gainullin, to an increase in space tourism interest and infrastructure. Benefits include accidental death and permanent disablement in space and are valid for spaceflights on operators like SpaceX, Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, as well as on stratospheric balloon rides. They’ve had many inquiries, Mr. Gainullin said, but no purchases just yet.

“Right now it’s such high-net-worth individuals who are traveling to space, so they probably don’t need insurance,” he said. “But for quote-unquote regular travelers, I think we’ll see some takeups soon.”

And as the industry grows, so perhaps will space travel’s impact on the environment. Not only do rocket launches have immense carbon footprints, even some stratospheric balloon flights have potentially significant implications: World View’s balloons are powered by thousands of cubic meters of helium, which is a limited resource . But Ted Parson, a professor of environmental law at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that space travel’s environmental impact is still dwarfed by civil aviation. And because space travel is ultra-niche, he believes it’s likely to stay that way.

“Despite extensive projections, space tourism is likely to remain a tiny fraction of commercial space exploration,” he said. “It reminds me of tourism on Mt. Everest. It’s the indulgence of very rich people seeking a transcendent, once-in-a-lifetime experience, and the local environmental burden is intense.”

Stay a while?

In the future, space enthusiasts insist, travelers won’t be traveling to space just for the ride. They’ll want to stay a while. Orbital Assembly Corporation, a manufacturing company whose goal is to colonize space, is currently building the world’s first space hotels — two ring-shaped properties that will orbit Earth, called Pioneer Station and Voyager Station. The company, quite optimistically, projects an opening date of 2025 for Pioneer Station, with a capacity of 28 guests. The design for the larger Voyager Station , which they say will open in 2027, promises villas and suites, as well as a gym, restaurant and bar. Both provide the ultimate luxury: simulated gravity. Axiom Space , a space infrastructure company, is currently building the world’s first private space station; plans include Philippe Starck-designed accommodations for travelers to spend the night.

Joshua Bush, chief executive of travel agency Avenue Two Travel , has sold a handful of seats on upcoming Virgin Galactic flights to customers. The market for space travel (and the sky-high prices that come with it), he believes, will evolve much like civilian air travel did.

“In the beginning of the 20th century, only very affluent people could afford to fly,” he said. “Just as we have Spirit and Southwest Airlines today, there will be some sort of equivalent of that in space travel, too. Hopefully within my lifetime.”

52 Places for a Changed World

The 2022 list highlights places around the globe where travelers can be part of the solution.

Follow New York Times Travel on Instagram , Twitter and Facebook . And sign up for our weekly Travel Dispatch newsletter to receive expert tips on traveling smarter and inspiration for your next vacation. Dreaming up a future getaway or just armchair traveling? Check out our 52 Places for a Changed World for 2022.

What’s Up in Space and Astronomy

Keep track of things going on in our solar system and all around the universe..

Never miss an eclipse, a meteor shower, a rocket launch or any other 2024 event  that’s out of this world with  our space and astronomy calendar .

The company SpaceX achieved a key set of ambitious goals  on the fourth test flight of a vehicle that is central to Elon Musk’s vision of sending people to Mars.

Euclid, a European Space Agency telescope launched into space last summer, finally showed off what it’s capable of with a batch of breathtaking images  and early science results.

A dramatic blast from the sun  set off the highest-level geomagnetic storm in Earth’s atmosphere, making the northern lights visible around the world .

With the help of Google Cloud, scientists who hunt killer asteroids churned through hundreds of thousands of images of the night sky to reveal 27,500 overlooked space rocks in the solar system .

Is Pluto a planet? And what is a planet, anyway? Test your knowledge here .

MIT Technology Review

• Newsletters

Space is all yours—for a hefty price

Commercial spaceflight is now officially a thing. But is it a transcendent opportunity for the masses, or just another way for rich people to show off?

• Adam Mann archive page

Private citizens have been buying their way into the heavens for decades. In the 1980s, McDonnell Douglas engineer Charles Walker became the first nongovernment individual to fly in space when his company bought him a seat on three NASA space shuttle missions. In 2001, American entrepreneur Dennis Tito dished out a reported $20 million to fly on a Russian Soyuz rocket to the International Space Station (ISS) and spend eight days floating in microgravity. 

But beyond those few flights, nothing much happened.

At least not until last year. After decades of development and several serious accidents, three companies—SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Virgin Galactic—launched their first tourist flights in 2021. William Shatner rode a Blue Origin vehicle to the edge of space in October. Former NFL star and Good Morning America host Michael Strahan took a similar ride in December. Even NASA, which was once hostile to space tourism, has come around and released a pricing policy for private astronaut missions, offering to bring someone to orbit for around $55 million.

Okay, so it’s a new era—but what does it mean? Do these forays represent a future in which even the average person might book a celestial flight and bask in the splendor of Earth from above? Or is this just another way for the ultrawealthy to flash their cash while simultaneously ignoring and exacerbating our existential problems down on the ground? Nearly all those 2021 escapades were the result of efforts by three billionaires: Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Richard Branson. Branson is a mere single-digit billionaire, whereas Bezos and Musk have wealth measured in the hundreds of billions. 

“The greatly undue influence of wealth in this country—to me that’s at the heart of my issues with space tourism as it’s unfolding,” says Linda Billings, a communications researcher who consults for NASA and has written about the societal impacts of spaceflight for more than 30 years. “We are so far away from making this available to your so-called average person.”

Each spot on Virgin’s suborbital spaceplane, the cheapest way to space at the moment, will set somebody back $450,000. A single seat on Blue Origin’s initial suborbital launch sold at auction for $28 million, and the undisclosed price tag of SpaceX’s all-civilian Inspiration4 mission, which spent three days in orbit before splashing down off the coast of Florida, has been estimated at $50 million per passenger. 

Not only are such flights ridiculously far out of financial reach for the average person, says Billings, but they aren’t achieving any real goals—far from ideal given our terrestrial problems of inequality, environmental collapse, and a global pandemic. “We’re not really learning anything,” she says. “There doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of thought or conscience in the people engaging in these space tourism missions.”

Laura Forczyk, owner of the space consulting firm Astralytical, thinks it’s misguided to focus strictly on the money aspect. “The narrative [last year] was billionaires in space, but it’s so much more than that,” says Forczyk, who wrote the book Becoming Off-Worldly , published in January, in which she interviewed both government and private astronauts about why they go to space.

Forczyk sees the flights as great opportunities to conduct scientific experiments. All three of the commercial tourist companies have carried research projects in the past, studying things like fluid dynamics, plant genetics, and the human body’s reaction to microgravity. And yes, the rich are the target audience, but the passengers on SpaceX’s Inspiration4 included artist and scientist Sian Proctor and data engineer Chris Sembroski, who won their tickets through contests, as well as St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital ambassador Hayley Arceneaux (the trip helped her raise $200 million in donations for the hospital). Blue Origin gave free trips to aviation pioneer Wally Funk, who as a woman had been barred from becoming an Apollo astronaut, and NASA astronaut Alan Shepard’s daughter Laura.

Forczyk also cites Iranian space tourist Anousheh Ansari, who flew to the ISS in 2006. “She talked about how she grew up in a war zone in Iran, and how [the flight] helped her see the world as interconnected,” Forczyk says. 

Billings thinks the value of such testimonials is pretty low. “All these people are talking to the press about how wonderful the experience was,” she says. “But to listen to someone else tell you about how exciting it was to climb Mt. Everest doesn’t convey the actual experience.”

As with an Everest trek, there’s the risk of death to consider. Historically, spaceflight has had a fatality rate of just under 4%—roughly 266,000 times greater than for commercial airplanes. Virgin suffered two major disasters during testing, killing a total of four employees and injuring four more. “A high-profile accident will come; it’s inevitable,” says Forczyk. But even that, she predicts, won’t end space tourism. People continue to climb Everest, she notes, despite the danger.

Another question is how space tourism might affect the planet. A 90-minute jaunt on Virgin Galactic’s suborbital spaceplane is roughly as polluting as a 10-hour transatlantic flight. Other calculations suggest that a rocket launch can produce 50 to 75 tons of carbon dioxide per passenger, compared with just a few tons per passenger from a commercial airplane.

Experts warn that even Blue Origin’s New Shepard, which burns hydrogen and oxygen and emits water, could affect the climate since its combustion products are injected high into the stratosphere, where their ultimate impact has yet to be understood. 

The Federal Aviation Administration oversees all spaceflight in the US and might strengthen safety and environmental regulations. The agency currently has a moratorium on new regulations until 2023, which was designed to give the nascent industry time to develop before legislators came in with too much red tape. But few lawmakers or citizens are clamoring for more regulation. 

“There are a lot of other things for people to worry about than whether or not only billionaires get to fly in space,” says Marcia Smith, the founder and editor of the news website SpacePolicyOnline.com, which covers space programs around the world.

Nobody has yet fully articulated a compelling reason to spend enormous sums on private spaceflight. It may have incidental value for science and engineering, or offer a small number of people a sense of transcendence. 

But at the moment, it seems we do it mainly because we think it’s cool.

Keep Reading

Most popular, how to opt out of meta’s ai training.

Your posts are a gold mine, especially as companies start to run out of AI training data.

• Melissa Heikkilä archive page

Why does AI hallucinate?

The tendency to make things up is holding chatbots back. But that’s just what they do.

• Will Douglas Heaven archive page

The return of pneumatic tubes

Pneumatic tubes were supposed to revolutionize the world but have fallen by the wayside. Except in hospitals.

• Vanessa Armstrong archive page

How a simple circuit could offer an alternative to energy-intensive GPUs

The creative new approach could lead to more energy-efficient machine-learning hardware.

• Sophia Chen archive page

Stay connected

Get the latest updates from mit technology review.

Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.

Thank you for submitting your email!

It looks like something went wrong.

We’re having trouble saving your preferences. Try refreshing this page and updating them one more time. If you continue to get this message, reach out to us at [email protected] with a list of newsletters you’d like to receive.

William Shatner went to space. Here's how much it would cost you.

It's the dawn of a new space age.

William Shatner , who for decades explored space on screen as "Star Trek's" Captain Kirk, finally launched into the final frontier.

"Everybody in the world needs to do this," he said. "Everybody in the world needs to see it." 

On Wednesday, the 90-year-old became the oldest person in space, a title briefly held by  Mary Wallace "Wally" Funk  and previously held by legendary astronaut John Glenn . At age 82, Funk, a longtime champion of women in space, joined Amazon founder Jeff Bezos on Blue Origin's flight to the edge of space in July.

What does this mean for the future of civilian space travel? Will space become the next ultimate human amusement park?

NASA Director Phil McAlister weighs in after more than 20 years working in the space industry.

►'I hope I never recover': William Shatner gets emotional after historic Blue Origin flight

►Sorry, Jeff Bezos: You're still not an astronaut, according to the FAA

How much does it cost to go into space?

It depends, says McAlister. For a trip on Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo and Blue Origin's New Shepard, seats typically cost $250,000 to $500,000.

"Those are suborbital transportation systems. They are about a 15-minute ride, and they just barely touch the edge of space and then come back down. They don't go into orbit," McAlister says.

SpaceX's  Inspiration4  mission in September was different.

The spacecraft of civilians was in orbit and circling the Earth for three days, similar to orbital spaceflight required for astronauts to get to the International Space Station. 

► Rocket visuals:  Visual explainer: SpaceX flight puts all-civilian crew of 4 into Earth orbit for 3 days

►The Inspiration4 mission:   No professional astronauts: SpaceX will launch first all-civilian crew into orbit tonight

Jared Isaacman, a 38-year-old billionaire high-school dropout who promoted the flight as a massive fundraising effort for St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, paid for it all.

Issacman, a pilot who is qualified to fly commercial and military jets, reached a deal with SpaceX in late 2020 for the mission.

Neither is saying how much he paid SpaceX, an Elon Musk-founded company, for the launch, though Isaacman has said it was far less than the $200 million he hoped to raise for St. Jude.

For NASA astronauts, McAlister says, orbital trips can have a $58 million price tag, based on averages calculated from commercial contracts with SpaceX and Boeing. 

While $58 million may seem like a lot, it's actually a great bargain for NASA.

After retiring its space shuttle, NASA had to pay Russia around $80 million for each seat on the Russian Soyuz spacecraft.

The privatization of space by American companies

This initiative to partner public and private resources for American space exploration has been years in the making.

NASA has been working with SpaceX and Boeing on their systems for the last 10 years, transferring their knowledge from more than 60 years of human spaceflight and innovation in low Earth orbit.

"During that 60 years, only about 600 people have flown the space, and the vast majority of them have been government astronauts. I think in the next 60 years, that number is going to go up dramatically, and the vast majority of them are going to be private citizens," McAlister says. 

►Inspiration4 mission makes history:  Cancer survivor Hayley Arceneaux to become youngest American in space with SpaceX launch

The goal for NASA is to eventually retire the International Space Station and allow companies to build their own space stations with the latest technological designs that require less maintenance.

In the future, astronauts could just rent seats on space shuttles and stay at rooms in space stations, similar to how business travelers buy plane tickets from airlines and sleep in hotels.

"If you remember back when airline travel first debuted, it was very expensive, and it was only for the very wealthy that can afford it. And then entrepreneurs entered the market. Forces of competition brought prices down to the point where today, most people, not everybody, but most people can afford a flight from New York to California," says McAlister. "I'm hoping that the same thing happens with human space transportation."

What would a trip to space look like?

Getting onto a spaceship definitely wouldn't be as simple as a check-in process at the airport. The participants on Inspiration4 had to train for months, understand spacecraft systems and prepare for the physical toll of space.

Here's who joined billionaire Jared Isaacman on the mission:

►Hayley Arceneaux, a physician assistant at St. Jude. She was treated for bone cancer herself at the hospital as a child.

►Chris Sembroski, an aerospace worker from Seattle who was selected from among 72,000 entries based donations to St. Jude.

►Sian Proctor, an educator and trained pilot who was a finalist in NASA's 2009 astronaut class.

SpaceX and Isaacman unveiled their project to the world in a TV ad that ran during the Super Bowl in February encouraging people to apply for the mission.

The crew ran a series of experiments  related to health research, such as drawing blood and measuring sleep activity.

Research institutes and medical schools will use the data to understand how the human body is affected by space, and how to make space a potential travel, or living, destination.

In a SpaceX press briefing , SpaceX Director Benji Reed said, "We want to make life multiplanetary, and that means putting millions of people in space."

McAlister also imagined that a big chunk of the crew's time was spent just looking out the window, staring in awe at the curvature of the Earth and the thin blue line of atmosphere encircling it.

"You can see the Earth, the whole Earth from space, and there's no boundaries. There's no borders, and you feel a connectedness to the human race that you didn't necessarily feel before," says McAlister. "You come back with a better appreciation for our home planet."

Florida Day contributed. Michelle Shen is a Money & Tech Digital Reporter for USATODAY. You can reach her @michelle_shen10 on Twitter. 

Why Is Commercial Space Travel So Expensive?

If you want to fly to space, there are a couple of ways to go if your pockets are well lined. The historical way up — used by the first space tourists — is through Russia's space agency Roscomos, riding a Soyuz rocket for about $20 million per ticket. This was how the U.S. millionaire Dennis Tito became the first tourist in space; he traveled to the International Space Station in 2001, as reported by CNN . Several followed his lead, including the South African millionaire Mark Shuttleworth in 2002, known for his work with the Linux-based Ubuntu OS (via  Tribune ), and Anousheh Ansari in 2006, the first woman to fly as a space tourist (via Space Legal Issues).

With the rise of private participation in the sector, space tourism kicked off in a major way in 2021. Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, and SpaceX led the charge with cheaper — but still very expensive — rides. These rates are still so high that only Virgin Galactic has been open about its price for a seat to space, leaving private travel only for the world's wealthiest people...for now, at least. Globe Trender reported in August 2021 that Virgin Galactic increased its prices from $250,000 to $450,000.

Blue Origin and SpaceX seat prices are more mysterious, but unlike Virgin Galactic, which takes tourists to space on a rocket plane, the companies ride them out on top of rockets. Inverse reports that a SpaceX Dragon Crew ride costs as much as $55 million.

What drives space flights costs up?

BBC Science Focus gives a short and straightforward answer on why space tourism is so expensive, stating that chemical-based propulsion is the biggest factor behind these rates. The Tsiolkovsky rocket equation states that the amount of rocket fuel needed to put something in orbit is 10 to 25 times its mass. The equation is so brutal that NASA calls it the "Tyranny of the Rocket Equation." The more weight and mass added to a spacecraft, the more fuel it needs, and therefore the heavier it gets; this creates an incremental cycle driving costs up.

Scientific American explains that rocket fuels can be solid, liquid, or gas. SpaceX reveals that it uses liquid oxygen and rocket-grade kerosene RP-1 propellant to power the Merlin engines that boost a Falcon 9 into space. But even these fuel costs don't amount to a significant fraction of what it costs to build a rocket. Reusable rockets do bring down costs, but they are not 100% reusable. Additionally, carrying a crew requires capsules that are also expensive to build. Launching, training, workforces, and the operations of a mission are also costs that ultimately affect the price of a ticket to space.

There are other issues that affect costs in the space industry. On March 23, 2022, CNBC reported that SpaceX had raised the price of all its launches due to all-time high fuel prices and inflation. The cost for a Falcon 9 launch was set at $67 million, and the Falcon Heavy mission was at $97 million. Small satellites launched under the rideshare program also saw increases, with prices rising to $1.1 million for payloads of 200 kilograms and additional costs of $5,500 per kilo. In conclusion, the rocket equation, cost of fuels, cost of construction and operations, and issues like inflation are why space tourism tickets are so expensive.

• Subscribe to BBC Science Focus Magazine
• Previous Issues
• Future tech
• Everyday science
• Planet Earth
• Newsletters

What makes space tourism so expensive?

Commercial space travel is already available, if you have the money! But why is it so expensive?

Asked by: Anonymous

So long as we rely on chemical propulsion to lift us into orbit, space travel will never be cheap. The Tsiolkovsky equation shows that a rocket needs between 10 and 25 times as much propellant as the mass that it’s lifting into orbit. To partly get around this, all rocket designs use multiple stages that are discarded during flight to reduce the dead weight as you ascend. But replacing – or recovering and then reusing – these stages isn’t cheap either. We’re also only just beginning the first generation of commercial passenger spaceflight, so there are all the R&D costs to pay off, still.

Subscribe to BBC Focus magazine for fascinating new Q&As every month and follow @sciencefocusQA on Twitter for your daily dose of fun science facts.

Share this article

• Terms & Conditions
• Privacy policy
• Cookies policy
• Code of conduct
• Magazine subscriptions
• Manage preferences

Why We Should Be Spending More on Space Travel

L et’s stipulate one thing: there’s absolutely no reason for us to go to space. It does nothing to feed us, to clothe us, to protect us, to heal us. It’s dangerous and hideously expensive too, a budget-busting luxury that policy makers and administrators have spent decades trying to defend—always unsuccessfully because the fact is, there’s no practical defense for it. So stand down the rockets, take down the space centers, pocket the money and let’s move on. Still want the adventure of going to space? That’s what they make movies for.

Now that we’ve established that, let’s stipulate the opposite: Space is precisely where the human species ought to be going. We accept that we’re a warring species. We accept that we’re a loving species. We accept that we’re an artistic and inventive and idiosyncratic species. Then we surely must accept that we’re a questing species. Questing species don’t much care for being stuck on one side of an ocean and so they climb aboard boats—indeed they invent boats—to cross it. They don’t much care for having their path blocked by a mountain and so they climb it for no reason other than finding out what’s on the other side. Accept that, and you can’t not accept that we have to embrace space.

April 12 marks the 60th anniversary of the day Yuri Gagarin became the first human being in space , taking off in his Vostok 1 spacecraft, spending 88 minutes making a single orbit of the Earth, and returning home to a species that seemed forever been changed by his efforts. The date will mark, too, the 60th anniversary of the by-now familiar argument that journeys like Gagarin’s and all of the ones that followed achieve nothing that can be touched and pointed to as a practical dividend of the effort made and the resources expended.

I found myself turning the old debate this way and that over the last week, when I was reading a column in the Guardian with the provocative headline, “Revive the U.S. space program? How about not,” by essayist Nicholas Russell. It opens with a mention of Gil Scott-Heron’s 1970 spoken word poem, “Whitey on the Moon,” which compellingly lamented the hard social truth that the U.S. was spending $24 billion in 1960s money on the Apollo program at the same time 10% of Americans were living in poverty, with Blacks suffering at three times the rate of whites.

“Was all that money I made last year (for Whitey on the moon?)” Scott-Heron wrote. “How come there ain’t no money here? (Hm! Whitey’s on the moon.)”

Russell goes on to cite the estimated cost of the new Artemis lunar program , which some analysts have placed at $30 billion; the role—a troubling one as he sees it—of the military in so many space projects, and the ongoing scourge of racism and inequality on Earth that persists while we still keep looking spaceward. Then he mentions, by way of caution, a University of Arizona proposal to send seed, spore, sperm and egg samples of 6.7 million terrestrial species to the moon as a sort of space ark in case life on Earth should come to an end. “When the vastness of space is cited as a means of escape from disaster, it’s exceedingly difficult not to believe nihilism acts as the prime motivator,” Russell argues. “Rather than sparking inspiration, it speaks of blatant fatalism about what is worth saving, a preference for the lofty and unpopulated … with delusions of innovation and heroism.”

Russell is right about some things—especially about the continuing blight of racism. But expenditures on space and expenditures on social programs have never been a zero-sum proposition, any more than any dollar the U.S. government spends on anything at all—the military, farm subsidies, tax cuts for corporations—is by definition a dollar not spent on something else. And the Artemis price tag is indeed high—but only if you look at it as a standalone figure. In the context of the federal budget? NASA funding currently accounts for just 0.4% of the total the government spends each year—down from 4% in the golden era of Apollo. The military’s role in the space program is inevitable, even if Russell sees it as regrettable. Rockets are rockets, after all, and physics is physics, and if the first machines that blasted humans off the Earth were originally designed as ballistic missiles, well, that was what the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. had on the shelf. What’s more, every Soviet R-7 rocket or American Atlas that was used to send an astronaut or cosmonaut to orbit was one fewer that could be used in a theater of war.

And as for that space ark? Well yes, it does suggest a certain fatalism. But the fact is, we are eminently capable of screwing the global pooch, to paraphrase the old Mercury astronauts. Unless you’re confident that no autocrat or hermit king with nuclear weapons and a button in reach won’t do something impulsive, storing the Earth’s genetic essence for safekeeping does not seem like a completely insane idea.

That doesn’t mean space exploration is inherently nihilistic, however. Look at the old footage of the global reaction to the Apollo 11 moon landing . Watch the worldwide relief when the Apollo 13 crew —three people the vast majority of the planet had never met—made it home safely. Consider the reaction today when a rover lands on Mars or a spacecraft whizzes past Pluto or a pair of women aboard the space station perform the first all-female spacewalk.

Yes, we can live without traveling to space. Indeed, we did perfectly well over all of the millennia that preceded April 12, 1961. We can meet most of our needs when we stay on Earth—we can raise our families and earn our salaries and feed our bellies. But we feed something less literal, more lyrical when we extend ourselves as far as we can. Once that meant crossing an ocean. Now it means more. Space is out there—and we should be too.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• Melinda French Gates Is Going It Alone
• How to Buy Groceries Without Breaking the Bank
• Lai Ching-te Is Standing His Ground
• How to Cool Your Body Down Fast
• Forget Having It All . Let’s Try Having Enough
• 4 Signs Your Body Needs a Break
• The 15 Best Movies to Watch on a Plane
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Write to Jeffrey Kluger at [email protected]

How Much Does it Cost to Travel to Space?

Fast facts: 

• As of right now (2021), the cost of booking a trip to space in the near future is approximately $250,000 .
• The immediate cost of a trip to space (via something like SpaceX) in the next 2-3 years is in the tens of millions per passenger .
• In the medium-future, the cost of individual tickets into space will drastically fall in price.
• Based on estimations, it is likely that the cost of space tourism tickets will be around $10,000 – $25,000 within the next twenty years .

How much will it cost for a private citizen to travel to space?

Since the Champion Traveler research team is heavily focused on private travel (as opposed to how much it costs astronauts to fly to space), all data used in this article will be based on the idea of privatized space tourism. This industry is expected to hit a major milestone in the 2020s, and it is likely that space tourism will become not only more common but more affordable within the next twenty to fifty years.

As of right now, based on early estimations from several major private space exploration companies (SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Virgin Galactic), the first privatized space travel will cost adventurous travelers somewhere around $250,000 for a short trip into Earth’s orbit. This quarter of a million dollar price tag for private space tourism will likely include somewhere between a few hours and a few days orbiting the Earth.

This type of space travel will remain expensive for several years, but as all things improve and become more efficient within the process, the cost will very likely start to decrease within a matter of years. There is likely a heavier price tag on the first couple of trips simply because of the historic nature of them. As market demand balances out and more space tourism is available, it seems likely the cost of a ticket for a short adventure into space will be somewhere around $10,000 to $25,000 depending on the length of the trip and the number of passengers included on each flight.

When will space travel become more affordable?

As of right now (2021), space travel is more likely a pipe dream for many than a realistic vacation. A quarter of a million dollars for one trip into outer space is likely not something many people will be able to afford in the short term. But as costs drop and space tourism becomes more efficient (and likely sees more competition), ticket prices for space travel will fall back down to Earth.

As for how long this will take, within 20 years (by about the year 2040), space travel should see a gradual decrease in price to somewhere in the $10,000 – $25,000 range (in 2021 dollars) where it will likely flat line for a while based on current cost estimations of scale, fuel costs, production costs, and regulation.

It is possible that we will see privatized space tourism drop down to somewhere in the $5,000 – $10,000 range as well if more competition enters the market if demand stays high.

Will space travel ever be cheaper than air travel?

The problem with comparing space travel to the current price of air travel is that the current market for air travel remains in high demand for both tourism and business purposes.

In the medium term, the only purpose that space travel as tourism will serve is for quick trips into space and back. There won’t be necessarily, at least in the foreseeable future, a spike in travel demand for business purposes and thus the overall market demand for space tourism will remain relatively small.

Because of this, it is very unlikely that we will ever see space tourism anywhere near comparable flights for something like a transatlantic flight to Europe from the United states for $500-700.

When will space travel be available to more people?

Based on current development of spaceships capable of carrying a larger number of private citizens, we expect that by the 2030s it will be possible to book a ticket via one of the current major space exploration brands (SpaceX, Blue Origin), and that we also will likely see between two and five new companies enter the market in that time.

With a growing number of companies producing spacecraft capable of allowing for space tourism, there will likely be hundreds of available seats in a given year within the next decade, and thousands of available seats a year after that.

Is space tourism safe?

This is something nobody has enough of a firm grasp on to say definitively one way or the other just yet, but it seems fair to assume given how long it has taken to commercialized space travel, that the early flights will take every precaution possible.

It’s fully reasonable to expect that over the course of space tourism expansion there will be accidents and likely death, but at the same time, the same can still be said about traditional air travel. While statistically considered extremely safe, there will always be a minimal amount of risk associated with any type of travel.

What companies offer private space travel?

There are many now-defunct companies who have tried to establish footing in space tourism, but as of now there seem to be three main companies we will be watching closely when it comes to offering one of the grandest possible adventures for private citizens:

• SpaceX – Led by Elon Musk, this company seems the most likely to begin ramping up space tourism within the next two decades. They have a planned launch for their first space tourists in the coming two years.
• Virgin Galactic – Led by Richard Branson, this company has been around the longest (of the surviving companies), but has yet to launch their first commercial space tourists into space.
• Blue Origin – Led by Jeff Bezos, Blue Origin has focused mostly on commercial space travel, but has also discussed expanding their efforts into personal space travel in the near future.

Location Search

About our travel data.

We compile multiple data sources from top tier travel companies around the world to create our guides and advisories. Our goal is to provide critical, timely and accurate information for all of your travel needs.

Advertisement

Is Space Tourism Worth It?

• Share Content on Facebook
• Share Content on LinkedIn
• Share Content on Flipboard
• Share Content on Reddit
• Share Content via Email

Key Takeaways

• Space tourism currently caters primarily to the ultra-wealthy, with Virgin Galactic's early ticket sales priced between $200,000-$450,000, and Blue Origin selling a seat for $28 million in a charity auction.
• Critics argue that the funds for space tourism could be better utilized for addressing Earth's problems, while others counter that space exploration has historically led to beneficial technologies like memory foam and insulin pumps.
• People have raised environmental concerns regarding the carbon footprint of space flights, with some spacecraft engines contributing to black carbon pollution, though companies like Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic are exploring sustainable fuel options.

This month, space launches have grabbed the headlines with a fervor reminiscent of NASA in its glory days of Apollo 11 and the moon landing. But unlike 50-plus years ago when those historic events took place, today's stories focus on an entirely different group of people reaching to the edge of space (and beyond): billionaire investors who have funded their own space companies.

Each with its own objective, Elon Musk 's SpaceX (Space Exploration Technologies), Jeff Bezos' Blue Origin and Richard Branson's Virgin Galactic are pushing progress in space technology and especially space tourism – the idea that ordinary citizens can visit space as a tourist destination – at a pace not seen before.

But is space tourism a good thing that benefits humankind? Or does the current billionaire "space race" signal the end of times as massive wealth is spent with no benefit to any but those with enough commas in their net worth?

The History of Space Tourism

Criticisms of space tourism, benefits of space tourism.

Space tourism is actually not a new or even a 21st-century concept . NASA envisioned the possibility of space tourism back in the 1970s. Early designs for the space shuttle ( dating to 1979 ) included a configuration that would allow up to 74 passengers space in the cargo bay for larger crews and even tourism flights.

Some of the earliest nongovernmental astronauts were actually corporate-sponsored – talk about a work benefit! These included Germany's Dr. Ulf Merbold, MIT engineer Byron Lichtenberg, both of whom served as mission specialists on STS-9 in 1983, and McDonnell Douglas employee Charles Walker, who flew on STS-41-D in 1984 . This helped inspire confidence in NASA's Space Flight Participant program , of whom Christa McAuliffe was set to become the first astronaut and first teacher in space. Unfortunately, the program – and the entire shuttle program – was set back with the 1986 Challenger disaster.

Space tourism may have been postponed, but it wasn't abandoned. At the turn of the century, self-made millionaires including Bezos and Branson both set their sights on building their own space companies to offer tourism opportunities as NASA focused on governmental and research objectives. Two decades later, the technology has finally developed such that both companies – Bezos' Blue Origin and Branson's Virgin Galactic – have launched their founders into suborbital space in quick succession.

Space tourism was initially a hopeful concept, one focused on increasing access for ordinary citizens to visit space. However, the modern space tourism industry looks different as early ticket sales by Virgin Galactic ranged from $200,000-$250,000 ; Blue Origin has not announced ticket prices, but it recently sold one seat for $28 million as part of a charity auction. This obviously prices access to space well outside the range of all but the ultra-wealthy; it's one of the primary criticisms of space tourism today.

Part of the reason spaceflight is so expensive is that just a few people are carried at a time. "If you want to get to get the price from $250,000 down to four digits, like an airline, you have to spread it over far more bodies," Ron Epstein, an aerospace analyst with Bank of America told CNN . But it might be decades before companies get to that point. The costs for fuel and energy currently don't make it feasible to offer space travel to large numbers of people.

Another complaint is that the funds spent on spaceflight might be better spent elsewhere such as solving problems here on Earth. Alan Ladwig, author of " See You in Orbit? Our Dream of Spaceflight ", says this commentary is not without basis – or historical precedent as people said the same thing about NASA. "There has been criticism that money spent in space would be better applied to other societal needs. This has been a matter of debate for a range of space activities for the past 60 years and is not likely to change regardless of what happens with space tourism," he says. And several items we take for granted like memory foam, insulin pumps and scratch-resistant eyeglass lenses, came from NASA inventions .

Finally, space tourism (and launch technology in general) is criticized for its environmental impact . "The most often talked about 'harm' involves pollution caused by black carbon from some spacecraft engines," Ladwig explains. "Virgin Galactic has downplayed this problem [saying its impact on climate change is minor and that it] also plans to invest in sustainable fuels for the future. Blue Origin's engines rely on liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen that combusts as water vapor. However, critics note that it still takes electricity to manufacture the fuels."

Right now, the number of flights to space are few, so carbon dioxide emissions are negligible, compared with airplane flights. But what happens when that number increases? Virgin hopes to have 400 flights a year by the end of the decade, the Wall Street Journal reported . And unlike the other two companies, SpaceX will achieve orbit when it takes four private citizens into space in September using its F9 rocket, which "calculations show puts out the equivalent of 395 transatlantic flights-worth of carbon emissions," reported Phys.org .

Boosters of space tourism say we don't know yet what positives may come out of going to space for recreation.

"Those who go will have a transformational experience that will lead to new ways of thinking of our home planet, how they interact with others, and develop a commitment to improving life on Earth," says Ladwig. "It remains to be seen what innovations, creations, and advances in knowledge might result from new categories of space travelers, but expectations are high."

Additionally, space tourism will be good business – both in space and on Earth: "A number of economic analysts have predicted that global space tourism could grow to $1.7 billion by 2027 . That would generate a significant number of new jobs and capabilities in the emerging space tourism economy," says Ladwig.

It's important to note that these launches are not one-off stunts. Some 600 people have been confirmed for Virgin Galactic flights in the future; the company hasn't even sold tickets since late 2018 and has registered over 8,000 interested potential buyers since then.

There's a long road ahead from early flights like recent ones to a sustainable, widespread space tourism industry that more people can afford. "Historically, wealthy individuals have always been the early adopters of new endeavors, adventures and transportation capabilities," says Ladwig. "The 'benefit' of their participation is to demonstrate that the experience has value, is something people are willing to support, and brings significant public attention to a new industry."

Only with that attention and funding can these companies – or their successors – hope to offer widespread and mass market-friendly flights to space, but it's an exciting prospect even if in the distant future.

While many consider it otherwise, Elon Musk's SpaceX is not actually a space tourism company. While they have offered private flights and have permission to fly commercial passengers to the International Space Station , the company objectives are focused on Mars colonization and making humans a multiplanetary species. If wealthy customers are willing to pay to help advance that mission, Musk is generally willing to accept the funds.

Frequently Asked Questions

How might space tourism impact scientific research, is there potential for the cost of space tourism to decrease.

Please copy/paste the following text to properly cite this HowStuffWorks.com article:

• Become A Member
• Gift Membership
• Kids Membership
• Other Ways to Give
• Explore Worlds
• Defend Earth

How We Work

• Education & Public Outreach
• Space Policy & Advocacy
• Science & Technology
• Global Collaboration

Our Results

Learn how our members and community are changing the worlds.

Our citizen-funded spacecraft successfully demonstrated solar sailing for CubeSats.

Space Topics

• Planets & Other Worlds
• Space Missions
• Space Policy
• Planetary Radio
• Space Images

The Planetary Report

The exoplanet issue.

The expanding frontier of discovery.

Get Involved

Membership programs for explorers of all ages.

Get updates and weekly tools to learn, share, and advocate for space exploration.

Volunteer as a space advocate.

Support Our Mission

• Renew Membership
• Society Projects

The Planetary Fund

Accelerate progress in our three core enterprises — Explore Worlds, Find Life, and Defend Earth. You can support the entire fund, or designate a core enterprise of your choice.

• Strategic Framework
• News & Press

The Planetary Society

Know the cosmos and our place within it.

Our Mission

Empowering the world's citizens to advance space science and exploration.

• Explore Space
• Take Action
• Member Community
• Account Center
• “Exploration is in our nature.” - Carl Sagan

Planetary Video

Is space exploration worth the money?

This content is hosted by a third party (youtube.com), which uses marketing cookies. Please accept marketing cookies to watch this video.

This video is for anyone who has ever asked: "Should we really be spending money on space when there are problems to deal with down here on Earth?” Let's dig in to several reasons why space exploration is worth our money.

Why space exploration is always worthwhile

A toolkit to help you advocate for the value of exploring space even when there are important problems to be solved here on Earth.

Maybe you've heard something like this before: “Should we really be wasting money on space when there are problems to deal with down here on Earth?” It's a good question. So is space exploration really worth it?

With issues like global public health concerns, social injustices, climate change and other urgent topics it may seem like exploring space is a misuse of our funding. While it is important to address these issues, solving these problems doesn't depend on defunding space programs. Here's why.

First, space research isn't as expensive as you might think. Many people think NASA takes up a quarter of the U.S. federal budget, but in fact, NASA's entire budget is about 0.5% of the total budget. In other countries, space budgets are even smaller.

And spending on space pays off. The money that governments spend on space programs positively impacts their economies. It supports highly skilled jobs, fuels technology, advancements and creates business opportunities that feed back into the economy. This, in turn, grows the pool of public money that can be spent on solving the world's most pressing problems.

Which brings us to the next point. Space research directly impacts earthly problems. As we humans apply ourselves to the challenges of exploring space we make discoveries that can help the whole world. Figuring out how we might grow food on Mars can help us grow food in extreme conditions here on Earth, which could help mitigate the impacts of climate change. Medical research on the International Space Station helps us understand the human body in new ways, helping save lives and improve the quality of life for all of us.

And, of course, all the social and environmental progress in the world won't help us if an asteroid impacts the Earth. We have to explore space to find and study asteroids and comets to make sure we can defend our planet if an object ever heads our way.

And then there are benefits that are difficult to put a price tag on. Comprehending the cosmos gives us all a powerful shift in our perspective. Studying other worlds makes it clear that Earth is a precious oasis for life. This cosmic perspective underscores the importance of protecting our planet's habitability and encourages investment in that effort.

On top of all of that, space is inspiring. We may not all get to be astronauts, but to be inspired, to aim for something so grand gives us all drive. Children are motivated to learn science, engineering, medicine, or other fields that benefit humanity. When we marvel at the beauty of Jupiter's clouds or the mystery of the oceans, on Enceladus, we get an opportunity to appreciate the wonder and majesty of this cosmos that we inhabit. The idea that life might exist elsewhere in the universe reminds us that we might not be the only planet struggling to achieve balance, justice and sustainability.

There's no denying that there are many important issues facing humanity that need fixing. But to deal with those problems doesn't mean we have to stop looking up, stop exploring, and stop making discoveries. We can and must do more than one important thing at a time. Because even in the bleakest of times, there's something beautiful about still striving to achieve something great and discover something that could change how we see ourselves and our cosmos forever.

For full functionality of this site it is necessary to enable JavaScript. Here are instructions on how to enable JavaScript in your web browser .

You are using an outdated browser. Upgrade your browser today or install Google Chrome Frame to better experience this site.

Space exploration pros and cons: Are space programs a waste of money?

Source: Image : ESA/Rosetta/MPS for OSIRIS Team MPS/UPD/LAM/IAA/SSO/INTA/UPM/DASP/IDA  

Space exploration is a hugely expensive affair. Should we spend money on space exploration when we have so many problems on planet Earth? We debate the pros and cons of space exploration and the reasons for investing in space agencies and programs. 

Should we spend money on space exploration?

The launch of SpaceX's Falcon Heavy rocket into has brought back media attention to space exploration . Elton Musk's private aerospace company is in the process of becoming a major player and a partner for many space programs. However, most of the efforts to discover whats out still depend mostly on public funding. 

Space exploration is costly, and many argue that in times of belt-tightening, we should focus on solving problems here on Earth, especially since the knowledge gained from space exploration has few immediate benefits. On the other hand, pronponents of space exploration argue that the knowledge to be gained is invaluable, and that it is in the very nature of humankind to explore. In addition, proponents of these programs argue that they have had significant benefits and resulted in the discovery or popularisation of many useful new technologies . Furthermore, space exploration could be the only way to escape  human extinction in case living conditions become unsustainable on Earth.

Today there are six big government space agencies with the capacity to create, launch and recover satellites: the National Aeronautics and Space Administration ( NASA ), Russian Federal Space Agency ( Roscosmos or RFSA),the China National Space Administration ( CNSA ), the Indian Space Research Organisation ( ISRO ),  the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency ( JAXA ) and the European Space Agency ( ESA ) which integrates several European space agencies. Among them only NASA, ROSCOSMOS and CNSA have full capacity for human spaceflights and lunar soft-landing.  In addtition to these there are many other government space agencies with variable capabilities, most of them have only the capacity to operate satellites, a few of them also have launch capabilities and can operate extraterrestrial probes. Some of these space agencies are competing to be the first to send humans to Mars  and investigating if there is intelligent life on other planets .

These space programs and agencies are very costly. It is estimated that the total annual budget of space agencies is $41.8 billion. Among them the highest budgets correspond to:

• NASA (USA, $19.3 billion)
• Roscosmos (Russia, $5.6 billion) 
• ESA (Europe, $5.5 billion)
• CNES (France, $2.5 billion)
• JAXA (Japan, $2.5 billion)
• DLR (Germany, $2 billion)
• ASI (Italy, $1.8 billion)
• CNSA (China, $1.8 billion)
• ISRO (India, $1.2 billion)

Are all these costs justfified? Are there better ways to spend public funding? Should we mainly rely on private investors such as Elton Musk to promote space expliration? Will capitalistic incentives lead the way towards space exploration? In order to help make up your mind we outline next the most important benefits and problems of space exploration.

Space exploration pros and cons

• Knowledge generation.  Thanks to space exploration programs we are discovering many things that help us understand the universe. For instance, learning about planets, comets, stars, etc. can help us find solutions for some of the problems our civilization will face, such as overopulation  and the need to colonize other planets.
• Exploration and discovery are beneficial. Humans have always engaged in exploration to satisfy their sense of curiosity and look for opportunities. During the Age of Discoveries in the 15th and 16th centuries, countries such as Spain and Portugal heavily invested in expeditions, but thanks to them they became super-powers and gained many riches. Later, during the second age of explorations in the 18th and 19th century, the discoveries of pioneers such as Captain Cook or Livingstone heavily contributed to scientific discovery.
• Artificial satellites are crucial tools in modern society. For instance they are used for defence purposes and to fight against terrorism. Satellites help us also monitor the effects of global warming  and detect wildfires. Space agencies are necessary to operate satellites.
• Scientific advancement and by-products. Space exploration programs help introduce and test new technologies. Much of the research carried out to find solutions for space travel have applications elsewhere. For instance NASA research has contributed to develop velcro, fire-resistant materials, medical devices to relieve muscle and joint pain, new precise thermometers, artificial limbs, new air conditioning systems, land mine removal systems, improved radial tires, etc. 
• Space race may save humanity. Life on Earth may be threatened by climate change, pollution, depletion of resources, infectious diseases or nuclear war. Further, space exploration is necessary to find another planet on which humans could pursue their lives. Space programs help also find solutions to adapt human lives to the space or other planets.
• Space industry jobs. The space industry employs directly about 120,000 people in the OECD countries and 250,000 in Russia.
• Few direct benefits to space exploration . True, space technology has helped us launch satellites and introduce many useful products, but do we need to keep pushing forward? The direct intellectual gains from learning about far away planets or satellites such as the moon can hardly compensate the costs. Historical exploration on Earth allowed collect and trade resources. Bringing resources to Earth is not possible with the current technology.
• Space travel is hazardous.  Many lives have been lost in space expeditions. Space missions are very dangerous and can often cost lives and stress to the families of the astronauts or cosmonauts. Should highly qualified professionals and scientists risk their lives traveling outside Earth? 
• Failure is common. Many of the space exploration fail. Probes and satellites crash, exploration robots are lost, rockets blow up in the air, etc. It is frustrating to see how so much money and time are wasted in unsuccessful missions.
• Danger of establishing contact with alien life. One of the main goals of space exploration is to find out if there is life outside Earth. However, establishing contact with other civilizations can be extremely dangerous and could jeopardize human life. If we flag our existence to technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilizations, we may be somehow exposing ourselves to their attacks and invasion. The wanna-be colonizers could be colonized. Primitive life-forms such as virus and bacteria could also provoke epidemic diseases.
• New source of international tensions. The space race is not over. There is a growing international competition to be the first in fulfilling some challenges in space exploration. Sovereignty over other planets and satellites, and over their resources, will become a controversial issue. With the advancement of technology domination of the outer space may tip the balance of power on a bipolar or multipolar Earth.
• Priorities and opportunity costs.  Even if there are benefits to space exploration, spending so much money and effort in reaching other planets is highly questionable. That money and brain power could be used to solve other more important problems for us. For instance governments could invest much more to prevent global warming, reduce crime rates and find a cure for cancer or Alzheimer's Disease.

Vote to see result and collect 1 XP. Your vote is anonymous. If you change your mind, you can change your vote simply by clicking on another option.

Voting results

New to netivist?

Join with confidence, netivist is completely advertisement free. You will not receive any promotional materials from third parties.

Or sign in with your favourite Social Network:

Join the debate

In order to join the debate you must be logged in.

Already have an account on netivist? Just login . New to netivist? Create your account for free .

 Report Abuse and Offensive language

Was there any kind of offensive or inappropriate language used in this comment.

If you feel this user's conduct is unappropriate, please report this comment and our moderaters will review its content and deal with this matter as soon as possible.

NOTE: Your account might be penalized should we not find any wrongdoing by this user. Only use this feature if you are certain this user has infringed netivist's Terms of Service .

Our moderators will now review this comment and act accordingly. If it contains abusive or inappropriate language its author will be penalized.

Posting Comment

Your comment is being posted. This might take a few seconds, please wait.

Error Posting Comment

  error.

We are having trouble saving your comment. Please try again .

Most Voted Debates

Start a Debate

Would you like to create a debate and share it with the netivist community? We will help you do it!

Found a technical issue?

Are you experiencing any technical problem with netivist? Please let us know!

Help netivist

Help netivist continue running free!

Please consider making a small donation today. This will allow us to keep netivist alive and available to a wide audience and to keep on introducing new debates and features to improve your experience.

• What is netivist?
• Entertainment
• Top Debates
• Top Campaigns
• Provide Feedback

Follow us on social media:

 Share by Email

There was an error...

Email successfully sent to:

Join with confidence, netivist is completely advertisement free You will not recive any promotional materials from third parties

 Join netivist

Already have a netivist account?

If you already created your netivist account, please log in using the button below.

If you are new to netivist, please create your account for free and start collecting your netivist points!

You just leveled up!

Congrats you just reached a new level on Netivist. Keep up the good work.

Together we can make a difference

Follow us and don't miss out on the latest debates!

Is Space Exploration Worth The Cost?

Space exploration is often considered worth the cost due to its numerous tangible and intangible benefits , inclusive of scientific discoveries, technological advancements, and economic impacts . It also plays a critical role in human progress by extending our boundaries and inspiring global cooperation.

Things to Know: Space Exploration Worth the Cost

• Innovations in Technology: Space exploration has led to advancements in various technologies that have practical applications on Earth.
• Scientific Discoveries: Research in space offers unique opportunities to learn about our universe, contributing to our fundamental knowledge and science.
• Economic Benefits: The space industry creates jobs, stimulates economies, and can lead to profitable commercial ventures.
• Human Progress: By pushing the frontiers of space, we challenge ourselves to grow and adapt, fostering unity and the shared goal of exploration.
• Global Collaboration: Space missions frequently involve international partnerships, encouraging peace and collaboration between nations.
• Long-term Survival: Exploring space can lead to the discovery of resources and potential new habitats, which could become crucial for humanity’s long-term survival.
• Inspiration and Education: Astronauts and space missions inspire generations and are vital for STEM education, sparking interest in scientific fields.

The Tangible and Intangible Benefits of Space Exploration

Investments in space research have led to significant advancements in technology that benefit our everyday lives. From medical research breakthroughs to enhanced disaster response methods, the impact of space exploration on Earth is both widespread and profound.

Some improvements in daily life courtesy of space exploration include the development of medical devices, materials, and procedures initially designed for astronauts but now used in hospitals worldwide. Innovations such as robotic surgery, portable X-rays, and health-monitoring systems trace their origins back to the demands of space travel. Furthermore, satellite technology has revolutionized communication, weather forecasting, and global positioning systems, all of which play vital roles in emergency management . When disasters strike, timely satellite data can be instrumental in coordinating rapid and effective responses, potentially saving lives and reducing damage.

These tangible improvements underscore the wide-reaching influence of space technology on various industries and public services. Moreover, on a less tangible level, the awe and wonder sparked by space exploration can drive societal interest in science and technology, fostering a culture of innovation.

Economic Impact and the Argument for Space Exploration

The economic benefits of space exploration are substantial, often countering the argument that space exploration is prohibitively expensive. The industry not only creates high-tech job opportunities but also drives economic growth through the development of new markets and industries.

The commercial space industry is a burgeoning sector that showcases the lucrative potential of space ventures. Companies focusing on satellite communications, space tourism, and the prospect of mining celestial bodies are opening new economic frontiers. This commercial involvement not only creates jobs within the space sector but also fuels a chain reaction of economic activity as suppliers, manufacturers, and various service industries expand to meet the needs of space-related projects.

Moreover, government investments in space exploration often result in economic returns that amplify their initial expenditures. The technologies developed often find applications in other sectors, leading to innovation, new businesses, and global competitiveness. These dynamic elements collectively contribute to robust economic growth, reinforcing the position that space exploration can be a wise investment for the future of the economy.

The Bigger Picture: Space Exploration’s Role in Human Progress

Humans have an innate urge to explore and comprehend their surroundings, and space exploration is an extension of this deep-seated drive. It is part of human nature to explore , and by reaching out into space, we seek to understand our place in the universe , satisfy our curiosity, and expand our knowledge.

The importance of space exploration extends beyond mere curiosity, as it is also tied to the long-term potential for future survival of humanity. As Earth faces challenges such as natural resource depletion, overpopulation, and environmental changes, the exploration and potential colonization of other worlds could become essential for ensuring the continuation of our species. Establishing human presence on other planets would serve as a hedge against catastrophic events that could threaten life on our home planet.

Space exploration has become a symbol of progress, showcasing human ingenuity and resilience. It compels us to develop new technologies, to collaborate across nations, and possibly to spread life beyond Earth. This grand endeavor provides context for our existence and allows us to imagine a future where humanity has a foothold in the cosmos, marking a significant chapter in our collective journey.

Related Posts:

• How Much Does It Cost To Go To Space?
• Reasons Why Space Exploration Is Important
• What technology and equipment is used in space exploration?
• How Often Do Astronauts Go To Space?
• What's The Purpose Of The International Space Station?
• How Far Can We Travel In Space With Current Technology?

Where Entrepreneurs Find Inspiration

Ideas and Research from Stanford University

Why is Space Travel So Expensive?

According to Musk, some causes of the high costs in space exploration are: The energy to launch a rocket into space is very high, all the calculations have to be right and this is very expensive given the low launch rate. His final analysis is that rockets should be a lot cheaper and presently there are a lot of inefficiencies.

Dare to Stretch Your Boundaries [Entire Talk]

Video clips.

Know Your 'Big Rocks'

Pace your hustle, what gives entrepreneurs an edge , accept and embrace change, widening access with technology.

A Burnout Manifesto [Entire Talk]

The Unsung Heros Behind Your Success Story

Prep yourself for the last mile, what's your why, charting to find a role that fits, outsmarting imposter syndrome [explicit].

Debugging the Brogrammer Culture [Entire Talk]

Hope in Artificial Intelligence

Mitigate biases with rubrics, who's not in the room, set goals and track progress, think deeply about diversity, embrace diversity early, quantifying women in tech.

Why space tourism is going to be utterly disappointing

by Joseph Stromberg

If you buy something from a Vox link, Vox Media may earn a commission. See our ethics statement.

People have been dreaming about space tourism for nearly a century. Think of the orbiting space hotels in 2001: A Space Odyssey , or the Martian visits in Total Recall . Years before anyone had ever even been to space, people were thinking of vacationing there.

Now billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson have poured tons of money into building vehicles for space tourism — and it seems possible that sometime in the next few years, one of their companies will become the first to carry paying passengers into space.

Suborbital flights will cross the 100-km Karman line that marks the bottom of space — but won't go much higher. ( SpaceFuture.com )

But there's a catch. Their plans merely involve flights into suborbital space: high enough up to technically cross the 100-kilometer line considered the lower boundary of space and give fliers a few minutes of weightlessness, but not high enough to actually enter Earth's orbit like a satellite or the International Space Station.

The sad reality is that Virgin flights, currently priced at $250,000 for an estimated six minutes of weightlessness, might not provide an experience tremendously different from what's currently available to anyone willing to spend $5,000 : a brief zero gravity flight on a plane often called the "vomit comet."

Now, all these companies — along with Elon Musk's SpaceX — have vague plans to eventually bring tourists all the way into Earth's orbit, but experts say it's a long shot. "Fundamentally, it's all very hard to do," says John Logsdon , founder of the Space Policy Institute . "We've been launching people into space for 54 years now, and less than 600 people have made the trip. I think the idea that there's some magic bullet that could open up orbital space to large numbers of people is illusory."

The hard truth is that we're closer to the era of space tourism than ever before — but if you're waiting for vacations in space, you'll probably be disappointed.

The X Prize jump-started the space tourism industry

"The idea of space tourism has been bandied about, at least in science fiction, since the 1920s," Paul Milo, author of Your Flying Car Awaits — a book about 20th-century speculation on future technologies — told me for an article last year . "In the 1960s, there was this perception that by the 21st century, space tourism — whether a stint aboard an orbiting hotel or a trip to the moon — would be as common as a flight from New York to Tokyo."

The main reason that isn't the case is money. After the moon landing and the perception that the US had won the space race, Congress's funding for NASA dried up significantly in the 1970s. For decades, dreams of space tourism went nowhere, as space travel remained far too expensive and risky.

That began to change in the late 1990s, when a pair of entrepreneurs created the X Prize : a standing offer of $10 million to the first private organization that created a reusable spacecraft. In 2004, the prize was won by Burt Rutan, who twice flew his spaceplane, SpaceShipOne, to an altitude of more than 100 kilometers — and in doing so, scraped the bottom edge of space.

SpaceShipTwo would scrape the bottom edge of space, giving passengers six minutes of weightlessness. ( American Museum of Natural History )

Soon after, Richard Branson licensed the technology for use in developing a similar craft (SpaceShipTwo) that could carry paying passengers to the same altitude, allowing them to experience zero gravity and see the curvature of Earth from space. But though his new company Virgin Galactic has generated lots of hype — and got about 700 people to sign up for the waiting list for the $250,000 flights — it has had to repeatedly push back its timetables for commercial flights. Most recently, plans had called for them to begin in the spring of 2015, but a crash that destroyed the sole SpaceShipTwo in existence and killed one of the co-pilots has caused delays.

To date, just seven people have gone into space as tourists — and they were all carried there on existing flights operated by the Russian space agency, paying $20 million to $40 million each for weeklong stays on the International Space Station. Even these flights have been put on hold (mainly because NASA will pay more to reserve those spots for American astronauts ), but they're expected to start back up in late 2015.

We might finally be getting close to spaceflight for tourists

After many years of delays, there's some reason to think that at least suborbital tourist flights might be around the corner.

For one, the field has recently become crowded with a number of legitimate, well-funded companies. Apart from Virgin, Jeff Bezos's Blue Origin has quietly been working on its own suborbital rocket. After a few failed test flights, it finally conducted its first successful one earlier this year, sending it to an altitude of 93,000 meters — just below the lower edge of space.

Eventually, the company says, its New Shepard craft will be able to carry three people into suborbital space, for tourism and research purposes.

Meanwhile, the California-based company XCOR Aerospace began developing a series of spaceplanes for the same purpose in 2008. It still hasn't conducted any actual flights, but last month the company raised the price of future flights on its Lynx craft from $100,000 to $150,000, promising that test flights will soon follow.

Virgin has seemingly moved on from its crash and appears to be the farthest along in development. A federal investigation largely blamed Scaled Composites (the company contracted to design and test SpaceShipTwo) for the disaster, and Virgin reportedly plans to begin testing an improved replacement craft later this year.

But there are some good reasons for skepticism

Wreckage from the 2014 Virgin crash. (Sandy Huffaker/Getty Images)

On the other hand, it seems that we've been just a few years away from commercial flights for some time now.

In 2008, for instance, Virgin founder Richard Branson predicted commercial flights would begin sometime in 2009. In 2012, the company's CEO, George Whitesides, said they'd start in 2013. When XCOR debuted its spaceplane design in 2008, it was supposed to fly by 2010 ; in 2012, it was supposed to fly in 2013 .

You get the idea. "It's always the same number, but it never gets any closer," says space expert Howard McCurdy .

Still, he believes that suborbital flights will eventually happen, given the number of companies involved and the large pool of wealthy people willing to pay for the thrill. Virgin and others have some technical problems to solve (most importantly, the aerodynamic difficulties of decelerating a plane from 2,600 miles per hour to landing speed), but they're doable, given enough money.

The Virgin crash, however, was a painful reminder of the inherent risks of space travel: after decades of research, about 5 percent of rocket launches still end in failure. For a purely recreational flight, this number might be too high for many would-be space tourists to swallow.

At the same time, McCurdy points out that even though 1 percent of the people who attempt to climb Mount Everest die, about 1,000 still attempt it each year. "The extreme adventure market carries substantial risk, but that doesn't keep people off Everest," he says. If Virgin or another company can approach this 1 percent figure, many thrill seekers might be willing to fly.

Why the next step in space tourism might never happen

These companies' hope is that once they start flying people into suborbital space, they'll make enough money to fund the development of orbital spaceflight. That would eventually lead to true space tourism à la 2001: space hotels, weeklong zero-gravity vacations, the whole shebang.

But even though suborbital flight and this sort of spaceflight might seem similar, from an engineering perspective they're vastly different. Right now, Virgin and XCOR are trying to fly a plane to a relatively high altitude, then coast back down. But it's essentially impossible to reach orbit this way because you can't reach the high speeds necessary.

"For a suborbital flight, you only have to accelerate to Mach 3 or 4. For an orbital flight, it's Mach 25," says Logsdon. "The energy difference needed to reach that speed is exponential." To date, everyone who's ever gone to orbit has gotten there with a vertically launching rocket.

But rocketry is the rare technology that has seen barely any advancement in the last 50 years. The rockets being used to launch satellites and astronauts today aren't all that different from the one that put Sputnik in space in 1957. Both involve large tubes that burn fuel, expelling huge amounts of gas to push the payload into orbit, and then fall away, breaking into pieces and disintegrating.

The problem with this model is that it makes orbital spaceflight really expensive. Elon Musk has famously likened it to throwing away a brand new 747 after a single flight to London. Because of the one-use model, NASA has to pay Russia more than $80 million for each astronaut it carries up to the International Space Station, after retiring its own space shuttles in 2011. If a company wants to carry out flights primarily for tourists, it'd have to drive down this price significantly.

The most obvious way to do so would be to figure out how to make that rocket reusable, instead of throwing it away after each launch. This is why SpaceX keeps trying to land its rockets vertically : A new Falcon 9 rocket costs $54 million , but the fuel needed to relaunch only costs about $200,000.

SpaceX's April rocket landing attempt was the closest one yet.

SpaceX still hasn't managed to land a rocket, but it's made a bit of progress toward the goal — and though its main business is conducting launches for the government, it could eventually enter the space tourism field. However, even if it managed to reuse a rocket, there'd be another big hurdle before it could be viable for orbital space tourism: It will need really fast turnaround between flights.

At the moment, it'd take a huge number of engineers many months to fully refurbish a Falcon 9 rocket for the next flight. NASA's Space Shuttle — which included a reusable spaceplane launched atop a pair of reusable rocket boosters — was the closest anyone hascome, but it took 19,000 engineers several months to refurbish all the equipment for the next flight. All this labor meant it ended up costing even more than the traditional method of spaceflight: launching a capsule atop a disposable rocket.

Here's what you can actually expect on your spaceflight

Given these difficulties, what can we realistically expect for the future of space tourism? In all likelihood, Virgin, XCOR, Blue Origin, or another company will eventually achieve suborbital flights, offering wealthy flyers the chance to scrape the bottom edge of space for a few hundred thousand dollars.

For many people, that raises an obvious question: Is it worth it? It's hard to say, since no tourists have taken this sort of flight yet. But thousands have gone up on Zero-G "vomit comet" plane flights, initially developed by NASA in the 1950s as a means of training astronauts and now offered by a handful of companies.

The Zero G plane flies in a series of parabolas to induce a feeling of weightlessness. ( Zero Gravity Corporation )

During each flight, a plane goes in a series of parabolas, diving steeply downward to produce a feeling of weightlessness for several 30-second periods. It's certainly not spaceflight, but it's the closest analogue we have to the "several minutes of weightlessness" Virgin promises for the future — far closer than the weeklong stay at the International Space Station a handful of tourists have had from Russia.

When I spoke with several Zero-G passengers, I found that they generally found it to be a fascinating, unique experience — but perhaps not a life-changing one.

"You're lying down, and then all of a sudden, you begin to feel your limbs lift up on their own," says Maraia Hoffman , who worked as an in-flight coach for the company. "It was just a weird, amazing feeling," says Cynthia Emmons, who took a flight in 2007. "I couldn't help but keep laughing the whole time."

"I wouldn't call the weightlessness life-changing," says Miriam Kramer , a space reporter for Mashable who took the flight for a 2013 article . "It was fun, but it was so quick." Though Zero-G says its flights are short enough to prevent nausea, Kramer also notes that, at least among her passenger group, the plane still lived up to its vomit comet nickname.

Suborbital flight probably won't give you a new perspective of Earth

A prototype of the Virgin Galactic cabin. (Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)

Of course, there's one big difference between suborbital spaceflight and the vomit comet: The former will offer passengers the chance to look down from about 10 times higher and see the curvature of Earth. Space tourism companies hope that will induce the so-called overview effect . Many astronauts have reported that seeing Earth from above — isolated as a marble floating in space — gave them a profound sense of awe and a dramatically different perspective on life.

But even though suborbital flights might come closer to providing this experience than Zero-G, they won't allow for a full-on overview of Earth. "At 100 miles up, you are just skimming the surface and you don’t get a feeling for the Earth as a whole," astronaut Michael Collins said in 1986 . On Virgin's SpaceShipTwo, you'll be peering through 17-inch-wide portholes to see out. And these flights won't necessarily even reach 100 miles — the lower boundary of space is just 62 miles up. The space station, by contrast, is 250 miles from Earth.

Still, these passengers and space experts believe there's a market for suborbital flights. "I can totally see the average person being really interested in it and wanting to experience it, as much for the aura of spaceflight as the experience itself," Kramer tells me.

You'll have to be superrich to afford it

(Mark Greenberg/Virgin Galactic/Getty Images)

At the same time, even if one of these companies succeeds in operating regular flights — and thereby driving down the price — we're still talking about hour-long flights, providing a few minutes of weightlessness, that will costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. And if orbital tourism ever happens, tickets will certainly cost millions. Both options might eventually get cheaper, but there's absolutely no way either will soon be accessible to the average person.

That brings us to what may be the most disappointing aspect of the future of spaceflight: its elitism. More than anything, spaceflight seems poised to become a new status symbol for the superrich.

"The odd thing about the space tourism business is that it's based on the assumption of income inequality, of intense concentrations of wealth," says McCurdy. "There might be a market for it, but it makes you ask: Is that really the kind of society that we really want to live in?"

Correction: This article previously stated that a suborbital craft would have to decelerate from 17,000 miles per hour, rather than 2,600 miles per hour.

Most Popular

The whole time the boys has been making fun of trumpers the whole time, the frogs of puerto rico have a warning for us, take a mental break with the newest vox crossword, this targaryen family tree explains jon snow’s parentage — and sets up house of the dragon, why you feel grouchy on super hot days, today, explained.

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

More in Space

How worried should we be about Russia putting a nuke in space?

“Equivalent to having 50 Super Bowls”: The staggering — and lucrative — scale of eclipse tourism

Space trash lasers, explained

America’s first moon landing in 50 years, explained

A war has never been fought in orbit. That may be about to change.

The sun’s poles are about to flip. It’s awesome — and slightly terrifying.

Julian Assange’s release is still a lose-lose for press freedom

Do you have a small-business story? Share it with Vox.

Louisiana wants the Ten Commandments in public schools. Will the Supreme Court let it?

Are headphones destroying our hearing?  Video

Yes, you should prepare your kids for climate disasters

share this!

June 19, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

Researchers investigate the impacts of space travel on astronauts' eye health

by Alyssa Schaechinger, Texas A&M University

As space travel becomes more common, it is important to consider the impacts of space flight and altered gravity on the human body. Led by Dr. Ana Diaz Artiles, researchers at Texas A&M University are studying some of those impacts, specifically effects on the eye. The findings are published in the journal npj Microgravity .

Gravitational changes experienced by astronauts during space travel can cause fluids within the body to shift. This can cause changes to the cardiovascular system , including vessels in and around the eyes.

As the commercialization of space flight becomes more common and individual space travel increases, astronauts will not be the only ones experiencing these changes. Individuals traveling to space with commercial companies may not be as fit or healthy as astronauts, making it even more important to understand the role that fluid shift plays in cardiovascular and eye health.

"When we experience microgravity conditions, we see changes in the cardiovascular system because gravity is not pulling down all these fluids as it typically does on Earth when we are in an upright position ," said Diaz Artiles, an assistant professor in the Department of Aerospace Engineering and a Williams Brothers Construction Company Faculty Fellow.

"When we're upright, a large part of our fluids are stored in our legs, but in microgravity we get a redistribution of fluids into the upper body."

These fluid shifts may be related to a phenomenon known as Spaceflight Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome (SANS), which can cause astronauts to experience changes in eye shape and other ocular symptoms, such as changes in ocular perfusion pressure (OPP). At this time, researchers are unsure of the exact cause of SANS, but Diaz Artiles hopes to shed light on the underlying mechanism behind it.

Diaz Artiles and her team are investigating potential countermeasures to help counteract the headward fluid shifts of SANS. In a recent study, they examined the potential aid of lower body negative pressure (LBNP) to combat SANS. This countermeasure has the potential to counteract the effects of microgravity by pooling fluid back into the lower body.

While the role of ocular perfusion pressure in the development of SANS remains undetermined, Diaz Artiles and her team hypothesized that microgravity exposure could lead to a slight but chronic elevation (compared to upright postures) in OPP, which may have a role in the development of SANS.

The results of the study showed that lower body negative pressure, while effective in inducing fluid shift toward the lower body, was not an effective method for reducing OPP.

Should elevated ocular perfusion pressure be definitively linked to SANS, the use of LBNP could theoretically not be an effective countermeasure to this syndrome. But they emphasize that future work should seek to better understand the relationship between OPP and SANS, and the impact of LBNP on these ocular responses as part of the countermeasure development.

"This research is just one experiment of a three-part study to better understand the effects of fluid shift in the body and its relationship to SANS. Previous experiments in this study included the use of a tilt table for researchers to understand the cardiovascular effects of fluid shifts at different altered gravity levels, recreated by using different tilt angles," said Diaz Artiles.

The published study, as well as upcoming research, focuses on countermeasures to the fluid shift; in this case, lower body negative pressure .

In future studies, the researchers will examine the effects of using a centrifuge to combat the fluid shift and its effects. Diaz Artiles and her team aim to collect cardiovascular responses using each countermeasure and compare effects on ocular perfusion pressure and other cardiovascular functions that may be affected by microgravity environments.

These studies are performed on Earth, so gravitational changes that occur in space may cause different outcomes. Thus, they hope to conduct future studies in true microgravity conditions, such as parabolic flights.

Journal information: npj Microgravity

Provided by Texas A&M University

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Researchers develop high-performance anion exchange membranes for sustainability applications

3 hours ago

Half of world's lakes are less resilient to disturbance than they used to be

Modeling software reveals patterns in continuous seismic waveforms during series of stick-slip, magnitude-5 earthquakes

Discovery of vast sex differences in cellular activity has major implications for disease treatment

4 hours ago

Researchers discover new flat electronic bands, paving way for advanced quantum materials

Not all calcite crystals perfect; synthesis methods can alter internal structure, affect chemical reactivity

Boosting 'natural killer' cell activity could improve cancer therapy

7 hours ago

AI predicts upper secondary education dropout as early as the end of primary school

Study reveals how one enzyme hitches a ride on another to recognize tRNA

1,500-year-old reliquary discovered

Relevant physicsforums posts, early universe massive black holes question.

2 hours ago

Interstellar navigation to Proxima B with an unmanned probe

Questions about dark matter/energy.

10 hours ago

Some photos of Antares and Sigma sagittarii (Nunki)

Jun 23, 2024

Why is the CNO Cycle considered catalytic in stellar nucleosynthesis?

Is the universe older than we think.

Jun 22, 2024

More from Astronomy and Astrophysics

Related Stories

Astronauts from NASA's Expedition 71 to conduct research aboard space station

Feb 12, 2024

Improving astronaut vision in long-haul space flights

Apr 5, 2023

Heavier astronauts have higher risk of post-flight eye changes

May 31, 2018

Vision changes in space

May 27, 2022

Long spaceflights affect astronaut brain volume

Apr 14, 2020

Analysis can predict individual differences in cardiovascular responses to altered gravity

Aug 12, 2021

Recommended for you

China lunar probe returns to Earth with samples

15 hours ago

China, France launch satellite to better understand the universe

Drone racing prepares neural-network AI for space

Jun 20, 2024

Would astronauts' kidneys survive a roundtrip to Mars?

Jun 11, 2024

Human bodies mostly recover from space, tourist mission shows

Researchers explore how the immune system goes awry during space travel and the implications for human aging on Earth

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

15 things kids should know about space travel

P rofessional and amateur astronomers alike love to share facts about our amazing universe: "The brightest star is…," "A black hole is…," and lots more. These facts are so incredible that we sometimes overlook our own little corner of the cosmos and how humans have ventured into it. Space exploration, however, goes hand in hand with astronomy. So, I've come up with a list of 15 simple facts about spaceflight that you can share with your children - or with your non-astronomer friends.

1. Russia was first

Yep, Russia (then the main country of the Soviet Union) beat the U.S. in spaceflight pretty much every step of the way until NASA landed people on the Moon. The first artificial satellite - Sputnik, launched Oct. 4, 1957 - was Russian. So was the first human in space, Yuri Gagarin, who also became the first person to orbit Earth. That happened April 12, 1961. The first woman in space was also Russian. Valentina Tereshkova orbited Earth 48 times starting June 16, 1963. She's also the only woman who ever flew a mission to space alone.

2. Space begins above our atmosphere

Believe it or not, there is a legal definition for where space begins. That's because the movements of spacecraft are regulated by different treaties than those of aircraft. Most countries use the Kármán line , which is named for Hungarian-American physicist Theodore von Kármán, the first person to calculate an altitude where space begins. The Kármán line lies 62 miles (100 kilometers) above sea level.

3. Rockets were invented long ago

The Chinese invented rockets perhaps as early as the 10th century. Some historians date their first recorded use to 1232. Early Chinese rockets used gunpowder as fuel, so they were a lot like fireworks. Soldiers attached an arrow to each rocket and launched them at their enemies during battles. By the 15th century, militaries around the world had adopted rocket technology.

4. Robert Goddard was a pioneer rocket man

Goddard was an American inventor who built the first liquid-fueled rocket. Historians credit the launch of his first rocket, on March 16, 1926, with starting the modern age of rocketry. Over the next decade, he and his team launched several dozen rockets, which traveled as fast as 550 mph (885 km/h) and as high as 1.6 miles (2.6 km).

5. Sputnik changed everything

If the question is "When did the Space Age start?" , the answer is "When Sputnik was launched." In the 1950s, the Soviet Union was in a race with the U.S. to be the first country to send a satellite into space. Scientists and engineers on both sides spent years trying to reach this goal. Then, on Oct. 4, 1957, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik 1, which became Earth's first artificial satellite (i.e., one launched by humans). Sputnik had four radio antennas and measured 23 inches (58 centimeters) across. It orbited Earth once every 96 minutes and 12 seconds. The radio transmitter Sputnik carried only sent back beeps. It worked for three weeks until the batteries ran out. And although the message was simple, it seemed to tell every radio operator on Earth who listened to it, "The Soviet Union is in space."

6. Alan Shepard was first for the U.S.

Shepard was a naval pilot and one of seven people chosen for Project Mercury, NASA's first space program. On May 5, 1961, he became the first American and the second person in space. In 1971, he became the fifth astronaut - and, at age 47, the oldest - to walk on the Moon.

7. The "Moon race" began with a speech

On Sept. 12, 1962, President John F. Kennedy gave a speech to a crowd of about 40,000 at Rice University Stadium in Houston, Texas. Among other things, Kennedy said, "We choose to go to the Moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard." However, The line that most historians think started the race to land a person on the Moon didn't come from this speech. Instead, it came from an address to Congress May 25, 1961, in which Kennedy said, "I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth." And although Kennedy didn't live to see it, in July 1969, the U.S. did exactly that.

8. Neil Armstrong was first on the Moon

This naval pilot entered the astronaut program in 1962. He first flew into space in 1966 aboard Gemini 8. That mission featured the first docking of two spacecraft in orbit. Later, he was named commander of the historic Apollo 11 mission, the first human Moon landing.

9. Spacewalks aren't really walks

Many astronauts have completed an extravehicular activity (EVA) in space. Astronauts often refer to this as a spacewalk. But usually, that term means going outside a vessel in orbit, attached by a cord.

In 1965, the Soviet cosmonaut Alexei Leonov became the first human to walk in space. The journey, during his Voskhod 2 mission, lasted 12 minutes. The first U.S. spacewalk took place later in 1965, when astronaut Ed White walked in space for 23 minutes during the Gemini 4 mission.

10. That's a long time in space

Russian cosmonaut Valeri Polyakov spent 437 days and 18 hours on a single trip to space, the longest ever by any human. He launched to the Mir space station Jan. 8, 1994, and returned to Earth March 22, 1995. The longest spaceflight by a woman is 328 days. NASA astronaut Christina Koch launched to the International Space Station March 14, 2019. She returned to Earth Feb. 6, 2020.

11. This crew went the fastest

On May 26, 1969, the crew of NASA's Apollo 10 mission (Thomas Stafford, John Young, and Eugene Cernan) reached a speed of 24,791 mph (39,897 km/h), or about 32 times faster than the speed of sound on Earth at sea level.

12. Spaceflight is dangerous

As of this writing, 30 humans have been killed in the pursuit of outer space. Six were Soviet or Russian cosmonauts, one was Israeli, and the rest were U.S. astronauts. Of these, 11 were killed during training or test flights and 19 were killed in actual flight. The latter group includes two seven-person crews aboard the space shuttles Challenger and Columbia , which were destroyed during atmospheric flight. The three-man crew of Soyuz 11 are the only people to have died in space.

13. Spacesuits are important

Space is a harsh environment. It's extremely cold and there's no atmosphere. Plus, human beings are pretty fragile creatures. So, exploring space means using special suits that allow astronauts to breathe and stay at the right temperature.

In 1961, cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin wore the first spacesuit; since then, they have come a long way. In the U.S., the Project Mercury spacesuits were just a bit different from the jumpsuits worn by fighter pilots. Each had a bubble-shaped helmet and its own air supply. The Gemini suits were more advanced and there were several types. One was for wearing inside the spacecraft, while others were for spacewalks.

NASA's spacesuits took a big leap forward with the Apollo missions. These suits were larger and made so astronauts could walk around on the Moon for hours. The suits were fireproof and had a liquid cooling system inside. The outer layer protected astronauts from possible strikes from micrometeoroids, tiny particles of rock that zip through space at high speeds.

Space shuttle astronauts wore partially pressurized suits adapted from the Air Force. And shuttle astronauts on spacewalks used the advanced extravehicular mobility unit, which gave them a lot more protection.

Future spacesuits will be even better. New models are already being used by SpaceX astronauts and will be used by the men and women who journey back to the Moon.

14. Astronauts use the bathroom in space

Bathrooms became very important for Alan Shepard, NASA's first astronaut. There was no toilet because the flight would last only 15 minutes. Nobody thought that he might have to wait in his capsule for about four hours before the launch. When he asked to go, the command crew first said no, but finally said OK - but he couldn't leave the capsule. Luckily, the air flowing through his suit dried everything out before the launch. After that, NASA designed equipment to deal with pee. 

The first one was connected to a plastic tube, a valve, a clamp, and a collection bag. It wasn't great because it sometimes leaked. In 1962, John Glenn used one on his five-hour flight.

Because the Gemini flights were a lot longer than earlier ones, NASA finally had to deal with poop in space. The first equipment was pretty simple: a bag that the astronauts taped to their butts. NASA's first space station, Skylab, needed a toilet because astronauts would be living in space for months. Unfortunately, it was just a hole in the wall with a fan for suction and a bag.

With women as part of the space shuttle crews, NASA needed to rethink their toilet design. It was called the Waste Collection System. The opening was much smaller than a regular toilet hole, so an astronaut's aim had to be good! Today, astronauts on the International Space Station use a much larger toilet and a vacuum sucks waste away. The waste then goes into a container that its jettisoned and burns up in Earth's atmosphere. Using the bathroom in space is still a pain, but it's a lot better than it was.

15. The future looks bright

The U.S., Russia, China, India, and other nations are all active with big plans for their space programs. And rather than governments being the only players in space, private companies are now joining the effort. SpaceX, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, and more are getting involved in space travel.

The U.S. and China both have plans to return humans to the Moon. Japan and South Korea are planning their first robotic lunar-landing missions, too. Several countries, space organizations, and companies would also like to send humans to Mars. This would be an extremely expensive, time-consuming, and dangerous endeavor.

Many nations are also actively exploring our solar system via robotic craft, including the United Arab Emirates, which recently sent a probe to Mars for the first time. There are missions from the U.S., Europe, and Japan - both planned and underway - to visit asteroids and comets, and other missions will explore the outer planets and their moons.

Editor’s note: This article was first published in 2022 and has been updated.

The post 15 things kids should know about space travel appeared first on Astronomy Magazine .

Impacts of space travel on astronauts' eye health

As space travel becomes more common, it is important to consider the impacts of space flight and altered gravity on the human body. Led by Dr. Ana Diaz Artiles, researchers at Texas A&M University are studying some of those impacts, specifically effects on the eye.

Gravitational changes experienced by astronauts during space travel can cause fluids within the body to shift. This can cause changes to the cardiovascular system, including vessels in and around the eyes.

As the commercialization of space flight becomes more common and individual space travel increases, astronauts will not be the only ones experiencing these changes. Individuals traveling to space with commercial companies may not be as fit or healthy as astronauts, making it even more important to understand the role that fluid shift plays in cardiovascular and eye health.

"When we experience microgravity conditions, we see changes in the cardiovascular system because gravity is not pulling down all these fluids as it typically does on Earth when we are in an upright position," said Diaz Artiles, an assistant professor in the Department of Aerospace Engineering and a Williams Brothers Construction Company Faculty Fellow. "When we're upright, a large part of our fluids are stored in our legs, but in microgravity we get a redistribution of fluids into the upper body."

These fluid shifts may be related to a phenomenon known as Spaceflight Associated Neuro-ocular Syndrome (SANS), which can cause astronauts to experience changes in eye shape and other ocular symptoms, such as changes in ocular perfusion pressure (OPP). At this time, researchers are unsure of the exact cause of SANS, but Diaz Artiles hopes to shed light on the underlying mechanism behind it.

Diaz Artiles and her team are investigating potential countermeasures to help counteract the headward fluid shifts of SANS. In a recent study, they examined the potential aid of lower body negative pressure (LBNP) to combat SANS. This countermeasure has the potential to counteract the effects of microgravity by pooling fluid back into the lower body.

While the role of ocular perfusion pressure in the development of SANS remains undetermined, Diaz Artiles and her team hypothesized that microgravity exposure could lead to a slight but chronic elevation (compared to upright postures) in OPP, which may have a role in the development of SANS. The results of the recently published study showed that lower body negative pressure, while effective in inducing fluid shift toward the lower body, was not an effective method for reducing OPP. Should elevated ocular perfusion pressure be definitively linked to SANS, the use of LBNP could theoretically not be an effective countermeasure to this syndrome. But they emphasize that future work should seek to better understand the relationship between OPP and SANS, and the impact of LBNP on these ocular responses as part of the countermeasure development.

"This research is just one experiment of a three-part study to better understand the effects of fluid shift in the body and its relationship to SANS. Previous experiments in this study included the use of a tilt table for researchers to understand the cardiovascular effects of fluid shifts at different altered gravity levels, recreated by using different tilt angles," said Diaz Artiles.

The published study, as well as upcoming research, focuses on countermeasures to the fluid shift; in this case, lower body negative pressure. In future studies, the researchers will examine the effects of using a centrifuge to combat the fluid shift and its effects. Diaz Artiles and her team aim to collect cardiovascular responses using each countermeasure and compare effects on ocular perfusion pressure and other cardiovascular functions that may be affected by microgravity environments. These studies are performed on Earth, so gravitational changes that occur in space may cause different outcomes. Thus, they hope to conduct future studies in true microgravity conditions, such as parabolic flights.

• Hypertension
• Heart Disease
• Human Biology
• Space Station
• Space Probes
• Space Telescopes
• Space Exploration
• Dominant eye in vision
• Eye examination
• Gulf War syndrome
• Gravitational wave

Story Source:

Materials provided by Texas A&M University . Original written by Alyssa Schaechinger. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• Eric A. Hall, Richard S. Whittle, Ana Diaz-Artiles. Ocular perfusion pressure is not reduced in response to lower body negative pressure . npj Microgravity , 2024; 10 (1) DOI: 10.1038/s41526-024-00404-5

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• Never Forget a Face? Good Relationships
• Forever Chemicals Absorbed Through Human Skin
• Ultrabright X-Ray Source in the Milky Way
• Doubling CO2: Temp Increase of 7 to 14 Degrees
• Early Universe: Star Clusters Within a Galaxy
• Dinosaur Fossils and the Griffin
• Guiding Humanity Beyond the Moon
• Simple Test for Type of Flu
• Easter Islanders Adapted to Harsh Environment
• Evolution of Human Cold and Menthol Sensing

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.