Science March 18, 2026

They're Spending $93 Billion to Fly to the Moon and Won't Even Land — Here's Why Artemis II Is Not Just Expensive Tourism

Summary

Humans are heading back to the Moon's orbit for the first time in 53 years. Artemis II, set to launch April 1, is just a 10-day flyby with no landing — yet this single mission carries the weight of the US-China space rivalry, the justification for $93 billion in spending, and humanity's shot at becoming a multi-planetary species.

Key Points

First crewed lunar flight in 53 years launches April 1

For the first time since Apollo 17 in 1972, humans will reach the Moon's vicinity. Four astronauts aboard the Orion spacecraft will fly for 10 days, approaching within 6,513 km of the far side. This mission is the critical gateway to validate Orion's life support, communications, radiation shielding, and thermal control systems with real human lives at stake. Without this validation, Artemis III's lunar landing is impossible. Rollout to the launch pad is scheduled for March 20, with a launch window of April 1-6. After three postponements due to helium leaks, NASA has nowhere left to retreat.

The crew deliberately shatters Apollo's narrative

Victor Glover becomes the first person of color to reach deep space. Christina Koch becomes the first woman. Canada's Jeremy Hansen becomes the first non-American to orbit the Moon. Commander Reid Wiseman rounds out a foursome that intentionally breaks Apollo's white American men's club image. This isn't diversity marketing — it's the physical embodiment of the Artemis Accords framework signed by 55 nations, with allied nations like Canada (Canadarm3 robotic arm) and ESA (Orion service module) providing core mission components.

SLS is a $4 billion-per-launch anachronistic rocket

SLS development cost $29 billion ($35.4 billion inflation-adjusted), with over $93 billion spent on the entire Artemis program. At $4 billion per launch, while SpaceX targets under $100 million for Starship, the cost is unsustainable. NASA's own senior officials admitted to the GAO that current cost levels are unaffordable, and the OIG called the 50% cost reduction goal highly unrealistic. The February 2026 cancellation of Block 1B/2 upgrades signals NASA is finally facing reality, but SLS may be retired after Artemis III.

The Moon has become a resource battleground, not a science destination

Permanently shadowed craters at the lunar South Pole contain significant water ice deposits. This water can be split into hydrogen and oxygen for rocket fuel, making the Moon a potential refueling station for Mars missions. Helium-3, useful for nuclear fusion, is also abundant on the lunar surface. The US has built a 55-nation Artemis Accords coalition while China is constructing a rival bloc with 13 ILRS partner nations including Russia. The geopolitical balance of the late 21st century may be determined at lunar South Pole craters.

Artemis II success opens the era of public-private space exploration

Artemis III will use SpaceX Starship as the lunar lander — an unprecedented depth of public-private cooperation. NASA provides the rocket and command module, SpaceX the lander, ESA the service module, and Canada the robotic arm. Artemis II must succeed for this model's first validation to be complete. Failure would shake confidence in the public-private model itself and intensify Congressional pressure for budget cuts.

Positive & Negative Analysis

Positive Aspects

53-year milestone in international cooperative lunar exploration
While Apollo was a US-only project, Artemis is a 55-nation framework. Canada (Canadarm3), ESA (Orion service module), Japan, and Australia are making core contributions, enabling cost-sharing and technology exchange. If this model succeeds, the same framework can be applied to Mars exploration. The international cooperation experience on the Moon could become the prototype governance model for humanity's multi-planetary transition.
Validation of a new public-private paradigm
The structure where NASA (government) handles the launch vehicle and command module while SpaceX (private) provides the lunar lander is unprecedented in space exploration history. As SLS faces cost criticism, SpaceX Starship's low-cost launch capability joining from Artemis III could dramatically improve the program's cost efficiency. This marks the end of NASA building everything alone and a qualitative transformation of the space industry ecosystem.
Accumulation of deep space crewed flight data
For over 50 years since Apollo, humans have not ventured beyond low Earth orbit (ISS). The data Artemis II collects on radiation exposure, life support performance, communication delays, and astronaut physiological responses in deep space will form the foundational dataset for all future lunar and Mars crewed missions.
Next-generation inspiration and STEM pipeline
The under-16 generation has never experienced human lunar flight. Artemis II's live broadcast will make space feel real for millions, stimulating STEM workforce entry. Just as the Apollo generation was inspired to drive the semiconductor, computer, and internet revolutions, the innovations the Artemis generation will create remain an exciting prospect.
SLS rationalization reduces risk
The February 2026 Block 1B/2 cancellation shows NASA has woken up from endless upgrade dreams to take a realistic path. Standardizing on proven Block 1 systems while buying time for the transition to next-generation vehicles like Starship is a strategic judgment to deliver results with certainty rather than invest in uncertain futures.

Concerns

Unsustainable $4 billion per launch cost structure
SLS launch costs are 40 times SpaceX Starship's target. Development costs of $29 billion and total program costs of $93 billion test Congressional and taxpayer patience. NASA itself admits current cost levels are unsustainable, and the 50% cost reduction goal was deemed highly unrealistic by auditors.
A decade of delays eroding strategic advantage
What was supposed to launch in 2016 has been pushed back 10 years. Artemis II alone was postponed three times. Meanwhile, China successfully returned lunar surface samples with Chang'e 5 and collected far-side samples with Chang'e 6, steadily marching toward a 2030 crewed landing. Time is a strategic asset, and America keeps spending it.
Orion heat shield safety concerns not fully resolved
Orion's heat shield eroded in an unexpected pattern during Artemis I return. NASA deemed it an acceptable risk after a risk assessment meeting, but this doesn't mean the problem was fully solved. The phrase acceptable risk with four lives at stake is inherently unsettling.
Artemis Accords missing China, Russia, and India
Despite 55 signatories, the accord lacks China (primary competitor), Russia (ILRS co-builder), and India (fastest-rising space power). Whether an incomplete international agreement can prevent lunar resource disputes without these key players is questionable.

Outlook

In the short term, what matters most is whether the April 1 launch actually happens. The March 20 rollout must succeed, and final checks at the pad must pass. The launch window runs April 1-6. I believe the launch will happen this time — the helium issue has been fixed and the rollout schedule is concrete. That said, weather or technical issues could push it a day or two to April 2-6.

If the mission succeeds, Artemis III preparations will accelerate dramatically within the next 6-12 months. Since Artemis III is the actual landing mission with SpaceX Starship as the lander, it marks the true beginning of public-private lunar exploration. I expect Artemis III by 2028, though slightly behind NASA's official timeline, as SpaceX needs more time to perfect Starship's orbital refueling technology.

Looking at 2028-2030, this becomes the decisive period for the US-China lunar competition. If China succeeds with a crewed landing by 2030, the psychological impact will be enormous even if America has already sent people to lunar orbit. If China begins ILRS Phase 1 construction simultaneously, the real competition for South Pole resource access begins. This is when the Artemis Accords face their true test — will those 55 signatures remain paper promises, or function as actual resource-sharing mechanisms?

Looking further out to 2030-2035, the Moon transitions from an exploration target to infrastructure. Permanent bases at the South Pole, hydrogen and oxygen fuel extracted from water ice, refueling stations for Mars-bound spacecraft — these scenarios could become reality. I predict at least two permanently operated bases on the lunar surface by 2035: one US-led, one China-led.

In the best-case scenario, US-China competition accelerates technological progress, both sides successfully operate lunar bases, and some international cooperation on Mars exploration eventually emerges. In the baseline scenario, the US lands first through Artemis but widening mission intervals due to costs allow China to steadily catch up, with both nations maintaining small outposts by the early 2030s. In the worst case, Artemis funding gets cut by Congress, the gap between SLS retirement and replacement vehicle readiness stalls America's lunar program, and China pulls ahead.

One thing is certain across all scenarios: Artemis II is a starting line, not a finish line. If these 10 days of flight succeed, humanity is ready to walk on the Moon again. If they fail? Well, $93 billion becomes an April Fools' joke. But I'm betting on success. After 53 years of waiting, it's time to prove the wait was worth it.

Sources / References

Artemis II: NASA's First Crewed Lunar Flyby in 50 Years — NASA
NASA Reassessing Artemis II Rollout — NASA
SLS: Cost Transparency Needed to Monitor Program Affordability — U.S. GAO
NASA sets launch date for historic moon mission after risk review — CNN
Artemis II highlights a shift in US space strategy — PBS News
NASA Artemis moon rocket will cost $6B more than planned — Space.com
NASA ready for another shot at Artemis 2 — Spaceflight Now

Related Perspectives

Science

CO2's Double Life: The Molecule That Warms the Surface and Freezes the Sky

A landmark study published in Nature Geoscience has for the first time resolved the physical mechanism explaining why CO2 simultaneously warms the lower atmosphere while cooling the stratosphere — a paradox that has puzzled climate scientists for six decades. Researchers led by Professor Robert Pincus at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory identified a "Goldilocks Zone" of infrared wavelengths in which CO2 molecules radiate heat directly into space with exceptional efficiency, rather than transferring that energy to neighboring air molecules. Observational records show that since the mid-1980s the stratosphere has cooled by roughly 2 degrees Celsius — more than ten times the rate that would occur from natural variability alone — confirming a prediction made by Nobel laureate Syukuro Manabe in 1967 but left unexplained until now. Paradoxically, this stratospheric cooling intensifies surface warming through a feedback loop: as the upper atmosphere loses more energy to space, less infrared radiation descends back into the troposphere, trapping additional heat near the surface. Perhaps most urgently, the research reveals that ongoing stratospheric cooling promotes polar stratospheric cloud formation that catalyzes ozone destruction, threatening to push the Antarctic ozone hole's recovery timeline ten to twenty years beyond the currently projected 2066 date and exposing a structural link between climate change and the ozone crisis that conventional policy frameworks have yet to confront.

5/19/2026

Science

Zero Percent Chance of Impact — And the Actual Reason Apophis Still Keeps Scientists Up at Night

Apophis (99942 Apophis), a 370-meter asteroid, will pass within just 32,000 kilometers of Earth on Friday, April 13, 2029 — closer than the geostationary satellite belt and roughly one-twelfth the distance to the Moon, a close-approach event with an estimated recurrence frequency of once per ten thousand years. In May 2026, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) formalized the joint Ramses mission through a binding bilateral agreement, with the primary scientific objective of observing unprecedented tidal deformation as Earth's gravitational field physically reshapes the asteroid in real time during the flyby. Despite a formally confirmed zero percent impact probability for the next hundred years, the mission commands a budget approaching 300 million euros, driven by the strategic imperative to acquire first-ever empirical physical data on near-Earth asteroid behavior following the DART kinetic impactor success of 2022. The United Nations has designated 2029 as the International Year of Asteroid Awareness and Planetary Defence, and approximately two billion people across Europe, Africa, and Asia are projected to observe Apophis with the naked eye — making it the first Potentially Hazardous Asteroid (PHA) in history visible without optical instruments. NASA's conspicuous absence from the Ramses framework signals an emerging Euro-Asian axis in space exploration and previews a more multipolar planetary defense governance structure for the 2030s, marking a meaningful fracture in the U.S.-centric post-Artemis space order.

5/16/2026

Science

It Came Out Before It Went In — Toronto Scientists Clocked the Impossible Time

A research team at the University of Toronto fired single photons into a cloud of rubidium atoms and used the weak measurement technique to observe photon dwell time, recording a statistically significant negative (-) value published in Physical Review Letters in May 2026 (DOI: 10.1103/gjfq-k9dv). The experiment presents the first empirical evidence that time can take on negative values at the quantum scale, with the photon appearing — in classical interpretation — to exit the atomic cloud before it even entered. While classical physics has always treated time as a strictly positive, absolute measure, quantum mechanics has long lacked a formal time operator, treating time as an external background parameter rather than a dynamic observable of the system itself. This finding forces a rigorous reexamination of whether causality applies differently at quantum scales, whether time is an emergent macroscopic property rather than a fundamental constituent of reality, and how the interpretive frameworks of quantum mechanics must be revised in light of hard experimental evidence. Assessed against the long history of physics, this discovery joins the lineage of "uncomfortable data" — results that resist existing frameworks and ultimately compel the construction of entirely new physical language.

5/11/2026

Science

I'll Be Honest — The "Brain as Radio" Hypothesis Is the Most Unsettling Idea in Science Right Now

The question of whether the brain actually produces consciousness has re-emerged as a live controversy in neuroscience during spring 2026, after veteran researcher Christof Koch publicly called for serious reconsideration of the prevailing materialist framework. Filter Theory, Integrated Information Theory (IIT), and panpsychism have gained renewed credibility as thirty years of research have failed to produce a single satisfactory answer to what philosopher David Chalmers called the "hard problem" of consciousness. Anomalous findings from near-death experience research, terminal lucidity in late-stage Alzheimer's patients, and psychedelic neuroimaging studies have accumulated a body of data that the standard hypothesis struggles to explain cleanly. In January 2026, MIT published a new tool for estimating Φ — IIT's core quantity — as a measurable value, moving this once-speculative framework into empirical testing territory for the first time. Whichever hypothesis ultimately prevails, the implications simultaneously destabilize AI ethics, clinical neuroscience, animal rights law, and the philosophical foundations of human exceptionalism in ways that reach far beyond any single academic discipline.

5/3/2026

Science

44 Namibians' DNA Just Tore the Human Origins Textbook in Half

The "Out of Africa" hypothesis — the six-decade consensus that modern humans emerged from a single ancestral population — has received its most substantive empirical challenge to date through a landmark April 2026 Nature study led by researchers at UC Davis and McGill University. Analyzing freshly sequenced genomes from 44 Indigenous Nama people of southern Africa, alongside genomic data from 290 Africans across the continent, the researchers demonstrated that Homo sapiens did not descend from a single ancestral group but rather emerged through prolonged genetic exchange among at least two or more ancient populations over hundreds of thousands of years. The study places the earliest estimated population divergence at approximately 120,000–135,000 years ago and finds that just 1–4% of genetic differences between contemporary human populations trace back to variation between ancestral stem groups — a figure that delivers a decisive empirical blow to any biological claim of racial purity or hierarchy. Independent findings from Cambridge University's Nature Genetics research and Uppsala University's ancient genome study corroborate this multi-population ancestry model, demonstrating that ancestral mixing contributed ten times more genetically to modern humans than our well-known Neanderthal admixture. Beyond overturning a foundational scientific narrative, this discovery carries sweeping implications for precision medicine, public education, and the urgent need to address the structural underrepresentation of African genomes — currently less than 3% of global genomic databases — in the research that shapes global healthcare and our understanding of human biology.

4/28/2026