Is there any serious reason to try to go to Mars?
From reading science magazines, especially popular science magazines, it seems to be
taken for granted that soon, after returning to the Moon, we will also make it to Mars,
making it an outpost of human civilization.
And it is also widely believed that in time the colonists will develop their own culture
and new traditions and even become a separate political entity.
That we will go there eventually, that's for sure, but are we really sure that we will
be able to make Mars our "Planet B"?
The colonization of Mars as a consequence of an
apocalyptic scenario on Earth is one of the reasons that defenders of the new space race
often employ.
Elon Musk has often argued that Mars is the Plan B humanity needs to defend itself from
its own extinction.
In the event of a nuclear conflict on Earth, Mars would be far enough away to keep the
community settled there safe, certainly safer than the nearby Moon.
Whether one agrees with Musk's vision or not, however, it is undeniable that Mars has much
in common with Earth.
The climate functions very similarly, with striking similarities between seasonal changes
and the length of a single day.
This means that plants and animals-not to mention human colonists-would be able to have
an almost identical day/night cycle.
Mars also has a tilt of its axis of rotation very similar to Earth's, which gives it a
cycle of seasons-summer-autumn-winter-spring-identical to ours.
The only difference, of course, is in the length of each individual season, which is
almost twice as long as ours.
There is also an abundance of water ice on Mars, which is largely concentrated in the
polar ice caps.
Studies of Martian meteorites, its atmosphere, and surface conditions have suggested that
significant amounts of water may also be trapped beneath the surface.
This water could be easily extracted and purified for human consumption.
In addition, Mars is closer to Earth than the other planets in the solar system, except
for Venus (which is too hot and acidic to be colonized.)
In fact, every 26 months, Earth and Mars are in opposition-the point at which they are
at the shortest distance-which would allow for biannual "launch windows" to send colonists
and supplies.
Unfortunately, the similarities end there.
Otherwise, Mars is a cold, arid, irradiated environment that is inhospitable to life as
we know it.
Its average surface temperature over a martian year is -63° C, compared to the relatively
mild 14° C on Earth.
The atmosphere is thin and unbreathable.
Measured at the surface, atmospheric pressure on Mars averages 0.6 percent of that on Earth
at sea level.
And considering that Earth's atmosphere is 78 percent nitrogen and 21 percent oxygen,
Mars' atmosphere is a toxic mixture of 96 percent carbon dioxide and a little water
vapor.
There is also no small matter of all the radiation the colonists will be exposed to.
Since Mars has a very thin atmosphere and no protective magnetosphere, its surface will
receive about 250 thousandths of a sievert (the sievert-whose symbol is "Sv"-is the unit
of measurement for radiation that replaces the old "rem": for comparison, the average
natural radiation background on Earth is 2.5 thousandths of a sievert per year...a hundred
times less than on Mars) NASA has set a maximum limit of 500 thousandths
per year for astronauts, and studies have shown that the human body can withstand a
dose of up to 2,000 thousandths per year without permanent damage.
However, prolonged exposure to the levels detected on Mars would greatly increase the
risk of acute radiation sickness, cancer, genetic damage, and even death.
We generally think of Mars as a desert planet, similar in some ways to Earth's hyper-arid
deserts such as the Sahara or the Atacama.
Mars is actually much drier, and much more inhospitable: there is very little water vapor
in the atmosphere, and no liquid water can exist on the surface of Mars.
There is a good supply of ice in the polar ice caps and below the surface where the ice
is mixed with the soil in a kind of permafrost.
In addition, ice can also be found in some particularly cold regions that, although not
at the poles, maintain a low temperature because they are always in the shade, for example.
One way or another then on Mars water, which is also needed for fuel production, can be
obtained.
For food, the issue is a bit more complex.
Direct cultivation on the ground is complicated by radiation and lower Martian gravity and
insolation, something that could be solved at least in part by pressurized greenhouses,
but these would require a lot of energy to operate.
Among the innumerable problems that would still remain to be named is, for example,
that of gravity, which on Mars is one-third of Earth's and we do not know what effect
this might have on the human body during an extended stay.
Or there is that of violent sandstorms, which darken the sky across the planet for weeks
or months and would, again, force people to live underground.
Then there are the dangers to the psyche of people forced to prolonged periods in a completely
artificial environment.
In short...with all these risks to human health, life on Mars does not exactly sound inviting...
Yet, reading certain articles, there would be many potential volunteers willing to make
the trip and become the first generation of "Martians."
Will this be true?
And have these supposed volunteer settlers been warned that going to Mars is not like
going to the Moon?
Are they aware that the estimated duration of the trip from Earth to Mars is not 3 days
as for going to the Moon, but is between 142 and 213 days?
Do they know, moreover, that for reasons related to the geometry of planetary positions, it
is expected that the duration of a mission to Mars-between outward journey, stay, and
return journey-can never be less than 587 and 723 days?
Two years on Mars, settled as Sunday campers--can you imagine that?
Some say all it will take is to follow the lifestyle of a Robinson Crusoe, space-wise,
and time will pass quickly...
"Hey, guys, just a moment before we continue...
BE sure to join the Insane Curiosity Channel...
Click on the bell, you will help us to make products of ever-higher quality!"
All kidding aside, if we wanted to tackle the problems to solve them at the root, some
say the only option is to deeply alter the Martian environment.
This process is known as "terraforming," in which changes to the planet's atmosphere and
surface result in a more "Earth-like" environment.
To terraform Mars, three things must be done: warm the surface, thicken the atmosphere and
create an Earth-like biosphere.
Fortunately, these three tasks are all interconnected.
By thickening the atmosphere, the planet would be warmed and the amount of radiation reduced.
By introducing terrestrial plants and vegetation, the atmosphere could be transformed into something
breathable.
The first step would be to trigger a greenhouse effect on Mars, which could be done in many
ways.
For example, ammonia, methane, or chlorofluorocarbons could be introduced into the Martian atmosphere.
Since all three are powerful greenhouse gases, their introduction could thicken the atmosphere,
thereby increasing global temperatures.
There is also the possibility of melting the polar ice caps, which would release significant
amounts of water vapor and carbon dioxide to achieve the same effect.
Once the atmosphere has thickened and the surface has warmed, liquid water would again
be able to flow over the surface.
This would also lead to precipitation, which would allow the introduction of organisms,
plants, and vegetation for photosynthesis.
Over time, these would be able to convert the CO2-rich atmosphere to an oxygen-rich
one.
Nice, no?
But unfortunately, everything we have just told you is to be considered pure science
fiction.
Although there is no doubt that humans will eventually visit Mars, perhaps even building
a couple of small bases there, everything else-cities with thousands of inhabitants,
colonization, terraforming, etc.-must be considered a fantasy without any scientific basis.
Usually, there are three goals that so-called "space advocates" invoke to justify the absolute
necessity of colonization:Mars:
Scientific research; The search for and exploitation of new natural
resources; The terraforming of a planet that can become
a "second Earth" should the need arise.
The first point is the one I agree with.
Exploration is understood as the search for life in the universe must be pursued at all
times.
And it is still the least complex and dangerous aspect of our activity in space.
Increasingly intelligent robotic probes will indeed be able to operate in our place, without
us having to descend to the planets as conquering demons or as desperate settlers in search
of new lands.
The second point on the list, on the other hand, I consider completely incomprehensible.
We here on Earth do not have a problem with raw materials, but with overpopulation and
political management of resources.
Imagining a future where we are going to make the same mistakes by raiding asteroids and
digging mines in dangerous, godforsaken places seems really silly to me.
Fortunately, this will never come true-there is indeed no convenience in digging materials
millions of miles from home.
The costs will be impractical, and those who try will abandon the venture after a short
time.
There could only be affordability if the raw materials were produced and consumed locally,
on a reclaimed planet where millions of settlers would work and live with their families.
And here we fall back on the third point.
Do you in our solar system know of a planet that could be adapted as a "second Earth"?
Do you know a place where you would go to live, perhaps taking your family with you?
I don't think so...
I think you would rather move to an Antarctic base than to Mars...
Am I wrong?
Here on Earth, we don't see settlers living in Antarctica or under the sea, so why would
we expect a bunch of people to want to live somewhere that is much more unpleasant and
far away?
And if you're really thinking about terraforming Mars--well, take it from me--it would cost
so much that we'd be better off colonizing our ocean floors instead.
Or turn all the deserts on Earth into gardens and orchards.
And in short, as I have done in the past, I'll say it loud and clear even now: we humans
will never be able to build permanent settlements on Mars, let alone terraform it!
Of course, we will at least pay it a visit, sooner or later...
just to keep up our investments and proclamations so far... but it will be like going to conquer
the summit of Everest: a thing of no use, except to prove our mettle.
Did conquering Everest mean perhaps planting a base there and trying to live there?
No, of course not -- so why think it for Mars, which is a place thousands of times more distant,
dangerous, and alien?
The "search for life" excuse doesn't even apply anymore...
In fact, we should hope not to find it at all!
In fact, even finding microbial life on Mars would mean coming into the crosshairs of those
who think it is unethical to contaminate an already "inhabited" planet.
The Moon, on the other hand, is absolutely perfect from this point of view: we have known
for some time now that the only organisms on its surface are those sent with our probes.
On the Moon, we will have no problem moving around and exploring to our heart's content.
And anyway, in recent times, it seems to me that slogans like "Get your ass to Mars" have
died down quite a bit...
In 2017, Musk declared that in 2022 he would send his first rocket to Mars, to identify
the location of water resources and that in 2024 the first manned and loaded mission would
leave...
It is now 2023, but none of this has been realized in the slightest, nor does it look
like it will be shortly.
Tacitly, all resources seem to have been diverted to the Moon, and Mars is hardly talked about.
And I honestly don't think this is a bad thing--the Moon is a target much more within our reach--it
is a world that rightfully belongs to us, and it is basically in our backyard.
What more could we want?