Has NASA Become Mars-Obsessed?

Planetary exploration is stuck in a Martian rut

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The landing of the Curiosity rover was a huge hit for nasa in the summer of 2012. Now the space agency is letting its winnings ride with another bet on Mars. Last December, NASA announced plans to send a similar rover to the Red Planet in 2020—its seventh planned or active Mars mission—citing the low risk and cost savings of a mission reboot.

NASA's fixation on Mars (or on avoiding risks) comes at the expense of the rest of the solar system. Outer planets Uranus and Neptune have scarcely been explored. The same goes for Jupiter's moon Europa, which planetary scientists believe to be a promising habitat for extraterrestrial life.

Recently a team of researchers proposed a novel mission concept: a floating spacecraft that would explore the hydrocarbon seas of Saturn's moon Titan. But NASA opted instead for a Mars lander called InSight—which, like the 2020 rover, is a low-risk mission based on proved hardware.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN ONLINE
For interactive graphics about planetary exploration, see ScientificAmerican.com/mar2013/graphic-science

^*Includes an estimated $150 million for launch services (actual launch costs not yet available)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American