GOP Nears Success in Bid to Scrap NASA Climate Satellites
▼ Summary
– NASA initiated a satellite mission in 2002 to track carbon dioxide emissions from orbit.
– President Trump’s budget proposal aims to terminate 41 NASA science missions and cut overall funding by 25%.
– Congress may reject these cuts, but the administration is planning for mission closures regardless.
– The legality of bypassing congressional funding through “pocket rescissions” is under court dispute.
– Canceling the carbon monitoring missions would waste over $750 million in investment to save only $16 million annually.
The future of NASA’s critical climate monitoring capabilities hangs in the balance as political efforts gain momentum to defund key satellite missions. For more than two decades, the agency has tracked greenhouse gas emissions using advanced orbital technology, but that legacy now faces an abrupt end due to proposed budget cuts and administrative maneuvering.
Initiated under President George W. Bush in 2002, NASA’s carbon dioxide monitoring program was designed to provide precise data on the primary greenhouse gas influencing global climate patterns. After numerous delays and revisions, the project finally reached orbit, delivering invaluable insights into atmospheric changes. Now, that entire scientific endeavor may be dismantled.
President Donald Trump’s latest budget proposal calls for the termination of 41 NASA science missions, with an additional 17 programs slated to lose all funding in the near term. The plan would reduce the agency’s overall budget by a quarter and slash science funding by half. While lawmakers from both parties have indicated they will reject many of these cuts, the political standoff over government spending creates significant uncertainty.
The current fiscal year concludes on September 30, and without a new budget agreement, the administration may move forward with its planned closures. NASA managers have already been instructed to prepare shutdown procedures for missions marked for cancellation.
Even if Congress passes a full appropriations bill, the White House could employ “pocket rescissions”, a controversial tactic allowing the executive branch to withhold congressionally approved funds. The legality of this approach is currently being challenged in court, adding another layer of instability to NASA’s operational planning.
The potential loss of two carbon monitoring missions is particularly alarming. These satellites, which cost U.S. taxpayers over $750 million to develop and launch, provide essential data on global CO₂ concentrations. Terminating them would save only about $16 million annually, a fraction of the initial investment.
David Crisp, a former leading atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, summarized the situation starkly. He compared shutting down the Orbiting Carbon Observatory missions to buying a new car and deliberately crashing it after just a few years to avoid paying for gas. The analogy underscores the profound inefficiency and short-sightedness of abandoning such vital scientific infrastructure.
(Source: Ars Technica)
