Virgin Galactic’s use of the ‘Overview Effect’ to promote space tourism is a terrible irony

Virgin Galactic, the space tourism company founded in 2004 by Richard Branson, promotes its flights as offering:

A Brand New Perspective: Deepen your connection to Earth and to humanity with the transformational experience known as the Overview Effect.

First discussed in 1987 by space philosopher Frank White, the Overview Effect is a result of viewing Earth from space.

Expressions of the effect range broadly. Astronauts might experience profound awe and wonder at the perception of Earth as a fragile living being. Some suffer crushing grief when considering the harm humans inflict on nature.

While Virgin Galactic promotes access to the Overview Effect as a major drawcard, it is a terrible irony that space tourism is enormously damaging for the environment.

On May 25, Virgin Galactic completed a final test flight before it starts taking paying customers.

The Overview Effect

The Overview Effect is not limited to astronauts from the West. Their Chinese and Russian counterparts have described the same profound connection to Earth when witnessing the planet from space.

As Soviet Russian cosmonaut Yuri Artyushkin reported:

The feeling of unity is not simply an observation. With it comes a strong sense of compassion and concern for the state of our planet and the effect humans are having on it. It isn’t important in which sea or lake you observe a slick of pollution, or in the forests of which country a fire breaks out, or on which continent a hurricane arises. You are standing guard over the whole of our Earth.

Until recently, researching the Overview Effect has required interviews with professional astronauts. Today, commercial space tourism is increasing awareness of the phenomenon, particularly when experienced by celebrities with large platforms.

In 2021, Star Trek actor William Shatner completed a suborbital flight with Jeff Bezos’ space tourism company Blue Origin. Shatner had anticipated emotions of celebration and joy when viewing “mother and Earth and comfort” from space. Instead, he later wrote, he struggled with “the strongest feelings of grief I have ever encountered”.

Shatner attributed his experience to the Overview Effect.

Space flight has a huge environmental impact

Virgin Galactic promotes the Overview Effect on its homepage as an experience exclusive to space flight.

However, access is extremely costly. While an eager space tourist consents to parting with US$450,000 to experience a profound connection with Earth, the planet itself has no say in receiving the massive pollution a single trip produces.

Rocket emissions impact Earth’s atmosphere, temperatures and the ozone layer at an unprecedented level. A 2022 study found space tourism produces black carbon particles that are almost 500 times more efficient at warming the atmosphere than all surface and airline sources of soot combined.

After being released into the upper atmosphere, the black carbon particles circulate for four to five years in a fine layer. This acts as a thin black umbrella absorbing solar radiation while blocking it from reaching Earth’s surface.

A 1.5-hour Virgin Galactic flight generates emissions equivalent to a ten-hour trans-Atlantic commercial air flight. However, the latter carries hundreds of passengers. With a passenger limit of six, a Virgin Galactic launch emits 4.5 tonnes of carbon per person. That’s more than twice the Paris Agreement’s recommended annual individual carbon budget.

Space tourism rocket launches don’t currently compare to commercial airline flights in number. But the suborbital transportation and space tourism market is expected to be worth US$2.58 billion by 2031. It’s growing at an annual rate of 17.15%.

Virgin Galactic is aiming to launch 400 space tourism flights every year.

In this video on its website, Virgin Galactic uses the Overview Effect to promote its space tourism business.

Caring for Earth doesn’t depend on space flight

The desirability of the Overview Effect is not the overwhelming emotions experienced when witnessing Earth from space. As was evident in Shatner’s feelings of immense grief, these emotions are not always pleasant.

Instead, researchers, astronauts and space philosophers are interested in the spontaneous and powerful awareness that occurs. Astronauts’ accounts of the moment vary, but a consistent theme emerges: a connection to planet Earth that inspires environmental care.

Importantly, such clarity can be achieved without a suborbital space flight.

Frank White argues that, while viewing Earth from space produces the “ultimate” Overview Effect, it might also be had while looking at landscapes from a great height – such as a mountain range. Commercial pilots flying at high altitudes have experienced similar phenomena.

And for those considering a Virgin Galactic flight, there are no guarantees. Many astronauts with long careers report never experiencing the Overview Effect.

Environmental epiphanies happen on Earth

Spontaneous clarity about the importance of nature can occur while standing on solid ground. “Environmental epiphanies” are well documented and have no connection to specific religious or cultural beliefs.

Involving profound emotions and sudden awareness similar to the Overview Effect, environmental epiphanies can be accessed for free in mundane locations – such as reading a book at home.

And, like the Overview Effect, environmental epiphanies can lead to lasting change.

As space tourism continues to “take off”, misaligned marketing tactics like Virgin Galactic’s promotion of the Overview Effect must be scrutinised.

Being launched into space – and the massive pollution the process creates – isn’t necessary for us to want to sustain our Earth.The Conversation

Ariane Moore, PhD Candidate in Philosophy, University of Tasmania

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More........

The US just returned to the Moon after more than 50 years. How big a deal is it, really?

In the few short years since the COVID pandemic changed our world, China, Japan and India have all successfully landed on the Moon.

Many more robotic missions have flown past the Moon, entered lunar orbit, or crashed into it in the past five years. This includes spacecraft developed by South Korea, the United Arab Emirates, and an Israeli not-for-profit organisation.

Late last week, the American company Intuitive Machines, in collaboration with NASA, celebrated “America’s return to the Moon” with a successful landing of its Odysseus spacecraft.

Recent Chinese-built sample return missions are far more complex than this project. And didn’t NASA ferry a dozen humans to the Moon back when microwaves were cutting-edge technology? So what is different about this mission developed by a US company?

Back to the Moon

The recent Odysseus landing stands out for two reasons. For starters, this is the first time a US-built spacecraft has landed – not crashed – on the Moon for over 50 years.

Secondly, and far more significantly, this is the first time a private company has pulled off a successful delivery of cargo to the Moon’s surface.

NASA has lately focused on destinations beyond the Earth–Moon system, including Mars. But with its Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program, it has also funded US private industry to develop Moon landing concepts, hoping to reduce the delivery costs of lunar payloads and allow NASA engineers to focus on other challenges.

Working with NASA, Intuitive Machines selected a landing site about 300 kilometres from the lunar south pole. Among other challenges, landing here requires entering a polar orbit around the Moon, which consumes additional fuel.

At this latitude, the land is heavily cratered and dotted with long shadows. This makes it challenging for autonomous landing systems to find a safe spot for a touchdown.

NASA spent about US$118 million (A$180 million) to land six scientific payloads on Odysseus. This is relatively cheap. Using low-cost lunar landers, NASA will have an efficient way to test new space hardware that may then be flown on other Moon missions or farther afield.

Ten minutes of silence

One of the technology tests on the Odysseus lander, NASA’s Navigation Doppler Lidar experiment or NDL, appears to have proved crucial to the lander’s success.

As the lander neared the surface, the company realised its navigation systems had a problem. NASA’s NDL experiment is serendipitously designed to test precision landing techniques for future missions. It seems that at the last second, engineers bodged together a solution that involved feeding necessary data from NDL to the lander.

Ten minutes of silence followed before a weak signal was detected from Odysseus. Applause thundered through the mission control room. NASA’s administrator released a video congratulating everyone for returning America to the Moon.

It has since become clear the lander is not oriented perfectly upright. The solar panels are generating sufficient power and the team is slowly receiving the first images from the surface.

However, it’s likely Odysseus partially toppled over upon landing. Fortunately, at the time of writing, it seems most of the science payload may yet be deployed as it’s on the side of the lander facing upwards. The unlucky payload element facing downwards is a privately contributed artwork connected to NFTs.

The lander is now likely to survive for at least a week before the Sun sets on the landing site and a dark, frigid lunar night turns it into another museum piece of human technology frozen in the lunar regolith.

The Moon visible 10km beneath the Odysseus lander after it entered lunar orbit on February 21. Intuitive Machines, CC BY-NC-ND

Win some, lose some

NASA’s commercial approach to stimulating low-cost payload services all but guarantees some failures. But eventually NASA hopes that several commercial launch and landing providers will emerge from the program, along with a few learning experiences.

The know-how accumulated at organisations operating hardware in space is at least as important as the development of the hardware itself.

The market for commercial lunar payloads remains unclear. Possibly, once the novelty wears off and brands are no longer able to generate buzz by, for example, sending a piece of outdoor clothing to the Moon, this source of funding may dwindle.

However, just as today, civil space agencies and taxpayers will continue to fund space exploration to address shared science goals.

Ideally, commercial providers will offer NASA an efficient method for testing key technologies needed for its schedule of upcoming scientific robotic missions, as well as human spaceflight in the Artemis program. Australia would also have the opportunity to test hardware at a reduced price.

It’s worth noting that US budgetary issues, funding cuts and subsequent lay-offs do threaten these ambitions.

Meanwhile, in Australia, we may have nothing to launch anyway. We continue to spend less than the OECD average on scientific research, and only a few Australian universities – who traditionally lead such efforts – have received funding provided by the Australian Space Agency.

If we do support planetary science and space exploration in the future, Australians will need to decide if we want to allocate our limited resources, competing with NASA and US private industry, to supply launch, landing and robotic services to the global space industry.

Alternatively, we could leverage these lower-cost payload providers to develop our own scientific space program, and locally developed space technologies associated with benefits to the knowledge economy, education and national security.The Conversation

David Flannery, Planetary Scientist, Queensland University of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More........