Is Bush eyeing diversification???

[HenryMc]

Last week someone here facetiously stated that if Dubya was interested in the Moon then there must be oil there - well according to this article U.S. Eyes Space as Possible Battleground ( Reuters Sun Jan 18, 2:27 PM ET) by Jim Wolf on YAHOO today:

"The moon, scientists have said, is a source of potentially unlimited energy in the form of the helium 3 isotope -- a near perfect fuel source: potent, nonpolluting and causing virtually no radioactive byproduct in a fusion reactor.

"And if we could get a monopoly on that, we wouldn't have to worry about the Saudis and we could basically tell everybody what the price of energy was going to be," said Pike.

Gerald Kulcinski of the Fusion Technology Institute at the University of Wisconsin at Madison estimated the moon's helium 3 would have a cash value of perhaps $4 billion a ton in terms of its energy equivalent in oil.

Scientists reckon there are about 1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the earth for thousands of years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 30 tons could meet all U.S. electric power needs for a year, Kulcinski said by e-mail.

Bush's schedule for a U.S. return to the moon matches what experts say may be a dramatic militarization of space over the next two decades, even if the current ban on weapons holds."

(This article has been edited!)

Keeping the Bush fortune for the next millenium!!

[Ron Thorne]

I would much prefer that we utilize the moon for peaceful purposes rather than militaristic ones, and with absolutely minimal or no impact. I can't imagine either of those scenarios occuring within a Bush administration, however.

The whole idea is, at this time, very unrealistic--I think it's just Rove having Bush do the Kennedy "we-will-put-a-man-on-the-moon" thing. However, it is not sparking enough imaginations, because--although interest in space exploration remains high--the average American's sense of economic priorities has been heightened by the outrageous spending of this appointed regime. A recent poll shows this notion to be as unpopular as Bush's proposed immigration amnesty. Here's an AP story:

• AP Poll: U.S. Tepid on Bush's Space Plans
  By Will Lester
  Associated Press
  
  WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush's plan to build a space station on the moon and eventually send astronauts to Mars hasn't grabbed the public's imagination, an Associated Press poll suggests.
  
  More than half in the poll said it would be better to spend the money on domestic programs rather than on space research.
  
  Asked whether they favored the United States expanding the space program the way Bush proposes, people were evenly split, with 48 percent favoring the idea and the same number opposing it, according to the poll conducted for the AP by Ipsos-Public Affairs. Most respondents said they generally support continuing to send humans into space.
  
  However, given the choice of spending money on programs like education and health care or on space research, 55 percent said they wanted domestic programs. Based on previous estimates for a moon-Mars initiative, the space cost would run in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
  
  "You can't have a war, cut taxes, have the economy in a garbage pail and spend billions going into space," said Dallas Hodgins, a 76-year-old retired University of Michigan researcher from Flint, Mich. "How are they going to pay for all this? I don't see how it's morally justifiable. In Flint, there isn't a school roof that doesn't leak."
  
  On Wednesday, Bush is scheduled to spell out details of his proposal to use an outpost on the moon as a jumping off point for more remote destinations such as Mars or asteroids.
  
  Those most likely to favor the plan to expand space exploration were men, young adults, people with more education and those with higher incomes.
  
  It made a difference who was said to be behind the plan. When half the poll sample was asked about a "Bush administration" plan to expand space exploration instead of the "United States" plan, opposition increased.
  
  Just over half of Democrats' opposed the plan by "the United States." Once it was identified as a "Bush administration" plan, Democrats opposed it by a 2-to-1 margin.
  
  Some have suggested that space exploration could be expanded more inexpensively using robots instead of human astronauts to explore the moon or other planets. The AP-Ipsos poll indicated that option was popular, with 57 percent favoring exploring the moon and Mars with robots and 38 percent saying humans.
  
  Despite the mixed response about the moon-Mars proposal, general support for space exploration remains strong. Even after people were reminded of a shuttle accident that killed seven astronauts last February, three-fourths said the United States should continue to send humans into space.
  
  Administration officials say the president will call for the retirement of the space shuttles by the end of this decade to make way for the next generation of spacecraft.
  
  For many people, the proposal to go back to the moon and beyond arouses the same sense of exploration and adventure the space program captured in its earliest days.
  
  "I think it's a great idea," said Paula Steiner, 52 of Jacksonville, Fla. "It's human nature. There's always been an instinct in human beings to explore to see what's going on elsewhere." She said she thinks it's "very important" for the United States to be an international leader in space exploration.
  
  "Part of it's mindless patriotism, I suppose," she said, chuckling. "I remember in the early days when we were racing with the Russians. I'd still prefer that we be first."
  
  Steiner's view is shared by most Americans.
  
  Three-fourths in the poll said they thought it was important for the United States to be the leading country in the world in the exploration of space. Still, only 29 percent of those polled said it was "very important."
  
  The AP-Ipsos poll of 1,000 adults was taken Friday through Sunday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.