Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

Palomar · 2004-04-07 15:27:02

*Well, got to consider it from all angles, right?

--Cindy

::EDIT:: Sorry, I should have included "all of the above" option. :-\

Paul · 2004-04-07 19:13:21

Would have been all above for me.
Got a laugh out of "nuke-nuke here, nuke-nuke there "

I like intelligent banter about t-forming. But some folks get carried away, imho, with it.

Cobra Commander · 2004-04-07 19:27:34

I'd have to go for the omitted "none of the above" as well.

Always lookin' for another option...

But if we ever get serious about terraforming then all of these problems can be overcome, in which case I'm for whatever works. Even the Martian Nuke-Fest, if it works.

Palomar · 2004-04-08 14:39:29

*(Disclaimer: Not directed at anyone at New Mars).

Time to "let go" and speak my mind (while trying to be as fair as possible).

When I first became acquainted with Zubrin and the Mars Society, terraforming wasn't on the plate for me; in fact, I'd never considered it. Never read KSR's books (still have not).

I've seen (here and in internet articles) some ideas which seem sane and well thought out to me; still not saying I go for it, but as contrasted with "fools rush in", "let's play marbles with the Solar System" mentality of others.

Many people, IMO, treat the subject so flippantly. Sort of like the 19th century "shoot all bison and ask questions later" mentality. ... as if there are zero consequences to be considered. Fact is, there are lots of consequences involved.

I've participated in discussions here about terraforming, even recently (Titan). Initially (2002) I was somewhat in favor of terraforming, now I'm more opposed to it. I try to keep an open mind and heart with regards to the topic, but to be blunt: I just -don't- see this as a "cut and dry" topic at all, period.

My major reluctance focuses on the fact that we are just *now* beginning to learn about the Solar System. The first satellite went into orbit less than 50 years ago, our first probes were sent out a mere 30+ years ago.
We still know very little about the Solar System, how it was formed/evolved, etc. I'm in favor of manned exploration to assist/increase our knowledge...but not to run amok all over the Solar System blowing up and smacking things together. :-\

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

As previously, my concept for Mars currently is manned exploration and colonization (primarily for purposes of studying Mars "upclose and personal" and in realtime)...with terraforming commencing much later (if at all).

I -don't- see colonization as *automatically synonymous* with terraforming the entire planet. I see no conflict of interest there.

There is still too much to learn about Mars; S & O, the orbiters, and past missions have only barely scratched the tip of the iceberg. There is still so much to be learned. To deliberately alter and manipulate will destroy what knowledge could have been gained, especially for astronomers and cosmologists seeking to learn and apply knowledge about our Solar System onto other planetary systems in the galaxy.

IMO, it's far too soon (understatement) to even be seriously considering terraforming...anywhere.

My 2 cents' worth. (And yes...I do feel better now) :laugh:

--Cindy

bolbuyk · 2004-04-08 15:01:56

Reserved about terraforming? I also a little. But the challenge to me, and maybe to most of the people on this forum, is just to brainstorm what are the possibilities. For me personally it's the technological issue that fascinates.

My personal feeling is that at least some planets/moons should never be terraformed, te keep them as 'cosmic parks'. And of course, cautiousnes is very important.

I think Mars will never be terraformed, neither colonized, because it is to uninteresting to do there something. There is nothing to mine we cannot find on earth. There are only 2 real reasons for continuous human precense on Mars, each have very limited importance, that are:
1. Tourism
2. Areography

Cobra Commander · 2004-04-08 16:12:55

I think Mars will never be terraformed, neither colonized, because it is to uninteresting to do there something. There is nothing to mine we cannot find on earth...

But on Mars we can mine more.

There are only 2 real reasons for continuous human precense on Mars, each have very limited importance, that are:
1. Tourism
2. Areography

Depending largely on one's own values. If there were little green Martians that just wanted to be left alone that would be one thing, but as far as I'm concerned if it's a dead rock it's ours. More land to live on away from the duly constituted Terran authorities is good. Being able to walk outside on it is better still.

Mars may not be analogous to colonial America, but it's at least Australia. We won't leave it alone forever, even if it seems like it at times.

SBird · 2004-04-08 16:13:48

The 'terraforming Earth's great deserts' thread has got a good discussion about the difficulties in manipulating even our own ecosystem. Personally, I think that we need to demonstrate that we have any aptitude at the effort here before we jump to entirely new systems.

kippy · 2004-04-16 09:47:12

Personally, I think that we need to demonstrate that we have any aptitude at the effort here before we jump to entirely new systems.

Wouldn't it make more sense to practice on dead worlds before putting up gigantic lenses, mirrors and sheilds in orbit of a living planet. I'd perfer that we learn the ropes on a place where a miscalculation wouldn't cost 100 million lives and 5 trillion dollars.

SBird · 2004-04-16 11:29:13

As a rebuttal, I'd counter that we're already doing unintentional terraforming with results that could very possibly be like what you just said. At least on Earth, we've got the luxury of only having to take small steps to correct extant problems rather than trying to revamp an entire planetary climate.

kippy · 2004-04-16 13:24:59

This is getting ever farther off topic but you're right about doing small scale terraformation on Earth. Since the industrial revolution the impact of human greenhouse gas production is barely noticeable. What I mean is 1 or 2 degrees rather than the hunred or so needed on Mars. Therefore any counter greenhouse efforts will probably not have a drastic impact unless they are done with more effort than the sum total of every industry on Earth.

When I'm talking about terraformation, I'm thinking of things like halon and methane factories, massive orbital lenses and sun-shades. Stuff that either delivers or starves the planet of tens of terawatts. Stuff that changes the composition and pressure of an atmosphere by tens of millibars.

It's that kind of stuff that we can't afford to chance on Earth. I don’t think people would even allow it due to the fear factor. You might be able to get CO2-> O2 + C factories approved but unless it’s doomsday or something, not many people are going to like the idea of huge lenses of space.

Dook · 2004-04-17 00:15:36

If we began terraforming mars today it would take 1,000 years before it had an atmosphere that would enable humans to walk around without an oxygen bottle. I think that is enough time to have a discussion about terraforming other planets. My vote is to begin now and not because there is something there to mine, business, or profit from other than giving humanity something to look up into the sky at night and smile about. Visit a tribe in the Amazon jungle to learn about them and by chance point out the moon and tell them that humans have been there and returned safely and you will understand.

As far as fixing the Earth I think we should reduce the pollution levels even more but that should not keep us from exploring. Things might not be perfect at home but people still go to work.

Eventually humans will go to mars, and farther. So what are we waiting for?

rstones8 · 2004-04-17 22:11:16

I think terraforming is not a question of if, how, or why, but rather it is a question of when. The fact is people will eventually go to Mars and live there permanently. And when that happens is it inevetable that they will sooner or later attempt to terraform, so that generations and generations down the line, people will be able to walk outside in the free air. Chances are it is a dead rock, so changeing the environment there would be no less ethical (perhaps more ethical) than the many things that we change on the living Earth everyday. I know this quote may be a little played out, but IMO they are wise words:

"We are the consciousness of the universe, and our job is to spread that around, to go look at things, to live everywhere we can. It’s too dangerous to keep the consciousness of the universe on one planet; it could be wiped out. Mars will always remain Mars, different from Earth, colder and wilder. But it can be Mars and ours at the same time. And it will be. There is this about the human mind: if it can be done, it will be done. We can do it, so we will do it. So we might as well start." -Kim Stanley Robinson

To me that sums it up.

kippy · 2004-04-19 15:48:56

"We are the consciousness of the universe, and our job is to spread that around, to go look at things, to live everywhere we can. It’s too dangerous to keep the consciousness of the universe on one planet; it could be wiped out. Mars will always remain Mars, different from Earth, colder and wilder. But it can be Mars and ours at the same time. And it will be. There is this about the human mind: if it can be done, it will be done. We can do it, so we will do it. So we might as well start." -Kim Stanley Robinson

The funny thing is, I've heard from fairly reliable sources that KSR is a staunch "Red". Yup, he's a rock hugger.

Palomar · 2004-04-19 16:06:12

"We are the consciousness of the universe, and our job is to spread that around, to go look at things, to live everywhere we can. It’s too dangerous to keep the consciousness of the universe on one planet; it could be wiped out. Mars will always remain Mars, different from Earth, colder and wilder. But it can be Mars and ours at the same time. And it will be. There is this about the human mind: if it can be done, it will be done. We can do it, so we will do it. So we might as well start." -Kim Stanley Robinson

The funny thing is, I've heard from fairly reliable sources that KSR is a staunch "Red". Yup, he's a rock hugger.

*Yes, I've heard that too. I've not (yet) read his Mars trilogy, but a (former?) member of New Mars mentioned to me privately the same info about Robinson.

I didn't want to chime in on that, however, until someone else here mentioned it.

--Cindy

kippy · 2004-04-19 16:09:37

I was taken aback when I heard that too because the books seem to glorify the terraforming effort and describe the reds as lunitics. One of the main characters Sax is the lead terraformer and he's cast like a geek-hero. Maybe that's just my slant as a green.

rstones8 · 2004-04-19 17:12:37

Yeah that is pretty suprising KSR is a Red, it sure doesnt show in his novels. But regardless, that quote pretty much embodies why I am a Green. Following the Red's logic, we should have left Noth America untouched and crammed Earth's growing population into Europe, so as not to harm any of the continent's natural beauty.

The Fed Man · 2004-04-20 17:08:31

Thats a good comparison. I like that one. I am about 100 pages into Blue Mars right now and through out all the books it really seems that KSR is a green. I know that I am a green. Not only for Mars though. If it was up to me I'd have so many missions to Venus, Mars, The moons of Jupiter, and Titan. But I guess that is only if it was up to me

kippy · 2004-04-23 07:37:20

If I could add one thing to the list it would be that Mars might be dry as a bone. Sure, there are the polar caps and some brine but what if that's it? No vast underground reserves, no huge polar lense of ice. What if all we see is all we've got? We'd have to import oceans worth of water.

The Fed Man · 2004-04-23 15:55:11

Even if there aren't vast amounts of water on Mars i shouldn't slow terraforming down too much. We would probably have to pump some of the underground resevoirs to the surface but if there aren't any to pump then you can use that time and money to get astroids. Besides areobraking ice astroids into the atmosphere with add more water vapor to the air than pumping liquid water to the surface would. This water vapor would increase the temp more and release more water from the poles.

Don't the poles go underground also? Like an iceberg where you can only see a small percentage of it. This is what I heard somewhere, don't know if it is true.

Hazer · 2004-04-24 18:09:04

The main hindrance to terraforming will be issues of scale, that and we don't fully understand planets are shaped in the first place (What made Mars from having liquid water, to bone dry and lifeless? for example)

Ian Flint · 2004-04-28 17:07:38

Speaking of Reds and Greens...

I'm a Blue!

I figure that as people go to Mars they will "polute" the place somehow, so it is an impossible dream to be a Red (a pure Red at least). On the other hand, with the technical challenges - not to mention the costs - of terraforming, it will probably take more than a lifetime to make a breathable atmosphere. So, Greens will have to wait, and wait, and wait.

That's where Blues come in. We are happy with enough air pressure to go outside without a space suit. We don't mind using oxygen tanks. That, I think, can be accomplished in less than a lifetime.

rstones8 · 2004-04-30 18:23:27

I would say "Blues" and "Greens" fall in the same category, in that they are both for terraforming rather than against it. Enough air pressure to walk around without a suit is a goal common to both, however I'm sure you would agree it is not the final goal.

Indeed it will take more than a lifetime to fully terraform, which is all the more reason to support every aspect of the project for the benefit of future generations.

MarsDog · 2004-05-14 18:44:47

Even on Earth, we live inside protected spaces.
From the caveman, to the Eskimo, to the high-rise dweller;
Outside has not been safe or comfortable.
-
Same will be in other locations;
Mercury, Earth, Moon, or Mars;
A small space, inside, made comfortable.

mars2015 · 2005-05-17 13:04:57

Thats a good comparison. I like that one. I am about 100 pages into Blue Mars right now and through out all the books it really seems that KSR is a green. I know that I am a green. Not only for Mars though. If it was up to me I'd have so many missions to Venus, Mars, The moons of Jupiter, and Titan. But I guess that is only if it was up to me

When talking US politics I am not a "Green" at all but when it comes to space and planetary terraforming, I am green all the way.

Cobra Commander · 2005-05-17 13:19:13

When talking US politics I am not a "Green" at all but when it comes to space and planetary terraforming, I am green all the way.

When talking US politics a Green and a Red are often one and the same.

That said, I'm going to have to go with human factors as the biggest obstacle, whether short attention spans or outright incompetence. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if a full-on terraforming project gets underway only to be cut 125 years down the line, leaving a cold clammy crap planet with a quarter-bar of atmosphere slowly seeping away and a chorus of naysayers proclaiming "see, terraforming was a failure, we should have stop it a long time ago."

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2004-04-07 15:27:02

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#2 2004-04-07 19:13:21

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#3 2004-04-07 19:27:34

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#4 2004-04-08 14:39:29

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#5 2004-04-08 15:01:56

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#6 2004-04-08 16:12:55

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#7 2004-04-08 16:13:48

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#8 2004-04-16 09:47:12

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#9 2004-04-16 11:29:13

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#10 2004-04-16 13:24:59

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#11 2004-04-17 00:15:36

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#12 2004-04-17 22:11:16

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#13 2004-04-19 15:48:56

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#14 2004-04-19 16:06:12

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#15 2004-04-19 16:09:37

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#16 2004-04-19 17:12:37

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#17 2004-04-20 17:08:31

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#18 2004-04-23 07:37:20

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#19 2004-04-23 15:55:11

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#20 2004-04-24 18:09:04

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#21 2004-04-28 17:07:38

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#22 2004-04-30 18:23:27

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#23 2004-05-14 18:44:47

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#24 2005-05-17 13:04:57

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

#25 2005-05-17 13:19:13

Re: Speed Bumps to Terraforming (Anywhere)

Board footer