Seven weeks after NASA Director Jared Isaacman's Senate confirmation, opinions differ regarding leadership of the agency and its approach to science. He works in an administration renowned for implementing changes at breakneck speed, perceiving utility largely through the lens of national security, and a view of science that ranges from neutral to actively hostile. Thus, he might need to tread carefully if he wants to stand up for the value of science for knowledge's sake, but what is certain is that space exploration momentum has been reestablished, that is, if you believe revisiting the Moon is a useful course. Whether you think NASA is moving toward that goal too rapidly or too slowly, you are probably right. Immediate concerns range from whether hydrogen fuel leakage from the SLS rocket can be contained, to whether the Orion capsule heat shield will be adequate to safely return astronauts to the Earth. Although the latest manned launch has been delayed until March while leaks are diagnosed and addressed, it feels like we are in a space race again, and this is good news.
Long-term, there is debate about how much effort and resources should be invested in the lunar campaign. The plan for human presence on the Moon includes having a working nuclear power source there in less than five years. That's a tall order. Can a permanent human presence be established? Do we really need a lunar orbital gateway? What resources are available on the Moon to do things, how much energy will be required, and how much will it all cost?
The best argument for human visits to the Moon is that it will establish a cadence of progress, and build confidence in our ability to explore space within acceptable risk. The Moon is close enough that this can be done with less fuel and without waiting for suitable launch windows, such as is the case with visits to Mars. It's also an opportunity to further develop a vibrant private space economy (with infusions of public money to order the goods needed), and to test and improve systems crucial for further exploration, such as spacesuits that provide sufficient mobility to accomplish tasks without exhausting astronauts.
Although change coming late is better than change coming never, the situation regarding commitments to the SLS rocket and a lunar gateway bring to mind the word zugzwang (literally, compulsion to move), a German term used mainly in chess to signify a situation where the player must move, but any move they make will have some negative consequence. Without using the SLS, at least for a while, there is no suitable alternative at hand for voyaging outward, to redevelop experience and working culture required to sustain an effort to reach beyond Earth with human hands. Likewise, although the lunar gateway might be a distraction from developing a human presence on Mars, it does buy us cooperation of other players in space exploration, such as Europe.
These are interesting times indeed.
Kevin Kelly, February 9, 2026