backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 48 comment(s) - last by NaughtyGeek.. on Mar 15 at 9:36 AM

The U.S. space organization does not have the monetary resources to track all of the flying objects that could pose a threat to Earth

Even though the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is able to detect and monitor most asteroids that are close enough in case of potential impact with Earth, the U.S. space organization lacks the proper funding to get it done within the deadline that Congress imposed in 2005.  Specifically, Congress wants NASA to detect 90% of the near-Earth objects (NEO) range from 140 meters in diameter up to more than a kilometer and a half.

The NASA report speculates there are around 20,000 asteroids and other flying objects that are currently in orbit somewhat close to the Earth.  But financial constraints will not allow NASA to detect, monitor, catalog and characterize all of the NEOs like Congress requested two years ago -- it is more likely that NASA will have to focus only on the flying objects that pose a real threat to Earth.

To accomplish the plan enacted by Congress by 2020 would force NASA to use ground-based telescopes that are used by other research and space agencies; the likely creation of a dedicated observatory designed specifically for tracking NEOs; and NASA to launch a space craft that would monitor a safety cushion around the Earth.  The report estimates that all of these projects would cost more than $1 billion, which is a high price that NASA cannot afford.

The Pan-STARRS telescope in Hawaii is one tool that is being used by three UK universities to help locate possible Earth-threatening asteroids.  The powerful telescope is able to detect objects from 300m in diameter, which is large enough to have a strong impact on the Earth.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

great.
By Quiksel on 3/14/2007 12:59:55 AM , Rating: 4
Now we're gonna need Bruce Willis to sacrifice himself for the sake of humanity. Dang, can't we get some more funding for this stuff? Bruce Willis could DIE! We can't have that.

/cue up the Aerosmith power ballads and airbrushed muscles on Ben Affleck

:)




RE: great.
By kristof007 on 3/14/2007 1:44:51 AM , Rating: 2
I thought you making the Fifth Element Reference but then I realized you were talking about Armageddon. I kind of liked that movie cheesy as it was.


RE: great.
By oTAL (blog) on 3/14/2007 3:11:28 AM , Rating: 3
Sure... he must have been talking about the fifth element cause Bruce Wilis really sacrifices himself in that movie...
You know... the romantic involvement with Mila Jogovich... Must have been really painful for him... poor guy....

/me tries to take of Leeloo of his mind... fails miserably...


RE: great.
By vorgusa on 3/14/2007 9:10:52 AM , Rating: 2
wow really makes me wonder about how many times Bruce Willis has saved the world... in movies of course


Stupid
By Nik00117 on 3/14/2007 1:12:30 AM , Rating: 3
We should track them, and spend the money to track them. Asteroids are the something which we can stop from hitting us, but only if we know they are coming.

Rember 9/11 are we getting into that gear again? Saying ah it'll never happen. WEll guess what when it does will you be saying the same thing?




RE: Stupid
By m1ldslide1 on 3/14/07, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid
By copiedright on 3/14/07, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid
By Schadenfroh on 3/14/2007 8:39:17 AM , Rating: 4
Check your sarcasm meter, I am about an hour away from the beach in Mississippi, I really know how bad FEMA is!

Luckily, we have REMA (Redneck Emergency Management Agency) and thanks to them and their gas guzzling oversized trucks / SUVs (that people around here hate so much) and chainsaws, the roads in my town were cleared the day after Katrina by private citizens and not the government and trust me, after the storm.... the roads were screwed. (they do not call it the pine belt for nothing!)


RE: Stupid
By hubajube on 3/14/2007 6:09:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
(they do not call it the pine belt for nothing!)
I thought it was the bible belt? oh wait, that's Virginia.


RE: Stupid
By copiedright on 3/15/2007 3:58:46 AM , Rating: 2
I wasn't being sarcastic!

I follow a lot of foreign politics and I understand how the replacement of FEMA under the DOHS has crippled its response and rebuilding capabilities.


Lack of Priorities
By Ard on 3/14/2007 3:00:49 AM , Rating: 2
It always amazes me that NASA, one of the most important government agencies we have, is also the most underfunded.




RE: Lack of Priorities
By ButterFlyEffect78 on 3/14/07, Rating: -1
RE: Lack of Priorities
By mezman on 3/14/2007 2:13:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hahaha, you doomsday prophecy people are so f-ing nuts it's hilarious.


RE: Lack of Priorities
By yacoub on 3/14/2007 7:28:02 AM , Rating: 2
Cartoon Announcer: THIS LOOKS LIKE A JOB FOR...


RE: Lack of Priorities
By FITCamaro on 3/14/07, Rating: 0
RE: Lack of Priorities
By SmokeRngs on 3/14/2007 1:52:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Thank Clinton and the American public. Clinton cancelled a lot of our next gen spacecraft plans and had the prototypes scrapped.


As much as I hate Bill Clinton, you're putting the blame in the wrong place. Congress drafts and approves the budget. A president may push for something to be included or removed from the budget, but it's Congress that has to write it in there. The president only signs or vetoes the budget passed by Congress.

I will agree that part of the problem is the citizens of the US. Most seem to be apathetic at best when it comes to anything involving space other than having satellites up there for communication or entertainment purposes. Without the public pushing Congress for increased funding for NASA, any funding increase will be hard fought and probably small.

I'm not sure the current setup concerning NASA is the best. I would like to see more private sector involvement and in more aspects than there currently is. This could increase funding for NASA outside the government mandated budget. It could also give a bit of a boost to the companies interested in civilian flight to space which would raise the public's awareness. This type of partnership wouldn't necessarily be limited to just the flight industry. I'm sure there are many other industries which see benefit to be able to travel to space or just some of the technology that NASA has.

Not all information and technology NASA has could be shared of course. There would be restrictions to many things but I think overall it would improve the efficiency of the space program and put it on a much faster track forward.


Quite Sad
By NaughtyGeek on 3/14/2007 12:11:15 PM , Rating: 1
And here in lies the true downfall of man. We actually put a price tag on something like this. How in the world can you put a price tag on the survival of the ENTIRE HUMAN RACE! Are there really people out there that would say we shouldn't make sure that this project is funded properly? The contractors that provide NASA with materials and equipment can't skimp a little on their overpaid executives salaries and bonuses to help bring costs down to a manageable level? Give me a break. If we can't afford a project like this, then perhaps it's best if our species does get wiped from the planet by some oversized hunk of rock.




RE: Quite Sad
By rcc on 3/14/2007 4:48:46 PM , Rating: 3
Another facet of the downfall of man. I notice you are happy to suggest someone else take one for the sake of mankind, but you didn't volunteer yourself.

How about if we all skip lunch once a week and send the money to NASA for this program. It wouldn't work, but it'd be interesting.


RE: Quite Sad
By NaughtyGeek on 3/15/2007 9:36:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
but you didn't volunteer yourself.


You either missed my point or your illustrating it for me, this is everyones problem and it those with the most that have the most to lose. I pay my taxes and from a percentage standpoint, I'm paying way more than the group I singled out. But anyway, the fact that there is any sort of financial considerations in a project of this sort is why we shouldn't last as a species. If there ain't a buck to be made, what's the point right? To hell with whether or not any of us will be here to see that pile of "wealth" you've amassed at the expense of the entire species.


Why NASA?
By jmunjr on 3/14/2007 2:28:26 AM , Rating: 1
Why is this NASA's responsibility? Let someone else handle this..




RE: Why NASA?
By lennylim on 3/14/2007 4:49:30 AM , Rating: 2
Who do you want tracking them then? The same guys tracking the terrorists?

Ideally it should be an international effort. But we all know how well countries cooperate.


When it rains, it pours
By Griswold on 3/14/2007 5:12:58 AM , Rating: 2
The National Science Foundation plans to shut down the worlds largest radio telescope in arecibo, puerto rico, by 2011 - which also happens to be the most powerful radar telescope.

Its not so much the ability to spot new asteroids that makes this telescope so valuable for this task, its mainly the superior radar capacity that is invaluable to scan asteroids - you need to know what its made of/surface looks like to defend yourself against it.
The only facility with a comparable capacity is the Goldstone antennae complex in the mojave desert - albeit at a much lower resolution.