Why the Obsession With the Moon and Mars?

Whatever tech companies tell you, there's more to the future than AI. SXSW London is covering ‘Futurism In Practice’ in a series of talks, looking at the frontier tech set to define the coming years: from robotics to space travel. Across a week in June, you’ll hear from the most innovative thinkers in the genre. Ahead of then, for our Trend Reports series, journalist Nick Thompson asks: Why are so many billionaires obsessed with sending so much money out into space?

Despite our evergreen difficulties here on Earth, the space business has never seemed more alive. Over the last week, NASA slingshotted astronauts around the moon for the first time in over 50 years with its Artemis II mission, which is a precursor to an eventual lunar landing. But space, the moon and Mars are no longer just the domain of governmental space agencies; rather, they are a hodgepodge of private, commercial, and governmental entities aligning and, at times, competing in a reinvigorated space gold rush.

All of which begs the question: Why? What’s with this obsession with putting people in space?

“I think people have many different motivations that have driven them to try to think about space, to understand space, and to try to move us towards a future where we might actually be able to live in space,” says Dr. Scott Solomon, biosciences professor at Rice University, and author of Becoming Martian: How Living in Space Will Change Our Bodies and Minds.

“Some people are driven by curiosity, wonder. Others see potential for money to be made. Others see it as an opportunity to start over with a new civilisation and get things right this time. To me, the most compelling argument is that if we don't do that, then eventually something might happen on Earth, either a natural disaster or something self-inflicted, that could wipe us out.”

You all know about space tourism, because it captures headlines. Probably, you’ve seen the image of Katy Perry stumbling out of a Bezosian space craft, because it’s seared into our collective imagination. Space tourism is a thing, and there is definitely money to be made. In fact, UBS Investment Bank estimates the space tourism sector could generate $4 billion annually. “In that sense, space tourism can be considered an emerging market rather than a novelty,” says Robert A. Goehlich, space tourism expert and adjunct assistant professor at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Worldwide.

So, what companies are there in the space? A roll-call follows of businesses operating reusable spacecraft. You’ve got Axiom Space, which, using SpaceX hardware, takes businessmen to the ISS Aerospace (they charged $55 million a head on their first launch). Virgin Atlantic has successfully launched seven commercial suborbital flights;. Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin completed 17 crewed missions before pausing its New Shepherd space flights in January to reorient resources towards its “human lunar capabilities”, a decision they say reflects their “commitment to the nation's goal of returning to the Moon and establishing a permanent, sustained lunar presence.” SpaceX, while not a space tourism company per se, has launched dozens of citizens into space in its Dragon capsules. As Goehlich notes, reusability is key to making space tourism viable.

But space travel ticket prices, while initially expected to trend down as technology progresses – as was the case with air travel – have instead remained super high. “Ticket prices, whether for suborbital or orbital flights, have not decreased; in fact, they have risen,” Goehlich says.

“Virgin Galactic's early suborbital tickets were priced around $200,000, but now they are approximately three times higher. While some long-term efficiencies may eventually emerge, structural cost drivers could limit significant price reductions.”

In pivoting from space tourism, Bezos’ Blue Origin is set to launch its Blue Moon Mark 1 Lunar Lander. The lander will carry a NASA payload to study lunar dust and will be targeting the Moon’s south pole, where there are possible water ice deposits. The great hope? That they’ll prove the viability of various critical systems which would lead to humans landing on the Moon via NASA’s Artemis program.

SpaceX’s Starship HLS will be the other lunar lander used in the Artemis program, and was originally intended for use in 2027 on what would have been the first crewed lunar landing since the 70s, Artemis III. “Blue Moon lander is much more in the tradition of Apollo. It is a wider-based, shorter lander than Starship, which is important given the number of commercial and national non-crewed lenders that have fallen over,” says Kate Arkless Gray, space journalist and educator. Other companies set to enter the Moon race in 2026 include Firefly Aerospace and Astrobotic, both using SpaceX rockets to land payloads, including rovers.

According to Gray, the new Artemis plans might go some way in explaining the recent moon pivot by Musk and Blue Origin. But there are other trends too, such as commercial space stations to replace the ISS, like that built by Axiom, and biotech and pharmaceutical research. But with all this flurry of activity, why is so much money being funnelled into space? “Projects like Artemis seek to push the boundaries of what’s possible,” Gray says. “International collaboration is going to be vital for getting humans to Mars; it’s too costly for any single nation to realistically attempt alone. So, enabling international cooperation is important, as it has been for the ISS.”

But then, why Mars, why space exploration? “Because we’re human,” Gray says. “The more we can understand about the Solar System, the better we can start to figure out how it came to be, whether we’re alone in the universe. They are also projects of national pride and inspiration. The number of students studying STEM subjects leapt up in the wake of the Apollo programme, and this advances innovation.”

“Politics is always in there, too,” Gray continues. “For Apollo, it was the US vs the Soviet Union to reach the Moon first, but now China has become a new space power and has great ambitions and technology. One of the reasons Artemis got support in Congress is that they want to keep America as the leading space nation – the question is, can they? A lot of the things we develop for space have benefits for us here on Earth – not to mention all the jobs the industry creates. The sensor in your phone camera was first invented for use in space, and medicines to treat bone density loss have been discovered thanks to research in space.”

In February SpaceX deprioritised its founding ambition of colonising Mars in favour of focusing on a future lunar settlement. But across the galactic space, Mars-related research, both for potential human involvement and ongoing rover experimentation, shows no sign of abating.

“The rocket technology seems to be advancing rapidly. This is what SpaceX and Blue Origin are focused on: the rockets to get us there. I think where we have much more limitation in the technology is: what happens then?” says Dr. Scott Solomon. “Getting there is going to be a challenge. We've sent spacecraft to Mars before, so we know that we can get there. Landing safely is a challenge in the thinner atmosphere, and then creating a self-sustaining settlement, creating a habitat, and growing food is a major challenge.”

Solomon points to several scientific hurdles that, until surmounted, will preclude any Martian settlement. “The soil on Mars is actually toxic. We haven't figured out yet exactly how, or even if, we'll be able to remove those toxic chemicals from the soil to grow plants to eat. When we send people to space, they eat packaged food for the most part, or they can get a resupply with some fresh food, but you can't resupply people easily on Mars.”

Another is human reproduction and child rearing in a low-gravity, high-radiation environment. “We seem to be assuming that it will be possible to have children in these places, that human reproduction will work. We don't actually know that. There's been very little research on human reproductive biology, or even reproductive biology generally,” Solomon says.

But as Solomon explores in Becoming Martian, there is research taking place today that might go some way to answering those unknowns. SpaceBorn United is a Dutch startup that successfully launched its mini-laboratory for IVF and embryo development into orbit last year. By spinning the mini-lab device at various speeds, the biotech company will be able to test the effects of different amounts of artificial gravity on fertilisation and embryo development.

Important work is also taking place at the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory in upstate New York, where a particle accelerator can simulate galactic cosmic radiation. Solomon says they are exposing rodents to prolonged simulated galactic cosmic radiation to measure potential consequences, such as cognitive effects.

Another relative uncertainty is the psychological toll visiting Mars would take on a person. NASA’s Crew Health and Performance Exploration Analog (CHAPEA) at Johnson Space Center is simulating life on Mars in a hangar in Houston. Participants spend one year in the facility, which is intended to mimic the Red Planet. “What are the group dynamics like? In what ways is it stressful? They can simulate communication delays similar to what people will experience on Mars, because it can take up to 20 minutes for a signal to travel between Earth and Mars,” Solomon says.

Solomon, while excited about our capabilities in space, urges caution on the notion of a Mars settlement. “On the one hand, we're at a point where we're on the cusp of really doing deep space exploration, human space exploration, unlike we've ever seen before,” he says.

“On the other hand, I worry that we are maybe moving too fast. I'm all for doing science. I'm all for exploration, but the idea of going to a place that has conditions that humans haven't spent time in before – I think we need to know what's going to happen to them when they're there.”

Head to SXSWLondon.com to grab your pass.