Michael Bloomberg argues that NASA's Artemis moon mission is a huge waste of money. The Artemis program was supposed to send astronauts back to the moon, but it has already spent nearly $100 billion without achieving this goal. Bloomberg believes that the program's complexity and costs are out of control, and he suggests that the next U.S. president should reconsider the entire project.

Bloomberg points out that more than fifty years after Neil Armstrong's famous moon landing, the Artemis mission has not made significant progress. Despite the enormous budget, no astronauts have yet been sent to the moon.

Bloomberg also highlights the opportunity cost of the Artemis mission. He suggests that the money spent on this program could be better used for other important projects, such as addressing climate change or improving healthcare. By redirecting funds from Artemis to these areas, the government could achieve more tangible and immediate benefits for society.

These are, if you ask me, empty and boring platitudes. But between one platitude and the next, Bloomberg makes some good points.

Starship would be a better option

Bloomberg criticizes the Artemis program for being inefficient and overly complicated, leading to continuous delays and escalating expenses. He argues that the program has become bogged down in bureaucracy and technical challenges. This has resulted in a project that is both expensive and ineffective.

And here comes the bomb:

"A celestial irony is that none of this is necessary," says Bloomberg. "A reusable SpaceX Starship will very likely be able to carry cargo and robots directly to the moon – no SLS, Orion, Gateway, Block 1B or ML-2 required – at a small fraction of the cost."

What are these projects Bloomberg mentions?

• SLS (Space Launch System) is NASA's powerful rocket designed for deep space exploration.
• Orion is NASA's spacecraft designed to carry astronauts beyond low Earth orbit.
• The Gateway is a planned space station that will orbit the Moon serving as a communication hub, science laboratory, and living quarters for astronauts.

Bloomberg admits that the successful catch of the Starship booster was a breakthrough that demonstrated that Starship is moving far beyond NASA.

Bloomberg praising SpaceX? Really?

Conflict between NASA and SpaceX?

Bloomberg's article has re-ignited the endless flame wars between the faithful supporters of NASA and the fans of Elon Musk's SpaceX.

There has been one and only mission of the SLS so far: the Artemis 1 mission carried an uncrewed Orion spacecraft around the Moon in November 2022. Before the launch of Artemis 1, I wrote a SpaceNews op-ed titled "SpaceX fans should stand behind NASA and support Artemis."

I argued that we don’t need a conflict between the supporters of NASA and the fans of SpaceX. In particular, I argued that the fans of Elon Musk and SpaceX should enthusiastically support NASA's Artemis program for a permanent and sustainable return to the Moon. Why? Because if Artemis is successful, it seems inevitable that Starship and SpaceX will play a more and more important role in the program. In other words, Artemis could be a powerful tide that lifts all rockets.

Yes, some parts of the current Artemis program seem too inefficient and costly, just like Bloomberg says. But I thought that we should be patient and let NASA and the government save face and have their moment of glory. Then, I thought, the U.S. administration would likely reconsider costs and wastes, and rely on SpaceX more.

Politics gets in the way

I still think this would be the best way forward. But politics gets in the way as usual.

SpaceX has had a great year so far, and the spectacular catch of Starship's Super Heavy booster has been a milestone of spaceflight engineering. But the booster has returned to a political storm centered on Elon Musk’s cultural and political positions: Musk has endorsed Donald Trump and is using his control of Twitter in a way that has upset some people.

If Trump wins the forthcoming presidential elections, the U.S. government will likely support SpaceX.

But Musk's bet on Trump is a risky one. if Harris wins the elections, it seems likely that the U.S. government will be very hostile to Musk and all his companies and projects for the next four years. This would damage the Artemis program, the prestige of the U.S. space program, and the very future of humanity. But often politicians put their greed for power and their ideological biases before the common good.

At this moment, the election seems to me a coin toss; Harris could win, or Trump could win. The only thing that seems certain is that, after the elections, the U.S. will likely be even more divided than before, and political polarization will likely reach even more toxic levels.

The need for bipartisan spaceflight

But perhaps spaceflight can help overcome toxic political polarization.

There's a long history of bipartisan support for the space program in the U.S., and politicians of both main parties have been enthusiastic spaceflight supporters.

Spaceflight, space exploration, and the prospect of human space expansion can inspire people (and especially the young) across partisan borders and give everyone a powerful sense of drive that transcends identity politics and dogmatic ideologies. Achieving bipartisan support for Artemis and future space programs will, I hope, show that we can work together for the common good and incite us to do the same for other common goals.

And China?

Meanwhile, The Economist has recognized that there is a new race to the Moon between the West and China, and that Elon Musk's Starship is the best hope of the West for winning that race.

"The recent test flight of SpaceX’s Starship brought the world one step closer to a host of new possibilities beyond Earth (not least the colonisation of Mars)," notes The Economist, adding that Starship is expected to play an important role in NASA’s plans to return to the Moon.

"But China has its own lunar ambitions, and a much simpler plan than America’s," warns The Economist. "Who will win this new space race?"

My simple prediction is that, if Harris wins the elections, China will win the new space race. If Trump wins the elections, the USA will have a fighting chance.

Let The Economist worry which nation wins the new space race; my concern is that humanity gets started on the long way to the stars with permanent bases on the Moon, Mars, and beyond. If China has to lead the way, so be it.