science-driven scenario for space exploration

8/7/2019 Science-Driven Scenario for Space Exploration

1/28

ESSC-ESF POSITION PAPER

Science-Driven Scenarioor Space ExplorationReport rom the European Space Sciences Committee (ESSC)

www.es.org


2/28

The European Science Foundation (ESF) was estab-

lished in 1974 to create a common European platorm

or cross-border cooperation in all aspects o scien-

tic research.

With its emphasis on a multidisciplinary and pan-

European approach, the Foundation provides the

leadership necessary to open new rontiers in Euro-

pean science.

Its activities include providing science policy

advice (Science Strategy); stimulating cooperation

between researchers and organisations to explore

new directions (Science Synergy); and the admin-

istration o externally unded programmes (Science

Management). These take place in the ollowingareas: Physical and engineering sciences; Medical

sciences; Lie, earth and environmental sciences;

Humanities; Social sciences; Polar; Marine; Space;

Radio astronomy requencies; Nuclear physics.

Headquartered in Strasbourg with oces in Brus-

sels and Ostend, the ESFs membership comprises

77 national unding agencies, research perorming

agencies and academies rom 30 European coun-

tries.

The Foundations independence allows the ESF to

objectively represent the priorities o all these mem-

bers.

This work was carried out under ESA contractNo. 21012

The European Space Sciences Committee (ESSC),

established in 1975, grew out o the need or a col-

laborative eort that would ensure European space

scientists made their voices heard on the other side

o the Atlantic. More than 30 years later the ESSC

has become even more relevant today as it acts as

an interace with the European Spa ce Agency (ESA),

the European Commission, national space agencies,

and ESF Member Organisations on space-related

aspects. The mission o the ESSC is to provide an

independent European voice on European space

research and policy.

The ESSC is non-governmental and provides an

independent orum or scientists to debate spacesciences issues. The ESSC is represented ex ocio

in ESAs scientic advisory bodies, in ESAs High-

level Science Policy Advisory Committee advising

its Director General, in the ECs FP7 Space Advisory

Group, and it holds an observer status in ESAs

Ministerial Councils. At the international level, ESSC

maintains strong relationships with the NRCs Space

Studies Board in the U.S., and corresponding bodies

in Japan and China.

Front cover:Aurora en route to Mars and the Moon

Image credits: ESA P. Carril


3/28

ESSC-ESF Position Paper | 3

Foreword

In 2005 the ESA Directorate or Human Spaceight,

Microgravity and Exploration (D-HME) commissioned

a study rom the ESFs European Space Sciences

Committee (ESSC) to examine the science aspects o

the Aurora Programme in preparation or the December

2005 Ministerial Conerence o ESA Member States,

held in Berlin. A frst interim report was presented to

ESA at the second stakeholders meeting on 30 and 31

May 2005. A second drat report was made availableat the time o the fnal science stakeholders meeting

on 16 September 2005 in order or ESA to use its rec-

ommendations to prepare the Executive proposal to

the Ministerial Conerence. The fnal ESSC report on

that activity came a ew months ater the Ministerial

Conerence (June 2006), and attempted to capture

some elements o the new situation ater Berlin, and inthe context o the reduction in NASAs budget that wastaking place at that time; e.g. the postponement sine

die o the Mars Sample Return mission.At the time o this study, ESSC made it clear to ESA

that the timeline imposed prior to the Berlin Conerence

had not allowed or a proper consultation o the relevant

science community and that this should be corrected

in the near uture. In response to that recommenda-

tion, ESSC was asked again in the summer o 2006 to

initiate a broad consultation to defne a science-drivenscenario or the Aurora Programme. This exercise ran

between October 2006 and May 2007. ESA provided

the unding or sta support, publication costs and

costs related to meetings o a Steering Group, two

meetings o a larger ad hoc group (7 and 8 December

2006 and 8 February 2007), and a fnal scientifc work-

shop on 15 and 16 May 2007 in Athens. As a result o

these meetings a drat report was produced and exam-ined by the Ad Hoc Group. Following their endorsement

o the report and its approval by the plenary meeting othe ESSC, the drat report was externally reereed, asis now normal practice with all ESSC-ESF reports, andamended accordingly.

The Ad Hoc Group defned overarching scientifc

goals or Europes exploration programme, dubbed

Emergence and co-evolution o lie with its planetary

environments, ocusing on those targets that can ul-

timately be reached by humans, i.e. Mars, the Moon

and Near Earth Objects. Mars was urther recognised

as the ocus o that programme, with Mars sample re-

turn as the recognised primary goal; urthermore the

report clearly states that Europe should position itselas a major actor in defning and leading Mars sample

return missions.We are glad to be able to provide this fnal report to

ESA, European national space agencies and the spacescience community. We hope that it will help Europe

better defne its own challenging, albeit realistic, road-

map or the exploration o the solar system.Finally we would like to thank grateully Proessor

Gerhard Haerendel, who was chairing the ESSC-ESF

during the most part o this evaluation and who contrib-uted to a very large extent to its successul completion.

John Marks Jean-Pierre Swings

Chie Executive ChairmanEuropean Science European SpaceFoundation Sciences Committee

December 2007

To explore is to adapt to situations you did not plan for

Mike Horn, Earth explorer, November 2007


4/28

4 | ESSC-ESF Position Paper

Acknowledgements

This strategy report has been reviewed by individuals

chosen or their diverse perspectives and expertise,

in accordance with procedures used by the European

Science Foundation (ESF). The purpose o this in-

dependent review was to provide additional critical

comments to assist ESF and the European Space

Sciences Committees (ESSC) Ad Hoc Group in mak-

ing the published report as sound as possible and to

ensure that it meets standards or objectivity, evidenceand responsiveness to the study charge. The contentso the review comments and drat manuscript remain

confdential to protect the integrity o the deliberative

process. We wish to thank the ollowing individuals or

their participation in the review o this report:Philippe Masson, University o Orsay,Orsay, FranceClive R. Neal, University o Notre Dame,Notre Dame, Indiana, USAAn anonymous reviewer

The ESSC and the ESF are also very grateul to

Proessor Gerhard Haerendel, all Steering Committee

members, Ad Hoc Group members, and participants to

the Athens workshop, or their dedication and hard work

in support o this evaluation activity. The contribution

o Agustin Chicarro in compiling the table appearing inAppendix 1 o this report is grateully acknowledged.


5/28


Contents

Foreword

Acknowledgements

1. Introduction 6

2. General scientifc goals o Europes

Exploration Programme 6

3. European capabilities and achievements 8

4. Robotic exploration o Mars 8

5. Robotic lunar exploration 11

6. The case or human missions to Mars

and the Moon 13

7. Planetary protection 14

8. Impact o human presence on the scientifc

exploration o Mars 15

9. The case or Near Earth Object sample

return missions 16

10. International cooperation 18

Appendices

1. Science goals or the scientifc explorationo Mars and the Moon 19

2. Steering Committee composition 213. Ad Hoc Group composition 21

4. Ad Hoc Group thematic sub-groups 21

5. The Athens Declaration 22

Bibliography and reerences 25


6/28


Science-Driven Scenario or Space Exploration

1. Introduction

The international space exploration programme ore-

sees multiple robotic and human missions in the solar

system in the coming decades. A global strategy is be-ing developed jointly by a large number o space-aring

nations and organisations. In Europe a major planning

eort is ongoing in the ramework o the ESA Aurora

Programme, Europes Exploration Programme (EEP)

that envisages the launch o ExoMars in 2013 as a frststep towards a robust and renewed eort or explora-

tion.A roadmap or Aurora started to be developed in

2001. Furthermore a strong heritage exists in Europewithin both the mandatory programme, with several

solar system missions having been launched, as well

as the various ELIPS-unded research programmes.

This allows Europe and ESA to ace new explorative

challenges making use o solid and successul experi-ences.

In view o the evolving international context, ESA

has initiated urther analysis and defnition o Europespotential role in the exploration initiative by identiying

scientifc, technological and societal priorities. For the

science part ESA has asked the ESSC-ESF to conducta broad consultation in support o the defnition o a

science-driven European scenario or space explora-

tion. To this end the ESSC has appointed a Steering

Committee to supervise the whole evaluation exercise

and an Ad Hoc Group (AHG) to conduct the evaluationitsel. The fnal report to ESA received the agreement

o the AHG beore it was approved by the ESSC and

ESF. The AHG met twice, on 7 and 8 December 2006

and 8 February 2007. At their second meeting the AHGdecided to split the work among fve sub-groups: NearEarth Objects (NEOs), Mars robotic missions, Mars

human missions, Moon robotic missions, and Moon

human missions (Appendix 4).In addition a workshop was organised by ESF to

consult with the relevant scientifc community. Eighty-

eight scientists and national representatives rom ESAMember States met in Athens on 15 and 16 May 2007

in a workshop organised by ESF and sponsored by

ESA (Appendix 5).This drat report eatures the recommendations

rom the AHG to ESAs Human Spaceight, Microgravity

and Exploration Directorate (D-HME), supplemented by

the fndings laid out by the participants in the Athens

workshop. Part o this outcome has already been taken

into account by ESAs D-HME as input to their archi-

tecture studies.

2. General scientifc goalso Europes Exploration Programme

Whether done robotically or with humans, or both,

science and the search or knowledge are an essen-

tial part o exploration. Exploration without human

spaceight does lack an important societal and

even scientifc interest and perspective. Hence hu-

man spaceight should be integrated in Europes

Exploration Programme (EEP) in a synergistic way at all

stages o development o the programme. However the

frst phases o this programme should be robotic.

A vision or Europe should thereore be to prepare

or a long-term European participation in a global

endeavour o human exploration o the solar system

with a ocus on Mars and the necessary intermediate

steps, initiated by robotic exploration programmes

with a strong scientic content.

Drivers or human exploratory missions include

science, technology, culture and economic aspects.

Above all the search or habitability and, hence, or liebeyond the Earth, has been considered as one o the

intellectual driving orces in the endeavour to explore

our solar system. This aspect was central in establish-

ing the overarching science goal o the EEP.

Figure 1: Artists impression o the Aurora programme roadmap

ESAAOESMedialab


7/28


1. The overarching scientifc goal o EEP should becalled: Emergence and co-evolution o lie with

its planetary environments, with two sub-themes

pertaining to the emergence o lie, and to the

co-evolution o lie with their environments.2. EEP should ocus on targets that can ultimately

be reached by humans.3. The frst steps o EEP should be done roboti-

cally.4. International cooperation among agencies en-

gaged in planetary exploration should be a majoreature o EEP, realised by concrete joint ven-

tures such as some o the elements mentioned

in the 14 space agencies Global Exploration

Strategy document.5. Mars is recognised as the ocus o EEP, with

Mars sample return as the driving programme;

Europe should position itsel as a major actor indefning and leading Mars sample return mis-

sions.6. There is unique science to be done on, o and

rom the Moon and o/on Near Earth Objects

or Asteroids (NEOs/NEAs). Thereore, i these

bodies are to be used as a component o EEP,

urther science should be pursued; the Moon

could thus be used as a component o a robust

exploration programme, including among oth-

ers: geological exploration, sample return and

low-requency radio astronomy, technology andprotocol test-bed.

7. The role o humans as a unique tool in conduct-ing research on the Moon and on Mars must beassessed in urther detail.

8. Since EEPs ultimate goal is to send humans to

Mars in the longer term, research on humans

in a space environment must be strengthened.

Beyond the necessary ongoing and planned bio-

logical research and human presence on, e.g. the

international space station (ISS) or in Antarctica,opportunities to this end might also arise in the

context o an international lunar exploration pro-gramme. ESA needs to ensure the continuity o

the necessary expertise in the longer-term by

supporting the relevant groups.9. Europe should develop a sample reception and

curation acility, o joint interest to ESAs scienceand exploration programmes. A sample distri-

bution policy needs to be established between

international partners early in the process.10. Understanding the processes involved in the

emergence o lie in the solar system, e.g.

through in-depth exploration o Mars, is crucial

to understanding the habitability o exoplanets,

and remains a high scientifc priority that shouldbe supported by ground-based laboratory stud-ies and specifc experiments in space.

11. Once EEP is unded and running it is suggestedthat a series o international science and technol-

ogy exploration workshops be set up in the nearuture, which or Europe could be organised by

ESF and the community and co-sponsored by

ESA, in order to better defne the mission con-

cepts and technological choices relevant to the

above goals as this multi-decadal programme

develops.

General Recommendations


8/28



3. European capabilitiesand achievements

In order to remain a key player with its unique exper-

tise, Europe needs to maintain and urther develop its

independent capabilities or planetary exploration so

that it can prepare independent access to planetary

exploration. This should be done by developing its

key enabling technologies and scientifc domains o

expertise. Niches already exist, e.g. or hardware de-

velopment in the feld o lie sciences, geophysical

sciences and planetary sciences. Europe has already

developed scientifc capabilities benefting human

spaceight in human physiology, countermeasures andradiation health.

Hence Europe certainly does not start rom scratch

on this exploration programme. Examples o these

niche developments and achievements are: Mars Express, which on the one hand has dem-

onstrated Europes technical capabilities to y an

independent planetary orbiter mission (Huygens andRosetta lander are examples o landing devices), andon the other hand has provided ample inormation

on the geology, mineralogy and atmosphere o Mars,which is important or its urther exploration (Res.

1-3). Concerning our understanding of the adaptation of

the human body and its unctions to the conditions o

space ight, above all weightlessness, Europe has a

leading role rom studies in space as well as in long-term simulation experiments. This is also valid or

psycho-physiological aspects o human space ight

(Res. 4, 5). Regarding our understanding of the regulations at the

cellular and sub-cellular level (signal transduction and

gene expression) and their responses to the gravity

stimulus European researchers are very strong in this

feld (Res. 6-8). There is a long heritage in Europe relating to the bio -

logical eects o cosmic radiation and its dosimetry.

The frst, and so ar only, radiobiological experimentsoutside our magnetosphere were done with theEuropean Biostack experiments during the Apollo

missions (Res. 9-11). European scientists have developed a prototype for

a sel-sustained bio-regenerative lie support system(Melissa, Re. 12).

SMART-1, the rst European mission to the Moon

has demonstrated new technologies or propulsion,

navigation and miniaturisation. It perormed recon-

naissance o geology, composition, polar regions

and possible landing sites as a precursor to uture

international exploration (Re. 13). Just as the International Space Station is a key

element or some o these achievements, the French-

Italian Concordia base in Antarctica is an asset in

preparatory studies on long-term isolation, water and

waste recycling and other relevant aspects.

A very strong synergy will need to exist between

Aurora and ELIPS, ESAs programme or lie and

physical sciences in space. ELIPS was reviewed, and

its second phase was evaluated by the ESSC-ESF

through a very large user consultation process, which

took place in 2005 (Re. 14). A similar exercise will takeplace in the frst hal o 2008.

Specifc recommendations were made in the fnal

report o that evaluation process, pertaining to the de-

tection o signatures o lie on other planets or bodies,and to the understanding o the limits o lie on Earth.

Several recommendations in that report address

the core competences o Europe in that domain, and

list specic contributions by the exo/astrobiology

and planetary exploration communities, including:

development of life-support systems including bio-

regenerative approaches

early detection control and prevention of microbial

contamination

investigation of the radiation eld in space and its

biological eects

These studies require preparatory robotic space

missions, supportive ground-based studies, and use

o the ISS and Concordia.

4. The robotic exploration o Mars

The study o other planets has told us how Earth

is unique. Clearly, lie, even i it ormed elsewhere in

our solar system, has developed signifcantly only on

Earth. Moreover, Earth presents a unique combina-

tion o geological characteristics: plate tectonics and a

global magnetic feld, an oxygen-rich atmosphere (orthe last two billion years, produced by lie itsel) and a

hydrosphere, and a satellite (the Moon) that stabilises

the obliquity and thus the climate.A habitable planet appears to be a complex and

perhaps rare object. But how are geological evolution

and habitability coupled? Will lie interact with the hostplanet to make it all the more habitable? On Earth, lie

has interacted with global geological processes to

make it habitable or large, multi-cellular lie orms.We may thus see lie as a geological process. On

Mars, it may have once appeared and eventually have

lost the race against aster developing adverse geo-

logical processes. For instance, one hypothesis is that

Mars had a warmer and wetter environment protected


9/28


by a magnetic feld. But the protecting feld died beore

lie had signifcantly evolved and the atmosphere was

eroded and went into a negative greenhouse cycle thatresulted in the cold desert planet we see today 1.

One may thus envisage Mars as a paleo-habita-

ble planet. What are the links between geology and

lie? Has Mars ever hosted lie? I so, or how long, andunder what conditions, was Mars able to sustain lie?

There is a deep need to understand how the geological

evolution and habitability are coupled, and Mars oersa unique opportunity to investigate this crucial ques-

tion on a second planet.One o the most signifcant and important aims o

robotic exploration o Mars is thereore to assess thehabitability o Mars and its capability to have sustained

lie, i it ever emerged, and or how long. This in turn iscrucial to understanding the habitability o exoplanets.

Another essential aspect is to continue a relevant

research on Earth to enable the determination o pos-

sible habitats, the mode o preservation o expected

bio-signatures (dierentiate traces o lie rom abiotic

processes) in these habitats, and the unambiguous

recognition o lie beyond Earth. Indeed, characteris-

ing bio-signatures involves studies o early traces o

lie in the Precambrian Earth and taphonomy2 o cells

in various preservational environments o present

Earth.

The search or extinct and extant lie on Mars re-

ers to the Emergence o lie theme o EEP, whereas

the search or extant lie and characterisation o past

and present habitability conditions deal with the Co-

evolution o lie with their environments theme o EEP.I a robotic mission should discover traces o extinct

or even extant lie on Mars, this would stimulate the

interest o scientists and o society at large or a con-

tinued human exploration o a second inhabited planet.

Thereore, a urther important goal o robotic explora-

tion is its ability to demonstrate the necessity or a

detailed human exploration o Mars in order to answerthe question o whether or not there is extant lie at

various locations on Mars.

Mars is recognised as the ocus o EEP, which

should rst be led robotically, with sample return(s)

rom the red planet as its driving series o pro-

grammes; urthermore Europe should position itsel

as a major actor in dening and leading Mars sample

return missions.

Recent evaluations conducted with international

partners are pointing towards the possibility o imple-

menting a caching system or uture Mars landers, tobe retrieved by MSR missions. Such a caching sys-

tem could then be developed by Europe or ExoMars,

which would then include samples obtained by drill-

ing. This approach could both increase the science

return rom uture Mars landers and also, spread

over several missions and a longer period o time the

technological risk attached to potential multiple point

ailures o a single mission. Hence one possible op-

tion would be or Europe to develop such a caching

system or ExoMars. This option must be weighted,

however, against the added complexity o the mission

which could easily generate unacceptable delays and/or budget increase.

Beyond the experience gained with Mars Express a

roadmap or EEP should articulate the ollowing steps:

Step 1: Exomars will be the rst and therefore criti-cal step in EEP; it will oer the European communitya leading position, by exploring Mars with scientifc

objectives as diverse as exobiology, geology, envi-

ronment and geophysics. Securing this mission or

a 2013 launch must thereore be the top priority o

Europes robotic exploration programme Step 2: Mars sample return programme

1. Recent observations made by the OMEGA spectrometer o ESAsMars Express probe seem to point to a quite dierent scenario, thatMars never had enough CO

2and methane to generate such an eect.

I confrmed this would mean that the red planet has always been coldand dry, even i major impacts could have modifed this situation orbrie periods o time (Re. 15).

2. Study o a decaying organism over time.

Figure 2: ExoMars rover

ESA


10/28



Step 3: Human mission programme, for which Europe

needs to prepare itsel to be a major partner

To participate in this endeavour with a major role,

Europe has a number o assets but needs to develop or

improve them, or identiy the assets that international

partners could contribute to its programme, such as:

improving and expanding Europes world-class in-strumentation capability; Europes industrial capability to build an infrastruc-

ture on Mars; international collaboration history of Europe;

development in Europe of 5-10W radioisotope-based,

long-lived (e.g. over 5 years) power devices to open

new opportunities or European-led international col-laboration.

There are two separate but equally important pur-

poses or the exploration o Mars using robots. One

purpose is science-driven, the achievement o specifcgoals that will aid in the understanding o the poten-

tial origin o lie beyond Earth and the evolution o a

rocky planet. Another purpose is preparation, in termso technology development and demonstration, or thehuman exploration o space. Scientifc drivers or the

exploration o Mars are: Is, or was, Mars inhabited? Were conditions for long-

term lie sustainability ever reached on Mars? How has Mars evolved as a planet? This will include

origin and evolution o the Martian atmosphere,hydrosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, magneto-

sphere and deep interior. To what extent are the present surface conditions of

Mars supportive or hazardous to lie (to putative in-

digenous or terrestrial lie orms, including humans)?

To explore Mars with robots, the approach must

consider both the science goals and human explora-

tion requirements o any programme.

a. Exploration o Mars rom orbit

High resolution imagery, spectroscopy and any

other relevant techniques o remote sensing o

planetary suraces;

ESA

Figure 3: Artists view o the Mars sample return ascent module liting o rom Mars


11/28


Planetary geodesy and all relevant techniques of

probing o planetary sub-surace and interior; Identication of potential landing sites (recent

changes in morphology; landslips); Monitoring and measuring atmosphere, climate

and weather (dust storms) over the solar (activity)

cycle or reconstructing the evolution o the Martian

atmosphere and early Martian environment.

b. Exploration o Mars with landers

Probing of deep interior by seismology and other

relevant techniques such as deep drilling (metres

to tens o metres);

Life detection; Ability to undertake direct imagery and any other

relevant analysis o surace and sub-surace re-

gions. This will require precision landing; Analysis of different rocks and ice. This will require

the ability to move; Assessment of ISRU 3: regolith composition, sur-

ace radiation levels, depth profle o radiation

penetration, etc. Setting up a weather station network in conjunc-

tion with seismology stations.

c. Exploration o Mars with returned samples

Very high precision analysis at sub-micron level;

Enabling technology demonstration for human ex-ploration.

Finally, the Ad Hoc Group has discussed limitations oexploring Mars with robots. Sections 6 and 7 address

these aspects in more detail.

5. Robotic lunar exploration

Europe should actively participate in the manned ex-

ploration o the Moon and Mars. The frst step is to

continue with robotic missions and prepare or manned

missions to Mars. An intermediate step could be to

contribute to an international venture to establish a

human base on the Moon; the third step would be to

contribute to the implementation o manned missions

to Mars and back to Earth again.The Moon as a target or exploration missions o-

ers a number o outstanding opportunities or scienceo, on and rom, the Moon. The main objective would

be the discovery, exploration, and use o the 8th conti-

nent (Re. 16), and the harvesting o unique inormation

rom the Moon as an archive o the ormation and ev-

olution o the solar system. Furthermore EEP should

consider the use o the Moon as a large laboratory in

ree space.While the Moon is geologically less active than

Mars, its structure (core/mantle, chemical stratifcation)

and geophysical processes are ar rom being under-stood and require in situ measurements (rover, seismicnetwork, heat-ow probes etc.) at various locations.

We also require in situ analysis and sample re-

turn or geochemical analyses o regions not yet

sampled (e.g. South Pole Aitken basin, ar-side high-

lands, young basalts in Procellarum, ar-side maria).

Experience gained in developing precision landing,

sample collection and return, and rover techniques

or the Moon will be advantageous or subsequent

Martian missions.

A particularly interesting aspect o the science o

the Moon is that lunar evolution is closely related to

Figure 4: SMART-1 mission at the Moon

3. In Situ Resource Utilisation

ESAAOESMedialab


12/28


the evolution o the Earth. All external eects that haveacted on lie on Earth in the past will have acted on theMoon as well. Like a museum the Moon has acted asa witness plate o past meteorite bombardments o

the Earth-Moon system and will harbour traces o pastactivity o the Sun (Re. 17).

Identiying promising locations or reading these

archives/records could rst be done robotically, al-

though the ull scientic exploitation o them is likely

to require renewed human operations on the lunar

surace.

Robotic exploration o the Moon should also pro-vide the prerequisite inormation or a sae presence

o humans on the Moon. Important issues to be un-

derstood are the biological adaptation to reduced

gravity, the assessment o radiation risks in missions

outside the geomagnetic shield, the establishment o

closed artifcial ecosystems, and the development o

technologies or the use o in situ resources. Because

planetary protection policy considers the Moon as part

o the Earth-Moon system, relevant studies on micro-

organisms, plants and animals can be perormed on

the Moon without planetary protection restrictions.Apart rom being a research target itsel, the Moon

is also an ideal platorm or a number o scientifc ex-

periments, especially in astrophysics, because o its

large stable ground 4, the absence o any signifcant

atmosphere and its large mass or shielding against

cosmic radiation and particles. A systematic lunar pro-gramme, with balanced contributions rom science,

exploration and technology demonstration, will includeorbiters, landers (equipped with rovers, environment

package, seismometers), sample return missions, lie

science experiments, precursors or human exploration

and science investigations conducted with astronauts.

There is a consensus among astrophysicists to-

day that initially the Moon should be used only or

projects uniquely requiring the Moon. A prime exam-ple o such a unique experiment is a digitally steered

low-requency radio intererometer consisting o an

array o non-moving dipole antennas (Res. 22-25).

The low-requency window to the universe has never

been explored with imaging telescopes beore be-

cause o the Earths ionosphere and the lack o any

lunar inrastructure; hence unique and novel science


can be done. Scientic goals o a rst explorative

mission would be the local interstellar environment

o the solar system, the solar-terrestrial relationship

and the history thereo. Ultimately this technique can

be developed into a large telescope or targeting pre-

cision measurements o the conditions in the early

universe and its infationary phase.

In addition a number o space-based intererom-

eters at other wavelengths (sub-millimetre, inrared,

optical) have been proposed (Res. 26-28). Should a

realisation o these large intererometers as ree-yersprove to be technically or fnancially more difcult than

expected, lunar options may be revisited. This too willrequire a detailed knowledge o lunar surace proper-

ties (dust, seismicity etc.) and potentially some actual

astronomical site-testing. Site-testing would include

the response o construction materials and lubricants

to extreme temperature variations.There are a number o enabling technologies to re-

alise this roadmap, such as air-less entry and descent,hazard avoidance control, precise point landing, ge-

neric sot-landing platorm, instrument development,

context and environment characterisation, sample

acquisition and screening (robotics), intelligent rover

sample etcher and permanent robotic assets deploy-

ment, planetary protection demonstration, lunar ascent

rocket, rendezvous, Earth re-entry, Earth descent and

landing, sample curation, radioisotope power sources

development.In summary a European roadmap or lunar explora-

tion would include: SMART 1 exploitation and orbiter follow-up

Surface missions-mobile laboratory

Sample return

Contribution to a human-tended science laboratory

Low-frequency radio astronomy, especially from the

ar side

4. This statement must be qualifed: rom the Apollo seismic data, theMoon has more than 1 seismic event o body wave magnitude largerthan 5 on the Richter scale. We also know that the Moon has a highQ and maximum ground movements that last between 10 and 60minutes. Hence the Moons surace is stable only insoar as such

seismic events can be accounted or (Res. 18-21).


13/28


6. The case or human missionsto Mars and the Moon

Science is driven by rationality, excitement, curiosity,

cooperation, competition and boldness. What is more

exciting than to send human beings to Mars and bringthem saely back to Earth again? What stimulates our

curiosity more than to explore, whether there can be orhas ever been lie on a planet other than Earth? What

is bolder than to test whether humans can sustain the

environment o long-term spaceight in the solar sys-

tem and live on another planet?Manned missions to the Moon and Mars are the

natural next steps to explore the conditions or the ori-gin and evolution o lie, and how it has interacted withits planetary environment(s).

Thus, missions to Mars, and especially those

involving humans are, rom an exploration, science

and technology perspective, an extremely exciting

challenge o our time. A broad range o scientic

disciplines rom physics, chemistry and geology to

biology and medicine will benet rom it by address-

ing the ollowing questions:

Can Mars sustain lie? Are there any signs o past

or present orms o lie on Mars, and could it be madehabitable? Only by sending human-made instruments

(robots) there with, at some stage, a human presence

to ully expand their capability, will we be able to an-

swer these questions.Without sample return and humans on Mars at

an appropriate stage, the scientifc and technological

return will be incomplete and the confrmation o the

hypothesis that lie exists or has existed in some orm

on Mars will remain open.Specifcally, a human presence will greatly acilitate

the ollowing: Deep (100m to km) drilling through the cryosphere

to seek possible habitable environments in Martian

aquiers probably the most likely environments orextant lie on Mars today. Searches for microfossils in Martian sedimentary

materials. Experience on Earth shows that large

quantities o materials rom careully selected loca-

tions will need to be searched with microscopes.

Shipping the required quantities o Martian materialsto Earth or analysis is probably out o the question,

so in situ studies by human specialists would be de-sirable.

How does gravity aect lie rom molecules to in-

tegrated physiology, and what is the signifcance o

the gravitational environment or evolution? To explore

these issues, biological material rom molecules and

cells to organisms should be subjected to long-term

variations in exposure to gravitational stress (g) such

as 0 g (spaceight, e.g. on the ISS), 0,17 g (Moon) and

0,38 g (Mars).

In addition to answering these questions, manned

missions to Mars are expected to increase public

awareness o science and expand unding and ac-

tivities in many related scientic and technological

felds. This will lead to an increase in scientifc knowl-

edge and an expansion in the economy at a global

level.

Prior to manned missions to Mars, appropriate

guidelines need to be developed to protect the planet

rom human activities that may be harmul to its en-

vironment, and also to protect human explorers rom

the environment (i.e. that o the spaceight and that oMars). Finally, we need to protect the Earth rom po-tentially harmul agents brought back rom Mars with

the return o the explorers. Answers to these issues

concerning planetary protection and countermeas-

ures against the eects on humans o weightlessness,radiation and the planetary environment need to be

available well ahead o manned missions to Mars.

Section 7 deals with this issue in more details.The human exploration o the Moon would be

an obvious means o developing techniques or lat-

er exploration o Mars and would add greatly to our

knowledge o the early history o the inner solar sys-

tem. Specifcally, human lunar exploration would have

the ollowing scientifc advantages:

ESAAOESMedialab

Figure 5: Artists impression o the Aurora Moon base


14/28


Much more efcient col lection of a more diverse

range o samples rom larger geographical areas than

is possible by tele-operated robotic exploration; Facilitation of large-scale exploratory activities such

as deep (approximately 100m) drilling to determine

geological details o the surace o the Moon (e.g.

paleo-regolith deposits); Facilitation of landing much more complex geophysi-

cal and other equipment than is likely to be easible

robotically; Increase of opportunities for serendipitous discover-

ies; Gaining operational experience on a planetary surface

that will be o value or later exploration o Mars; Facilitation of a number of other, non-planetary sci-

ence activities on the Moon such as lie sciences

investigations under reduced gravity conditions, andmaintenance and upgrading o astronomical instru-

ments placed on the lunar surace.

It can be noted that human versatility is such that

a number o these objectives can be met simultane-

ously.For European scientists to continue exploring the

rontiers o new research, Europe should actively par-

ticipate in the manned exploration o the Moon and

Mars. The frst step is to continue with robotic missions

and prepare or manned missions to Mars. An inter-

mediate step could be to contribute to an internationalventure to establish a human base on the Moon; the

third step would be to contribute to the implementation

o manned missions to Mars and back to Earth again.

Thereore, this programme should start as soon

as possible with a dual-track roadmap: (1) robotic

and non-manned missions to Mars and, in paral-

lel, (2) the continued biological research and human

presence on the ISS, in Antarctica, atmospheric bal-

loons, etc. in preparation or the manned missions to

the Moon and, eventually, Mars.

7. Planetary protection

Whereas rom the planetary protection point o view, the

Moon is considered as part o the Earth-Moon system

and thereore no special planetary protection measuresare required or lunar missions, Mars on the other hand

is a target o special concern with regard to possible

orward, as well as backward, contamination, as laid

down in the planetary protection guidelines o COSPAR.

(Res. 29, 30).

ESA is encouraged to continue the development

and adoption o its own Planetary Protection policy

in compliance with the COSPAR guidelines. European

involvement must be investigated urther, or example

with respect to Mars sample return missions, dening

the role that Europe should play in developing Earth-

based quarantined sample curation acilities. A sample

distribution policy also needs to be established be-

tween international partners early in the process.

With this involvement in planetary protection ac-

tivities, Europe will develop urther competence to be

able to actively contribute to the planetary protection

discussions with regard to human exploratory missionsthat are just starting.

As already indicated, prior to manned missions toMars, appropriate guidelines need to be developed:

to protect the planet from human activities that may

be harmul to its environment; this includes preventing

the introduction o biological agents and human mi-

crobes that could hamper the search or indigenous

Martian lie;

to protect the Earth from potentially harmful agents

brought back rom Mars or even sample return mis-

sions upon return o the explorers.

Answers to these planetary protection issues need

to be available well ahead o manned missions to Mars,e.g. by testing this protocol and guidelines during lunar

missions.


Figure 6: Inspection o a STARDUST canister and sample collector

NASA/JSC


15/28


8. Impact o human presenceon the scientifc exploration o Mars

In the endeavour to search or signatures o lie on

Mars, it is expected that several robotic missions will

and have to precede any human landing on Mars.

Overall, human and robotic missions should be com-

plementary. Finally, astrobiology can immensely beneft

rom a human presence on Mars. The advantages o

human presence include: the adaptability and dexterity of humans, thereby

providing a better capacity in dealing with the un-

predictable;

possibility of carrying out eld geology, such asdeep-drilling (metres to tens, or even hundreds, o

metres), critical in situ inspection and decision-tak-

ing, and long-term in situ analysis o a wide variety

o samples (rocks, ice, atmosphere), thereby also

enabling a skilul pre-selection o samples to be re-

turned to Earth;

remote control of on-site robotic activities, such as

search or lie in special regions;

adaptability and exibility of the research experi-

ment portolio;

in situ repair of explorative and analytical facilities

and instruments, as has already been demon-

strated with the Hubble Space Telescope repair by

astronauts.

On the other hand, one should bear in mind that

human involvement may also impede the scientifc ex-ploration o the planet.

Those cases where human presence could become

an impediment pertain to the ollowing areas:

ESA

Figure 7: Artists impression o a base on Mars


16/28


9. The case or NEO sample returnmissions

Small bodies, as primitive letover building blocks o

the solar system ormation process, oer clues to the

chemical mixture rom which the planets ormed some4.6 billion years ago. Near Earth Objects (NEOs) rep-

resentative o the population o asteroids and dead

comets are thought to be similar in many ways to the

ancient planetesimal swarms that accreted to orm theplanets. NEOs are interesting and highly accessible tar-

gets or scientifc research.The chemical investigation o NEOs having primitive

characteristics is thus essential in the understanding o

the planetary ormation. They carry records o the so-

lar systems birth and early phases and the geological

evolution o small bodies in the interplanetary regions.

Moreover, collisions o NEOs with Earth pose a possible

hazard to present lie and, additionally, they could havebeen one o the major deliverers o water and organic

molecules on the primitive Earth. Characterisation o

multiple small bodies is important in that context or

threat evaluation, mitigation and, potentially in the long-er term, or identifcation o resources.

For all these reasons the exploration o NEOs is par-

ticularly interesting, urgent and compelling. The main

goal is to set, or the rst time, strong constraints on

the link between asteroids and meteorites, to achieve

insight on the processes o planetary accretion and

on the origin o lie on Earth and its distribution in

the solar system. In the short term, and ater fyby

and landing missions on NEOs (ca. 2014), the next

goal should be sample return, enabling a detailed in-

vestigation o primitive and organic matter rom one

selected, small body.


Science: planetary protection requirements might

hinder access o humans to astrobiologically in-

teresting sites. Bearing these constraints in mind

a rigorous sequence o events must be established

well in advance, e.g. by testing them on the Moon.

In addition it may become necessary to establish

human-ree areas on Mars;

Human health issues: a detailed environmental risk

assessment is required beore humans are sent to

Mars;

Technology: human presence requires much higher

demands on reliability o the mission than robotic

missions; there are additional requirements with re-

gard to lie support and saety; Economics: high costs of a human mission;

Societal issues: risk of potential back-contamina-

tion when returning to the Earth.

Thereore, a careul planning o the overall sce-

nario o the EEP is required to make maximum use o

the synergy between robotic and human exploration

o Mars. Adequate guidelines, both scientifc/techno-

logical and legal, will need to be established with the

dierent stakeholders involved.

NASA/JPL-Caltech

Figure 9: Asteroid 243 Ida & Dactyl


17/28


A sample return mission to an NEO can be a precur-

sor, low-cost mission to Mars sample return missions,

and it is possible with a short planning phase (beore

2020). Priority shall be given to pristine small bodies;

e.g. C or D-type asteroids or comets.It is generally agreed that NEOs are among the most

accessible bodies o the solar system and that some othem could even turn out to be more accessible than

the Moon. A sample return mission to an NEO could berealised with new technological developments.

Based on the present knowledge o the NEO popu-lation, it is possible to fnd 320 objects, reachable witha V < 7km/s, and about 180 with a V < 6km/s (Ref. 31;

see also Res. 32, 33). Target selection strategy musttake into account both compositional properties and

V.

At a later stage, the diversity o objects should be

investigated by missions to dierent types o objects.

Finally, characterisation o potentially hazardous ob-

jects is considered vital.

Europe should implement an NEO technological

demonstration mission, where the cosmogonical and

exobiological contexts would be explored.

The leading aim is to answer the ollowing unda-

mental questions: What are the initial conditions and evolutionary his-

tory o the solar nebula? What are the properties of the building blocks of the

terrestrial planets? How have major events (e.g. agglomeration, heating,

aqueous alteration, solar wind etc.) inuenced the

history o planetesimals? What are the elemental and mineralogical properties

o NEO samples and how do they vary with geological

context on the surace? Do primitive classes of NEOs contain pre-solar mate-

rial yet unknown in meteoritic samples? How did NEO and meteorite classes form and acquire

their present properties?

Furthermore, sample return missions on primitive

NEOs will give insights into major scientifc questions

related to exobiology, such as: What are the nature and origin of organic compounds

on an asteroid? How can asteroids shed light on the origin of organic

molecules necessary or lie? What is the role of asteroid impact for the origin and

evolution o lie on Earth?

Although challenged by several recent articles one

important observation to date is the chiral asymmetry

in organics such as amino acids in meteorites. It has

been suggested that this let-handedness may be re-

lated to the let-handedness that is the signature o lie

on Earth (Res. 34, 35). The planets o the inner solar

system experienced an intense inux o cometary and

asteroidal material or several hundred million years a-ter they ormed.

The earliest evidence or lie on Earth coincides with

the decline o this enhanced bombardment. The act

that the inux contained vast amounts o complex or-

ganic material oers a tantalising possibility that it may

be related to the origin o lie.A detailed study o the material at the surace or

sub-surace o an asteroid is thereore needed. The in-

ormation that is required demands complex pre-analysisprocessing and very high levels o analytical precision.

Thereore, it is essential that the sample is returned

to Earth or detailed laboratory investigations where

the range o analytical tools, their spatial resolution

and analytical precision are generally orders o mag-

nitude superior to what can be achieved rom remote

sensing or in situ analyses.

Such inormation can be achieved only by large,

complex instruments; e.g. high mass resolution instru-ments (large magnets, high voltage), bright sources

(e.g. synchrotron) and usually requires multi-approach

studies in order to understand the nature and history o

specifc components.In summary, a mission with sample return to a prim-

itive NEO o C or D type will help in understanding the

chemical and biological aspect o the ormation and

the evolution o our and other planetary systems.

Such an innovative mission will be very important:

to test new technology developments: precision

landing, autonomous sampling (sample transer,

containment, drilling), advanced propulsion, Earth

re-entry capsule, in-orbit docking, telecommunica-

tion, in situ energy, planetary protection;

to prepare new adequate laboratory facilities forextraterrestrial sample analysis;

for scientists, and particularly young scientists,

or a programmatic vision o exploration, huge

scientic interest, large interest or the media and

European citizens.

Moreover, robotic sample return mission to NEOs

can serve as pathfnders or sample returns rom high

gravity bodies, e.g. Mars and, much later on, or human

missions that might use asteroid resources to acilitatehuman exploration and the development o space.


18/28



10. International cooperation

All space agencies agree that international cooperation

will be essential to accomplish advanced missions such

as Mars sample returns. One o Europes strengths is

its collection o member states, making it naturally

open to international cooperation. Apart rom a pri-

oritised mission list, Europes exploration programme

could have two components. One is architecture or

Mars: i one agrees to concentrate on Mars sample

return missions, this architecture could be based on

telecom & navigation (GPS on Mars). The other one

bolder is to engage other partners to join Europe

in developing instruments or other aspects and coordi-nating their approach.

Indeed the current situation sees duplication o

similar initiatives by various international partners; e.g.Moon missions by India, China, Japan etc. It has beenargued that an IACG 5 with a renewed mandate, or

instance on an international exploration programme,

would greatly acilitate this coordination o eorts.

There are two ways to international collaboration: mul-tilateral or bilateral; in the latter there is a minor partner,

which is rarely a satisactory option. ITAR 6 rules are

also very detrimental to international cooperation.

Thereore we propose: to give a strong international cooperation side

to the EEP, identiying relevant partners or each

building block o the programme;

to base this cooperation on planetary assets that

partners can bring in: systems deployed on plan-

etary bodies to be used by everybody; e.g. GPS on

Mars.

This is a dierent philosophy, not one guided by

nationalism, but one o cooperation which should ap-

peal more to European citizens. In addition the Global

Exploration Strategy Group composed o 14 space

agencies has met a number o times in the past year

and a hal to try and better coordinate the explorationgoals and objectives o the various space agencies,

including NASA, ESA and a number o European part-ners (Re. 36).

5. Inter-Agency Consultative Group.

6. International Trafc in Arms Regulations.


19/28


The ollowing table summarises the remaining sciencegoals or uture European exploration o the Moon andMars, ater ExoMars and beore and in preparation o

Mars sample return. Thus, the table attempts to answer

the ollowing question: In view o past international sci-entifc missions to Mars, what are the remaining majorinvestigations or the planet and what type o missionswould enable them to be carried out, in preparation orMars sample return missions and, one day, human ex-ploration?

Appendix 1Science goals or the scientifc exploration o Mars and the Moon

Planet MARS MOON EARTH

Mission Network Mapping Geophysics Super Deep Balloons, Sample SampleScience Orbiter Orbiter Rover Drilling Zeppelin Return Analysis

Interior

Internal structureand activity

() ()

State o the coreand dynamos history

Mapping omagnetic anomalies in crust

Geodesy andgravity anomalies

Volcanic activityat present

()

Thermal gradientand evolution

Ground-penetratingradar

Surace

Characterisationo most geological () units

Calibration ocratering curvewith in situ

absolute dating

Very hi-resolutionimaging and

spectroscopy

Detailed historyo water on Mars (inventory, alteration)

Bio/chemical rockand soil sample analysis

In situ Ar/K isotopicage measurements

Sample curation oranalysis on Earth

The table does not address new technologies to betested in those missions. It will be the responsibility oESA to identiy useul mission technologies in prepara-tion or Mars sample return missions, such as sample

collection and handling, orbital rendezvous, capsule

return to Earth, etc. In the long term, the establishmento international assets (such as GPS) through interna-

tional collaboration is a necessary endeavour.


20/28


Appendix 1

Planet MARS MOON EARTH

Mission Network Mapping Geophysics Super Deep Balloons, Sample Sample

Science Orbiter Orbiter Rover Drilling Zeppelin Return Analysis

Atmosphere

Meteorologicalmonitoring (surace & orbit)

Global & localcirculation(dust storms,

dust devils)

Link climateand rotation

(obliquity,

nutation, etc)

Trigger oatmospheric change 3.8 Ga ago

Coupling o solarcycle andatmospheric

density

Monitoringatmosphericescape (thermal& non-thermal)

as unctiono solar activity

IonosphereLink atmosphericescape to crust magnetism

Space weather

Astrobiology

Identiyastrobiologicalniches (surace

and at depth)

Establishenvironmental limits o lie

Coupling o

geological evolution

and habitability

In situ carbonisotopic measurements

Detailedenvironmentalhazards (dust, radiation, internalactivity)

Connectionbetween evolutiono martianatmosphere/early magnetic dynamo

and terrestrialexoplanets


21/28


Angioletta Coradini, IFSI-CNRPascale Ehrenreund, Universiteit LeidenMonica Grady, Open UniversityGerhard Haerendel, MPE Garching,ESSC ormer ChairmanJohn Zarnecki, Open UniversityJean-Claude Worms, ESSC-ESF

Antonella Barucci, LESIA MeudonReta Beebe, University o New MexicoJean-Pierre Bibring, IASJacques Blamont, CNESMichel Blanc, CESRRoger Bonnet, ISSIJohn R. Brucato, Osservatorio CapodimonteEric Chassefre, IPSLAngioletta Coradini, IFSI-CNRIan Craword, Birkbeck CollegePascale Ehrenreund, Universiteit LeidenHeino Falcke, ASTRONRupert Gerzer, DLRMonica Grady, Open UniversityManuel Grande, University o WalesGerhard Haerendel, MPE Garching,ESSC ormer ChairmanGerda Horneck, DLR

Bernhard Koch, DLRHelmut Lammer, SRIAndre Lobanov, MPIJos J. Lopez-Moreno, IAA-CSICRoberto Marco, University o MadridPeter Norsk, University o CopenhagenDave Rothery, Open UniversityJean-Pierre Swings, IAGL, ESSC ChairmanCam Tropea, Technische Universitt DarmstadtStephan Ulamec, DLRFrances Westall, LPCE-CNRSJohn Zarnecki, Open UniversityJean-Claude Worms, ESSC-ESF

Robotic exploration o Mars

Monica Grady, Jean-Pierre Bibring,Helmut Lammer, Eric Chassefre

Robotic lunar exploration

Ian Craword, Heino Falcke,Dave Rothery, Jean-Pierre Swings

Human missions to Mars and the Moon

Ian Craword, Heino Falcke, Gerda Horneck,Bernhard Koch, Roberto Marco, Peter Norsk,Dave Rothery, Jean-Pierre Swings

Impact o human presence on science

exploration o Mars

Gerda Horneck, Jean-Claude Worms

NEO sample return missions

Antonella Barucci, John R. Brucato,Monica Grady, Jos J. Lopez-Moreno

Planetary protection

Gerda Horneck, Jean-Claude Worms

International cooperation

Jacques E. Blamont, Gerhard Haerendel,Jean-Claude Worms

Appendix 2

Appendix 3 Appendix 4

Steering Committee composition

Ad Hoc Group composition Ad Hoc Group thematic sub-groups


22/28


Eighty-eight scientists and national representatives rom

ESA Member States met in Athens on 15 and 16 May

2007 in a workshop organised by ESF and sponsored by

ESA, with the aim o establishing recommendations to

ESAs Directorate or Human Spaceight, Microgravity

and Exploration on a science-driven scenario or space

exploration. The discussion was initiated by the ESSC-ESF Ad Hoc Group on exploration, and concentrated

on a series o science goals and mission concepts or

the short term (up to 2020), medium term (2020-2030),

and long term (ater 2030).The workshop participants met in plenary and

splinter sessions to refne the fndings o the Ad Hoc

Group report or the three target bodies: Mars, Moonand NEOs. The workshop participants agreed on a set

o recommendations and fndings that orm the core othis Athens declaration.

Commonalities

The overarching scientic goal of EEP should be

called: Emergence and co-evolution o lie with

its planetary environments, with two sub-themes

pertaining to the emergence o lie, and to the co-

evolution o lie with their environments. EEP should focus on targets that can ultimately be

reached by humans. Mars is recognised as the focus of EEP, with Mars

sample return as the driving programme; urthermoreEurope should position itsel as a major actor in defn-

ing and driving Mars sample return missions. There is unique science to be done on, of and from

the Moon and o/on Near Earth Objects or asteroids

(NEOs or NEAs). Thereore, i these bodies are to be

used as a component o EEP, urther science should

be pursued; the Moon could thus be used as a com-ponent o a robust exploration programme, includingamong others: geological exploration, sample return

and low-requency radio astronomy.

The rst steps of EEP should be done robotically. Since EEPs ultimate goal is to send humans to Mars

in the longer term, research or humans in a space

environment must be strengthened. Beyond the nec-essary ongoing and planned biological research and

human presence on, e.g. the ISS or in Antarctica, op-portunities to this end might also arise in the context

o an international lunar exploration programme. The role of humans as a unique tool in conducting

research on the Moon and on Mars must be assessed

in urther detail. Europe should develop a sample reception and cura-

tion acility, o joint interest or ESAs science and

exploration programmes.

Understanding the processes involved in the emer-

gence o lie in the solar system, e.g. through in-depth

exploration o Mars, is crucial to understanding the

habitability o exoplanets. International cooperation among agencies engaged

in planetary exploration should be a major eature o

EEP, realised by concrete joint ventures. Once EEP is funded and running it is further sug-

gested that in the near uture a series o internationalscience and technology exploration workshops be set

up, which or Europe could be organised by ESF withthe science community and co-sponsored by ESA, inorder to better defne the mission concepts and tech-nological choices relevant to the above goals as this

multi-decadal programme develops.

1. Robotic exploration o Mars

Mars is recognised as the ocus o EEP which should

frst be led robotically, with sample return rom the red

planet as its driving series o programmes; urthermoreEurope should position itsel as a major actor in defn-

ing and driving Mars sample return missions.Beyond the experience gained with Mars Express a

roadmap or EEP should articulate the ollowing steps: Step 1: ExoMars will be the rst and therefore criti-

cal step in EEP; it will oer the European community

a leading position, by exploring Mars with scientifc

objectives as diverse as exobiology, geology, envi-

ronment and geophysics. Securing this mission or

a 2013 launch must thereore be the top priority o

Europes robotic exploration programme Step 2: Mars sample return programme

Step 3: Human mission programme, for which Europe

needs to prepare itsel to be a major partner

An essential goal is to understand the details o

planetary evolution: why did the Earth become so

unique, as compared to Mars or Venus? Understanding

the issue o habitability o planets (Mars in particular)

and the co-evolution o lie within its planetary environ-ments is thereore our major goal. This in turn is crucialto understanding the habitability o exoplanets.Another essential aspect is to continue relevant

research on Earth to enable the determination o pos-

sible habitats, the mode o preservation o expected

bio-signatures (dierentiate traces o lie rom abiotic

processes) in these habitats, and the unambiguous

recognition o lie beyond Earth. Indeed, characterisingbio-signatures involves studies o early traces o lie in

the Precambrian Earth and taphonomy 1 o cells in vari-ous preservational environments o present Earth.

Appendix 5The Athens Declaration

1. Study o a decaying organism over time.


23/28


To participate in this endeavour with a major role,

Europe has a number o assets but needs to develop or

improve them, or identiy those assets that international

partners could contribute to its programme, such as: maintaining Europes world-class instrumentation ca-

pability Europes industrial capability to build an infrastructure

on Mars International collaboration history of Europe

the development in Europe of 5-10W radioisotope-

based devices would open new opportunities to

European-led international collaboration

2. Robotic exploration o the Moon

The main objective would be the discovery, explora-

tion, and use o the 8th continent, and the harvesting

o unique inormation rom the Moon as an archive

o the ormation and evolution o the solar system.

Furthermore EEP should consider the use o the Moon

as a large laboratory in ree space.A European roadmap or lunar exploration would

include: SMART 1 exploitation and orbiter follow-up

Surface missions-mobile laboratory

Sample return

Contribution to human-tended science laboratory

Low-frequency radio astronomy, especially from the

ar side

Sample return missions can in particular address

samples rom the South Pole Aitken Basin (window to

lunar interior), rom Procellarum (youngest volcanism),

rom poles, rom paleo-regolith, extraterrestrial sam-

ples, regolith samples o the solar wind history, samples

o ice cometary deposits in the last billion years, sam-

ples from Mars and asteroids (and Venus?), and lunar

samples o the Early Earth.Prototype radio astronomy experiments could ini-

tially be realised at one o the poles with the desire tomove towards the ar side thereater. The useulness

o the Moon as a potential site or telescopes at other

wavelengths needs to be urther assessed by in situ ex-ploration.

There are a number o enabling technologies to re-

alise this roadmap, such as: air-less entry and descent,hazard avoidance control, precise point landing, generic

sot landing platorm, instrument development, contextand environment characterisation, sample acquisition

and screening (robotics), intelligent rover sample etch-er and permanent robotic assets deployment, planetary

protection demonstration, lunar ascent rocket, rendez-

vous, Earth re-entry, Earth descent and landing, sample

curation, radioisotope power sources development.

3. Near Earth Object sample return

In the short term, and ater yby and landing missions

on NEOs (ca. 2014), the next goal should be sample

return, enabling a detailed investigation o primitive and

organic matter rom one selected, small body. Priority

shall be given to pristine small bodies, e.g. C or D-typeasteroids or comets.

At a later stage, the diversity o objects should

be investigated by missions to dierent types o ob-

jects. Finally, characterisation o potentially hazardousobjects is considered vital. The ollowing relevant tech-

nologies should start to be developed by Europe:

precision landing autonomous sampling (sample transfer; containment;

drilling) advanced propulsion

Earth re-entry

in-orbit docking

sample treatment on Earth

Europe should implement a technological demon-

stration mission, which could be airly cheaper than

Mars or Moon sample return missions, and where the

cosmogonical and exobiological contexts would be ex-

plored.Characterisation o multiple small bodies is impor-

tant in that context or threat evaluation, mitigation and,

potentially in the longer term, or identifcation o re-

sources.In the context o the preparation o Mars sample

return the development o technologies or NEO sam-

ple environment monitoring and control during cruise,

and sample storage on the ground, are relevant to ad-dressing planetary protection issues or uture Martianmissions.

4. Human exploration o Marsand the Moon

A driver o exploration programmes is to advance

human presence in space. Future manned missions

should make use o humans as intelligent tools in the

exploration initiative, with the ollowing specifc scien-

tifc goals: reach a better understanding of the role of gravity in

biological processes and in the evolution o organ-

isms at large determine the physical and chemical limits of life

(rom microorganisms to humans) determine the strategies of life adaptation to extreme

environments acquire the knowledge required for a safe and ef-


24/28


fcient human presence in outer space (rom the

International Space Station via Moon to Mars)

Specifcally, human exploration would have the ol-lowing scientifc advantages: Much more efcient col lection of a more diverse

range o samples rom larger geographical areas

than is possible robotically Facilitation of large-scale exploratory activities such

as deep (approximately 100m) drilling to determine

geological details o the surace o the Moon (e.g.

paleo-regolith deposits) or to seek possible habitable

environments in Martian aquiers

Facilitation of landing much more complex geophysi-cal and other equipment than is likely to be easible

robotically Increase of opportunities for serendipitous discover-

ies Facilitation of a number of other, non-planetary, sci-

ence activities on the Moon such as lie sciences

investigations under reduced gravity conditions, andalso maintenance and upgrading o astronomical in-

struments placed on the lunar surace

In terms o the enabling science and technology

needed to reach these goals, urther knowledge is re-

quired to enable a sae and efcient human presence

in outer space: responses of the human body to parameters of

spaceight (weightlessness, radiation, isolation, etc.)and development o countermeasures

responses of the human body to surface conditions

on Mars and on the Moon, and protection measures development of efcient life support systems includ-

ing bio-regenerative systems which can be done on

Earth conditions, to be urther adapted to specifc

mission conditions; in this context support to a Moon

mission as an intermediate step towards a Mars mis-sion could become relevant

development of a habitat providing a living and work-

ing area on Mars and the Moon

To reach these goals experiments must be support-

ed to better understand the role o gravity on biological

processes on the International Space Station (multi-

generation experiments in microgravity and long-term

adaptation o humans to microgravity), on the Moon

(multigeneration experiments at 0,17 g and long-term

adaptation o humans to low gravity), and on Earth

(multigeneration experiments under hypo- and hyper-

gravity).Furthermore the limits o lie and its strategies o

adaptation to extreme environments must be urther

studied through experiments on the International Space

Station, the Moon and on Earth. More specifcally the

programme should aim at determining the climate

and environmental parameters o potential hazard to

humans, i.e. on the Moon: dust, radiation, 0,17 g, seis-mic activities, and micro-meteorites; on Mars: dust,

radiation, atmospheric traces, temperature variation,

seasons, 0,38 g.Knowledge acquired by the abovementioned exper-

iments will enable human health and working efciency

in space and planetary environments. It is a sine qua

non beore the involvement o humans in exploratory

missions to Moon and Mars, which then will beneft

signifcantly rom their presence.Finally, guidelines or planetary protection need

to be elaborated with international partners concern-ing orward and backward contamination, and Europe

must play an inuential role in that context by continu-ing the development and adoption o its own planetaryprotection policy, in compliance with the COSPAR

guidelines.

Concluding summary

These our components o EEP illustrate the overarch-ing science goal Emergence and co-evolution o lie

with its planetary environments which should structure

Europes approach, along with the ramework recom-

mendations presented in the commonalities section.

This declaration is a complement to the more detailed

report o the ESSC Ad Hoc Group, which took into ac-count and incorporated the discussions arising at the

Athens workshop.

Appendix 5


25/28


Lundin R. et al., 2004, Solar Wind-induced1.Atmospheric Erosion at Mars: First Results romASPERA-3 on Mars Express, Science 305,1933-1936.Murray J. et al., 2005, Evidence rom the Mars2.Express High Resolution Stereo Camera or a rozensea close to Mars equator, Nature 434, 352-356.Bibring J.P. et al., 2005, Mars Surace Diversity3.as Revealed by the OMEGA/Mars ExpressObservations, Science 307, 1576-1581.Horneck G., et al, 2003, HUMEX, a Study on the4.Survivability and Adaptation o Humans to Long-Duration Exploratory Missions, ESA SP 1264, ESA-

ESTEC Noordwijk.Clment G., 2005, Fundamentals o Space Medicine,5.Springer, Dordrecht.Clment G. and Slenzka K. eds., Fundamentals o6.Space Biology Research on Cells, Animals, andPlants in Space, Microcosm Press, El Segundo, CAand Springer, New York (2006).Brinckmann E. ed., Biology in Space and Lie on7.Earth, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim (2007).

Seibert G., Fritton B., Battrick B. (eds), A World8.Without Gravity Research in Space or Health andIndustrial Processes, ESA SP-1251 (2001).Bcker H. and Horneck G., 1975, The biological9.eectiveness o HZE-particles o cosmic radiation

studied in the Apollo 16 and 17 Biostack experiments,Acta Astronautica 2: 247-264.Horneck G., Space Radiation Biology in: Brinckmann10.E. ed., Biology in Space and Life on Earth, Wiley-VCH,

Weinheim, pp. 243-273 (2007).Reitz G, Berger T., 2006, The Matroshka acility11. dose determination during an E.V.A., Radiation

Protection Dosimetry120, 442-445.Mergeay M. et al, 1989, MELiSSA a microorganism-12.based model or CELSS development. In Proceedingso the 3rd symposium on space thermal control andlie support system. Noordwijk, The Netherlands,3-6 October, ESA Publication, pp. 65-68.By Sunpower to the Moon SMART-1, ESA13.

Publication BR-191, 2003.Scientifc perspectives or ESAs uture programme14.in lie and physical sciences in space, ESSC-ESFrecommendations, ISBN 2-912049-51-2, EuropeanScience Foundation Strasbourg, September 2005.Bibring J.P. et al, 2006, Global Mineralogical and15.Aqueous Mars History Derived rom OMEGA-MarsExpress Data, Science 312, 400-404.Craword I.A., 2004,16. The Scientifc Case or RenewedHuman Activities on the Moon, Space Policy20,91-97.Space Studies Board, US National Research Council,17.The Scientifc Context or the Exploration o theMoon Final Report, NAS 2007, www.nap.edu/

catalog/11954.html

Oberst J. and Nakamura Y., 1992, A Seismic Risk or18.the Lunar Base, Proceedings o the 2nd Conerence onLunar Bases and Space Activities, 231-233.Schreiber E., 1977, The Moon and Q, Proceedings19.o the 8th Lunar Scientifc Conerence, 1201-1208.Tittmann B.R. et al, 1978, Laboratory Measurements20.o p-wave Seismic Q on Lunar and Analog Rocks,Proceedings o the 9th Lunar Scientifc Conerence,3627-3635.Nakamura Y. and Koyama J., 1982, Seismic Q21.o the Lunar Upper Mantle, Journal ofGeophysicalResearch 87, 4855-4861.Jones D.L. et al., 2007, Towards a Lunar Epoch22.

o Reionisation Telescope, AAS 210.Basart J.P. et al., 1997, Directions or Space-based23.Low-Frequency Radio Astronomy2. Telescopes,Radio Sci. 32, 265-275.Kuiper T.B.H. and Jones D., 2000, Lunar Surace24.Arrays, Radio Astronomy at Long Wavelengths,Geophysical Monograph Series, Vol. 119, R. G. Stone,

K. W. Weiler, M. L. Goldstein, and J.-L. Bougeret eds.,American Geophysical Union, pp. 351-357.Lockwood M., 2007, Fly Me to the Moon?25.Nature Physics 3, 10, 669-671.Lger A. Herbst T. et al., 2007, Darwin Science26.Across Disciplines A Proposal or the CosmicVision 2015-2025 ESA Plan, http://de.arxiv.org/

abs/0707.3385v1.Helmich F., Ivison R., 2007, FIRI A Far-inrared27.Intererometer, http://de.arxiv.org/abs/0707.1822v1.Monnier J.D., 2003, Optical Intererometry in28.Astronomy, Rep. Prog. Phys. 66, 789-857.Horneck G. et al (2007) Astrobiology exploratory29.missions and planetary protection requirements,in Horneck G and Rettberg P (Eds.) CompleteCourse in Astrobiology, Wiley-VCH, Berlin New York

pp. 353-397.http://cosparhq.cnes.r/Scistr/Pppolicy.htm30.Perozzi E. et al., 2001, Basic Targeting Strategies31.or Rendezvous and Flyby Missions to the Near-EarthAsteroids, Planetary and Space Science 49, 3-22.

Christou A.A., 2003, The statistics o ight32.opportunities to accessible near-Earth asteroids,Planetary and Space Science 51, 221-231.Binzel R et al. 2004, Dynamical and Compositional33.Assessment o Near-Earth Object Mission Targets,Meteoritics & Planetary Science 39, 351-366.Cronin J.R. and Pizarello S., 1997, Enantiomeric34.excesses in meteoritic amino acids, Science, 275,951-955.Cronin J. and Reisse J., Chirality and the origin35.o homochirality, in: M. Gargaud, B. Barbier, H. Martin,J. Reisse (Eds.) Lectures in Astrobiology, Vol. 1,

pp. 473-515, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2005.The Global Exploration Strategy: the ramework or36.

coordination, http://www.globalspaceexploration.org

Bibliography and reerences


26/28

This Paper is published under the responsibility o the ESF-

European Space Sciences Committee (ESSC). As such

it represents a considered and peer reviewed opinion o

the community represented by the Committee. It does not,

however, necessarily represent the position o the European

Science Foundation as a whole.

Printing: IREG Strasbourg February 2008

ISBN 2-912049-80-6


27/28


28/28

n:1200F

ebruary2008

1 quai Lezay-Marnsia | BP 90015

67080 Strasbourg cedex | France

science-driven scenario for space exploration

Documents