NASA Climate Mission Crisis

Cost-Effectiveness of Missions

White House Decision: The White House has instructed NASA to terminate two pivotal space missions dedicated to climate change study, namely the Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO) missions. These satellites collect precise and comprehensive data on carbon dioxide distribution, providing vital information for sectors such as oil and gas companies and farmers on how carbon emissions affect crop health and the environment.

Details and Importance of OCO Missions

OCO-2 Mission: The Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 (OCO-2) mission, launched in 2014, is NASA's first satellite dedicated to making global, high-precision measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The observatory aims to identify carbon emission sources and natural absorption areas (sinks), helping scientists better understand the global carbon cycle and its impact on climate change. Meanwhile, the Orbiting Carbon Observatory 3 (OCO-3) instrument is aboard the International Space Station to continue this vital monitoring.

Fate of the Satellites: The autonomous satellite will face its permanent demise after burning up in the atmosphere if the mission is terminated. It can be speculated that President Donald Trump's administration's desire to end these missions is linked to its denial of climate change and its efforts to cut the NASA Science Directorate's budget.

Data Quality: To make matters worse, these observatories were designed to operate for many years to come, according to scientists working on the project. A 2023 assessment by NASA concluded that the data they provided was "exceptionally high quality," offering detailed measurements of carbon dioxide across various locations, allowing scientists to gain an accurate view of how human activity affects greenhouse gas emissions.

Implications of Mission Termination

Experts' Concern: David Crisp, a former NASA employee who worked on the Orbiting Carbon Observatory instruments, reported that current employees had contacted him saying: "They've been asking me very sharp questions." He added: "The only thing that would motivate these questions is that someone asked them to put together a mission termination plan."

Cost vs. Value: Crisp asserted that "there is no economic rationale for ending NASA missions that provide extremely valuable data," noting that the cost of maintaining the two observatories does not exceed $15 million annually, which is a tiny fraction of the agency's $25.4 billion budget. Similar questions have been raised with other scientists who rely on data from these missions for their research.

Political Reactions

Proposed FY26 Budget

Threat to Space Missions: The two observatories are among dozens of space missions facing existential threats within the proposed FY26 budget from the White House administration. Countless scientists have expressed outrage at this proposal, arguing that it could lead to a decline in U.S. leadership in space. Lawmakers have since offered a counter-proposal that would keep NASA's budget roughly at its current levels.

Rejection of Cuts: Senator and senior appropriator Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) stated in a July statement: "We rejected cuts that would have devastated NASA science by 47 percent and would have ended 55 working and planned missions." Lawmakers assert that canceling Earth observation missions in response to an anti-science agenda could be a "grave mistake," and perhaps illegal by exceeding already appropriated budgets.

Warnings from Representatives: Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), a member of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, said that halting satellites dedicated to Earth observation would be "catastrophic" and would significantly weaken our ability to predict, manage, and respond to weather and climate disasters. Lofgren added that imposing 2026 budget cuts on already appropriated 2025 funds is an "illegal" action.

Conclusion

Importance of Climate Monitoring: This crisis highlights the importance of climate monitoring missions in understanding and predicting environmental changes, and the necessity of maintaining investment in space science to ensure a better future for planet Earth.