Post #1108862

2026-04-10 08:13 UTC

I&#39;m as fascinated by the Artemis II mission as many other people, but as scientist I&#39;m frustrated that experts interviewed about it in the media are rarely asked to justify the truly astronomical cost. So far the program is reported to have cost $93Bn, with the direct costs of this mission alone amounting to more than $4Bn. I&#39;m perhaps particularly sensitive to this because I&#39;m frequently asked to justify funding three orders of magnitude smaller that we have used to improve knowledge of how the Antarctic ice sheet will respond to climate change and contribute to future sea-level rise.

Replies (7)

@donlamb_1@mastodon.online 2026-04-10 13:17

@PoLaRobs@fediscience.org I heard a NASA interview where they stated, "We're going to get a lot of great pictures." Like, wow.

Open ##2790641
@foolishowl@social.coop 2026-04-10 15:29

@PoLaRobs@fediscience.org Wow, that dwarfs the costs of the mission to retrieve Martian soil samples. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_sample-return_mission#Proposals

Open ##2790647
@jfmezei@cosocial.ca 2026-04-10 17:27

@PoLaRobs@fediscience.org Pork. When the Shuttle was killed , certain key industries knocked on politicians doors for sustinence. Politicians dictated the new rocket had to have solid rocket boosters. Dictated use of shuttle engines with tank made at Michoud. ATK (now part of larger company) made not only shuttle SRBs but also intercontinental missiles which is cyclical business, and SRBs keeps it alive between large ICBM purchases.

Open ##2790648
@TimWardCam@c.im 2026-04-12 09:50

@PoLaRobs@fediscience.org We know what the justification is - "gotta get there before the Chinese." (*Why* the USA gotta get there before the Chinese is the bit that isn't explained.)

Open ##2790652
@ewen@social.ewenbell.com 2026-04-12 10:25

@PoLaRobs@fediscience.org This comes across like a zero-sum equation. I think back to the likes of Carl Sagan and the arguments for space missions, and many many other scientific endeavours. I like to think the question isn't so much "why spend this much money on space exploration" and more "why don't we spend more on health and education at home" instead of weapons of war or corporate welfare. I also feel too much of science careers are spent justifying money and efficiency and relevance, instead of encouraging innovation. Universities have been forced into justifying their capacity to serve industry, instead of serving society. Same goes for Arts funding. We need humanities skills as much as knowledge itself. I just listened to a fascinating talk by the late Stephen Garton on this topic: https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/bigideas/stephen-garton-universities-humanities-academy-lecture/106341138

Open ##2790656
@RosyMaths@mathstodon.xyz 2026-04-12 10:31

@PoLaRobs@fediscience.org 😭 I 100% sympathise with you on this. It's unbelievable.

Open ##2790658
@Amgine@mamot.fr 2026-04-12 21:26

@PoLaRobs@fediscience.org I am connected to one of the leading schools of nursing. There may be a few dozen grants above $10M. This is what world nursing care leadership looks like.

Open ##2790659