Arguments for terraforming Mars

David Anthony Ricketts · 2005-10-30 10:26:13

If we do not start with some form of terraforming programe then the atmosphere will deplinish even further. There are traces of gasses slowly escaping from the atmosphere in to space. We need to start now or it will become more difficult. The technology is out there now to seen a manned mission, and just needs bringing together, and it wont cost 65 billion like they suggest the next moon landing will. There is to much skimming the cream of the top of the milk going on, if you know what I mean.

Dook · 2005-10-30 11:29:28

Mars has less gravity than the earth and it's weak magnetic field does not protect it from the sun's solar rays so less dense elements rise and are blown away. Even if we terraform mars the same thing will still happen, actually it will probably get worse. More CO2 and water vapor released from the ground to create the atmosphere will be exposed to the sun's solar wind.

Plus mars is slowly (very slowly) gaining material although there is not really much wandering material left in our solar system. Slamming comets into mars may just become more possible in the future.

It does not become more difficult to go to mars or terraform it. Technology advances, I'm sure in 50 years we will be able to cut hundreds of years off of the terraformation process.

We just barely have the technology to go to mars with a lot of risk but that's not what's keeping us from doing it, the leadership is.

What references can you provide to show that it won't cost $65 billion? Private space organizations may be able to do it for much less but they still have a lot to prove.

David Anthony Ricketts · 2005-10-30 17:29:39

It is true that Mars has a surface gravity 38% less than Earth‘s, and a magnetic field strength <0.1% of the Earth, which is next to nothing. All the same is that going to stop us trying. When some people think of the word terraform they generally think of it as a place for human life, far from it a foothold for life would be adequate, like a hardened single cell or as research is showing Lichens are slow but highly adaptable to change, with exception to sulphur dioxide, that we are working on. Terraforming would be better left to create itself, but it dose need a helping hand, a small toehold if you like. And if in a few thousand years human life could venture out of shelters then this would be great, although probably not for the other life forms.

Risk is a factor, and would be decreased as time progresses. But now we are in a stage of our existence where countries can be pulled together, and organisations have the availability to share ideas and concepts. Sadly history has shown that times like the present don’t last long, and change is inevitable. When this time comes that is what will make it more difficult, not what technology we have.

I personally think we do have a good leadership in some areas of space exploration, although they seem to get distracted in the attempt to try to please the media circus that surrounds them, and tied up in the red tape increasingly encircling everything, that I must admit angers me a lot these days, hence my dig at the 65 billion. Allot of corporations are just throwing an extra two, three million on the price of an object not because that’s how much it costs, but just because there is no comparisons or competition.
Sorry if I am sounding to political, but that is one good thing about these forums. It gives you a release for those things that niggle you. As far as private space organizations go they may never make it to the big league games, but so long as they keep pitching ideas that speed things up for the big cats, then they are doing there part.

Dook, your idea on steam power got some people here thinking, and it could work on a smaller scale of generator. Thank you, even if it dose not work, nothing works without an idea first.

Feel free to E.mail I dont generally have to much time for forums.

srmeaney · 2005-11-02 08:08:38

Conceivably terraforming Mars is a good idea. It cuts the cost of colonization from 20 billion per person per year to just twenty billion per person.

The problem is that that is not the big plan of existing governments with regards to space. There seems to be a distinct pseudo-religious philosophy suggesting that the planet be left to create its own life. That Mars is for science, and that Colonization is not an option anytime in the near future.

SpaceNut · 2005-11-02 09:50:44

Ok so we have established that mars has a weaker gravity, a thin Co2 atmospher and it is escaping. We want a breathable atmospher but that is a problem since lighter gaseous elements will continue to escape since we would need the weight of the upper atmospher to hold them in. If we use heavier gas elements what would they be?

Atmosphere
Mars' atmosphere is thin: The air pressure on the surface is only 750 pascals, about 0.75% of the average on Earth. However, the scale height of the atmosphere is about 11 km, somewhat higher than Earth's 6 km. The atmosphere on Mars is 95% carbon dioxide, 3% nitrogen, 1.6% argon, and contains traces of oxygen and water.

And of course methane

Argon is the chemical element. In the periodic table that has the symbol Ar and atomic number 18. The third noble gas, in group 18, argon makes up about 1% of the Earth's atmosphere, making it the most common noble gas on Earth.

Nitrogen is the chemical element in the periodic table that has the symbol N and atomic number 7. A common normally colorless, odorless, tasteless and mostly inert diatomic non-metal gas, nitrogen constitutes 78 percent of Earth's atmosphere

Here is Earth table:

Percent Composition of Dry Atmosphere,
by volume - ppmv: parts per million by volume
Gas per NASA
Nitrogen (N2) 78.084%
Oxygen (O2) 20.946%
Argon (Ar) 0.9340%
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 365 ppmv
Neon (Ne) 18.18 ppmv
Helium (He) 5.24 ppmv
Methane (CH4) 1.745 ppmv
Krypton (Kr) 1.14 ppmv
Hydrogen (H2) 0.55 ppmv
Not included in above composition
of dry atmosphere:
Water vapor Highly variable;
typically makes up about 1%

So I guess if we were going to teraform mars to be more Earth like then on the next missions We should bring along some of these gasses, tagging them radioactively or by some other means to track how they dissapate into the current mars environment.

David Anthony Ricketts · 2005-11-02 15:36:20

The Elements that have been recorded leaving are the lighter elements.
Solar wind is strong, but not to drag such elements as Co2 from the gravity.
The problem will arise when we start production of such elements as Hydrogen.
We will be able to see the effect when the first missions leave the plant.
As they leave they will be creating a vast amount of light gasses that could be carefully observed.
I’m not a big believer that terraforming is totally necessary, but I think it is safe to say that there is a lot of worry about the destruction of Earth, through war or some deadly bacteria etc. So wouldn’t it make sense not to put all your eggs in one basket, and if structures did start getting constructed on Mars then the process will happen naturally over time anyway.
Religious philosophy may hold strong in government, but my big worry is the mining of planets. Governments seem to be able to go all Moralistic one moment they destroy something the next.
As I said before I am not a large one for forums, but it is nice to see so much interest in space exploration. It shows that the human taste of the unknown is still alive.
And there is a lot of unknown out there.

noosfractal · 2005-11-02 16:05:14

Is this your web site David?

http://projectmarsltd.org/home.html

That's a great graphic on the home page 8)
_

MarsDog · 2005-11-13 23:43:19

Mars Poles Covered by Water Ice
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news … poles.html

"Byrne and Ingersoll make the case that only the top layer of the south polar cap is composed of CO2 and that the total amount is well less than 1 mb, {which} is, as they suggested, interesting and relevant to terraforming since the CO2 in the polar caps is the most accessible CO2 on Mars," says McKay "There may be, however, other possible sources of CO2, absorbed CO2 in the soil (regolith), and CO2 in the form of carbonate, although," he admits, it hasn't been found yet and "releasing CO2 from carbonate is not a simple task."
http://www.planetary.org/html/news/arti … r-ice.html

=============================================

With the solar wind having blown away most of the gasses, Mars needs a refill.

David Anthony Ricketts · 2005-11-15 15:12:18

As stated in this well written article Ingersoll says. Terraforming is a process to transform a planet so that it would resemble Earth and be suitable for supporting human life.
I agree with a lot on the article but do disagree with this small statement. For me terraforming is about making Mars habitable for life may it be large or small new or old.
There seems to be a lot of rush in the terraforming of Mars, why cant we live in biospheres for as long as it takes. You do not see people rushing to terraform the North Pole. I say stay there and study the plant as it stands while we slowly and naturally terraform the surface, it may be less costly, and we may find out more about Mars’s past states and easier ways of releasing all that locked up CO2.
And noosfractal I can not take credit for the web pages as one of my associates is placing the information on in his spare time. Thank you for your comments, any criticisms please let us know, as the web site is still very young.

MarsDog · 2005-11-15 16:15:02

ways of releasing all that locked up CO2

Most of the CO2 is long gone with the solar wind.
Would take several hundred years to crash comets into Mars.
In the near future, the options are limited.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-10-30 10:26:13

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#2 2005-10-30 11:29:28

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#3 2005-10-30 17:29:39

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#4 2005-11-02 08:08:38

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#5 2005-11-02 09:50:44

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#6 2005-11-02 15:36:20

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#7 2005-11-02 16:05:14

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#8 2005-11-13 23:43:19

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#9 2005-11-15 15:12:18

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

#10 2005-11-15 16:15:02

Re: Arguments for terraforming Mars

Board footer