[WSJ] 'On the Moon, Water, Water Everywhere, But Not a Drop to Own' - I disagree

[Sentient Void]

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/10/22/on-the-moon-water-water-everywhere-but-not-a-drop-to-own/?mod=djemlawblog_h


There’s water in them thar moon craters!

That’s right; there is a lot more water on the moon than previously believed. There’s also hydrogen, ammonia, methane, mercury, sodium and silver, according to an analysis of NASA data published Friday. The finding could bolster the case for a manned base on the lunar surface. Click here for the WSJ story; here for the NYT story.

So what is this news doing on the LB? Glad you asked. Thing is, the moon needs laws. Some people feel it needs laws pretty quickly.

That is, in order for any government or any private enterprise to make use of the resources on the moon — a prospect many in the scientific community think is likely to happen before the calendar reads 2060 — a more legal regime needs to be set up. Click here for my story in the WSJ on Friday; here and here for earlier posts I’ve done on law and space. For the more visually inclined, click here for a video of me waxing (get it?) on the topic Thursday.

Let’s start with this question: who owns the moon? The answer for now is no one. An international space treaty created in 1967 at the height of the Cold War likely makes it very difficult for any party to claim rights to the lunar water scientists now say exists.

Yet technology and moon exploration have advanced in the past four decades. That is forcing lawyers to grapple with how international law can govern ownership rights in outer space. It is unlikely any corporation would undertake lunar resource-extraction without far more legal certainty that its rights would be legally protected.

“The law of ‘finders-keepers’ just isn’t going to work in regard to the moon or space,” said Skadden’s Timothy G. Nelson, an international lawyer and space-law expert.

The so-called Moon Treaty of 1979 tried to advance the body of space law by saying that questions about resource extraction would be settled by an international regime to be set up in the future. Only 13 smaller nations ratified that pact. In much of the West, including the U.S., the Moon Treaty was viewed as unfriendly to business.

Some entrepreneurs, who believe moon and space exploration for private companies is not far off, say the law has to catch up with the science quickly.

“We’re late in starting,” said Jeff Greason, the chief executive of XCOR Aerospace, a California company that produces rockets and launch vehicles for manned space flights. “It’s going to take longer to develop a settled legal regime than it is to develop the technology for such a mission.”

Why not? It's called 'homesteading'. And it's exactly how the Western frontier was explored, settled, and private enterprise prospered quite successfully, actually.

Let companies claim unowned land on the moon based on what areas they physically mix their labor with. That's how homesteading works.

Also, they should read 'The Moon is a Harsh Mistress' by Robert A. Heinlein. Awesome book, great scifi and some libertarian philosophy, along with how a lunar colony revolts against the earth and claims it's independence ;)

[ClayTrainor]

Also, they should read 'The Moon is a Harsh Mistress' by Robert A. Heinlein. Awesome book, great scifi and some libertarian philosophy, along with how a lunar colony revolts against the earth and claims it's independence ;)

That sounds pretty badass, I'll have to check that out. Thanks for the recommendation.

[BenIsForRon]

It's such a limited amount of space that only a team of astronauts, astrophysicists, and other qualified minds, working in the best interests of humanity, should be able to decide what to do up there.

Keep in mind, we're talking about the southern edge of a crater here, incredibly limited real estate. It can serve no other purpose than as a base for further space exploration. Anybody that claims the land for any other purpose must be thrown off.

[Anti Federalist]

That sounds pretty badass, I'll have to check that out. Thanks for the recommendation.

You never read it???

:eek:

Go, now, and seek it out.

You know, I actually took a lot of heat around here for posting these, my favorite, Heinlein quotes:

Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss.

My second fav:

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

[Anti Federalist]

It's such a limited amount of space that only a team of astronauts, astrophysicists, and other qualified minds, working in the best interests of humanity, should be able to decide what to do up there.

Keep in mind, we're talking about the southern edge of a crater here, incredibly limited real estate. It can serve no other purpose than as a base for further space exploration. Anybody that claims the land for any other purpose must be thrown off.

Who decides that?

[Sentient Void]

You never read it???

:eek:

Go, now, and seek it out.

You know, I actually took a lot of heat around here for posting these, my favorite, Heinlein quotes:

Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors... and miss.

My second fav:

A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.

I don't like the specialization one myself so much (because I disagree with him on that and very much support the division of labor), but that first one is awesome... and I love the Professor's quite (he's a self-proclaimed 'rational anarchist')...

"I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. "
- Professor de La Paz, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, by Robert A. Heinlein


also...

"First, what is it you want us to pay taxes for? Tell me what I get and perhaps I’ll buy it."
- Manuel O’Kelly, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein

"Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a god superior to themselves. Most gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child."
- Lazarus Long, Time Enough for Love by Robert A. Heinlein

An armed society is a polite society.
- Beyond This Horizon by Robert A. Heinlein

[Sola_Fide]

It's such a limited amount of space that only a team of astronauts, astrophysicists, and other qualified minds, working in the best interests of humanity, should be able to decide what to do up there.

Keep in mind, we're talking about the southern edge of a crater here, incredibly limited real estate. It can serve no other purpose than as a base for further space exploration. Anybody that claims the land for any other purpose must be thrown off.



WHAT??????????


That sounds very statist to me bro. Screw this "scientific elite". It's just a fancy term for tyranny.

[BenIsForRon]

Who decides that?

Governments, hopefully republican ones. The International Space Station has worked out OK. Why wouldn't that work out for a moon colony?


WHAT??????????
That sounds very statist to me bro. Screw this "scientific elite". It's just a fancy term for tyranny.

I don't care "what it sounds like", how about you actually try to understand what I'm saying?

Who else would you want to decide what to do with the water on the moon. Coca-cola?

[EvilEngineer]

Space travel and moon / space bases will only be viable once the incentive is great enough to risk the capital to venture forth i.e. rare or non-earth occurring minerals or materials.

This will eventually drive down the cost of space travel / exploration allowing further colonization on a more idealistic level.

Honestly though... I hope we don't leave this planet or solar system until we evolve a bit more. Humans amidst the stars would be as bad a unleashing a plague of locusts on the galaxy.

[CCTelander]

That sounds pretty badass, I'll have to check that out. Thanks for the recommendation.


Definitely do. You won't regret it.

[paulim]

You never read it???

:eek:

Go, now, and seek it out.

You know, I actually took a lot of heat around here for posting these, my favorite, Heinlein quotes:



Didn't you realize that "The Moon is a harsh mistress" absolutely contradicts itself (as all books I read so far from him): In order to be free from government, the colonists set up the most centralized government you can think of.
Also if you read the follow up story "The cat who walks through walls" you can see where his philosophy ends. It ends with a small conspiring group of people who pride themselves of being most reasonable and therefore kill people whenever they want, alter former historical facts whenever they want, because its for the welfare of the common man they claim. And without Heinlein noticing it, they create more problems in the end. Heinlein should have known Ron Paul, than he would have known what unintended consequences of do gooders are.

[Anti Federalist]

Honestly though... I hope we don't leave this planet or solar system until we evolve a bit more. Humans amidst the stars would be as bad a unleashing a plague of locusts on the galaxy.

Amazing how well the propaganda has worked.

In less than a century, mankind has gone from a self assured species, seeking the betterment of the species, to a self loathing, self destructive lost cause, full of ennui and world weary cynicism, to the point where they view themselves as a pestilence and wish to be eradicated.

Truly, "adversity makes men, while prosperity makes monsters".

Malthus would be proud.

Makes me wonder what's wrong with me, that I still enjoy a crisp autumn day, the love and laughter of my children and gaze up at the stars and wish to travel to them.

[Anti Federalist]

I don't like the specialization one myself so much (because I disagree with him on that and very much support the division of labor)

Consider it not so much from an economic viewpoint but rather, the idea that good citizen should have skills beyond the narrow confines of what a highly specialized job may require.

[Sentient Void]

Didn't you realize that "The Moon is a harsh mistress" absolutely contradicts itself (as all books I read so far from him): In order to be free from government, the colonists set up the most centralized government you can think of.
Also if you read the follow up story "The cat who walks through walls" you can see where his philosophy ends. It ends with a small conspiring group of people who pride themselves of being most reasonable and therefore kill people whenever they want, alter former historical facts whenever they want, because its for the welfare of the common man they claim. And without Heinlein noticing it, they create more problems in the end. Heinlein should have known Ron Paul, than he would have known what unintended consequences of do gooders are.

This is true, and while it's still a great book and presents some great libertarian philosophy and a revolution based on (mostly) libertarian principles and organized by some fairly libertarian folk - it shows how even such circumstances could lead to yet another special interest centralized government. There's a lot of mention of the American revolution, the constitution, etc in a part of the book - so I think it's alluding to the failure of the alleged attempted limited govt system we had, and even by some libertarian principles, people and foundation for revolution - it devolved into what we have today - which is yet another centralized and oppressive govt.

IMO, without realizing it, I think he makes a great case for anarchy - in that regard at least. Perhaps his aim was to show that tyranny and oppression and self-interested govt bureaucrats expanding the size and scope of their power is inevitable regardless of the initial intentions of the revolutionaries.

While on such a topic - I HIGHLY recommend the movie 'Land of the Blind'. Awesome movie and basically makes the same point.

Yet one of many reasons I'm an ancap. Limited govt is a unicorn and an oxymoron.