Terraforming of Mars / Human's Future on Mars

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   
This is a future which might be 50, 100 or 200 years from now.

I personally am convinced that we will succeed with terraforming of Mars. It might start out slow, and there will be problems encountered, naturally, but in the end it will work out.

We will create an artificial greenhouse effect on Mars by releasing high levels of CFC into its atmosphere, this will increase the temperature on Mars. We will seed all kinds of plants and algea, this will also increase temps and increase oxygen levels. We will also establish operations like mining to further aid this process, eg. making use of the existing resources, like the CO2 bound in ice.

We will build giant stations on Mars where humans will live and work, with one major goal the long-term terraforming of Mars, but likely also resources which will also be used on Earth. Eg. mining operations etc.

In a very far future, maybe several hundreds years from now, the terraforming will be so far progressed that no space suits are required anymore, humans can breathe the Martian air. Mars will be our "second" home planet. But it will require lots of time to get there.




posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


Read Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars. It's a trilogy of sci-fi books about the terraforming and colonisation of Mars.

link to wiki



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   
isn't mar's core dead? no magnetosphere means no atmosphere. have fun trying though!



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


As exciting as it would be to find life on Mars, terraforming is one reason it might be nice to find it lifeless.

Should We Terraform Mars?

If Mars is home to any indigenous life, then terraforming should be a non-issue.


Even if we don't terraform it we should be able to set up some colonies on Mars, the Martian moons, or Earth's moon.

Given all the mass extinctions Earth has experienced in the past, it seems likely there will be more, and therefore it behooves us to not be a one-planet species that can be wiped out by a single ELE (Extinction Level Event).



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:44 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by nrd101
isn't mar's core dead? no magnetosphere means no atmosphere. have fun trying though!


The Martian core is at the very least partially molten, possibly fully molten. The lack of magnetosphere is due to insufficient mantle convection as to produce a dynamo. That in itself isn't particularly a large problem. The magnetosphere isn't as important in the retention of an atmosphere as if commonly thought. The solar wind only works to strip gas away form a planet on geologic time-scales, so much so that if Mars today had an atmosphere of 1 bar it would take billions of years for it to be stripped to a level harmful to human life.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 05:59 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 06:18 AM
link   
I'm sure I read that it cannot be done because the planet is too wobbly on its axis.. it has too much tilt or something. I'm no scientist though so I m probably completely wrong.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by flexy123
 


The way to start would be a rover like curiosity which would deploy mini greenhouses,supplied with a source of ox and co2 and seed them with mosses and lichens.
The first few gens would need supplements,but after that a sustainable ecosystem could be possible,as long as they were enclosed in a greenhouse.
But later-
We may be able to breed certain plant life which could become"acclaimatised"to the martian outdoors over time,then we could seed the planet and begin the slow process of developing an atmosphere through carbon decay.

Its not impossible,but it would take many hundreds of years with todays tech.
But with tomorrows tech...
Maybe faster.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by DaesDaemar
 


I am going to second your suggestion of reading Kim Stanley Robinsons' Red Mars Trilogy. I think that series of books pretty much covers every topic from the scientific to the social aspect of a Martian Terraforming effort. Do we have the tech (now)? Yes. Should we? Yes. Will we? Probably not anytime soon. Why? Money. Period. Until the Earth and its inhabitants are left with no choice but to escape from the extinction we ourselves initiated there will likely be very little effort to terraform the red planet.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by flexy123
This is a future which might be 50, 100 or 200 years from now. [...] But it will require lots of time to get there.

I believe it will never happen. It's only going to get more expensive, particularly when it comes to humans going into space. We're not really built to travel in space for any length of time, and "warp drive" is not going to be available soon, if ever. Same thing with "free energy," which would be necessary to thaw out enough underground Martian water to make lakes and rivers and a breathable atmosphere. It will always be cheaper to keep the air and water contained, given the limited number of people who will be there.

And in the year 2200, the Earth's population will be about 21 billion, or three times what it is today. Unless we do something stupid like cure all diseases, and then it will be much more. You think resources are strained now, just wait.

The most efficient way for us to explore Mars (or space in general) is either by using intelligent robots, or by setting up an online Virtual Mars using data gathered from robots to create a kind of Sim Planet. People can just plug into it and get the vivid, virtual experience of being on Mars without the time and cost of actually going there, or the annoyance of wearing space suits and living in a cramped little dome. Walk around, feel the soil, watch the sunset, all from the comfort of your own apartment. Or, if you prefer, skip the dust and boredom of Mars and visit the much more interesting although fictional Pleasure Planet. Guess which one most people will choose?

Nope. If you add it all up, it just doesn't make sense. It's just a fantasy, and like most fantasies, reality just can't live up to it.



posted on Aug, 15 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by fatpastyhead
I'm sure I read that it cannot be done because the planet is too wobbly on its axis.. it has too much tilt or something. I'm no scientist though so I m probably completely wrong.

Its tilt is okay. Pretty close to Earth's actually. And it has an okay rotational period, unlike someplace like Venus.

But it has a cold core. Without a hot core and active volcanoes, it doesn't have a good carbon cycle to keep a functioning atmosphere going. We would have to continuously maintain it by importing water (crashing wrangled comets into the atmosphere), and that would be much more expensive than building big domes and keeping everything inside.

edit on 15-8-2012 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


This probably sounds dumb but I was wondering if there could be a way to heat the core of mars? I was considering the possibility of drilling to its center then detonating a series of nuclear bombs or creating a huge fusion reaction non explosive type which would start the process of melting the core.

Is something like that theoretically possible?



posted on Dec, 18 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaesDaemar
reply to post by flexy123
 


Read Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars. It's a trilogy of sci-fi books about the terraforming and colonisation of Mars.

link to wiki


Great books, I fully concur.

I did the first non-fiction treatment of terraforming back in 1981, check out my book 'New Earths'

Find excerpts on my home page [see signature]..





new topics
top topics
 
3

log in

join