TED Case Studies
Moon Rocks
Click on the Landing Sites to see pictures of lunar
samples brought back.
I. Identification
1. The Issue
The world is quickly entering into a new age, the space
age. This paper will look at the laws which has started to govern
this new age. The current problem is one of rights. Who, if any
body has the right to own, sell, and privitization the moon. Over
Thirty years ago the Outer
Space Treaty was created in order to solve this problem. The
major problem with the Outer
Space Treaty was it left out private entities in regards to
owning any part of the moon or other celestial body. The The
Moon Treaty was then created in order to make it so no one
could own any part of the moon or other celestial body. This treaty
was only supported by 6 UN nations, and the United States did
not sign this treaty. Currently this is where the world stands
in regards to space law.
2. Description
On July 20, 1969 at 4:17:40
p.m. the world changed. Neil Armstrong became the fist person
to land on the moon. With Neil Armstrong's landing the world entered
into a whole new age, the space age. Upon entering in to any age
there are always people who want to exploit this new situation
and others who want to preserver the new situation. This is only
too true for the moon. The current debate over moon rocks is not
the buying and selling of moon rocks but in the acquisition of
moon rocks from the moon and if any body has the right to exploit
the resources on the moon. The parties directly involved in this
controversy are Private Business and the United Nations.
On December 19, 1966 "Outer
Space Treaty" was ratified by the UN General assembly and
was open for signature in the United States in 1967. The Outer
Space Treaty is some times referred to as the Magna Carte for
all space law and treaties. From the Outer Space Treaty four other
treaties were spawned. (1) the Agreement on the Rescue and Return
of Astronauts, and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space,
opened for signature in 1968 (11); (2) the Convention on International
Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (Damage Convention),
available for ratification in 1972 (12); (3) the Convention on
Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space, opened for
signature in 1975 (13); and (4) the Agreement Governing the Activities
of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (Moon Treaty),
available for signature in 1980 (14).1 In regards to the trade of moon rocks,
the Moon Treaty is also relevant in understanding the issue of
moon rocks. It should be noted though only 6 members of the United
Nations supported this and the President Reagan Did not sign this
treaty.2 This means the only basis for law
on the buying, selling, and appropriating of moon rocks comes
from section two of the Outer Space Treaty.
Article II
Outer space, including
the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national
appropriation
by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by
any other means.3
A Moon Rock from Apollo 15
This is the only legal wording
in regards to the moon. This explicitly leaves out privatization
of the moon. This paper will first look at the privatization of
the moon and its resources and then at the Moon Treaty which directly
opposed any and all exploitation of the moon.
Currently one man owns the
entire moon, Mr. Dennis Hope AKA "The Big Cheese." Mr.
Hope in 1980 made a claim for the entire lunar surface, as well
as the surface of all the other eight planets of our solar system
and their moons (except Earth and the sun). His claim was accepted.
Mr. Hope then informed the US government, the General Assembly
of the United Nations, and the Russian Government in writing of
the claim and the legal intent to sell extraterrestrial properties.
None of the three entities mentioned above disputed his claim
over the solar system. Mr. Hope then copyrighted this with the
US Copyright registry office. This is the first legal basis to
owning any part of the moon. It should b noted that Mr. Hope is
selling this property at $14.99 for 177 acres on the moon and
the purchaser gets mining rights to the property as well.4
This is obviously sets the standard as to the owning of the moon,
moon rocks and all other minerals on the moon. Another group ASR,
Applied Science Research, is planning to launch a rocket to the
moon and bring back 10 kilograms of moon rocks.5
ASR's plan is to sell the
rocks that will be picked up by their Lunar Retriever I for the
price of less then $10/mg.6 Current Prices for moon rocks and
dust are: a few milligrams of lunar dust sold at a Superior Galleries
auction in California in 1993 for $42,500, and one carat moon
rock sold for approximately $442,000 at Sotheby's in New York.7
The Honduras government also tried to sell a moon rock to collector
in Florida for $5 million.8 ASR basis as to why they are doing
this is directly from congress.
"The
Commercial Space Act of 1997 would direct NASA to purchase space
science data from private concerns when doing so would be more
economical.5 H.R. 1275, a NASA appropriations bill for 1998-99,
states as a finding of Congress:
The overwhelming preponderance of the Federal Government's requirements
for routine, non-emergency manned and unmanned space transportation
can be met most effectively, efficiently, and economically by
a free and competitive market in privately developed and operated
space transportation services." 9
Lunar Basalt From Apollo 12
ASR interpretation of this
is that any company that wants to should and can exploit the moon
and all other celestial bodies for the exploration of space. This
is key to the understanding of the trading of moon rocks. ASR,
Mr. Hope and many others argue the moon should be open for exploration
and exploitation. If the moon and the natural resources on the
moon are not open for exploitation then private funding for space
exploration will not occur. This is why the private sector argues
the moon and other celestial bodies should be exploited for a
profit. This is in diametric opposition to the Moon Treaty, which
was created by the United Nations and by the other groups, and
organizations, which believe the moon, should be left alone.
The Moon Treaty as created by the Untied Nations sates in Article
11 section 3:
neither
the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof
or natural resources in
place, shall become property of any State, international
intergovernmental or non-governmental
organization, national organization or non-governmental entity
or of any natural person. The
placement of personnel, space vehicles, equipment, facilities,
stations and installations on or
below the surface of the moon, including structures connected
with its surface or subsurface,
shall not create a right of ownership over the surface or the
subsurface of the moon or any areas
thereof.10
A Space Rock from the Apollo
16 Mission
This makes it explicitly cleat
that no one can own any part of the moon and no one can exploited
the moon's natural resources either. Though as stated earlier,
only 6 members of the UN General assembly ratified the treaty.
The original reason the moon treaty was created was because of
the wording in the original Outer Space Treaty which left out
private entities as not being able to own or exploit the moon
and the natural resources on the moon. As stated before though,
the Untied Sates did not sign this treaty, neither did the former
Soviet Union, or any other country having a space program. As
a result of all but 6 countries not signing the moon treaty is
has made the discussion about outer space extremely difficult.
The additional point, which has made this so difficult, is that
no private entity has ever gone to the moon. It is my feeling
thought in the next few years all these problems will have to
get sorted out, and probably in favor of privatization. There
is no realist way that space can not be privatized. NASA cannot
fund space exploration forever. The moon has real value to the
human race as a whole; thus we should take advantage of this.
3. Related Cases
Keyword Clusters
(1): Trade Product = MOONrock
(2): Bio-geography = SPACE
(3): Environmental Problem = NA
Created on April 11, 1999
II. Legal
Clusters
5. Discourse and
Status: AGREEment and INPROGress
Currently
the only agreements are the Outer
Space Treaty, which was ratified by
the UN in 1966. This is core of all space law. The other relevant
treaty is the Moon Treaty, but this has yet to be approved by
the UN General assembly. No country with a Space Program supports
the adoption of the Moon Treaty.
Russian Lunar rock samples
6. Forum and Scope: MANY and MULTILATERAL
At the international level
this effects all countries. What ever laws are decided upon now
will effect future law for space. Currently though these agreements
only affect countries with a space program.
7. Decision Breadth: Many
The moon does not have to
be claimed by any one country or entity. The moon is much like
the new world was 500 years ago. The long term effects of the
decisions made now will choose the path we look at space, the
moon, and the exploitation of space.
8.
Legal Standing: TREATY
Currently the only law which
every country is part of is the Outer
Space Treaty. This is the only formal
international law in regards to the exploitation of celestial
bodies including the moon.
Lunar brown glass from Apollo
17
III. Geographic
Clusters
9. Geographic Locations
a. Geographic Domain: SPACE
b. Geographic Site: MOON
c. Geographic Impact: GLOBAL
10. Sub-National Factors:NO
11. Type of Habitat: SPACE
IV. Trade
Clusters
12. Type of Measure:LICENsing
13. Direct v. Indirect
Impacts:INDirect
There
is no direct ban on the trade of moon rocks for profit, except
nation states. One of the reasons the Moon Treaty was supported
because of the possible impact on the environment on the moon
as a result of people exploiting the natural resources on the
moon. The current problem is who has the rights to retrieve moon
rocks from the moon.
Lunar Breccia from Apollo 14
14. Relation of Trade Measure to Environmental
Impact
a. Directly Related to Product: YES (MOONrock)
b. Indirectly Related to Product: NO
c. Not Related to Product: NO
d. Related to Process: YES SPACE
15. Trade Product Identification: MOONrock
16. Economic Data
ASR is counting on the project
to retrieve moon rocks to cost about $100 million. This will be
paid for by the rocks which are brought back. Other factors are
the additional engineers that ASR and companies like ASR will
employ. There is also a cost savings to NASA. When NASA can buy
space data from private companies, then more money can be spent
on other aspects of the space program. As of yet there are no
hard numbers as to the actual effect of this on the economy.
Russian Lunar Samples
17. Impact of Trade Restriction:HIGH
Since the moon has never been
exploited for profit, the possible environmental problems are
enormous. Also there is currently no law regarding the environment
on the moon. This opens up the possibility for gross abuse of
the lunar surface.
18. Industry Sector:MOTH
19. Exporters and Importers: EARTH and
MOON
V. Environment
Clusters
20. Environmental Problem Type:POLL-
MOON
The environmental effects
have not been calculated and are not know. Though we can assume
humans will have some type of effect on the environment on the
moon if we land multiple rock finding devices on the moon.
21. Name, Type, and Diversity of Species
Name:N/A
Type:N/A
Diversity:N/A
22. Resource Impact
and Effect:LOW and SCALE
Currently
there is no problem, but it is an issue we need to address in
the future. If the scale of exploitation on the moon is low, there
will be no problem. The large problems will occur in the amount
of projects which will try to bring back moon rocks from the moon.
Lunar Rocks Brought back on Apollo 11
23. Urgency and Lifetime:N/A
24. Substitutes:N/A
VI. Other
Factors
25. Culture:NO
26. Trans-Boundary Issues:YES
27. Rights:NO
28. Relevant Literature