That strikes a funny note, though I’m not sure it was intended that way. It’s just that I too noticed the bandwagon of thought and emotion directed toward the red planet, some fanciful and some more thoughtful, but all well into the future. I even occasionally hopped on, enjoying those nice 3D models of habitats built into the hillsides, and greenhouses growing Mars lettuce.

Through it all, though, I also kept reading Wingo & Spudis (and others, too), and after finding a critical mass of good analysis and solid engineering, I came around. Your quote “to sustainably colonize Mars we must industrialize the Moon” is spot on. I’d say it’s true not only in logistical terms, but that the industrial base of the Moon will pay for settling Mars in a sustainable way. This may be in terms of corporate revenues and a tax base, but also in that lunar propellants, sent to cislunar depots, will allow more food, robots, colonists and other mass to be sent to Mars.

From the moment ice on the Moon was revealed in 2010 everything should have changed. I lay blame squarely on a campaign contribution made by a certain “entrepreneur” with a hobby rocket. I am no naysayer and have always advocated a state sponsored Super Heavy Lift Vehicle and a lunar return. I do not apologize for my skepticism and being a NewSpace denier and for the last seven years been shunned, harassed, and ultimately banned from almost all forums discussing space because of this view. The legion of toxic groupies that have hijacked all public discourse about space are, as I state whenever I am allowed to, the worst thing that has ever happened to space exploration.

“The path to new and revolutionary capabilities is often littered with stumbling blocks and naysayers.”

The real stumbling block has always been the military industrial complex. The most significant event in the space program was the Apollo 1 fire and was, in my view, the beginning of the end of the first and only space age. Aerospace concerns realized from that day forward Human Space Flight was going to be hard money while cold war toys were a fortune waiting to be made. Norm Augustine could explain how that works. And the rest, as they say, is history.

That is a great line, especially about space resource utilization. Will have to start quoting him.

Teller’s X-ray laser directed most of the energy of a hydrogen bomb in one direction in a tight beam. This is coincidentally the working principle of Nuclear Pulse Propulsion which super-heats and accelerates a cloud of plasma derived from a slug onto a plate or sail surface. The Isp of such a system is measured in the tens of thousands. As Freeman Dyson noted in his work on Project Orion the problem with pulse propulsion is of course the fallout. Used anywhere within the magnetosphere of the Earth the radioactive byproducts will eventually contaminate the atmosphere. The Moon is just outside the magnetosphere.

I want to thank you for the link to the “”Defense Applications of Near-Earth Resources”” report. I had never come across that before.

You stated:
“As for space resource utilization, much of the current skepticism stems from the notion that we can somehow lower launch costs to a point, where everything we need in space, can be cheaply launched from Earth. ”

For me, I want launch costs lowered so it is easier and cheaper for a start up to access space resources. Where I find the skepticism is two fold.

Group A: Every rock in the solar system is sacred and should not be touched by capitalism.
Group B You should fix ever problem on planet earth before you worry about going to space.

Thanks again for the post.

I would add one possible player to the mix.

Detailed study of the Earths environment with the intent to understand weather patterns. While I am an Anthropogenic Global Climate Change Skeptic (or denier as its adherents would have it), the natural short and longer term changes in the climate in regions of the Earth (as opposed to the Earths supposed single environment) have very important implications both humanitarian and military.

During the period being discussed I participated in EVA studies for the SEI (on loan from what was then still called Space Station Freedom). There was another parallel project called Mission to Planet Earth. Even as SEI was being abandoned Mission to Planet Earth still enjoyed strong support among the very people who opposed SEI. That is it did until it was realized that the basic science requirements listed for Mission to Planet Earth would require orbital platforms large enough to need the same combinations of Heavy Lift Capability and Orbital Assembly (I was a “fly on the wall” for some of these discussions before returning to Space Station Freedom). When that became known support for Mission to Planet Earth eroded and it was de-scoped.

If the capability (by means of lunar resources) to build platforms that could meet the original Mission to Planet Earth requirements were to become available, it would be interesting to note what the attitude of the environmental community would be.

Regarding the Moon, I met Dennis Wingo at Maker Faire Bay Area (did a video interview). My first question was “Everyone loves to talk about Mars except you and Paul Spudis, why?” Dennis answered there are others besides Paul and him, and as with discussion with his friend Robert Zubrin that to sustainably colonize Mars we must industrialize the Moon.

Wingo said here we are at Maker Faire with 3D printers and all this advanced technology we didn’t have 40 years ago and this makes going to the Moon much easier.

“We live in the 21st century now, time to act like it!”