Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson explains why the future of space exploration is critical.
NASA will be dealing with some tough choices in the years ahead: The space agency has to start virtually from square one on its Mars exploration program. It has to rein in budget overruns on the $8.8 billion James Webb Space Telescope, widely seen as the heir to the Hubble Space Telescope. It's spending hundreds of millions of dollars on commercial efforts to replace the space shuttle, and billions of dollars on the development of a new launch system to send astronauts beyond Earth orbit for the first time in more than 40 years. And to top it off, it's been allotted less money for next year than it's getting this year.
How can NASA strike the proper balance in its budget? It can't, astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson says. In his latest book, "Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier," Tyson explains why America's space effort needs more of a boost than it's getting.
"I'd really argue for doubling NASA's budget," Tyson told me today.
For the past few years, the space agency's spending has amounted to roughly half a percent of the total federal budget. (This year NASA is due to spend $17.8 billion.) In proportional terms, that's half what it was 20 years ago under President George H.W. Bush — and roughly a ninth of what it was in 1966, at the height of the U.S.-Soviet space race.
Tyson said that NASA's budgetary situation is so untenable that if he were on the NASA Advisory Council, as he was between 2005 and 2008, he couldn't give any advice. "I would excuse myself from the meeting," he said. "I wouldn't even stop at the White House."

Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York City, is in his element among large-scale planetary models.
Over the past couple of years, Congress has had a stronger hand in setting NASA's future course, but Tyson thinks the ultimate fix for what ails NASA won't be found on Capitol Hill.
"If I write members of Congress with the ideas that I have, in a way, that's circumventing the electorate, because they elected a person to serve their interests," he said. "If I come around the side door and say, 'Do this,' I'd feel uncomfortable in that role. I'd rather address the public. As an educator, this is a fundamental part of what I do: communicating the thrill of discovery and exploration to the public. And if the public is not enchanted by exploration and discovery, that's OK. ... Then I appeal to the economic argument: In this, the 21st century, the nations that embrace innovations in science and technology are the ones who will lead the world."
Don't stop thinking about tomorrow
Tyson has been thinking about these topics for years — as the director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York City, as an adviser to NASA and a member of several space policy commissions, as the author of several books and myriad magazine articles, and as the host of the updated "Cosmos" TV series, due to debut next year.

W.W. Norton
"Space Chronicles: Facing the Ultimate Frontier" is adapted from commentaries written by Neil deGrasse Tyson over the past 15 years.
He freely acknowledges that the glory days of the space effort were driven not by economics, not by science, but by the Cold War's military realities and image-building imperatives. "We did it for military purposes, but we reap the economic benefits," he said.
Which benefits does Tyson have in mind? He noted that there have been plenty of technological spin-offs from spaceflight, ranging from satellite weather forecasting to electronic gadgetry to Tang and Teflon. "Spin-offs are great, but that's not even what I'm talking about," he said. "I'm talking about a culture that wants to dream about tomorrow, and make tomorrow happen today. That culture prevailed in the 1960s and early '70s."
Nowadays you don't hear so much about Tomorrowland. "We've been coasting on those investments, and it's finally caught up with us," Tyson said. "Meanwhile, other countries understand this investment, and they are making active gains in their innovations in science and technology. In particular, space is galvanizing that effort. We knew that would happen, because that's what happened to us in the 1960s. This is not some surprise emotion. It's already been tested ... with us. Right now it's in China, but I think we can resurrect it here going forward."
No delusional thinking
Unlike GOP presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich, who made such a splash with his pledge to build a moon base by 2020, Tyson shies away from pointing to a particular destination for the space effort. It could be the moon, or Mars, or an asteroid, or the solar system's Lagrangian gravitational balance points. And unlike Gingrich, Tyson believes space exploration efforts will always have to be led by governments. Routine operations in low Earth orbit could be handed over to private enterprise, just as airmail delivery was handed over to commercial carriers in the 1920s. But exploration is a different matter, Tyson said.
Tyson said his book's original title — before his publisher talked him out of it — was going to be "Failure to Launch: The Dreams and Delusions of Space Enthusiasts."
"Where the delusional thinking reveals itself ... is the expectation that private enterprise can lead a space frontier. No ... no is the answer," Tyson said. "Not that I don't want that to be the case. There's just no precedent for that in the history of human culture. To take something that's expensive, dangerous, unknown and risky ... put all of those together and you cannot value it in the capital markets. There's no known return on investment."
"Space Chronicles" represents Tyson's effort to lay the groundwork for informed, non-delusional decisions about America's future in space — and also work in some of the catchy topics that he's written about over the years, ranging from the prospects for extraterrestrial life to the potential for killer asteroids.
"I want to put people on firm ground of how to think about the science and engineering of space exploration, so that when it comes time to make a policy decision, they have some fluency in the ambitions of those who want to explore space," Tyson said. "The book is a celebration of space, but it's also an indictment of all the delusional thinking that has interfered with efforts to resurrect another golden age of space exploration."
Is it delusional thinking in this budget-conscious era to propose doubling NASA's budget? Or would it be a policy move just crazy enough to work — and inspire a new generation of innovation? Please feel free to weigh in with your comments, pro and con.
More from Neil deGrasse Tyson on msnbc.com:
- 2010: Why the frontier matters
- 2009: Pluto's pros and cons
- 2008: Black holes for beginners
- 2007: From black holes to black history
- 2005: Einstein and Darwin — a tale of two theories
Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter or adding Cosmic Log's Google+ page to your circle. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for other worlds.


As an educator, I see no sense in raising the education budget before raising our exploration and innovation budgets. Until we create a national culture that values exploration and innovation, kids will continue to be bored by science, math, and any aspect of technology that doesn't involve entertainment.
I can easily bring in a dozen kids who want to learn to rap, or play electric guitar, because that's what our society is selling: quick and easy. Unless we bring back that inspirational imagery of the early astronauts, of the moon landing, of the amazing ways we can change the world for the better... well, don't expect to get any attention from kids who would rather watch music videos on their iPad than spend 20 minutes on homework, because most (by the age of 12 or so) are too busy dreaming about getting laid, buying clothes, and being famous.
Excellent points, meanmrmatt. It's not enough to just simply throw more money at education. As a society we need to develop the drivers that provide incentive, a path, and a destination for the educated (i.e., jobs), who in turn develop future technologies and progress for society as a whole, in every sector. NASA is one such "driver"...
...and one which transcends the inane drivel of everyday society and pop culture in particular, as you point out.
Have you ever seen the movie 'Idiocracy'? It's a shame but our society is heading in that direction, where people do the quick, easy, cheap route to whatever goal they have.
But on the flip side, changing culture isn't nearly as easy as infusing any industry with more cash. You can't just throw a bunch of money at NASA and hope kids see those new mission and want to be scientists. That will help inspire them, but changing the culture is much more complex. There needs to be rewards for that inspiration. And they need to be rewards that people get along the way.
I wanted to be an astronaut when I was young. When I was 14 I had hip surgery and the option of being an astronaut pretty much went out the window. I have bone problems that would only be accentuated by the bone and muscle loss. It's odd to think about how that affected me psychologically, because I think it was a major part of why I turned into a complete waste of space during my 20s. I smoked copious amounts of reefer and drank 18 packs of beer by myself and made some god-awful music on my electric guitar (... I hope that stuff doesn't turn up when I run for office. ;-P )
Anyway, long story (not so) short, keeping kids motivated while they are on their path is the real key. Whether they want to be an astronaut or a scientist or an engineer, as a society it is up to us older folks to change our outlooks so that the younger folks will learn by example. We really need to become a nation of "do as I do" types and we need to not do the quick easy route kind of lifestyle that encourages celebrity and d-baggery. We need to create a world in which Jersey Shore would never have a large fan base.
that god awful music can't be any worse than what is being pushed by the media industry now can it.
If so, OMG that is bad.
LOL, I suppose you're right. There were some tasty guitar licks in there. And there were even some pretty funny tunes. But for the most part it was pretty bad. Unless you were drunk and stoned, then it freakin' rocked! lol
Interesting viewpoint as I would argue the exact opposite - education is the driver that will provide jobs. I think we could argue this chicken-and-egg relationship forever and not reach agreement.
Excellent points and I agree completely.
Most of us who can remember watching the early space years... Projects Mercury and Gemini, and even those of us who remember watching humans walk on the moon, are highly unlikely to live long enough to see man on Mars. The current gutting of the space program makes it possible that my generation won't even live to see an American again ride into space on an American spaceship.
Arx, assuming that the Earth does not end this December in the Mayan apocalypse, and assuming the United States of America doesn't completely collapse in the next 4 years, I can pretty much guarantee you will see Americans riding into space in American spaceships again. My dad was born in 1949 and I'm positive he will live to see Americans riding into space in American spaceships again.
It's not that far off. We should, by all accounts, see test flights within 5 years. It would surprise me greatly if we didn't see missions shortly thereafter.
@mob_barley
Thanks for the pep talk but... I don't share the optimism.
PS - Your dad and I may have attended school together.
Well, I can understand why you don't share the optimism. But, the commercial space industry is doing what they are doing in order to make money. And I can trust them in that regard. Greedy corporations will do what it takes to get the money. And in this case I think that's a good thing. I'm not all in favor of greedy corporations but I do trust them to go after the money. And there is certainly money to be made in transporting our astronauts and cargo to space. And along side that we will see America provide it's own means (with SLS and specifically Orion). Orion is already well into the testing phase. So, if NASA gets funding to build it's new rocket then I am confident they will have it before the end of this decade. So, there are multiple lines of attack happening and they are all leading to a much more prolific American space program. I think there is plenty to be optimistic about.
"The current gutting of the space program makes it possible that my generation won't even live to see an American again ride into space on an American spaceship."
Are you saying you expect to die within the next five years? I'm 58 and have every confidence of getting that far...
(Google: "CCDev" to see what I mean. Now, yes, getting back to the Moon will take somewhat longer, but that was not your point.)
there is so much stuff in space that we can take advantage of as a nation if we not china or russia had access to the metals and raw materials just floating around in the asteroid belts and used it to manufacture things then we could sell to the rest of the world and have trillions in revenue and make america the world super economy forever but im guessing that private businesses are already lining up so that they can have more money and buy more governments and then own everything including you as a person and the earth you stand on
I'm 57 yrs. old for God's sake. We should have had colonies on our moon, Mars, and other sites in our solar system and already headed outward into the universe by now. We've had the brainpower and the raw materials for all this time and have still hung onto that "almighty dollar" and fear of the death of a human as a reason for why we are unable to achieve greatness as a WORLD. So why don't we get off our rears and forget about money and death and GET OUT THERE.
Since the Apollo Program successfully fulfilled JFK's goal in 1969 the American people have not been solidly behind making space exploration a priority. Tyson spoke about that during his appearance on The Daily Show last night. We won the "Space Race" with the Soviets and other issues took priority for our government. Congress cut the budget and Nixon had no incentive to keep such a prominent program that was so associated with his bitter rival, JFK, well funded. Apollo missions 18, 19 & 20 were cancelled despite NASA already having the flight hardware already built and paid for ready to go. NASA had to fight tooth & nail just to get the Shuttle program to follow up on Apollo. The problem is not that our Presidents lack vision or that Congress doesn't care because those are symptoms of voter apathy. Until the American people find that excitement for space exploration again and demand that Congress fully funds NASA over the long-term based on a comprehensive national space policy our nation will continue to flounder in the backwash of this new ocean. We will watch other nations take over and dominate the high ground of space and reap the benefits of their investment in this field of enterprise. We will become a 2nd rate power and sit around complaining with only our glorious history in space to give us cold comfort for the rest of this century. JFK and the visionaries of the 50's and 60's who saw our future success in space would be very disappointed in us and depressed to see that their hard work had not been followed up on by the American people.
I just saw how the military is worried about China's space program, I bet we'll see more money in NASA because of that.
John, you may be right, but 15 to 20% of NASA's budget already goes towards DOD space related stuff.
I agree with the commentators who point out that how the money is spent is more important than how much is spent. The SLS seems like a waste to me, and a very expensive one — if NASA spent the same amount on, say, orbital fuel depots, market guarantees, and prizes, it could get a heck of a lot more done even with its current budget. And in that case, I'd love to see what amazing things it could do with twice that.
But, I think it's likely futile to expect the public to get excited about space exploration again. This is the country where a significant chunk of the population thinks evolution and climate change are both myths perpetrated by evil scientists to undermine their god's will (or something). If you can't reason about science and history, how can you possibly see the long-term importance of expanding beyond the Earth?
Comment from: Lee Jun-fan
NASA accepts donations, if you'd really like to contribute:
Reply: I make "contributions." They are called "taxes!
"The discussion is where we as public "contributors" want our "contributions" applied.
The White House should have its budjet halfed and NASA should have its budjet doubled
Wow, imagine where we would be or what kind of technology would have been developed if we spent half of what we do on DOD towards NASA...