By James Pethokoukis and Robert Zubrin

2021 saw many exciting headlines
on the advancements happening in private space flight and fusion energy. But
are the achievements of SpaceX and the vision of colonizing Mars espoused
by its founder, Elon Musk, nothing more than wasteful vanity projects? In
this episode, Robert Zubrin makes the case for colonizing the solar system
and explains how harnessing fusion energy could revolutionize life on Earth and
in space.

Robert is President of Pioneer Astronautics and the founder and President of the Mars Society, an international organization dedicated to furthering the exploration and settlement of Mars. An aerospace engineer and energy expert, Robert is the author of several books including “The Case for Mars” and “The Case for Space.”

Below is an abbreviated transcript of our conversation. You can read our full discussion here. You can also subscribe to my podcast on Apple Podcasts or Stitcher, or download the podcast on Ricochet.

Pethokoukis: Why should humanity try to become a multi-planetary,
spacefaring species?

Zubrin: In order to have a bigger
future. In order to have an open future. In order to open the possibility to
create new branches of human civilization that will add their creative talents
to the human story. The game of life isn’t played for money; it’s played for
children. And the societies that move out and settle space will be those that
put their stamp on the future.

Humanity
will benefit tremendously from the new creative societies that are established
in space. Martian civilization is going to be forced to be as inventive as
America has been, because they’re going to be a frontier society, confronted
with challenges, but composed of technologically adept people who are going to
have to tackle those challenges and will undoubtedly create technological
breakthroughs that will benefit all of humanity in the process.

How much have launch costs declined as a result of SpaceX
introducing reusability? And what will be the implications of continued declines
in launch costs?

The
cost of space launch was astronomical at the time of Sputnik. It declined to
about $10,000 per kilogram by the time of the Moon landing. It stayed at $10,000
per kilogram till 2010 — 40 years. Since 2010, as a result of SpaceX
introducing reusable rockets, it has fallen to $2,000 per kilogram. And if
they’re successful with the Starship, they’ll bring the price down to $400 per
kilogram. All sorts of business plans that don’t make sense at $10,000 per
kilogram are going to make a lot of sense at $400 per kilogram.

Well,
let’s take one example: orbital research labs. A Falcon 9 can launch a space
station for $65 million. And maybe the space station itself costs another $35
million. That’s $100 million to create an orbital research lab. That’s well
within the means of a Fortune 500 company. Space hotels are a little further
out: If Starship comes along, you’re talking about launching 100 tons to orbit
for $20 million. For 100 passengers, that’s $20,000 per person. People who are
well heeled could afford $20,000 for a vacation in space. That’s the cost of a
first-class, round-trip ticket from Los Angeles to Sydney right now. And to be
able to do that in an hour instead of 18 hours? People will pay for that.

What do you say to critics who argue that space
exploration is a waste of resources while we are facing existential threats
here on Earth?

It
was not global warming or resource exhaustion that caused the catastrophes of
the 20th century. It was bad ideas. And one bad idea in particular in a variety
of forms, which is, “There isn’t enough for everyone so we need to fight
over what is here.” Now this is a fiction. The world was not overpopulated in
1914 or 1939, and it’s not overpopulated now. The problem is not the shortage
of the resources, but this fundamental idea that the world is zero sum. And
this is the fundamental driving force for war, which is the existential threat
to humanity today. We’re not threatened by there being too many people; we’re
threatened by people who think there are too many people.

People
who expound the theory of limited resources, whether it’s the Club of Rome or
Paul Ehrlich or any of these other people, will never lack for sponsors.
Because if you say resources are limited, then human aspirations must be
constrained and someone must be empowered to do the constraining. But this idea
that resources are limited is the existential threat facing humanity, and it’s
what we can obliterate by expanding to space and showing that the resources
available to us are as unlimited as our creativity.

How helpful would it be in making this vision reality for
us to figure out nuclear fusion?

This
entrepreneurial space revolution is what has set off this entrepreneurial
fusion revolution. People looked at the success of SpaceX and they said,
“Huh, maybe the problem with fusion is the same as the problem with
achieving space launch. Maybe the fundamental problem isn’t technical; maybe
it’s institutional” — that instead of something being done by large
government bureaucracies, this needs to be done by teams of entrepreneurs. And
so now you have entrepreneurial fusion companies being funded at a higher level
than the official government fusion programs, and they’re moving much faster.

Mars
doesn’t have fossils, and they don’t have waterfalls, and solar energy is
pretty weak, and nuclear power certainly can be used on Mars but it takes a big
industrial base to do all the isotope separation and mining and all this stuff.
But deuterium, which is the fuel for fusion reactors, is five times as common
on Mars as it is on Earth. So the Martian [colonists] will have a tremendous
incentive to develop fusion power.

Now,
fusion is a way to generate electricity. It’s also an incredible possible
source of space propulsion. With a fusion rocket, you can get exhaust
velocities of up to 8 percent the speed of light, and a rocket properly
designed could get up to about twice its exhaust velocity. You’re talking about
the introductory capability for interstellar travel. That’s where this thing is
going.

What should the government be doing to facilitate further
expansion into space?

The
most important thing the government can do to help the entrepreneurial space
revolution is to be a smart customer. If the government is not free to buy the
best deal, that disincentivizes the provision of the best deal. If the
government is a smart shopper, if it rewards merit, then merit will be
promoted.

Within
NASA there is a bifurcation between what I call purpose-driven programs and
vendor-driven programs. Purpose-driven programs spend money to do things;
vendor-driven programs do things in order to spend money. The human space
flight program was purpose driven during Apollo. After Apollo, since the manned
space program hasn’t had a purpose, it has degenerated into a vendor-driven
program. The human space flight program’s imperatives are all distorted by the
need to supply funds to this district, this state, this manufacturer, and so
forth. And so the funds of the human space flight program are not being used
effectively. So really, all the government needs to do is spend the taxpayer’s
money efficiently and they will promote the space launch revolution.

James Pethokoukis is the Dewitt Wallace Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he writes and edits the AEIdeas blog and hosts a weekly podcast, “Political Economy with James Pethokoukis.” Robert Zubrin is President of Pioneer Astronautics and the author of “The Case for Mars” and “The Case for Space.”

The post 5 questions for Robert Zubrin on humanity’s multi-planetary future appeared first on American Enterprise Institute – AEI.