China Association of Science and Technology is holding its annual conference in Bo'ao, southernmost Hainan Province. At a press conference, Ouyang Ziyuan, academician, chief scientist of China's moon probing program, answered questions from reporters in regard of the huge project.

Q: Hainan is suitable for launching rockets judging from its latitude. Do you support building a launching center in Hainan? Americans once presented you 1gram of lunar soil, how did you make use of it? When will China be able to obtain lunar soil?

A: Hainan is more southward in latitude, and this is an advantage for becoming a launching base. Deep space exploration is a developing trend, which requires rockets of bigger and bigger sizes, while compared to road transportation, ocean shipping is better for bigger rockets. Besides, Hainan is of lower latitude and near the ocean, its many advantages making it sure that no other impact will be made upon rocket retrieving. What's more, along with China's advancement in outer space exploration we need to build a new launching site.

In 1978, President Carter's envoy, National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski presented China 1gram of lunar soil sample enclosed in plexiglass. The sample was finally given to us, without informing us in which Apollo mission it was collected. We took 0.5 g of it and organized meticulous studies on it, from non-destructive to destructive tests. We studied the chemical contents of the rock, isotope, minerals and its location on the moon--the sunny side or the shady side? We published over a dozen articles and confirmed that the sample belonged to Apollo 17. The remaining 0.5g sample soil was presented to Beijing Planetarium for permanent preservation. The studies showed that we are both confident in, and capable of conducting lunar researches. The moon-probing program needs public understanding and support.

Q: will the moon-probing program consume a lot of money and manpower that it affects ordinary people's lives? Is it possible to establish a base on the moon? And how about putting up a solar energy power generating station? How much economic benefit will the input of 1.4 billion yuan bring back?

A: to build a well-off society in an all-round way is the major objective of China's construction and development. For a country of over trillion yuan in total GDP as China, 1.4 billion yuan takes up only one thousand of the total. What's more, the 1.4 billion yuan total fund is allocated in three years, each year only taking a little more than 400 million yuan. The moon-probing program can drive forward hi-tech advancements. I cannot figure out how much economic benefit the 1.4 billion yuan will generate, but a fact is that the Apollo Program pushed forward sci-tech, economic and military developments after the 1960s, with the 3,000-odd new technologies stemmed from it applied in every aspects of production and life. It lifted the US position not only in science, technology but in politics and economy. It is estimated that each one dollar input generates 4-5 dollar economic returns. Now knowledge about the moon, the Earth and the sun cannot be measured by money. China has handed down the fairy tale of goddess Chang'e who flew to the moon. We should say that exploring the moon is a long-cherished aspiration of the Chinese nation, but up to now we are still on the Earth. The probing program will dramatically boost our national pride. Could you tell me how much money it is worth?

Now we are taking out 1/10,000 GDP to realize a thousands-year-old dream of ours. Our sci-tech workers cannot be more cautious with the fund, for it is money from taxpayers. A sum of 1.4 billion yuan only equals the total fund for building 2km subway, while in Beijing to build 1 km subway costs 0.7 billion. I personally don't agree on spending too much. The moon-probing program will not hinder our building of a well-off society, but will instead accelerate our paces towards such a society. On this point we stand on the same side with the central authority.

The United States is returning to the moon for resources and military dominance. The moon doesn't belong to anybody. The high seas belong to the whole world, but other countries will not share their catches with us. So China must not leave it out of consideration.

As for long-term lunar base, moon-probing means from unmanned exploration to manned exploration, then to short stay. The moon is a super vacuum with extremely high and low temperatures, where sound cannot be transmitted. The moon serves a base and springboard for deep space exploration, and the US plan is to go from the moon to the Mars. It's very difficult and expensive to set up lunar a base. The moon is suitable only for a base but not for human inhabitation.

The moon is rich with solar resource, on which one daytime equals 14 days on the earth. But it's not worthwhile to build solar power generating station on the moon. It's only a prospect and cannot be deemed a good way out for solving energy crisis. The moon, after all, can only serve to provide energy for a base.

Q: Is the 1.4 billion yuan input only for orbiting the moon? Do we have the timetable for landing and retrieving after 2007? Is there any progress in international cooperation?

A: the 1.4 billion yuan is only the total fund for the first stage, which will be enough if we are meticulous in using it. The second stage is the soft landing on the moon and robot exploration. The third stage is the robot attempt to send back samples collected. The timetable is soft landing in 2012, sample back in 2017. It means they are to be realized in 13 years.

International cooperation is an irreversible trend, for no country is able to accomplish it by itself. Landing on the moon is a universal undertaking and we Chinese should make our due contributions. We should learn earnestly from others and we will not close our door.

Q: Will lunar exploitation cause ecological damage, just like that on the earth?

A: There will be no large-scale emigration onto the moon, but it's necessary and feasible for a few number of people to land on it. The moon is four times larger than China, which can at most sustain people three-digit in number. Large-scale infrastructure construction on the moon simply doesn't pay, so no one will be so silly as to do that.

Q: How big is the gap of lunar investment between China and other countries? Will the exercise of frugality in work affect our sci-tech level?

A: The fund for moon probing is a practical sum worked out through strict assessments and examinations. Our present cost will not be as huge as Apollo's since technological advancement helps reduce the expenditure. The US moon-probing fund is less than 100 million dollars, lower than ours because they have better infrastructure and there is no need to re-purchase devices and instruments. Cases are similar in other countries. While we need build infrastructure and buy equipment, so the cost will be higher. The key problem is the scientific choice of a goal.

Since our manufacturing is quite backward we may be awkward for the first time. But things are sure to turn out better and it will mean far more than taking the first step.

Q: Is the year 2005 a crucial one for our moon probing? When will helium-3 really serve human beings?

A: The year of 2005 is indeed a crucial one. We have just concluded our second leading team meeting of the Chang'e Project. We must work out designs before next June and find out possible troubles. We must finish testing and turn it out in production prior to next yearend. We put quality at priority and must try every means possible to ensure success.

As for helium-3, it's only a perspective. I'd like to state solemnly here that our aim of lunar exploration is by no means only for "securing helium-3". We suggest that the media hold a scientific attitude in the report instead of making hues and dins.

Q: Isn't it too late for us to start the moon probing now? How about our international ranking in this regard?

A: We were simply unable to do it in the last century. For this is related to the nation's overall strength. I dislike very much the practice of mentioning ranking before a thing is done, for we are entitled to rank only after we do it. If you insist on ranking we can only say we at the head of the "second group". This is only my own interpretation, not representing others' views.

By People's Daily Online