The Cost of Exploring Space: Film vs. Reality
We all know that space exploration, while certainly not the largest expenditure of most countries, doesn’t come cheap. But neither do big-budget science fiction films, either. Special effects, sets, special effects, popular acting talent… special effects… those all come with hefty price tags that make sci-fi and fantasy films costly ventures — although bigger definitely isn’t always better. If you were to compare the price of real space exploration missions (which provide actual information) to the costs of movies about space exploration (which provide “only” entertainment) what would you expect to find?
This infographic does just that:
“Prometheus’ movie budget would be enough to keep the search for real aliens going for another 52 years.”
Wow. (Maybe they should have just written a check to SETI.)
Infographic provided by Neo Mammalian Studios and paydayloan.co.uk. U.S.S. Enterprise © CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.
By budget, costs, infographic, Sci-Fi, Space Exploration
Related posts
Actually a little misleading; as the Shuttle’s™ true cost, two thousand million dollars a year, whether it flew or not, is only hinted at.
The prices listed are costs per launch.
Yes. Only hinted at. $2 billion (with a B) a year whether it flew or not.
History will read that Shuttle’s™ only purpose was to employ 20,000 scientists and engineers who, presumably, would otherwise have nothing to do. This is the opinion of the Chief Investigator for Apollo 20, Jerry Pournelle, I only happen to agree with him.
One may rewrite history and make consequences a stated “purpose”. (I would rather not, it only confuses history.)
Even so, the “purpose” of the STS was manifold, it build ISS for one.
My understanding was that the cost per shuttle launch was closer to $1 billion a pop.
The general trend is the same for movie and rockets. The more they cost, the more they suck.
Alien, Hitchhikers, and 2001 – all near the bottom. MIB:3, Avatar, Armageddon and John Carter – near the top,
And now, for rockets…. oh – they forgot to put SpaceX’s Falcon on the chart. ooops.
You just made me think how cheap it is to fund SETI compared to everything else.
Maybe SETI can make a deal searching for Extra Stellar Auroras as a side science to fund its main science intention.
SETI program is completely pointless and a waste of money. Those millions per year are better spent on any other space research.
SETI is just a ‘baby’ at present… The effort promises to evolve or keep pace with our technical prowess as we will continue to explore radio freq. bands, light then gravity waves?
I appreciate your realistically speaking comment. But what other method of communication over interstellar distances do we have at our disposal? The ‘odds’ are certainly against any radio *.coms, but since we humans tend to use what tools are available to us….
Personally… I think it’s much more likely that we will eventually find, perhaps encoded in our DNA, a way to communicate over the vastness of space. That would imply that we have had contact in the past? OR that our presence IS that eagerly awaited communication….
1: Lasers,a coherent beam of light, still travels at the same speed as radio waves, approximately 250,000 miles/second. IF there is intelliegent life in our galaxy, some of the closer stars are enjoying “I Love Lucy’ as a first run broadcast right about now.
2: ‘There’s
absolutely no chance that any civilization in the Milky Way is on the same stage of development..” . Can you back up that statement with some proof?
That’s being realistic, and there’s no emotional involvement. I support SETI on the grounds that it’s a worthwhile endeavor.
are you forgetting that they recently discovered that the laws of physics arent universal
Amazing how the European Space Agency is ignored in the infograph. Oh well, its an American based internet site, so can’t expect it to be accurate – can we.
Ariane vehicles are European.
Do they broadcast launches live somewhere? If not, it would be interesting if instead of press released videos of the launch, NASA, ESA and others would broadcast the launch live and pay per view. Don’t know if they would really compete with movies but I for one would be intrigued.
Somehow, the world’s space budget diagram lost Russian budget $5,6 billion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Federal_Space_Agency
Thanks.. I wondered why it wasn’t shown~
Seems as if they missed an opportunity to compare Apollo 13 the movie and Apollo 13 the mission.
The UK, France and Norway go though ESA, not really by themselves. Also, your first pie/cirle chart has several nations at $1.8B, yet they are different sizes on the chart.
52 year no. Articles like this always forget to consider things like inflation. Use common sense, branes peoples.
It says near the bottom that prices are adjusted for inflation. Please grow a BRAIN.
Maybe some people enjoy entertainment. It’s not like we can only have one or the other. Should we force all the actors to become astronauts instead?
This argument is like saying we shouldn’t buy steak when we could have lots of potatoes for the same price.
This an idiotic comparison. When you make a movie you get that money back plus more (hopefully). It’s a business proposition whereas Seti funds are donated dollars and basically disappear other than employing a few people.