Hey Open Lunarians, 2025 has begun with momentum. We’ve kicked off new Hunch research, expanded the Lunar Registry Initiative, and supported development of the Lunar Policy Platform, all while sourcing and recruiting new teammates (more on that soon!). Cislunar operations have also seen notable progress. Firefly’s Blue Ghost stuck the landing, Intuitive Machine’s Athena is prepping for touchdown later this week, and ispace’s RESILIENCE is hitting all of their key milestones. We are also thinking of all our friends at Blue Origin during the layoffs that took place in February. With shifting policies and funding, our work of building open, collaborative lunar infrastructure matters more than ever. We are grateful for your support as we shape the future. - Rachel Williams, Acting Executive Director |
|
As Moon Missions Mount Globally, We Need to Reserve Future Exploration and Science By Jatan Mehta, Open Lunar Affiliate and Science Communications Lead On March 6, Intuitive Machines will attempt to land its Athena spacecraft on the Moon’s south pole at about 85° latitude as part of NASA’s CLPS program. China’s upcoming Chang’e 7 and Chang’e 8 landers, targeting launch in 2026 and 2028 respectively, will explore the Moon between 86–89°S. The exploration site for the upcoming Indo-Japanese LUPEX rover mission lies around 89°S. Landing site candidates for NASA’s crewed Artemis III mission range from 85–89°S. Against the expanse of the Moon, it’s a small region for countries globally to target. All these missions and then some more have one goal in common: locate and analyze water ice deposits on or beneath the surface for potential use in future habitats as drinking water, breathable oxygen or even rocket fuel. |
|
Left image: Chang’e 7 candidate landing sites on the Moon’s south pole. Image: DSELRight image: The Moon’s south pole shows the nine candidate landing regions for NASA’s Artemis III crewed mission. Image: NASA / GSFC / ASU / LRO |
|
If and when substantial lunar water deposits are identified, the next set of missions will only cluster further in a handful of areas. This could cause coordination challenges, legal issues, resource depletion, and potential conflicts among mission owners. What if extensive mining operations in such regions make it difficult or virtually impossible for others to conduct any other activities either due to local dust kickup or political keep-out areas? Should we have shared resource areas or mining limits on the Moon? How do we agree on its norms? Moreover, lunar polar water ice deposits offer unique windows to understanding various stages of our Moon’s and Earth’s evolution. Would gradual erasure of planetary history from extensive mining at the lunar south pole mean we’d be wise to preserve the north pole as a scientific sanctuary? Will all mission owners agree? Likewise, incessant communications with polar missions could destroy the Moon’s farside as the most pristine place in the inner Solar System for radio astronomy observations. Space agencies globally recognize the incoming need for a governance framework and a code of conduct for how we should operate collectively at our Moon. But the US and China are leading separate international cooperation efforts vis-à-vis the Artemis Accords and the ILRS Moonbase project respectively, with barely any common signatories like Thailand. While China has presented their thinking on the legal use of lunar resources via the UN COPUOS, a positive development for potential mutual dialogue at an international fora, the country’s absence in the Accords remains notable. Conversely, the Wolf Amendment prevents the US from meaningfully collaborating with China on any missions. Moreover, the Accords are non-binding, and each country and company ultimately choose their own path on the Moo. Amid these disparities, how to sustainably explore our Moon? Christine Tiballi, a researcher at the Open Lunar Foundation, says, “We will never get full consensus internationally but having more than 50 countries sign the Accords, and ILRS gaining several dozen signatories, means they’re open to a common code of conduct at the Moon”. Tiballi is ideating on having lunar activity areas in ways that could incentivize greater coordination between mission owners for shared long-term benefits. There will always be roadblocks but identifying an open model to improve transparency between future missions clustered at the Moon’s south pole would be a good start. “We could draw from aspects of international systems that work well on Earth, such as the Svalbard treaty,” says Tiballi. “It’s Important to invite everyone and operate transparently.” |
|
We're Hiring! Join Us to Build a Global Database for Lunar Coordination: Lunar Registry Project Lead Our team is seeking a Project Lead to guide the development of the Lunar Registry, a global database for coordinating lunar activities. This project aims to enhance transparency and reduce risks for future lunar missions by providing a shared platform for all stakeholders involved. |
|
Stay in the loop. Connect with us on social media. |
|
399 Webster Street
San Francisco, CA 94117, United States |
|
|
|
