![]() |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Talking Point Is the space station a waste of money?
It is hard to put a price tag on intangible benefits like international cooperation and shared knowledge. The tangible benefits may not be realized for many years, yet the potential rewards justify the risk and the expense.
I feel that unmanned space exploration is a better way to spend money. Working on international projects may help promote world peace but I have not seen much evidence of that as yet. Also at some point it is probable that accidents in space will happen and with manned missions people will die.
The first part of the multi-billion dollar International Space Station has been launched into the skies, heralding what some say is the dawn of an international era in space.
It will take several years and cost many billions of dollars to complete, but when finished, it will be so big that you will be able to see it from the ground.
Many scientists say it is the greatest achievement since man first stepped on the moon.
It is the most complex engineering task ever undertaken and is designed to match the needs and ambitions of mankind as it enters a new millennium.
But do we really need it?
The station's escalating costs are causing alarm, with many observers estimating that the total cost could reach $50bn or higher. Leading US scientists argue this is stifling other areas of space research.
US politicians have said it is a relic of the cold war and was developed for political reasons to counter a perceived threat in space posed by the then Soviet Union. But others would argue cementing relations between the US and Russia can only be a good thing.
Yuri Semyonov of Russia's Energia space company: "We still have some contradictions, we still have combat missiles aimed at each other, but the predominant trend is the state of co-operation and doing things together. "
So is the International Space Station a pioneering project or a white elephant?
What do you think?
|
Your reaction in full |
||||||||||||||||||||||||