Space Exploration

For clarity I will define space exploration as the investigation, by means of manned and unmanned spacecraft, of the reaches of the universe beyond Earth’s atmosphere and the use of the information so gained to increase knowledge of the cosmos and benefit humanity. Contention 1: Private companies are far less reliable than public agencies, and will often cut corners to make money. Private companies have one obligation, profit. Thus they will do anything to make profit. These drastically increased the chance of them trying to make cheaper products. For example, the Audi 5000 was redesigned in 1984 for an affordable price of $23,000. During 1985, there was an increase in consumer complaints of an unexpected sudden acceleration in the Audi 5000 car. Six people have died and 700 accidents have occurred because of this acceleration problem. The Audi Company cut corners to ma a cheaper car all for profit. This can happen with space exploration as well. Companies will not give out billions of dollars carelessly. There must be a monetary incentive thus venturing deep into space exploration is unlikely. However with public sectors,the intention is to gain knowledge for the good of the people. We also must consider the fact that if space exploration is private-based the guarantee of a safe flight isn't close to as high as a public flight. One example of a crash, as reported by "International Business Times" on August 24th 2011 was when the Amazon's unmanned rocket crashed dug a test flight. Also there was a terrible accident with Virgin Galactic which killed three people. The private sector launch success rate is 67%, while the private sector launch success rate is 97%. It is apparent that private companies are at an extreme deprivation when it comes to safety and reliability so we should not trust them with such an important task. Contention 2: The is that all private sectors neglect and fail to address in depth due to inability to have fiscal comeback is space debris, which has provided a great danger to human space exploration, as well as space ventures in general. Space debris, an ongoing and gradually growing concern that has become real from what once seemed impossible must be addressed directly without neglect. The radar screens at NORAD in Colorado, a leading observatory in the astronomical field, have detected over 100,000 chunks of debris and junk that is orbiting in almost all levels, starting from low orbit to the outer reaches of our magnetic field at speeds exceeding 18,000 miles/per hour. This has started to grow to become a very tangible fact of reality that we must learn to come to terms with in our debate about space exploration. First off, this space debris is vital to concern if we are to debate further about space exploration, for it poses a concern all vessels venturing beyond low orbit, as well as satellites and outer space telescopes that form the foundation of the space exploration field. The public sector, however, has already felt the impact of this issue and has taken steps to form orbital sets, an ongoing process even now to track the trajectories of such debris. Howe, there is little incentive for a commercial entity to build its own space surveillance network. With the growth in the commercial space industry, telecommunications, and with the real prospect of affordable deep space exploration on the horizon, the control and monitoring of debris will become an increasingly important factor in the planning of future space activity. Contention 3: There is no available fiscal comeback for the private sector, thus it is improbable to assume that any investments will be made by them. Some may argue that demand will be higher because the private sector will seek to go space as well, once a private firm is capable of providing a means for which they can take a person into orbit. This seems to be the logic behind the administration's plans. It hopes increased demand will lead to new suppliers, which promotes competition, which eventually lowers prices. Unfortunately, increased demand normally leads to greater, less expensive access to space for people, largely because no compelling private rationale has been offered to engage in human spaceflight. Since 2001, 7 private individuals have traveled to the ISS, paying between $40-$50 million per person to collectively spend time in space, approximating to around a little less than $350 million over the course of a decade. This obviously is not a valid means by which we can ensure capital investments by the private sector, due to flimsy comeback and risky incentive. Thus it is not only not guaranteed that the private will invest, but also on the contrary, there is no such motivation for them to do so, thus it will have a minimal impact. Thanks and I urge a CON vote. . http://www.britannica.com...http://multinationalmonitor.org...http://www.ibtimes.com...http://www.space.com...www.nasa.gov/.../384767main_SUMMARY%20REPORT%20-%20F...http://www.thetechherald.com...