wrong. the titan submersible that went missing last sunday aimed to combine science with tourism. similar trips have raised billions of dollars. organizers say that helps fund science and industry, but are the risks too high? this is inside story. folly: welcome to the program.

i am folly bah thibault. commercial companies offering dangerous adventures to the ends of the earth and beyond are attracting billions of dollars every year. some of the risks in commercial sea exploration have been exposed by the plight of the five men on board the titan submersible that went missing. are these multibillion-dollar industries contributing to science? and how do these adventures benefit society? first, let us take a closer look to how private companies are pushing boundaries in space and under the sea. commercial investments in the space race have trouble -- have tripled. in may 2020 space x became the first private company to send people to the international space station. in july 2021 blue origin sent

its first commercial service into space. virgin galactic is about to send customers into space. in 2019 an american explorer broke a record by descending 11 km to the deepest place in the pacific ocean. what did he find? sea creatures and a plastic bag. the company oceangate has sought to further expand sea tourism, taken people deeper into the ocean than ever before. away from commercial ventures, scientists are shining lights deep into space. and the oceans. in june, scientists found phosphorus on one of saturn's moons. looking down, scientists found 5000 new species of marine life. but they are deeply concerned as the area is earmarked for deep

sea mining. scientists are continuing to discover strange lifeforms at greater depths. let's bring in our guest for today's inside story. in germany, sylvia sander, chair of the european marine board working group on deep sea and ocean health. ezzy pearson, astrophysicist and space journalist. in norway, victor lund shammas, head of sociology and social work at the university of agder. thank you for joining us today. sylvia, in the past few years, commercial space tourism companies owned by billionaires have been making headlines for sending paying customers into

space. how developed is commercial deep ocean exploration? why do people go into these extreme expeditions? >> i think it is an adventure. people have done adventures since humans are inhabiting the earth. i think it is one of the main reasons people aim for adventure. i think i am quite certain that this kind of tourism that has led now to this tragic loss of the titan is not helping learning more about the sea. we are looking into the impact of research and we are doing

this to learn and understand the ocean and the ecosystem and not just to have a glimpse of some sea creatures down there. the deep ecosystem is very fragile, very cold, buried deep. everything is growing very slowly. it can easily be disturbed. noise is an issue. it is very sad for those people definitely. but i do not see how this kind of adventure is helping research in general. folly: how developed is commercial deep ocean exploration when you compare it space exploration? >> there are some adventures i think which are rich enough to

fund their own vessels. and that are sponsoring themselves to go down there with a little crew. but then there are these tourism organizations, like with the titan. we cannot just say commercial organizations going down into the deep sea. you have to differentiate. of course there are also organizations like the smith ocean organization that are nongovernmental come up that are really funding research, like true research. it is not black or white. folly: ezzy, we talk about space now. in terms of scientific

exploration, we have had leaps and bounds in the past few years. we have collected data from one of saturn's moons. how have private companies like a sex and blue origin -- spacex and blue origin disrupted this? what do you see about the benefits and drawbacks to them? >> has led to a lot more smaller missions happening. for instance, there was the axiom to mission which allowed saudi arabia to put their first astronauts on board the spacex sprocket. it allows people who could not into space before pay for one to some of their experiments and astronauts into space. we have seen that will happen a lot at the moon specifically

over the next couple of years. apparently that is to fuel nasa's artemis mission. the problem that comes with that is this is a very new industry, there is not a lot of regulation at the moment. which means if you get the ok to launch your vehicle, you can pretty much, once you are in space, they are not a lot of people who can control what you do once you are up there. folly: it is interesting that you bring up the question of regulation. that is the real issue when it comes to deep sea regulation. i want to get your thoughts victor. what are your thoughts about commercial expeditions into

space and the deep sea? how do you see them benefiting society? >> there is no doubt that space exploration can be good for humanity. we have seen technology benefits some from the space race. that may continue through the umbrella of these private entrepreneurs. space exploration satisfies the innate human desire to explore. there seems to be a common human impulse to explore and figure out what lies beyond. but there are significant risks and costs associated with transferring power to these private enterprises. it is a way that is hugely ironic that people like elon musk want to do it.

there are potentially significant environmental harms from these rocket launches. there is also the political and regulatory side of things. who controls what goes on? folly: what about ethical concerns? what ethical concerns should be considered here? >> one of the benefits of old space, meaning the cold war model where the state is in control, is that you have a certain element of democratic control. the question really is who

controls what goes on in outer space in the future? there is also the issue of militarization of space, which is connected to this issue. satellite technology is heavily involved. there is a test ban treaty. we have seen the establishment of the u.s. space force as an element of militarization of outer space and more will probably happen on that front. 9 sylvia, what are your thoughts about this? -- folly: sylvia, what are your

thoughts about this? what kind of challenges are you seeing and how do you address them in your view? >> i think in that sense we are a little ahead of space in the marine realm because we do have jurisdiction and legislation in place. we have the united nations convention. we also just yesterday signed the jurisdiction. so we do have legal instruments in place. and it is not the wild west down there. of course, there is also, this is the area, the open ocean outside of the jurisdiction. of course, people can do what

the jurisdiction is allowing and that counts for i guess private operations, but also things like deep sea mining and so on. i think people have realized it is really necessary to set up organizations that are taking care of the ocean for human [indiscernible] probably it is the only time that before we destroy an ecosystem that we are thinking about it. we try to at least put regulations in place. how good they will work will be seen. but there was an effort to do so. folly: ezzy, we talked about some of the significant

achievements, but there are a lot of people asking why is the money being spent by these private companies and commercial companies? why is this not being spent on man's exploration and given to governments? would that make a difference do you think? >> with a lot of the private-based companies, but they are trying to make money. it is people using money to make more money. it is their primary goal. they have larger goals of being able to perhaps go to mars and do things like that. folly: what is the reward in terms of financial gain and scientific exploration? >> in terms of scientific exploration, it is more of a tool and it is giving access to

people to go on and do what they want what they. these private companies are still open to governments. in fact, that is one of the reasons why blue origin and spacex exist, it is because nasa hired them to build the spacecraft to operate for them. so it is giving a different way to be able to conduct these scientific experiments that is out of the hands of justice one government agency is the general idea. it still costs a lot of money, but it is cheaper to hire a company to send your spacecraft into space. folly: victor, your thoughts about this. how might ethnology and scientific advances change our approach to space exploration and even deep sea exploration?

>> i think it is important to bear in mind there is a certain false understanding amongst silicon valley billionaires. i agree with the previous speaker that there is an implication with government funding. so this idea that many of these space billionaires have is reliant on government funding. it is important to not necessarily take industry on their own premise as it were. we have developed this concept which we call capitalist kind. they like to present themselves as if they are acting on behalf of humanity, but in reality they are acting on behalf of their own pocketbooks. that carries with it certain

risks. we also have this outer space treaty of 1967, very progressive piece of legislation, which states that the exploration should be carried out for the benefit and interest of all of mankind. there is this legal ideal from the cold war era that the resources should be made available to all of humanity, but whether that will become reality seems somewhat dubious. folly: sylvia, speaking of the economics of all, i was curious to know whether these companies that are engaging in deep sea exploration, are they accounted for the potential risks and costs of potential rescue

missions? are they also contend for the environmental damage that comes with it? >> i doubt that they do. this will cost a huge amount of money this rescue activity. that is always in the sea, if something gets lost, everybody's hoping to find it. of course, people are putting themselves at risk at their own choice. i am not entirely sure if they are going to cover the cost are now. folly: victor, do you know about this? do they take into account the risks and costs associated with feeling in a mission like this? -- failing in a mission like this?

>> some of those details are probably not available to the public or to researchers. i would reiterate the importance of the validity of the outer space treaty of 1967. folly: the question becomes, sylvia, on how to balance the risk to the individuals come to the environment against the potential value for society as a whole? how do we balance it all? >> to be fair, i do not see a benefit to the society in an activity as we see here, sadly. i really do not see any benefit to it. it is really an adventure people

are taken and they are paying money for it. the research that is done in the deep sea, which is very expensive, is funded national organizations. they are still international and they are open to all nations, but they are not funded by these kind of organizations. folly: tell us about some of the recent successes which are not funded by these private companies in deep sea exploration and what we have learned as a result. >> in the first place, we know very little about the deep sea. we find that over 50% of the species we are bringing up and we can specify are unknown so far. there is a vast amount of

organisms and species in the deep sea we have no idea about. every time an expedition is going down, they find new species. in some cases, they find that they are in large numbers down there, that they are having an impact on the ecosystem down there. more than 90% of the deep sea has completely unknown. because of its vastness, because of its depth. it is difficult to get down there. successes at the moment is that we do find these organisms and we have the possibility of collecting samples in a very good way, mostly using remote operated vehicles because they are much cheaper.

they do have the same capability . so there are very few submersibles in action. folly: ezzy, assessing the risks, how do you think nations and companies prepare for the possibility of accidents or emergencies? how do we balance the desire for exploration with the potential risks associated with it? >> certainly when it comes to national agencies, there is a lot of concern put on safety. looking back historically throughout the space age, there have been a tragedy. people have died. and they have taken a lot of

responsibility for that when it happened. there has always been a huge inquest. it would stop for years while they investigated to make sure the mistakes will not happen again. there is a precedent of what to do to make sure to minimize risk . partly because when you want to protect human lives and also they do not want to lose their missions either. safety is also a very big concern, whether it is human or even a robotic mission. whether it will transfer to the private companies remains to be seen. typically in the united states there is a lot of regulation about what you can launch. you need to be able to prove that it can support human safely

before you can even launch it. certainly in the united states there is a lot of safety checks that goes on when it comes to spaceflight. folly: victor, i will ask you the same question. we heard about the risks and the challenges. what role do you think government and nongovernment organizations can play in better regulating all of this? >> i think government can play a significant and expanded role, particularly implementing an idea like space tax. asteroid mining is kind of a science fiction idea, but we need to start thinking about the regulatory environment around those potentially significant resources out there. one model for inspiration might be the case in norway.

the scandinavian society which discovered oil resources in the 60's and the 70's and taxed those resources in order to fund a generous welfare state like free public health care. it has allowed some governments to fund its day-to-day activities. in lieu of state ownership, there needs to be a minimal kind of space tax to capture windfall profits and make sure ordinary taxpayers are enumerated in some cases. folly: very interesting. as for the benefits, what are your thoughts on this? what is exciting that might have

an impact on society? >> space industry is very much a part of our daily lives. gps systems are used every day. it helps food get around the world. communications, all kinds of things, there is very big benefits from being able to get into space. there was a lot of research that can be done with humans and spaceflight. getting up there and exploring the universe i personally think would be a bigger thing. the question is when will those benefits show? i think in terms of things we have coming up, i mentioned earlier people are going to be going back to the moon. nasa's artemis mission and there will be more robotic missions ahead of that that will take a lot of smaller missions towards -- there are lots of small companies sending rovers, so i

think it is going to be a big opportunity for some of the smaller industries out there to start benefiting from space exploration. folly: sylvia, you have the last word. what does the future look like for deep sea exploration? >> i think it is really robotics. autonomous instruments that use only little energy and can cover long distances. there is even a no impact call for research and i am not sure if i am for that, but there is thought of sending out remote operated instrumentation to do the research for us. i guess it can be done in a lot of fields where you can measure remotely, but not everything can

be done remotely. so i think the research expeditions on board of a ship will remain. and i think they are very necessary to really discover more of the ocean and to see the connectivity of everything. because we have not fully understood that. i think it is very important to note the baseline we are at at this very moment with our ocean. before something like climate change kicks in. but i think really remote operated vehicles are the future for us to go. folly: thank you all very much for a very interesting conversation.

[captions made possible by kcet television] ♪ ♪