Who owns the moon?

[JKPolk]

So for the past few months I have been involved in a project for my college. It entails discussing lunar mining rights and what problems are going to arise come colonization of the moon. Plans are already in the works to begin lunar bases, mining, and habitation and should be put into works within the next few years, supposedly beginning around 2010-2012 construction will begin by some of the major countries.

The real thing about all this, however, is that the Outer Space Treaty (OST) quite explicitly prohibits any country from owning any part of the moon, or outer space in general. The OST was written back in the mid 60s, right before the United States made the first successful lunar walk. Both Russia and the United States were instrumental in drafting the treaty which is important because each stood to gain immensely had it not been in place at the time of the Space Race. Now that another Space Race is imminent, the OST is being brought back into play.

An interesting loophole in the OST, however, allows for private entities to own and trade lunar property. Even more controversial is the fact that weapons are not allowed in space at all. This leaves one to wonder who exactly will be able to police space, especially if private organizations begin to colonize. The UN certainly has a hard enough time policing terrestrial areas, and yet they are the only ones with the "support" of superpower countries.

The questions we raise in our paper are those dealing with who, if anyone, is allowed to own the moon under any circumstances, who is allowed to govern lunar properties, and how are they expected to govern these properties?

I'm going to leave this open-ended and not put in some of the results we've come up with in order to encourage unbiased responses. I'll try to check back as often as I can to answer any questions on this problem of our times.

Note! My partner and I will be speaking at Holy Cross College in Central Massachusetts on April 11th at approx 1:30PM. If anyone's in the area, feel free to attend. We've planned for a discussion afterward with the audience, and if you come you can ask any questions and get in-depth answers without the internet filter on!

Contact me for more information if you'd like, hope to see some of you there

[Maid]

If there is need, laws will change to accommodate.

[Hudelf]

Sounds to me like we threw in the clause about private corporations for a reason. Funny that a country can't own any part of it, yet companies that can make government contracts are allowed to. Conspiracy theory? Maybe, but not entirely unfounded.

I'm sure things will be altered and amended once large-scale plans are enacted, and ESPECIALLY when space travel becomes more widespread and available to, if not the general public, government workers.

[JKPolk]

The problems occur with the OST already being as far reaching as it is. It's very difficult to get the countries already involved with it to suddenly agree to change their mind and allow for different provisions, especially given the time period expected.

[Hudelf]

Well the main problem I see (not necessarily in the near future, but eventually), is the weapons clause. Once civilian traffic to space becomes somewhat commonplace, it may be difficult to prevent weapon movement into space.

Furthermore, it's going to be next to impossible to regulate any form of land rights if no one can own the land they're using, unless of course, it comes down to private companies. Which is kind of a paradox, because it's currently impossible for a company to get anything into space without the government to back them.

[Sullyman2007]

The concept of a lunar base has been floating around for quite some time now. As much as I would like to see it to happen, I can't say I want to see it right away. We should be working to solve problems on our own planet first, before we go and make new ones in outer space.

As for your question, who should be allowed to "own" the moon, I don't see the moon actually falling under any particular ownership, by any particular country. I think just as current space operations (the International Space Station) have become a cooperative international effort, the moon will be the same case. As for companies monopolizing the moon, hopefully it won't happen. Maybe they'll create some sort of "Moon Trading Commission" or something.

[JKPolk]

Nah, the Ansari X Prize showed that a private organization could touch space with a reusable vehicle. Google is running a competition right now for moving lunar regolith (moon surface). A lot of companies launch their own satellites at this point, too, without any help from the Gov't. They do require permission, but that's mostly just for launching rights at this point.

[Hudelf]

There's a big difference, though, between getting to space and sending up enough supplies to support a consistent colony on the moon that would consist of X number of people. Along with, of course, sending up the initial workers to construct it and sustain them. The cost would probably be in the hundreds of millions, if not more, and countless trips to the moon, not just space.

I'm not sure of many companies willing to do that, not to mentions ones rich enough to afford it without substantial government assistance.

But Sully might be right in that this all might become an international effort, which would be wonderful. The way you put it though, it sounds like individual countries have separate plans to build lunar bases.

[JKPolk]

That's one thing we're trying to address with the paper. Obviously, yes, it would be fantastic if there was an international effort to colonize the moon and use its resources. It seems to be very unlikely, though, what with America's aggression as of late dealing with other countries, as well as the fact that China is very, very close to being able to start their own lunar missions. They don't seem the sharing type, really.

Current estimates at building a base put the number of missions at about 20. It is quite expensive to do that, but there are some projects nearing completion which would cut those costs immensely. Other things to consider include return missions containing resources from the moon. With slightly altered technology and fuels used for return missions, minerals can be sent back to earth at less that $16k/kg which, when dealing with some raw earth metals that are abundant on the moon, is a profitable price. It's also quite easy to get these minerals and metals out of the lunar surface without extensive mining equipment.

Something else to consider is that mining on the moon is entirely different than mining earth. Excavations are a rarity up there; rather they use large magnets to pull the metals out of the surface, using giant hoses and pumps to move loose topsoil.

[Maid]

Originally Posted by Hudelf

There's a big difference, though, between getting to space and sending up enough supplies to support a consistent colony on the moon that would consist of X number of people. Along with, of course, sending up the initial workers to construct it and sustain them. The cost would probably be in the hundreds of millions, if not more, and countless trips to the moon, not just space.

At this point of time, it's hundreds of billions.

[SSCUJO]

well you kinda have to look at this logically, no single private company is going to go up there alone and start an operation, the cost alone would not be worth it, any private company would need government backing.

now lets say thats all settled, this private company would need a fleet of space shuttles and astronauts, not to mention people who want to live on the moon.

of course lets not count out the insane risk factor that comes with manned missions in space, i would say they could expect to lose a shuttle once every 2 years, and lose a life once every year (guesses but i can't imagine they would be far off).

the investment in starting something like this has to be enormous, and a compny will not start anything until they have a detailed layout of whats up there,where it is, and how to get it out. not only that, but they won't risk putting billions of dollers on the moon without the land being undisputadly thiers. if there is even a chance of the land being disputed its not worth the investment.

[JKPolk]

Minerals can be sent back to earth at less that $16k/kg which, when dealing with some raw earth metals that are abundant on the moon, is a profitable price

There is reason for them to go up.

Why would you need a fleet when 1-2 would suffice?

Excluding Challenger, there haven't been any fatal shuttle accidents for a LONG time. Missions are continually being run to the ISS without fatalities, and it's only getting safer. Plus, we do have a fairly detailed layout of what's up there. Just some food for thought.

[Relambrien]

You're forgetting Columbia, which was in 2003.

Yes, space travel is getting safer, but it will be quite a while before it can become "routine." I don't think we'll have anything come to a head about lunar ownership for quite a long time. As long as the main financial support for lunar travel remains in the hands of governments, things should be fairly easy to handle. However, when you give corporations the ability to head to the moon, from all over the world, ownership rights issues will come up as a problem.

I would think a "first-come, first-served" protocol would be ideal in such a situation. Basically, people agree that if you get to an area of the moon first and start utilizing it, then it's yours until you leave. Now if things get -really- complicated, you can have the moon sectioned off or have restrictions set in place, but that probably won't be necessary for quite a while.

[JKPolk]

If you do first come first serve, then who's to say "you can only own x amount of the moon?" And why shouldn't America simply use the argument that since there's already an American flag planted, it's our moon? Obviously because these would result in massive retaliation from neighboring countries. First come first serve would only result in a violent race with lots of subterfuge and could easily result in massive territorial wars both in space and on earth.

Also I mentioned that plans are already nearing completion for lunar bases, which will have construction begin in less than 5 years. These laws are going to come into light very soon.

[SSCUJO]

Originally Posted by JKPolk

There is reason for them to go up.

Why would you need a fleet when 1-2 would suffice?

Excluding Challenger, there haven't been any fatal shuttle accidents for a LONG time. Missions are continually being run to the ISS without fatalities, and it's only getting safer. Plus, we do have a fairly detailed layout of what's up there. Just some food for thought.

well you can't really depend on one shuttle going back and forth every month for years... nor can you depend on two shuttles to do that job. if anything were to happen to one of those shuttles, workers could potentially be stranded, supplys could run low, people could die. not to mention the company would lose massive amounts of money in non transportation. also have you worked out the exact costs for fuel from the moon and back, all living supplies needed to live on the moon, the constant repairs that will be needed as they face unknowns, the cost of hireing private astruonauts to fly your ship, and any documentation or permits they would have to purchase to get off the ground in the first place.

after all that are they still making a profit?? what if one ship is damaged or a crew dies? are they still making a profit then??

[tsugomaru]

The only reason I would ever want to be immortal is to live to see the day when we can space travel.

In any case, I believe that the moon should be equally divided amongst the countries who can actually colonize it. No country is going to be able to colonize a spot on the moon within a decade, much less the entire thing. It'd be foolish to claim the moon belongs to one single country like how it's foolish to claim that the Earth belongs to any one country, although it is clear who has the power and that's the people with the big guns. Same goes with the moon, the people who can colonize it will have power there.

~Tsugomaru

[MixMasterLar]

With OST locking everyone in place, I see someone breaking the rules and just going up there doing their own thing. America and China seem like they would if either had the time or funds to do it. I dont believe we'll have a meeting at the UN and decide what happens, I have a feeling that someone will simply make a move and force everyone's hands.

Frankly, you cant attempt to co-exist with everyone up there without someone playing cop, and who gets that honor? I doubt enough countries agree and get along long enought to get a World Space Police in action.

EDIT: Yeah what Tsugomaru just ninja'd me with pretty much sums it up. Those who think thay can break bad and take it will. now I know he ment more of a friendly division among the countries but someone somewhere is always going to disagree.

[JKPolk]

That's actually one of the points we make, is that someone is going to have to get the ball rolling. Unfortunately, right now the US has very little support for any moon activity as NASA is so focused on Mars missions. It looks like a European country, or China is going to get there first. This has major implications for any future endeavors the US might have on the moon.

[Relambrien]

Originally Posted by JKPolk

If you do first come first serve, then who's to say "you can only own x amount of the moon?" And why shouldn't America simply use the argument that since there's already an American flag planted, it's our moon? Obviously because these would result in massive retaliation from neighboring countries. First come first serve would only result in a violent race with lots of subterfuge and could easily result in massive territorial wars both in space and on earth.

You should probably have read my post more carefully.

Originally Posted by Relambrien

if you get to an area of the moon first and start utilizing it, then it's yours until you leave.

See the emphasis. America can't claim the moon is its own under such a system, but someone who goes up there and starts building can declare that the area on which the construction takes place is their own. People who go up for studies can claim the area as their own until the study is completed and they head back down.

Yes, there will be disagreements regarding just how much area around a construction site that someone can claim, but similar disagreements will occur with any system that divides the moon.

And like I said, the point in time where this becomes a problem is so far off, the world's politics are bound to be very different. I expect a much greater global government presence by the time moon colonization becomes a big deal, meaning everything should generally be easier to moderate.

[MixMasterLar]

probably a bit offtopic but if Relambrien's thoery of world peace isnt realized by the time that we want to go up there, then I would think that neither the US or Russia would "Break bad" and get the ball rolling. For some reason I want to think that both are busy with other things at the moment