It seems that every day in the news someone famous is diving into the depths of the seas with new and innovative technologies to investigate what the human eye has never seen the first hand. From new submersibles and new techniques, these progress to create a new era of exploration and perhaps a whole new segment of the economy. So this begs the question:
“Should public funds traditionally have been convicted of space exploration will be redirected to ocean exploration with the intent to create cutting-edge technology and a new economy that will benefit far more people than that of NASA? “
A very famous scientist once said that for the human race to survive, we must go into space. This flow of thoughts actually coincides with the current problems associated with our planet as pollution, food shortages, disease and overpopulation as all actually supports a ‘get away from the planet and in space otherwise’ mentality. But the cost of space travel and colonization of the moon or Mars is not an economically viable one, with tax money, given the current state of our national economy. What is within easy reach by private foundations and much lower government involvement moves massive amounts of research and development towards the sea environment, which would result in as much, if not more, technological progress in a multitude of areas. This fact has already been proven.
Although there is still underwater labs are being used, and there were many laboratories used in the past to get a working knowledge of the underwater world, Sealab is perhaps the most famous how many experiments were performed and a large amount of information was gained from these studies. Examples of such ranged from:
Production of new types of redskaberSalvage teknikkerNye types tørdragterFysiologisk test
Other progress that would undoubtedly lead to investments in any kind of underwater plants would involve such things as reusable energy, placement of more natural resources, more efficient recycling methods, knowledge about climate and security practices related to an independent and self -sufficient habitat for humans.
Space vs Oceans
The cost of the colonization of space is massive and its return on investment for taxpayers is negligible. The obvious choice is to only inhabit the underwater kingdom that we have the technology to do it, and the workforce, in the form of commercial divers, to do it. It would give a boost to the diving industry and divers involved. There are far more divers and dive companies than astronauts and space agencies and the money generated will soon dwarf anything that NASA could ever produce for the national economy. The benefits of a renewed interest in any underwater extension would be directly and quickly realized unlike some lunar outpost that would cost over 100 billion dollars and take years (decades) to generate any real value to the US economy.
This is not to say that space exploration should be scrapped in favor of underwater laboratories or jobs for commercial divers. What is being proposed is that tax money be used to place a hand full of people to circle the globe and instead invested in direction employs thousands of people who will eventually lead to an economic windfall to the dive industry.
In order to fix the planet (that is 75% water) it seems obvious that investments from the government and private companies both need to move their funds from a mediocre public authority to startups and small businesses that will create jobs and lead to new innovations that would out pace those created by NASA.