The Soviet Union sent the first man into space, as well as the first woman and the first dog. An American was the first human to step on the lunar surface. China has built the world’s largest radio telescope. Arguably, the three countries, with Russia as an unchallenged successor of the Soviet Union, have the courtside seats to space exploration and utilization.
Before OSIRIS-REx completes its mission to Bennu or an Earthian sets foot on real Mars, not in Mars-simulated dome in Hawaii, there is something much closer to home and seemingly within an easy reach: the Earth’s devoted Moon. And specifically, it is the Moon’s Helium-3-rich top layer that Russia, the U.S., and China would love to mine and process cheaply as the new-generation energy source. Some believe that the recent SPACE Act of 2015 serving to “facilitate commercial exploration for and commercial recovery of space resources by United States citizens” (Sec. 51302, para. (a)(1) had precisely the Moon’s helium on the agenda. Roscosmos may be postponing its Moon missions, but it has never taken its eyes off the Moon’s helium and the faster the country can get to utilize it, the faster it can claim a major stake in all of the Moon’s resources. True, according to the Outer Space Treaty of 1967, Russia would not be able to claim sovereignty, but it could successfully skirt the issue through something like the U.S.’ SPACE Act with private and state corporations engaging in “commercial recovery of space resources.”
And when American, Russian, and Chinese entities are collecting the Moon’s abundant Helium-3, do Haiti or Moldova get a piece of the Moon’s pie? Barring the often-cited parallels with regulations of international waters here on Earth, does the Moon belong to everyone or only to those who can get there? What if we divided the Moon’s surface among all countries in proportion to their population size and encouraged space leasing by foreign companies on a given country’s territory. The U.S. would still get a sizable chunk of the Moon, much smaller than China’s but more than double that of Russia’s. And if American companies wished to collect the Moon’s helium on say Haiti’s portion of the Moon, they’d pay a usage fee to the Haiti’s people, hopefully represented by the country’s government.
With territorial claims in Antarctica yet to be settled and Russia’s relentless quest to legally claim the North Pole as its own, we may need to start the conversation about dividing the Moon fairly before the much coveted Helium-3 is appropriated by the savviest explorers. And contrary to the Cadillac’s famed commercial, Americans may not be the only ones going back up there (even if they left the keys in the car https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=xNzXze5Yza8 ).
What an interesting conundrum, “who owns the moon?” Whenever I ponder questions such as this, after allowing my brain to wonder all over the macro-economic sphere of thought, I always come back to capitalism works, and it works darn well. Few people would argue against the idea that capitalism starts with self-concern. But capitalism creates entrepreneurs, thus people that truly have no choice but to concern themselves with the needs and desires of their customers. What is often missed is that within the system of capitalism, entrepreneurs by the very nature of the system must shun greed because the idea of responding to the needs of customers is the quite the opposite of materialism.
To get to the moon, these current or future entrepreneurs must collaborate with others. No one is going to the moon by themselves. By building coalitions to achieve the end goal of making money from the resources of the moon, entrepreneurs cannot focus on their own needs, but instead focus on the the needs of society. This is what makes capitalism great. For an entrepreneur to succeed, they must meet the needs of others in society.
However, there is a historical downside to capitalism. The down side was the exploitation of resources without regard for the long-term future of the resource. Today, I would argue that this is old school capitalism and not new-age capitalism. New age capitalists understand that if their company is not seen as green, then the company risks customers freely consuming their product. Still, potential exploitation is where the prudent check and balance of government regulation comes into play. Allowing capitalism to rule the ownership of the moon is the proverbial a rising tide raises all ships, but exploitation of the moon’s resources should be done with prudent regulation…prudent being the optimum word, but you could substitute the words “minimum necessary.”
I think the Outer Space Treaty was written under the assumption that only state actors would have the technological capabilities to conduct activities in space, especially on the moon. Now that we have wristwatches with as more computing power than NASA had at its disposal in the 1960s, clearly the possibilities have expanded. The U.S. SPACE Act is an effort to open space travel for commercial purposes by taking active steps to establish rules of the road. Corporations may see great opportunity in space travel and other commercial endeavors, but there is also considerable risk that international competition may lead to unfavorable terms in the future. U.S. efforts to set its own rules for activities such as mineral mining on the moon should stimulate other countries to follow suit, leading perhaps to a UN effort like the Law of the Sea Treaty, which attempted to establish common rules for deep sea mineral extraction outside of territorial waters. An agreement like this would ensure that while countries/corporations that make the early investment in space activities can reap the rewards, those “property rights” would not be permanent or amount to any kind of long term sovereignty over a celestial object.
I’m ashamed to say that I’ve never given this topic much thought, but it raises a number of questions for me. How do you divide land fairly amongst individuals who don’t necessarily own the planet on which the land is found? We’ve evolved since the beginning of the space age to not wonder who will reach the moon first, but to wonder who will “collect” the moon.
Helium 3, while an important factor in this area, is not the only factor influencing the actions of the major players in the game. The regulation of the collection of Helium 3 will come in due time, after each inch of the Moon’s surface has been allocated to the appropriate countries. Will barriers be built? Will lines be drawn? In this discussion, we’re not just talking about cutting an object in half. Such actions would require a great deal of administration and regulation. If America were to collect Helium 3 from another country’s section, what would the consequences be? How do you put a price on a material so rare that people will travel 239,000 miles for collection?
This discussion opens up a conversation about the future of space, the Moon and space travel in general. We’re seeing the desire for space exploration grow with every day, but how do we ensure that each country has the same opportunities and is given the same consideration in these conversations? In my opinion, in the coming years, we will see a great deal of policy come forth in regards to space exploration and travel. We will be witnesses to monumental moments in the development of this field.