With two spacecraft now en route to Mars and

another 18 interplanetary probes in various

stages of design and construction around the

world, solar system science seems poised on the verge of a

golden age. Public enthusiasm, fueled by possible evidence of

ancient life on Mars as well as startling images from the Gali-

leo probe now orbiting Jupiter, is higher than it has been

since the Apollo era. Yet the outlook is not as rosy as it ap-

pears at first glance. Russian and European space research

will take years to recover from the loss of Mars 96, a seven-

ton craft loaded with 22 instruments that crashed into the

Pacific last November. And in the U.S., political repercus-

sions from Russia’s failure to make progress on its principal

contribution to the International Space Station, together with

planned budget cuts at the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration, threaten missions, including one scheduled

for 2005 to return rocks from Mars to Earth. Torrence V.

Johnson of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.,

who heads the team of Galileo investigators, says “projec-

tions that fit within the push for a balanced budget are very,

very bad for space science.”

The crisis comes at a time when reasons for exploration of

the solar system are stronger than they have ever been. Even

before David S. McKay and his colleagues at the NASA John-

son Space Center announced last summer that meteorite

ALH84001 had features suggestive of Martian bacteria, NASA

was redefining its objectives to take into account scientific de-

velopments. The new focus, which has widespread support

among scientists, is the quest to understand the origins of plan-

etary systems and the environments that might support life.

Researchers have collected evidence that life thrives on

Earth in almost any place that has usable energy and liquid

water, notes Claude R. Canizares, head of the space studies

board of the National Research Council. Moreover, it now

News and Analysis12 Scientific American February 1997

NEWS AND ANALYSIS16

SCIENCE

AND THE

CITIZEN

30PROFILEPatricia D.Moehlman

34TECHNOLOGY AND BUSINESS

IN FOCUS

THE NEXT STAR TREK

A budget squeeze and space station woesthreaten solar system exploration

16 FIELD NOTES

18 IN BRIEF

28 ANTI GRAVITY

29 BY THE NUMBERS

40CYBER VIEW

LAUNCH OF MARS PATHFINDERfrom Cape Canaveral by a Delta 2 rocket took place last December 4. The spacecraft is one of nine slated

to visit the planet in the coming decade.

NAT

ION

AL

AER

ON

AU

TIC

S A

ND

SPA

CE

AD

MIN

ISTR

ATIO

N

Copyright 1997 Scientific American, Inc.

seems that life appeared on Earth within a geologically brief100 million years after the planet cooled down enough fororganic molecules to evolve, some 3.9 billion years ago. Thoseinsights suggest life might spring up relatively easily and soencourage searches for life elsewhere. Besides Mars, Saturn’smoon Titan and Jupiter’s moon Europa—which may havewater oceans containing organic matter—are considered goodprospects.

Some groups of enthusiasts, such as the National Space So-ciety, are riding the wave of excitement to argue for a crashprogram to send humans to Mars. Fossil hunting cannot bedone by a robot, asserts the society’s chairman, Robert Zub-rin. But Canizares points out that the first mission to Mars toinclude humans will certainly contaminate the planet enoughto cast doubt on the origin of any organic molecules foundthere later. He therefore urges a vigorous robotic program toexplore Mars and other solar system bodies before astro-nauts arrive.

The White House has apparently accepted that argument. Asomewhat ambiguous National Space Policy issued last Sep-tember endorses bothhuman and robotic ex-ploration but backsaway from former pres-ident George Bush’s ear-lier announced goal ofsending astronauts toMars. The formula ap-pears to be an attemptto combine support fornear-term robotic ex-ploration of the solarsystem with continuedfunding for the spacestation, which the Clin-ton administration seesas bringing importantforeign policy benefits.

Yet NASA scientists say the budget cuts facing their agencyput even relatively inexpensive robotic missions in jeopardy.Budget projections that the administration announced almosta year ago envisage reducing NASA’s cash burn rate from $13.8billion in 1996 to $11.6 billion in 2000, with a gradual in-crease thereafter. “I don’t think they can do a simple samplereturn within the planned budget,” says Louis D. Friedman,executive director of the Planetary Society, an organizationthat promotes space exploration.

The small robotic planetary missions that NASA has fa-vored since the loss of its Mars Observer probe in 1993 typi-cally cost some $200 million a year to run. The agency spends,in contrast, about $5.5 billion annually on human space-flight, including $2.1 billion for the space station, a figurecapped by agreement with Congress. There is no leeway fordiverting funds from human spaceflight to planetary science,because the space station is already falling behind schedule.Indeed, some observers fear that woes besetting the programcould add to the pressure on planetary missions. “I am wor-ried that if extra funds have to be provided for the space sta-tion, should it come to that, space science is going to behurt,” Friedman says.

Research planned for the space station itself has alreadysuffered from the budget squeeze. In order to release $500million for station development, NASA last September decid-

ed to delay by two years launching eight closet-size racks ofthe station’s scientific equipment. The agency is also trying togain some financial maneuvering room by negotiating abarter with Japan. That country would supply the station’scentrifuge and a life-science research unit in exchange forshuttle launches. The deal could push some of the station’sdevelopment costs into the future.

Even creative accounting, however, cannot solve the prob-lem of the Russian government’s failure to provide funds forthe service module, a key early component of the space sta-tion now languishing in Moscow. The holdup means thatpermanent habitation of the station will have to be delayedby up to eight months from the previous target of May 1998.The postponement creates a major political problem, becausedelays, even more than cost overruns, corrode congressionalsupport. Andrew M. Allen, director for space station servicesat NASA headquarters, says Russia promised in December 70percent of the amount needed for work on the module in 1997.But that still leaves a question mark over the other 30 percent,not to mention work in 1998 and follow-on components.

NASA is therefore eval-uating contingency plansin case the U.S. decidesthat the current agree-ment with Russia hasto be recast. A year agoofficials indicated thatbuilding a substitute ser-vice module would costin the region of $500million. Allen believesNASA may be able topare down that figureand stay within its bud-get limit for the orbit-ing outpost. But the sta-tion would inevitablysuffer delays.

The crunch facing NASA has gained high-level recognition.At a meeting billed as a “space summit,” to take place thismonth, congressional leaders will meet with President BillClinton to thrash out a long-term space strategy. Scientistsare being heard. Canizares and a star-studded team of inves-tigators, including Stephen Jay Gould of Harvard Universityand Stuart A. Kauffman of the Santa Fe Institute, briefedVice President Al Gore late last year on the new evidence oflife’s ubiquity on Earth and its possible existence elsewhere.After the meeting, Gore pledged that NASA “will continue topursue a robust space science program that will give us great-er knowledge about our planet and our neighbors.”

Space scientists cannot afford to relax yet. One importantplayer in the debate over NASA will be Representative F.James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, a Republican who willchair the House Committee on Science this year. Sensenbren-ner is a strong supporter of the space station. He has, more-over, in previous years expressed dismay about the program’sdependence on Russian hardware. Unless Russia proves inthe next few months that it can be relied on to provide itsshare of the station near budget and near schedule, Congressmay direct NASA to come up with a homemade fix. The re-sulting budgetary tumult would be unlikely to benefit eitherhuman or robotic space exploration.

—Tim Beardsley in Washington, D.C.

News and Analysis14 Scientific American February 1997

JOVIAN MOON EUROPA(left) reveals surface ice and mineral mixtures when seen

by Galileo in the infrared (right).N

ASA

/JPL

Copyright 1997 Scientific American, Inc.