Before I left town for the NASA Tweetup a co-worker asked me "How does the Space Program benefit the average person." Initially all I could think of was Velcro. I remembered from a previous visit to Kennedy Space Center that they had a hand in making its use widespread. According to Wikipedia, "...Velcro only became widely used after NASA's adoption of it, NASA is popularly — and improperly — credited with its invention." While Velcro is a great product, I think most of us could agree that in any given day we could probably live without it. If I had enough time while I was in Florida last week I would have taken detailed notes at the exhibit answering this question at the Kennedy Space Center Visitors Complex. Since I didn't I was hoping to find a better list of more substantial items online. It took a bit a of searching but I think I found that list.
A nifty site called The Space Place has an entire page dedicated to NASA Spinoffs. One of the stats that is typically the first response for the justification of the space program was noted that "It has been conservatively estimated by U.S. space experts that for every dollar the U.S. spends on R and D in the space program, it receives $7 back in the form of corporate and personal income taxes from increased jobs and economic growth." This question was asked at the Tweetup and a couple of different officials stated that it is closer to being $10 in benefit for every $1 paid in. The latter may be due to inflation and or intangibles that were not previously considered. Any way you look it, I think most people would agree that a 700% plus return on investment is amazing.
I'm not going to rehash the entire list they have published, but I do want to highlight a couple of items. One that stuck out is smoke detectors. Imagine the number of lives this device has saved. When a smoke detector is working and is not signaling an alarm I typically don't think about it. However, when mine starts beeping at me to change the batteries I can't sleep at night until that problem is resolved. The lack of sleep isn't because the beeping keeps me awake, rather it is the loss of security I feel when it isn't working. And speaking of security, home security systems are listed as another one of the benefits.
Another item that struck me is Doppler Radar. Again, this is another life-saving device that is especially relevant to people like me who reside in the Midwest. Doppler Radar is still one of the most prevalent ways to predict thunderstorms and tornadoes. The ability to warn citizens about severe weather minutes versus seconds in advance is a huge benefit. Technologies that have spun-off Doppler have also enabled meteorologists to make more accurate weather predictions. Being able to accurately predict an inch of snow versus a foot of snow enables municipalities to prepare appropriately and lessen any potential economic impacts.
Finally, one item that is not on the list and is a more recent development is Bloom Energy's energy server, sometimes referred to as a Bloom Box. The energy server uses a solid fuel cell that does not use combustion to provide electricity, and has come up in the media recently because companies like Google, Walmart, and Coca-Cola have begun using this technology. So how does this relate to the space program? Bloom Energy's technologies are a direct spin-off of a NASA sub-contract to develop fuel (for rockets) from electricity instead of electricity from fuel. If Bloom Energy is able to meet its development goals the energy costs of a typical house would drop to $25 a month when averaged over the 10 year life space of the energy server.
Because of the breadth of research NASA conducts it is difficult to distill the benefits to the average person. As I mentioned, I listed only a couple of the hundreds of items I found on The Space Site, and they admit they only covered a fraction of the benefits the space program has had. So the next time you question the amount of money spent on the space program or some asks you what the benefits are remember these two things: NASA makes up less that 1% of the overall national budget (compared to 10% during the Apollo era), and for every dollar spent there is a 7-10 fold return.
A previous version of this post incorrectly stated that the NASA sub-contract regarding Bloom Energy was for fuel cells. This has been corrected to show that "[NASA] funded [Founder & CEO Dr. KR Sridhar's] CO2 electrolysis development: produce fuel (for rockets) from electricity, instead of electricity from fuel," as pointed out to me in an email from John Finn, Founder & VP of Bloom Energy. I apologize for any confusion.