When government agencies run short of money, and want Congress to give them more, they often threaten that they will be forced to cut back on popular services. “We’ll have to close parks, free clinics, food banks, etc.” But cash-strapped NASA has issued the ultimate threat – the extinction of the entire human race.
In its Interim Report on Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies NASA finds that due to inadequate funding, it will not be able to identify and track large, near Earth-approaching objects (NEOs) as directed by Congress in 2005.
Finding: Congress has mandated that NASA discover 90 percent of all near-Earth objects 140 meters in diameter or greater by 2020. The administration has not requested and Congress has not appropriated new funds to meet this objective. Only limited facilities are currently involved in this survey/discovery effort, funded by NASA’s existing budget.
Near Earth-approaching objects (NEOs) include asteroids and comets following orbits around the sun that place them in or near a potential collision path with the Earth. Blamed with ending the reign of the dinosaurs, damage from the impact of a large NEO could result in the mass extinction of species -- including us.
NASA generally considers the impact of NEOs larger than one kilometer in diameter as having potentially “globally catastrophic effects.” Such NEOs, says NASA, “would be expected to produce a continent-sized fireball and form a crater approximately fifteen times the diameter of the asteroid, similar in size to many craters known from the geologic record; it could instead produce a devastating tsunami if it hit in an ocean.” NASA estimates that while more than 20,000 NEOs of this size exist, it will be unable to track more than one-third of them given its current funding.
Since 1995, NASA’s Near Earth Object program has identified over 1060 potentially hazardous asteroids, but says it has done so mainly using funds from other NASA programs. “Although Congress has mandated that NASA conduct this survey program and has established goals for the program, neither Congress nor the administration has sought to fund it with new appropriations,” states the Interim Report. “As a result, NASA has supported this activity by taking funds from other programs, while still leaving a substantial gap between the goals established by Congress and the funds needed to achieve them.”
Also See:
Citizens Ask Congress for Asteroid Protection
NASA on Watch for Killer Asteroids (2002)
Comments
Your report is a bit unfair in laying the blame for NASA not being able to move ahead with the NEO search for 140 meter objects. In fact the blame must be shared by NASA, or perhaps better placed, the Bush Administration.
In the George E. Brown Act of 2005, the law (passed by Congress; signed by the President) required three things of NASA at the of 1 year;
…
“(4) INITIAL REPORT.—The Administrator shall transmit to Congress not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act an initial report that provides the following:
(A) An analysis of possible alternatives that NASA may employ to carry out the Survey program, including groundbased and space-based alternatives with technical descriptions.
(B) A recommended option and proposed budget to
carry out the Survey program pursuant to the recommended option.
(C) Analysis of possible alternatives that NASA could employ to divert an object on a likely collision course with Earth.”
…
Item (B) was completely disregarded by NASA… no recommended program, and no budget submitted to support it. Congress asked for a program AND the budget… and NASA/Bush ignored the law.
Congress is not blameless… it has a sad record of unfunded mandates, as you report in your article. But in this instance the Congress did all it could do… and the Bush NASA proactively chose to ignore the law.
Actually I am looking for a quote I saw by Russell Schweickart that was posted on the wall of a mathematics classroom in Monterey, CA almost 20 years ago.
It was about how much time we spend identifying differences inorder to classify things in science. Yet, the most important things of all are the joy, hope, fear, and love that bind us all.
I stopped using it one year and then the computer where it was stored got wiped. I would very much like to use it again to start this next school year.
Can anyone help me find it ?
Rusty: Excellent comment and a point well made. Appreciate the insight.
Robert
Some excellent points here. I think it is all a matter of priority. Interesting article by the way.
looks like old g.w. got us again. what’s new.
the way bush ignored the law on everything else, why is it any suprize that he ignore this 1?
Rusty:
I really appreciate your insight and concern and research on this issue and generally, wholeheartedly concur with your conclusions. Thank you.
Perhaps I am a bit dull witted, but I find your last statement a bit confusing. If Congress is not blameless, as you assert, how can it be that they have done all that they could do? If what you assert about the Bush Administration is correct about their flagrant lawlessness, and I believe it is, as do a great number of the U.S. population , including at least one high ranking U.S Justice, concerning a number of Bush’s trespasses. The fact is that they utterly failed in acting on one of their primary responsibilities as a Constitutional counter balance to the Executive Branch. Many people, including the Justice already mentioned, openly expressed during that time, amazement that he wasn’t impeached for treason. Ever since the advent of nuclear warfare, Congress has acted with ever increasing timidity toward discharging their Constitutional obligations and instead, waiving them in favor of the acting President. This is a dangerous overbalance of authority in our system and needs correction. The George W. Bush Presidency is a case in point and should be taken as a warning that we are fearfully in danger of losing our democracy.
Thanks for your comments in this blog and for your patriotic service to our nation. -
Augustus, nip (nobody in particular)
Sorry for the sentence fragment. I don’t always take the time I need to proof read as well as I should.
2nd) paragraph should read, “If what you assert about the Bush Administration is correct… concerning a number of Bush’s trespasses, the fact is… “.
A poorly written run-on sentence I know. I can only offer my sincerest apologies.