Summary

The United States possesses a treasure trove of extraterrestrial samples that were returned to Earth via space missions over the past four decades. Following the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Apollo and USSR Luna sample return missions to the Moon in the late 1960s and early 1970s, samples of the solar wind (Genesis, 2004), a cometary coma and interstellar dust (Stardust, 2006), and an asteroid (Hayabusa, operated by the Japanese Space Agency, JAXA, 2010) have all been returned to Earth. In addition, there are two missions under way to primitive asteroids (JAXA’s Hayabusa2 and NASA’s Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security, Regolith Explorer, or OSIRIS-REx) that are expected to return samples in the 2020s. Plans are in the making to return samples from Mars, the martian moon Phobos, a cometary nucleus, additional samples from the Moon, and, perhaps eventually, ices from comets, lunar polar impact basins, and outer solar system moons. Analyses of previously returned samples have led to major breakthroughs in the understanding of the age, composition, and origin of the solar system. Having the instrumentation, facilities, and qualified personnel to undertake analyses of returned samples, especially from missions that take up to a decade or longer from launch to return, is thus of paramount importance if NASA is to capitalize fully on the investment made in these missions and to achieve the full scientific impact afforded by these extraordinary samples. Planetary science may be entering a new golden era of extraterrestrial sample return; now is the time to assess how prepared the scientific community is to take advantage of these opportunities.

In response to a request from NASA, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine established the Committee on Extraterrestrial Sample Analysis Facilities to determine the current capabilities within the planetary science community for sample return analyses and curation and where these facilities are located; to assess what capabilities are currently missing that will be needed for future sample return missions, as guided by the decadal survey;¹ to evaluate whether current laboratory support infrastructure and NASA’s investment strategy are adequate to meet these analytical challenges; and to advise how the community can keep abreast of evolving and new techniques in order to stay at the forefront of extraterrestrial sample analysis.

Readers are directed to the following chapters:

• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: Sample Return Missions and Other Collections

___________________

¹ National Research Council, 2011, Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in the Decade 2013-2022, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., https://doi.org/10.17226/13117.

• Chapter 3: Current Sample Return Missions and Near-Future Priorities Outlined in the Planetary Science Decadal Survey
• Chapter 4: Current Laboratories and Facilities
• Chapter 5: Current and Future Instrumentation and Investments for Extraterrestrial Sample Analysis

The committee concludes that the planetary science analytical community has access to a wide range of instrumentation relevant to sample return missions that are currently flying, and there are no obvious gaps in instrumentation for analysis of rocks, glasses, minerals, and the current inventory of organic materials. However, the committee raises concerns about sample analysis capabilities needed for future missions, including the replacement of aging analytical facilities, the ability for laboratories to innovate and evolve from their current state, and the ability to maintain the technical support to sustain these laboratories. In addition, as many of the current planetary sample scientists will be retired before some of these missions are flown, laboratory sustainability requires training young scientists in analytical methods and instrumentation and growing the next crop of instrument developers. With the greater challenges of possible future sample return missions that seek to return martian samples, or possibly ices and gases, the committee concludes that developing new partnerships with related communities that analyze terrestrial samples, international collaboration, and finding ways for interdisciplinary discussion and knowledge sharing will be critical.

The above needs are superimposed upon a flat budget for purchasing instrumentation, which, because it does not track inflation, represents declining spending power. Thus, if NASA does not invest new funds into the replacement of current instrumentation and development of new technologies, technical staff support, and training the next generation of analysts, the current capabilities cannot be sustained, and development and adoption of new technologies will be impaired. Under such a scenario, NASA will need to plan for a reduction in the number of laboratories supported by the Planetary Science Division (PSD) funding program.

ADVICE TO NASA REGARDING FUNDING OF LABORATORIES

As currently formulated, NASA’s investment in analytical instrumentation is insufficient to provide for replacement of existing instruments, most of which can be assumed to have an average life span of 10 years. This typical time scale for depreciation and obsolescence of analytical instrumentation means a significant fraction of current capabilities will be gone by the time ongoing missions (Hayabusa2 and OSIRIS-REx) return samples to Earth, and most will be gone on the time scale of Mars sample return or other anticipated near-future missions. It follows that the currently robust analytical infrastructure for study of extraterrestrial samples is diminishing. Addition of new technological innovations further stretch the current funding programs. One solution to this dilemma is to leverage NASA funding of laboratory analysis of returned samples with contributions from other funding agencies or institutions, which has long been a key source of support for these efforts. The committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should continue to engage in and encourage cost-sharing arrangements for laboratory analytical equipment with other funding sources. (Section 5.2.1)

Many scientists engaged in analyses of extraterrestrial materials utilize multiuser facilities for sample characterization that are funded through a variety of sources. While multiuser facilities can provide increased access to common instrumentation for many investigators, innovations and breakthroughs have historically occurred at individual principal investigator (PI) laboratories. Thus, the committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should continue to invest in both multiuser facilities and individual principal investigator laboratories. (Section 5.2.1)

In addition to investing in equipment, having highly qualified technical staff is essential to keep laboratories running efficiently and to develop new methods and instrumentation. Most U.S. laboratories engaged in sample analyses are experiencing increased difficulty finding and retaining good technical support staff because these positions are generally supported by one or more short-term (~1-3 years) research grants (i.e., the “soft money” funding model common in many U.S. institutions). This funding model forces laboratories to distribute their efforts among a variety of tasks and to be accountable to a variety of funding sources, which degrades the specialized skills and sustained advances in capabilities that result from focused study of returned samples and other extra-

terrestrial materials. NASA’s investment in analytical facilities could be enhanced by providing sustained funding for technical support staff, so that the analytical work undertaken by a laboratory remains focused on extraterrestrial sample analyses. The committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should provide means for longer term (e.g., 5-year) funding of technical staff support. (Section 5.2.2)

There are currently no missions under way or even planned that entail return of cryogenic materials. However, efforts are under way to undertake missions that could return gases within the next decades—for example, the Comet Astrobiology Exploration Sample Return mission to sample a comet surface that is currently under consideration—and eventually to return ices from the Moon, comets, or moons of the outer planets. If one or more of these mission concepts is pursued, it could reap tremendous scientific advances. Technology development focused on Cryogenic Comet Sample Return, as recommended by the decadal survey, is warranted, and exploring technologies already available in related communities that analyze terrestrial samples of ices, gases, and organic matter could benefit the extraterrestrial sample analysis community. Given that development of curatorial facilities and instrumentation to handle these challenging materials will likely take decades to complete, the committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should make appropriate investments in the technological development of novel instrumentation and unconventional analytical techniques, specifically for curation, as well as characterization and analysis of nontraditional samples that are expected to be returned from future missions. These would likely include gases, ices, and organic matter, including volatile organic compounds and related hybrids and complexes. (Section 5.3.1)

In particular for organic matter, the committee recommends that with the rapid developments in related fields such as molecular biology, and concomitant advances in bio-organic analytical methodologies, NASA should consider partnerships with relevant federal agencies (e.g., the Department of Energy and the National Institutes of Health) and laboratories (e.g., the National Laboratories). NASA should implement information exchange activities (e.g., joint workshops) to enhance cross-fertilization and cooperative development of analytical instrumentation and methods, specifically to enhance analysis of organic matter (both macromolecular/polymeric and molecular-moderate molecular masses, as well as volatiles—low molecular weight compounds), in the study of extraterrestrial returned samples. (Section 5.3.1)

Many spacefaring nations have, like the United States, recognized the scientific potential of extraterrestrial sample return missions and have either executed such missions or are actively planning them. These nations have invested significantly in state-of-the art instrumentation and in developing a highly skilled workforce to carry out analyses of extraterrestrial samples. It would be advantageous for strategic alignment in investments in such facilities by international space agencies to maximize the availability to U.S. researchers. The committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should continue to engage in strategic relationships with international partners to ensure that the best science possible is extracted from extraterrestrial samples with the limited resources available to all space agencies. (Section 5.3.1)

The committee further recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should consider ways to facilitate the dissemination of information about present and future international, state-of-the-art facilities relevant to sample analysis. This could, for example, include organizing workshops to be held with existing international conferences. (Section 5.3.1)

Last, a highly qualified workforce that is able to perform both routine and state-of-the-art laboratory analyses, as well as develop the instruments of the future, is necessary to fulfill NASA’s goals for the characterization and analysis of future returned samples. The committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should encourage principal investigators to specifically address in their research proposals how the work will contribute toward training future generations of laboratory-based planetary scientists. (Section 5.3.2)

ADVICE TO NASA ON MAINTAINING WORLD-CLASS CURATION AND DEVELOPING FUTURE CURATORIAL FACILITIES

The NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office is the world leader in curating and tracking returned samples, as well as in the types of analyses conducted on those samples. The impact of the JSC curatorial staff’s efforts go well beyond their immediate duties of curation, as they have been

instrumental in helping to train the next generation of extraterrestrial materials scientists and have helped in the development of curatorial facilities at international partner institutions. It would be desirable to harness the expertise represented by the collective knowledge of the curatorial staff at JSC when future mission PIs are planning for sample return missions.

While JSC’s current expansion plans will provide adequate curatorial facilities for active (Hayabusa2 and OSIRIS-REx [Origins, Spectral Interpretation, Resource Identification, Security, Regolith Explorer]) and possible near-future missions such as martian moons sample return, there is a need to develop additional facilities for any future sample return in the 2030s and beyond. Such facilities will require advanced planning and new technologies for the return of significant organic matter, ices, and gases. To ensure that NASA and the science community continue to be at the forefront of extraterrestrial sample curation and analysis, the committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should increase support for Johnson Space Center to develop appropriate curatorial and characterization facilities relevant to and necessary for future sample returns of organic matter, ices, and gases. (Section 5.3.3) In addition, the committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should accelerate planning for curation of returned martian samples, seeking partnerships with other countries, as appropriate. (Section 5.3.3)

Last, there is a need to develop online archives of the analyses undertaken on all return samples, along with metadata (e.g., analytical precision, accuracy, etc.) associated with these analyses.

ADVICE TO NASA REGARDING INVESTMENT STRATEGY

As noted above, NASA’s investment in analytical instrumentation is insufficient to provide replacement of existing instruments as well as develop new instrumentation needed for future missions. Without modest to significant increases in funding by NASA in analytical instrumentation for sample analyses, either a decrease in capacity or a reduction in future capabilities seems inevitable, as well as the inability to support highly trained technical staff, train the next generation of extraterrestrial sample analysts and laboratory instrument developers, and begin planning for the curation and analyses of challenging new types of samples. The committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should place high priority on investment in analytical instrumentation (including purchase, maintenance, technical oversight, and development) and curation (facilities and protocols) sufficient to provide for both replacement of existing capacity and development of new capabilities. This will maximize the benefit from the significant investment necessary to return samples for laboratory analysis from asteroids, comets, the Moon, and eventually Mars and outer solar system moons. (Section 5.4)

Lunar samples are excluded from one of the major sources of funding for analytical instrumentation within PSD—the Laboratory Analysis of Returned Samples program—and yet fundamental discoveries regarding the origin and nature of the Moon continue to derive from analyses of lunar return samples. Opportunities to propose lunar sample analysis to other research funding programs are limited by the focus of those programs—Solar System Workings and Emerging Worlds; see the discussion in Section 5.1. Thus, the committee recommends that NASA Planetary Science Division should consider opening the Laboratory Analysis of Returned Samples grant program to all mission-returned extraterrestrial samples. (Section 5.1)