Rockets and Monkeys

Yesterday I got a link from a friend about Google teaming up with the X Prize Foundation to sponsor a new Lunar X prize. The new prize sets a high goal for a privately funded organization to land a robotic rover on the moon, and have it perform a number of tasks on the surface. Perhaps more significant is the lineup of companies and organizations stepping up to form partnerships and participate.

It’s interesting to note how that spirit of cooperation contrasts with the days of the Space Race between the United States and the Soviet Union. It’s actually a lot more like the international cooperation among rocket societies in Europe and Asia before World War II. English, German, and Russian aerospace researchers where all freely sharing information before their respective governments drafted them into their weapons and military aircraft programs. Many of the German rocket scientists, and production engineers were “adopted” by the Americans and Russians to develop missile technology and space programs after the war. So it’s taken space exploration the better part of a century to come full circle and back into the non-governmental organizations where it started.

That same day, I also saw an article about recent updates to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Apes are among those species with dangerously declining numbers, and quickly vanishing habitat. Gorillas and Chimpanzees are in danger not only for loss of habitat, but also because they are hunted for meat. In spite of the faint whiff of cannibalism, the Chimps probably wouldn’t find this idea too strange if they were given to abstract reasoning. They are known to hunt smaller monkeys for their meat as well.

But like so many humans, the chimps don’t waste a lot of time thinking about the ethereal implications of eating other simians. They’re hungry, and they like the taste of meat. They probably like the chase too. They’re animals. Just like us. OK, 98% like us. But understanding them, and our relationship with them, past and present, is important. It puts things in perspective. While many protest that they aren’t “a monkey’s uncle,” our continued habit of treating each other with suspicion and cruelty without ever considering our commonality demonstrates our animal nature.

But many of the comparisons between ourselves and the great apes are more positive. Apes, hairless and otherwise, can be tender and caring. We can work cooperatively to great advantage. We have an uncanny ability to make and use tools from the simplest things. And our ingenuity can astound. After all, we’re descended from monkeys and look what we can do; we landed a monkey’s nephew on the moon.

The Automotive X Prize

On April 2, the X Prize Foundation announced the new Automotive X Prize http://auto.xprize.org/. Like the recently awarded Ansari X Prize for space flight, this prize will go to the first group to successfully demonstrate a car that gets 100mpg, or equivalent energy usage, and is an economically viable production model. The group has already been fielding inquiries from well-known and unknown automakers alike. The foundation was inspired by similar competitions in history, like the Orteig Prize. Charles Lindbergh won the Orteg in 1927 by being the first to fly non-stop from New York to Paris. Funds for the X prizes are supplied by a collection of forward thinking corporations and entrepreneurs.

Announcement of the new X prize came on the same day of the Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. the Environmental Protection Agency. The lawsuit included a number of states and organizations frustrated with the Bush Administrations lack of action on global warming. The court’s 5-4 ruling asserts that the Clean Air Act gives the EPA the authority to regulate tailpipe emissions of greenhouse gases. This is in contrast not only the Bush Administration’s position, but to the stated position of the EPA as well. However the court has yet to rule on whether the Agency is in fact required to regulate emissions. Furthermore, a set of standards by which to regulate these emissions would also have to be agreed upon by Congress and the White House.

I’m struck by the contrast in these two announcements. Both reflect the growing concern in our culture over the environment, yet they each represent a very different approach, and pace of change. On the one hand we have the gears of bureaucratic democracy and judiciary slowly responding to public pressure, and on the other we have the enthusiasm of competition and the race to be first in something new.

The winner of the new Automotive X Prize is anybodies guess at this point. But another interesting contest is being played out here. The role of influencing change in our technology and even our culture for the betterment of our environment is in question. Historically, culture and especially market forces move much faster than legislation or justice. But in the end, it’s likely that both governments and the private sector will find some role to play. Maybe for once, the real winners will be consumers and the environment.