LAST week, NASA bombed the moon. Or rather, it crashed its Lunar Crater Observation and Sensing Satellite into the moon's south pole in a bid to discover reserves of water and other resources.
This was the latest in a veritable flurry of moon missions: between 2007 and 2011 there will have been eight: one from Japan, two from China, one from India, one from Russia and three from the US.
The race back to the moon has been prompted by the realisation that exploiting it may now be within reach. And it poses the question: who gets to use the moon's recoverable resources, such as oxygen or water?
This could be resolved through negotiation, as space scientists happily lodging their instruments in foreign spacecraft hope. But the Lunar Treaty drafted by the United Nations in the 1990s has still not been signed by the space powers. Since this leaves the moon unprotected by law - the ultimate terra nullius - we may now see a scramble for territory.
The UN's Lunar Treaty is still unsigned by the space powers, leaving the moon unprotected by law
History shows that the first step is colonisation and - the pressing issue - staking a claim. Thanks to the explorers Amundsen, Scott and the early sealers, the UK and Norway now claim about one-sixth of Antarctica each. So we may be witnessing a slow-motion reworking of the Antarctica story in which lunar exploration lays the ground for claims.
We are already witnessing the same mix of challenge, bravado, inquiry and national enthusiasm, suffused with dreams of empire and wealth that spurred the Antarctic race. Plus, there's fear. "Whoever first conquers the moon will benefit first," as Ouyang Ziyuan, chief scientist of China's moon exploration programme, once told the BBC.
This potent cocktail can be used by scientists to win support for bigger, more aggressive national programmes. It is a long, expensive game but that never prevented it from being played out in the Antarctic for almost a century, and there are potential rewards to match.
When I put these ideas to David Parker, head of space science and exploration at the British National Space Centre, he called them Machiavellian. Perhaps he should recall that Machiavelli's Prince is the ultimate guide to realpolitik.
Interactive graphic: Moon landings: 1959-2009
William Cullerne Bown is founder of Research Fortnight
- Like what you've just read?
- Don't miss out on the latest content from New Scientist.
- Get 51 issues of New Scientist magazine plus unlimited access to the entire content of New Scientist online.
- Subscribe now and save
If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
Have your say
Subscribe?
Thu Oct 15 01:25:05 BST 2009 by Phil Stooke
http://publish.uwo.ca/~pjstooke
I'm reading this story, and a pop-up asks me to subscribe to New Scientist. Do you really think that this kind of ill-researched and frequently erroneous article is going to elicit a subscription from me? It's wrong in half a dozen places.
If so, why don't you list the six errors and correct them?...
Moon Estates
Fri Oct 16 15:14:34 BST 2009 by I. Manoss
http://www.moonestates.com/shop-moonestates.php
What about moonestates.com where they sell acres of moon and other planets?
http://www.moonestates.com/shop-moonestates.php
How does this equate in to who owns the territory?
I'd assume that is a scam.
Moon Estates
Fri Oct 16 16:04:35 BST 2009 by I own the Moon!
http://www.webkinz-cheat.net
Yes Moon Estates claims the Moon but they have not been there or sent an agent there to validate their ownership. I however have have validated my claim to the Moon by physically planting my claim of ownership on the surface of the Moon.
No I am not making this up.
For the recent LCROSS Impact mission NASA allowed members of the public to place a message on the LCROSS craft which is now on the surface of the Moon. see http://lro.jhuapl.edu/NameToMoon/
My claim, which is now on the Lunar surface was as follows:
I, (name not posted for privacy) hereby stake claim to the Moon
I, (name not posted for privacy), hereby stake claim to ownership of the Earth's Moon for myself, my heirs, and transferable to other parties as I see applicable. Including all rights and deeds, and all governmental powers over said property and the space surrounding it to a distance of 200,000 miles.
If you are interested in a ownership of a Moon parcel let me know. Some areas are available for purchase or development.
I hate to break this to you, but unless your claim was etched on the face of a diamond its unlikely theres any evidence of it left. Saying that if it did survive then in a couple of hundred years when the moon is worth a fortune in recourses and is being exploited, they might come across your claim and then you surviving relatives would be minted. It would be like a 22nd centaury beverly hill billies
Moon Estates
Sat Oct 17 01:09:34 BST 2009 by I own the Moon!
http://webkinz-cheat.net/
I wasn't able to find any details on whether the microchip of messages (see http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/million_names.html ) would survive impact, but certainly NASA retains a database of those messages and my claim is in there.
Mine is a more valid claim then those scam artists. My plan is to sell land to finance Lunar settlement. Win-Win
You cannot sell what you do not own. I think this is either a scam, or a novelty. Also, checking that site i seriously doubt their scientific prowess, land on Venus? You would need some seriously good sun block to land there.
Moon Estates
Sat Oct 17 01:16:08 BST 2009 by I own the Moon!
http://webkinz-cheat.net/
You need more then sun block. Really the sun doesn't make it through those hot, sulfuric acid clouds that much. The top of that one big volcano might be at near one atmosphere though.
I payed £20 at W.H. Smith for an acher of land on the moon. I got a certificate of ownership and everything.
If no-one owns it then surely no-one can sell it.
Have I been ripped off?
"Have I been ripped off?"
Yes.
Next question?
Yeah, you bought a certificate that's all.
So long as it stays a scientific thing, it will be open to everyone. It's once the govn/enterprise can make something useful of it that ppl will start to claim "ownership"
All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.
If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.
PRINT
SEND
