By Rich Lowry
Friday, July 23, 2021
Rarely has stunning human achievement been greeted with
as much churlishness as when Richard Branson and Jeff Bezos managed
to fly or launch themselves into space.
There may be all sorts of legitimate grounds for
criticizing billionaires, but attaining suborbital flight under their own power
doesn’t seem one of them.
Branson and Bezos were mocked and criticized for not
paying enough taxes, for being selfish and wasteful, for ignoring problems here
on Earth, and so on.
Even by contemporary Twitter-driven standards, all of
this is exceptionally stupid. It speaks of a contempt for human endeavor as
such, and a casual disregard for a hugely promising new model of space
exploration.
First of all, it’s not unusual for entrepreneurial
pioneers to be obsessively consumed by the development of a new technology and
to want to partake of the glory of its rollout. One can only imagine what would
have been said about prior instances.
Couldn’t Samuel Morse have been less of a showboat about
it when he sent his famous message on the new telegraph line between Washington
and Baltimore, “What hath God wrought?”
Wasn’t it incredibly selfish of Henry Ford to build
racing cars early in his career, when winning automobile races does nothing to
improve the human condition?
Why did the Wright brothers waste their time flying a
plane at Kitty Hawk, when they could have focused on the abuses in the
meatpacking industry instead?
It’s not as though government space flight via NASA has
been knocking anyone’s socks off. The space shuttle was a flawed program, but
since the last flight in 2011, the agency hasn’t been able to send people into
space on its own.
NASA has been hobbled by the political imperatives of a
Congress that considers almost every government initiative a jobs program and
by its flawed contracting model, as well as other inevitable government
inefficiencies.
Private actors have stepped into the gap, especially
another space entrepreneur, Elon Musk. He is now routinely launching
satellites into orbit for NASA and the military. He has flown astronauts to the
International Space Station. These aren’t vanity projects, but essential
contributions to our existing publicly sanctioned space program.
Musk’s rockets are significantly cheaper than those of
NASA. Following the heroic period of innovation with the onset of the
U.S.–Soviet space race, the cost of space launches stayed stubbornly flat after
1970. Then, along came Musk.
Lower cost means more satellite launches. More satellite
launches mean cheaper satellites, because of efficiencies of scale. When
everything is less expensive, it creates an incentive for more technological
innovation — engineers don’t have to be as cautious anymore.
In true entrepreneurial fashion, Musk is working to make
his own technology obsolete. He wants to supplant the partially reusable Falcon
9 rocket with the fully reusable Starship rocket. He’s not satisfied, in what
was the old aerospace model, to keep taking the government’s money for his
current technology until the government directs him to develop something new.
The private space industry is opening up new vistas in an
enormously consequential area. Consider just one dimension. In any major conflict
that involves rival militaries targeting each other’s satellites, the power
that has the ability to launch new satellites quickly and easily will have an
edge. If Musk, Bezos, or someone else helps provide that edge, they are making
a contribution to the national interest that can’t be matched by the average
Senate committee chair, let alone the average caviling commentator on Twitter.
The typical critiques of capitalists over the past decade
have been that they only make incomprehensibly complicated bets on the markets,
or that they take over existing companies in pointless exercises in “vulture
capitalism,” or that they outsource our jobs. But here are, in the case of Musk
and Bezos, capitalists making very tangible products, with easily understandable
— indeed, inspiring — goals, in conjunction with the U.S. government.
What’s not to like?
No comments:
Post a Comment