Thursday Throughput: Billionaires In Space Edition

Richard Branson with SS2. Photo by Jeff Foust, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Billionaires…..in….SPAAAAAAAAACE!
[ThTh1] So last week, Richard Branson announced that he intends to fly into space aboard the VSS Unity, a space plane that launches from below a massive jet, goes to the edge of the atmosphere and then glides back to Earth. This announcement followed Jeff Bezos’ claim that he would be on the crew of Blue Origin’s first flight.

For some reason, this set off a wave of hand-wringing articles about how awful billionaires in space is, how inappropriate it is for billionaires to jaunt into space¹ and even hysterical claims that the billionaires are going to emigrate into space, leaving the rest of us stuck on this hell rock.

This crosses me an over-reaction bred mainly by one of the defining emotions of our time: wealth envy.

First of all, the billionaires in space race is something that will benefit all of us. Mostly inadvertently, I grant you. But finding innovative cheaper ways of getting things into orbit (or even better, out of it) is a good thing. It means innovations in things like microminiaturization and electronics that will benefit other industries. It means ailing or dead satellites can be replaced faster and cheaper. It may eventually mean more bang for our taxpayer buck when it comes to space exploration and space science. It means more inspiring moments when humans do the impossible.

Second, we are a long long long way away from people being able to live in space. This Twitter thread goes over some of the massive technical support the ISS needs as well as the intense schedule astronauts are subjected to and the physiological stress it places them under. Now that is a situation that will improve over time, at least partially because of people like Bezos and Branson who want space to a destination, not just a dream. But the amount of innovation and investment needed to get there is substantial and well beyond the reach of even Earth’s richest people.

Finally, as always happens when the conversation turns to space flight, we find ourselves beset by the “why are we wasting all this money in space instead of solving problems on Earth?” naysayers. But, as I have been saying seemingly from the time I could crawl, this is not either-or. Both men have pledge billions of dollars to help fight climate changed. But more importantly, Earth-bound problems are far too large and far too complex to be solved by these men. Let’s pretend we could confiscate all of Jeff Bezos’ wealth. And all of Elon Musk’s. And all of Branson’s. And hell, let’s throw Bill Gates in there. That’s maybe $100 billion or so?

That’s about a tenth of what is spent to fight poverty by the United States government alone each year. That’s 0.1-0.2% of the cost the Green New Deal. That’s maybe two years of what we’re investing in alternative energy right now, let alone in the future.

This is a subset of an issue I’ve gotten into before: you can’t fund government on the backs of the rich. But it’s more an illustration of our need to not let wealth envy cloud our perspective. Social and environmental issues exist on a scale that is beyond the ability of even entire countries to solve. Global problems are…global problems. And however, much money Jeff Bezos may have, it pales in comparison to the $81 trillion global GDP. If you want to solve the problem of, say, global warming, massive tech investment by government (maybe a Bezos’ worth every year), regulation and international cooperation are the key. Cancelling a Blue Origin flight will contribute nothing toward that goal.

In the meantime, I don’t have a problem with billionaires hitching rides on spaceships they funded to get a few minutes in freefall. Maybe, if they enjoy it, this will inspire them to make the innovations we really do need to open up space to the human race, an arena where Bezos-scale money can make a big difference. Or, failing that, billionaires in space really will stay up there and we can go back to ignoring their press clippings.

[ThTh2] So what’s the deal with the COVID-19 Delta variant? Are we going back to masks and social distancing? Hard to tell at this stage. We’re still gathering data on how effective the vaccines are against Delta. The lowball estimates come from studies in Israel and Singapore, which suggest that the vaccines are about 65% effective in preventing infection but about 95% effective in preventing serious illness. When this entire mess began, I saw that as the optimistic case. However, it’s difficult to tease this out as Delta is mostly running rampant in unvaccinated populations. Almost all infections and all deaths are among the unvaccinated. Other studies in the UK and Canada indicate that the two-dose Pfizer and Moderna regimens may be 90% effective. The gripping hand here is that Delta is so infectious that even if the efficacy of the vaccines is 90%, that lucky 1-in-10 who contracts the disease can spread it like wildfire among the unvaccinated.

In the end, the advice has not changed. Get vaccinated. If you haven’t had your second dose, get it. Do activities outdoors when possible. It’s not clear what will happen with mask mandates — the science is clear that masks work but much muddier on whether mandates work. But masking indoors where people may not be vaccinated seems a reasonable precaution. (And no, they don’t cause you to choke on CO2.)

A lot of scientists I’ve spoken to expect a big COVID-19 surge in the fall, followed by the virus finally dying down to manageable levels (i.e., occasional outbreaks that we can keep at bay with vaccines). I hope they’re wrong about the former but right about the latter.

[ThTh3] Also on the vaccine front, a new study may show why some COVID vaccines cause an extremely rare blood-clotting condition. This is a critical step toward making the vaccines even safer. It’s also becoming clear that the China-backed Sinovac vaccine is becoming nearly useless, assuming it was ever useful. Singapore, for example, is no longer counting people as vaccinated if they received the Sinovac vaccine.

In related news, several scientists have resigned from the editorial board of the journal that published the garbage study claiming that vaccines kill two people for every three they save. You can click within Retraction Watch to see why the study is so badly wrong.

[ThTh4] Phil Plait has a great rundown of what’s going on with the Hubble Space Telescope. The short version is that they’re having computer issues and they want to be very careful about how they solve them, since we can no longer service the telescope with the Space Shuttle. Hopefully, it will be back up and running soon.

If and when the end comes for Hubble, it will be the end of an era. Right now, there is nothing on the books to replace it. James Webb is a magnificent telescope, but will work in the infrared. Our eyes in space be very darkened in the optical and ultraviolet.

[ThTh5] The story of human evolution just got messier.

[ThTh6] This study, suggesting that people must cut their energy needs by 90% to meet global warming targets is a good illustration of why we can’t conserve our way out of this. No one will accept that standard of living. We have to innovate. And the recent record-shattering heat wave is as good a reminder as any that we to innovate radically and now.

[ThTh7] A new paper suggests that decreasing pollution has resulted in increased crop yields. Just one more data point showing that cleaning up the environment and having a strong economy are not opposed to each other.

1. For all of about five minutes.