Artemis Offramp

As NASA continues towards Artemis II next year and the return of American astronauts to the lunar surface on Artemis III, Congress is wrestling with budget challenges and the question, “What comes next?” The Administration has enunciated the goal of not just visiting the Moon but also developing it economically and enabling permanent settlement. The strategic objective: the U.S. should not just stay ahead of China in space but strive to achieve a dominant leadership position.

How in today’s budget environment? By following the recommendations of a 2015 NASA study on how commercial partnerships can enable earlier, cheaper, and more sustainable expansion of America’s economy and civilization to the Moon.

The Evolvable Lunar Architecture Study

In 2014, NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) commissioned the Evolvable Lunar Architecture study because NASA was under pressure to demonstrate realistic options for human exploration beyond low Earth orbit after the cancellation of Constellation and during the Asteroid Redirect Mission era. The agency needed to know whether the success of the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) and Commercial Resupply Service commercial cargo model could be extended into exploration, particularly to the Moon, and whether this could be done within flat budgets. Congress and the White House were not willing to provide Apollo-level funding, so HEOMD wanted to see if commercial partnerships could provide a way forward that fit within existing resources.

There was also a political angle. NASA was officially directed toward Mars as the long-term goal, while lunar return had strong advocates in both industry and Congress. By having an external group like NextGen Space conduct the study, HEOMD could explore lunar options without appearing to contradict the White House’s Mars-first and ARM focus. The outside analysis also offered credibility and cover, since it wasn’t NASA itself making the case.

In short, the study was commissioned as a relatively low-cost way for HEOMD to test whether commercial partnerships could make lunar return politically and financially feasible while keeping strategic options open.

Report Summary

The Evolvable Lunar Architecture (ELA) study assesses the feasibility of a low-cost, incremental approach to human lunar exploration using commercial capabilities and public-private partnerships (PPPs). The ELA aims to establish a sustainable lunar presence to support NASA’s long-term Mars exploration goals while fostering lunar industrialization.

Key Assumptions:

Public-Private Partnerships: Utilizes NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) model, sharing costs and risks with industry to reduce development expenses.
Private Ownership: Assumes 100% commercial ownership of lunar infrastructure and assets to incentivize private investment.
International Lunar Authority: Proposes a governance body to reduce business risks and facilitate international cooperation.
Incremental Approach: Focuses on scalable, low-risk steps starting with robotic missions, progressing to human sorties, and culminating in a permanent lunar base.

Strategic Objective:

The ELA targets commercial mining of lunar propellant (e.g., water ice from lunar poles) for transport to lunar orbit, enabling cost-effective human Mars missions by reducing Earth-launched fuel needs. This leverages existing or near-term commercial capabilities.

Technical Analysis:

Infrastructure: Proposes a lunar base at the South Pole for access to water ice, with small satellites in Earth-Moon libration points (L1/L2) for communication and navigation.
Operations: Begins with robotic precursor missions, followed by short human missions, and scales to a permanent outpost using in-situ resource utilization (ISRU) for propellant production.
Cost Efficiency: Estimates $40B for a lunar base over 10-15 years, significantly lower than traditional NASA programs, by leveraging commercial launch services and ISRU.

Economic Viability:

Commercial Leverage: PPPs reduce NASA’s costs by sharing development with private firms, mirroring COTS’ success with ISS cargo delivery.
Market Creation: Lunar propellant mining could create new markets, supporting a sustainable cis-lunar economy and reducing mission costs to Mars.
Case Studies: Draws parallels with historical models like AT&T’s regulated utility, Boeing-United Airlines, and National Parks tourism to illustrate viable PPP structures.

Key Findings:

The ELA is technically and economically feasible, offering a 10x cost reduction over traditional approaches by using commercial capabilities.
It supports NASA’s Mars goals while enabling lunar industrialization, creating a scalable framework for future exploration.
An International Lunar Authority could mitigate risks, encouraging private investment and global participation.

Conclusion: The ELA proposes a cost-effective, commercially driven path for lunar exploration, emphasizing PPPs and ISRU to build a sustainable presence. It aims to integrate space into the broader economy, aligning with national goals for Mars and beyond.

2025 Hill Briefing

In 2025, the Foundation held a briefing at the Capital Visitors Center to help staffers understand not only the historical context and impact of the ELA, but its role in informing the Administration on commercial alternatives to the existing Artemis program of record. The following two slide decks outline China's ambitions and the features of the ELA.