Tuesday, May 22, 2007

In their May 10 op-ed, "The Planet NASA Needs to Explore," Tony Haymet, Mark Abbott and Jim Luyten argued that NASA's purportedly changing priorities "will threaten exploration here at home."

The reality is far different. NASA's annual budget for Earth and space science is more than $5.3 billion, almost 32 percent of our expenditures, up from 24 percent in the early 1990s, and 17 percent during the Apollo era.

NASA satellites supply more data on global climate change resulting in more scientific research than is enabled by any other organization in the world.

Fourteen satellites collect information on the Earth's climate variability, atmospheric composition, carbon cycle, water and energy cycles, weather, and the surface and interior of our planet, and NASA will have launched seven new missions by 2011.

Rather than take money from other parts of NASA to pay for Earth-science missions, we should remember that U.S. leadership in space requires NASA to carry a balanced portfolio. We're dedicated to Earth-science research at NASA. We must also be just as dedicated to space exploration, lest our nation's leadership on this new frontier slip away.

MICHAEL GRIFFIN

Administrator

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Washington