"I do think that if the Democrats take back the House and take over the Science, Space and Technology Committee, we will maintain a really strong emphasis on Earth science,” Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) said. | Cliff Owen/AP Photo
One member of the House space panel sees a major policy shift if control flips in midterms.
With control of the House in Democrats' grasp, one potentially major policy shift on the horizon for NASA watchers is a renewed emphasis on the space agency's efforts to track climate change and carry out other Earth science programs, says a leading member of the space panel.
The Science, Space and Technology Committee, now chaired by retiring Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, a noted climate change skeptic, is likely to rejuvenate the issue through oversight hearings and budget deliberations if party control flips, predicts Rep. Don Beyer, a Virginia Democrat.
Story Continued Below
“I do think that if the Democrats take back the House and take over the Science, Space and Technology Committee, we will maintain a really strong emphasis on Earth science,” Beyer says. “It was NASA that figured out that climate change was an issue in the first place.”
Beyer, who entered Congress in 2015 and serves on the panel's space subcommittee, said his top space priority for the next Congress is increasing funding for the Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope, a space telescope set to launch in the mid-2020s to search for planets beyond our solar system.
“It really got short shrift in the latest NASA authorization,” Beyer said. “That’s one thing that was a high priority of the astrophysics community that didn’t get enough attention, so I will push back on that.”
Beyer also talked about how to increase oversight for NASA programs, the relationship between the U.S. and Russia in space, and what it will take to fully fund NASA’s ambitious agenda .
This transcript has been edited for length and clarity.
How did you end up on the House Space Subcommittee?
When I first got a chance to put down the committees I [wanted to be] on, of course you put down Ways and Means and Appropriations knowing you’ll never get on those as a freshman. I raised my hand for Science, Space and Technology just because I had always been fascinated by science and the difference it makes in our lives.
Among the science subcommittees, space is the one that’s most interesting and exciting. I was 11 or 12 years old when [former President] John Kennedy made his speech at Rice University about going to the moon by the end of the decade and I was 19 years old when we actually did it. So this has been...a part of my whole life.
[I was eager about] the chance to provide oversight to NASA and learn about the big picture science issues, [like] dark energy, dark matter, gravitational waves, or even the little things. I don’t think I knew...that we were using Russian engines or the role the commercial sector increasingly plays in space [before coming to the committee.] It’s been a wonderful education for me.
What would you like to see the subcommittee focus on in the next Congress?
I think it’s really important to stay on track for Mars...One of the long-term criticisms of NASA is that it may not show sufficient consistency of purpose...so when the last [NASA Administrator Charles] Bolden was before the space subcommittee a year or two ago...I asked him what the constancy of purpose at NASA was. Without hesitation he said Mars.
As human beings, we need to be constantly inspired...Right now Mars is that distant objective that could change the way we understand our planet and even our humanity. That I think is the biggest picture.
More immediately, it’s going to be really important to keep the focus on increasing investments in our science. We need to get the James Webb Space Telescope launched...The WFIRST [Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope] is one of the highest priorities in the decadal survey. That got short shrift in the current NASA authorization, but we need to really refocus on that. That’s going to help on exoplanet detection and trying to figure out what dark energy is.
There are a lot of important pieces. What happens to the space station? Does it go through 2025 or 2030? Can we really transition it over to the commercial sector and have it be viable for the long run?
We’ll always keep this focus on planetary research...We don’t want to lose focus on Earth...That’s been a little controversial. In the last Congress, there was a move to take most of the earth science over to the [Environmental Protection Agency] without any funding. NASA is the only one that can do that job.
How can Congress have better oversight of programs like the Space Launch System and James Webb Space Telescope, both of which are behind schedule and over budget?
I think the [Government Accountability Office] does a very good job of diving in whenever we ask them to, or even sometimes when we don't ask them, to look at issues of overspending or time delays or just any kinds of mistakes along the way.
During the recent oversight hearing on JWST, I ended up being fairly defensive about it. Even though it’s going to be $9 billion total [and finished] in 2021 or 2022 -- that’s very different than when they started in 1996, when it was going to be $500 million and be ready in 2002 -- the science is so incredibly different. We didn’t know about dark energy or dark matter then. We had no idea how far back you could go into the universe. What we’re asking James Webb to do is far, far greater than we thought about even asking when the project started. So the scope of the science is very, very different. No one in the world has ever done this before. It’s hard to predict what it’s going to cost if you’ve never tried it.
We don’t get any second chances...You’d hate to spend [billions of] dollars and have a couple bolts shake lose an hour into the flight and have wasted all of that. Better to spend a little bit more money, take a little bit more time and maximize the chance you’re going to get it right.
If Democrats win the House, how will the committee’s focus shift?
Two or three years ago, I very much felt there was a move by our chairman [Rep.] Lamar Smith to almost defund the earth science parts of NASA. Literally, [they were trying to move the mission] to the [Environmental Protection Agency] without moving any money...But this last year, the NASA authorization package we passed preserved the earth science almost in total...I don’t know whether the Republicans understood that with the increasing evidence of climate change, we needed to keep the earth science in or whether they felt this was the appropriate political compromise...But it was encouraging.
I do think that if the Democrats take back the House and take over the Science, Space and Technology Committee, we will maintain a really strong emphasis on earth science. It was NASA that figured out that climate change was an issue in the first place.
I also think one of the priorities…[for Democrats will be to] push for sustained long-term funding. One of the complaints from NASA over the years is Congress runs hot and then runs cold in terms of funding. All of us...like predictability...so we can plan effectively.
Do you think there is enough support in Congress to fund NASA’s exploration goals?
Yes, I think so. I obviously think it will be bipartisan. There will fairly be people very much concerned about the human needs of real people in our lives today, [like] hunger, housing and healthcare that demand government resources.
But, if you figure the incredible size of budget and NASA’s $19 billion...It’s a small fraction of 1 percent of the federal budget to satisfy the larger human aspirations for exploration [and] for science that’s really valuable.
Also, I don’t mean to sound like a catastrophist...but we have stressed this planet very greatly and exploring other planets beginning with Mars...is going to help us take care of this planet better and perhaps one day give us some alternatives to Earth. If we’re not reaching out, we cut off that possibility. None of those things are easy. We’re not just going to move mankind to Mars. But look how far we’ve come in the last 100 years. The next 100 years could bring dramatically new opportunities for us. I think covering our bets is a really wise thing.
What are your priorities in space?
The biggest priority I have right now is WFIRST...mostly because it really got short shrift in the latest NASA authorization. That’s one thing that was a high priority of the astrophysics community that didn’t get enough attention, so I will push back on that.
The other thing I’m really concerned about is the whole space debris issue. There are 20,000 human-made objects in orbit. A lot are really small, so it’s analogous to the issue of plastics in the Indian Ocean. As we’re putting ever more things into space, especially into low-earth orbit, if we don’t understand how best to manage the debris problem, we could be costing ourselves enormous amounts of money and destroying other critical functions. That’s an important new area for us to really get into.
And all the while, we’re getting ready for Mars. Having the commercial folks out there, whether its Virgin [Galactic] or [Blue Origin owned by Jeff] Bezos or Elon Musk [at SpaceX], all of them provide counterexamples and stimulus for NASA research. I think it all makes for this huge beautiful mosaic that will help us understand the universe much better. If Elon Musk can get to Mars before NASA does, that’s okay, we’ll learn from that.
Are you concerned geopolitical events could degrade the close relationship in space between the U.S. and Russia?
It’s certainly a possibility and that would be really unfortunate. So far it does not seem to have degraded. I’ve asked every one of the astronauts I’ve met who has flown on the space station about the relationship with the Russians and they’ve been nothing but full of praise about the camaraderie and the cooperation.
My sense is the relationship with Russia is pretty stressed at the level of interference in our elections and the issue of competing security interests in places like Syria, but we do really well with sharing intelligence and really well in space. We need to continue to do that. This is one of those areas where we build as many bridges of common mutual interest and benefit as we can and hopefully it will also calm things down on the more political level.
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Democratic takeover could mean boost for NASA's climate science"
Post a Comment