It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: PhloydPhan
a reply to: swanne
Yeah - Mars probably has enough oxygen (bound up in iron oxide and other rocks on the surface or bound to CO2) and greenhouse gases (in the form of C02 either in the atmosphere as a gas or as dry ice at the poles) to at least begin terraforming (assuming we had the other technology). What it lacks is a decent buffer gas. Nitrogen fits that bill nicely here on Earth.
originally posted by: pikestaff
originally posted by: PhloydPhan
a reply to: swanne
Yeah - Mars probably has enough oxygen (bound up in iron oxide and other rocks on the surface or bound to CO2) and greenhouse gases (in the form of C02 either in the atmosphere as a gas or as dry ice at the poles) to at least begin terraforming (assuming we had the other technology). What it lacks is a decent buffer gas. Nitrogen fits that bill nicely here on Earth.
Just not enough gravity for teraforming, and virtually no magnetic shield to keep the suns nasty stuff from hitting the surface, or blowing away the lighter gases, as has happened.
originally posted by: wildespace
originally posted by: makemap
Why should we bring more combustible gas on this planet than it already needs? That is dangerous and deadly to our air quality and life on Earth.
Because the combustibles drive the machines, and the machines drive profit.
originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: openminded2011
A simpler solution would be to stop relying on hydrocarbons.
Progress is irrelevant if the technology ends up damaging the biosphere with even higher levels of pollution. Since we humans are part of the biosphere, we would basically be ensuring our own downfall, along with millions of species.