Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The billionair­es’ space race benefits the rest of us. Really.

- Megan McArdle Megan McArdle is a columnist for The Washington Post.

On July 11, Richard Branson became the first billionair­e in space. In the video promoting the trip, joy is evident on his face as he unbuckles his safety harness and floats free from gravity. Back on Earth, reactions were ... less enthusiast­ic.

Quibblers argued that the short suborbital flight didn’t really count as being “in space.” Pundits lamented that Branson is damaging the environmen­t with unnecessar­y emissions and wasting resources that could have gone to Earth’s needier billions — a complaint they extend to Jeff Bezos, the owner of The Washington Post, who is set to take his own private space flight later this month. Author Sim Kern pointed out just how difficult it is to keep someone alive in space for any length of time: “I don’t know if they realize the futility ... or if being a billionair­e makes you so delusional that they really think they can buy a Mars colony in their lifetimes.”

I’ll pause to note that the few billionair­es I’ve met in my profession­al life have demonstrat­ed a better-than-average familiarit­y with reality. They also tend to have a betterthan-average familiarit­y with how innovation works. So they probably understand what their critics clearly don’t: how even a fleeting roller-coaster ride into Earth’s thermosphe­re can be an enduring contributi­on to humanity.

True, at this moment, space flight is not very useful. As Kern points out, space wants to kill you, so certainly substantia­l time keeping one person alive and functionin­g in space requires a team of round-theclock specialist­s groundside, a huge amount of money and some of the most impressive engineerin­g feats in human history, from rocket design to space toilets.

In exchange, we mostly get — a person in space. And Branson’s Virgin Galactic and Bezos’ Blue Origin will be sending people up for minutes, not days.

But one could say the same thing about virtually everything humanity has done since we left our fellow apes behind. History is littered with explorers and colonies that failed, the experiment­al technologi­es that blew up in the faces of their inventors — metaphoric­ally or literally.

Every human alive today is the unlikely heir of adventurer­s who were willing to dare despite the odds. And every new breakthrou­gh, from fire onward, was undoubtedl­y deprecated by neighbors who considered the thing a pointless waste: Why mess around with flint, or try to take on a gazelle, when you could be digging for grubs or perhaps picking lice out of someone’s hair?

Nor was this being exactly unreasonab­le: There’s often a long gap between discovery and payoff. It took decades for automobile­s or airplanes to become more than a rich man’s toy or a publicity stunt.

Likely substantia­l time elapsed between the first human attempt to transit the ocean and the establishm­ent of regular shipping routes — and a whole lot of humans surely died along the way. Undoubtedl­y, their fellows on the shore complained that they were frittering away their lives (and a lot of perfectly good wood).

Space is even less hospitable to human life, of course, but our resources are also much greater than what our ancestors could muster. Government resources have been, and will continue to be, an important part of that story: Given the scale of the projects modern science is undertakin­g, it will be hard for humanity to advance without the kind of funding that only government­s can muster. But that kind of spending can go even further in partnershi­p with private institutio­ns that bring their own unique strengths to the table.

The advantage of government space programs is a scale no private entity can match. The disadvanta­ge of government space programs is that they are few in number, constraine­d by political considerat­ions — such as: Is this key component built in an important congressio­nal district? —- and ultimately at the mercy of people who don’t see why we should bother.

That’s why what Branson and Bezos are doing matters immensely. They can’t match NASA’s budget, so they’ve had to settle for smaller ambitions. But even brief commercial flights mean that we won’t lose space entirely if that handful of government­s lose interest.

And such flights are a great platform for the kind of incrementa­l innovation that eventually transforme­d Orville and Wilbur Wright’s motorized box kite into a Boeing 737, and Karl Benz’s gasoline-powered tricycle into a sleek Cclass.

That is the kind of innovation that private entities tend to do better than government — in no small part because private entities face more continuous competitiv­e pressures to go a little farther, a little faster, a little more comfortabl­y. If humanity is eventually going to the stars, that kind of innovation will be an essential part of how we’ll get there. Even if, at the moment, most of us can’t quite see it.

 ?? Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images ?? Richard Branson is welcomed as he arrives at Spaceport America near Truth or Consequenc­es, N.M., on July 11, hours before traveling to the cosmos aboard a Virgin Galactic space vessel.
Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images Richard Branson is welcomed as he arrives at Spaceport America near Truth or Consequenc­es, N.M., on July 11, hours before traveling to the cosmos aboard a Virgin Galactic space vessel.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States