Terraformation of Mars (opinions or ideas)

[question123]

Ideas and strategies for terraforming mars.

 

I have no serious backround in sciences above high school level but I had several ideas for terraforming mars and I would like any one with knowledge to the contrary of my ideas come forward so that I may know and adapt my ideas.

 

1) My first idea is that to increase the amount of gas trapped in mars's atmosphere we must increase the gravitational pull of the planet by increasing it's density, to do this couldn't we put a material on mars that is very dense that will increase of mars but the mass much more. I think this would increase mars's density and its gravitational pull so that it would hold more gases in and create an atmosphere.

2) My second idea has to do with another gas trapping mechanism that the earth employs but mars does not, the magnetosphere. This idea is based in the fictitious world of the movie "The Core" but I believe that the scientific principles still apply. To create a magnetic field for mars we could send a nuke or many nukes if neede to explode inside mars at points that, using fluid dynamics, were found to spin the outer core. When the outer core is spun the inner core will remain still and the rubbing metals will create a magnetic field.

3) My third idea isn't just about terraforming mars but about reducing pollution on earth. This idea involves sending a ship to mars with about fifteen people on it to build a hyper secure and extremely large greenhouse filled with plants and enough c02 to last them several years. During those several years you send the people back to earth and you then send up massive ships with a feww people and lots of water and carbon dioxide. These ships deliver the c02 and water to the plants and then return to earth, in a few years they return and by then they will have to release the oxygen the plants created to put in more water and c02. This will decrease the amount of c02 in earth's atmosphere and increase the amount of o2 in mars's atmosphere.

 

Finally I would just like to reiterate that i would appreciate any comments or constructive criticism on these ideas as well as new ideas about terraforming mars

 

I have no serious backround in sciences above high school level but I had several ideas for terraforming mars and I would like any one with knowledge to the contrary of my ideas come forward so that I may know and adapt my ideas.

 

1) My first idea is that to increase the amount of gas trapped in mars's atmosphere we must increase the gravitational pull of the planet by increasing it's density, to do this couldn't we put a material on mars that is very dense that will increase of mars but the mass much more. I think this would increase mars's density and its gravitational pull so that it would hold more gases in and create an atmosphere.

2) My second idea has to do with another gas trapping mechanism that the earth employs but mars does not, the magnetosphere. This idea is based in the fictitious world of the movie "The Core" but I believe that the scientific principles still apply. To create a magnetic field for mars we could send a nuke or many nukes if neede to explode inside mars at points that, using fluid dynamics, were found to spin the outer core. When the outer core is spun the inner core will remain still and the rubbing metals will create a magnetic field.

3) My third idea isn't just about terraforming mars but about reducing pollution on earth. This idea involves sending a ship to mars with about fifteen people on it to build a hyper secure and extremely large greenhouse filled with plants and enough c02 to last them several years. During those several years you send the people back to earth and you then send up massive ships with a feww people and lots of water and carbon dioxide. These ships deliver the c02 and water to the plants and then return to earth, in a few years they return and by then they will have to release the oxygen the plants created to put in more water and c02. This will decrease the amount of c02 in earth's atmosphere and increase the amount of o2 in mars's atmosphere.

 

Finally I would just like to reiterate that I would appreciate any comments or constructive criticism on these ideas as well as any new ideas about the terraformation of mars.

 

If you would like to reach me directly you can email me at maureenfitzgeral@juno.com

[Realitycheck]

Ideas and strategies for terraforming mars.

 

I have no serious backround in sciences above high school level but I had several ideas for terraforming mars and I would like any one with knowledge to the contrary of my ideas come forward so that I may know and adapt my ideas.

 

1) My first idea is that to increase the amount of gas trapped in mars's atmosphere we must increase the gravitational pull of the planet by increasing it's density, to do this couldn't we put a material on mars that is very dense that will increase of mars but the mass much more. I think this would increase mars's density and its gravitational pull so that it would hold more gases in and create an atmosphere.

 

This, in itself, is quite an order. I am not an expert on this, but I think the atmosphere was destroyed by bombardment and there simply is not that much atmosphere left, as it was gradually spewed out into space. Even if you could somehow zap all of the existing planet with a gigantic raygun in order to convert it to a denser form of matter, there still would not be enough gas to form an atmosphere. However, a key to forming an atmosphere would be to warm the planet up, as it is extremely cold.

 

There is evidence recently discovered that suggests that there is a very large body of water existing on Mars, possibly covering up to 40% of the planet, but unseen, as it is frozen and covered with sand that has blown over it. If the environment could be warmed up, the ice would melt, hydrogen and oxygen would be released in an evaporation cycle and this, by itself, could help contribute to an atmosphere.

 

Of course, I don't see any way to warm up an entire planet until the sun does it in a few billion years when it turns into a red giant. Even if you somehow nuked the planet enough to melt all the water, without leaving all kinds of fallout for the next billion years, it would just freeze up again.

[SkepticLance]

There is no need to increase the gravity on Mars, even if we had such a method. Mars is fully capable of holding a much denser atmosphere, even with its current small gravity. It will not hold it forever, of course, but the 'short' period it can hold an Earth density atmosphere is measured in many millions of years - quite enough for humans to live there. The problem is to get the atmospheric gases to Mars. The easiest way would be to tap material already on Mars. We cannot really know how practical this would be unless we go there to carry out a proper inspection. If the right materials are present, we could produce the atmospheric gases in situ.

 

Some people have suggested that we might set up 'space tugs' and tow ice satellites, probably from orbit around Jupiter or Saturn, and crash them into Mars. This would add heat to Mars, vaporise some of the ice to add atmosphere, and add liquid water to Mars. Obviously all this crashing would have to be done before people settled there. This consideration alone makes it unlikely.

 

Moving material from Earth to Mars in large quantities will almost certainly remain impractical. The costs, both financial and environmental, are simply too great. There is also no need. There is plenty of CO2 on Mars. There is probably plenty of water also. We will need to sequester CO2 right here on Earth to reduce the excess in the air.

 

Various suggestions have been made for how to warm Mars, ranging from adding lots of greenhouse gases to its atmosphere, to putting giant mirrors into orbit, to reflect extra heat down. I doubt if anyone really has a solution to this problem, but one may develop in the future.

 

However, all this is for the reasonably distant future. If humans get to live on Mars, the first 50 odd generations will almost certainly live in domes or underground habitats, sealed off from contact with the cold and toxic air of Mars.

[Sayonara]

Some threads you might find helpful for getting a more esoteric view of Mars and terraforming issues:

 

Why is it always Mars?

How do we share Mars?

 

 

If humans get to live on Mars, the first 50 odd generations will almost certainly live in domes or underground habitats, sealed off from contact with the cold and toxic air of Mars.

Why are you obsessed with settlers living underground on Mars? It's not "almost certain" at all, it's unnecessary and economically stupid and therefore remarkably unlikely.

Cheap, light, modular domes yes; ridiculous amount of mining no.

[Klaynos]

1) Where do we get this dense material from?

2) IIRC Mars doesn't have enough iron in it's core for this to work.

3) This would be massively energy intencive, can't we send the plants, water, CO2 and O2 all in one go... What about everything else the plants require?

[jackson33]

Mars is said to have an atmosphere of 95% Carbon Dioxide (CO2), 3% Oxygen.

CO2 is one part (atom) Carbon and two parts oxygen. This as a liquid/gas/solid item, differs by barometric pressures, as well as the natural half life (breakdown) of the substance. On earth its said to be no more than 100 years.

 

Many folks, for other reason, on earth are trying to improve the breakdown of CO2, such as currently done (to degree) by catalytic converters. I understand there are some offering big rewards for new ways to do this, in time we should have a means. Another way would be, to artificially raise the surface temperature (reflection/magnification or additional heat source) to say 60-70 degree F, make a large section of land suitable for plant life and introduce this life for a natural place for carbon to be stored (as much is in forest, plant life) on earth today, the natural production from the heat (introduced H2O if required) would begin a process, which could generate its own atmosphere.

 

The altering of comets, asteroids to a collision course for Mars has been suggested to add elements to Mars as well. Not so much for gravity, since the amount required would heat the plant, taking a very long time to cool back down.

 

Mass transfer by laser beams, another current theory and in experiment with some success could be a means to transfer substance to Mars, well into the future.

 

Mars, is most referred to for terraforming, but Venus and our own moon are possible targets. Venus, also very high CO2 (96%) quite warm at 480 degree C, which is not beyond the proper atmosphere to keep from affecting the planet.

 

My problem with all the current ideas, is the probable existence of micro-ism's which should exist (even if dormant) which the human species may not ever be able to adapt to. Or at least it would take a great deal of time, as it did on earth, about 4 billion years to evolve the proper atmospheric/biological conditions.

[foodchain]

Mars is said to have an atmosphere of 95% Carbon Dioxide (CO2), 3% Oxygen.

CO2 is one part (atom) Carbon and two parts oxygen. This as a liquid/gas/solid item, differs by barometric pressures, as well as the natural half life (breakdown) of the substance. On earth its said to be no more than 100 years.

 

Many folks, for other reason, on earth are trying to improve the breakdown of CO2, such as currently done (to degree) by catalytic converters. I understand there are some offering big rewards for new ways to do this, in time we should have a means. Another way would be, to artificially raise the surface temperature (reflection/magnification or additional heat source) to say 60-70 degree F, make a large section of land suitable for plant life and introduce this life for a natural place for carbon to be stored (as much is in forest, plant life) on earth today, the natural production from the heat (introduced H2O if required) would begin a process, which could generate its own atmosphere.

 

The altering of comets, asteroids to a collision course for Mars has been suggested to add elements to Mars as well. Not so much for gravity, since the amount required would heat the plant, taking a very long time to cool back down.

 

Mass transfer by laser beams, another current theory and in experiment with some success could be a means to transfer substance to Mars, well into the future.

 

Mars, is most referred to for terraforming, but Venus and our own moon are possible targets. Venus, also very high CO2 (96%) quite warm at 480 degree C, which is not beyond the proper atmosphere to keep from affecting the planet.

 

My problem with all the current ideas, is the probable existence of micro-ism's which should exist (even if dormant) which the human species may not ever be able to adapt to. Or at least it would take a great deal of time, as it did on earth, about 4 billion years to evolve the proper atmospheric/biological conditions.

 

I am not absolutely sure but I think that the core of mars is to weak to support any real atmosphere.

[SkepticLance]

Sayonara said :

 

Why are you obsessed with settlers living underground on Mars? It's not "almost certain" at all, it's unnecessary and economically stupid and therefore remarkably unlikely.

 

Currently, due to the very thin atmosphere, and , compared to Earth, minimal magnetic field, there is a high radiation flux reaching the surface of Mars. Settlers will need to be protected from this, and will only be able to stand a certain amount of time on the surface. The easiest form of protection is to build dwellings underground. A few metres of rock above our heads would be enough to cut the radiation to acceptable levels.

[kanzure]

Hey, cool- a Mars thread. I can do this. Some weeks ago I posted on Slashdot re: getting off this rock, so there are some links there on this very topic, but are more organizational.

 

Also, there was a recent discussion on the Orion's Arm mailing list re: Mars and terraformation.

 

See the New Mars terraformation forum.

 

- Bryan

[Sayonara]

Currently, due to the very thin atmosphere, and , compared to Earth, minimal magnetic field, there is a high radiation flux reaching the surface of Mars. Settlers will need to be protected from this, and will only be able to stand a certain amount of time on the surface. The easiest form of protection is to build dwellings underground. A few metres of rock above our heads would be enough to cut the radiation to acceptable levels.

 

"Easiest", or "hardest"?

 

Surely it would be easier to throw up some modular shelters than it would to pretend the radiation isn't there while you dig out a network of tunnels with the drilling equipment that was too heavy to take.

 

The sources I have read state that the bulk of the damage done by the solar radiation takes place in the upper atmosphere, and that explorers on the surface would be exposed to high levels of radiation only during solar eruptions (from several a day to perhaps one a week).

 

If you have different data it would be helpful if I could see it.

[someguy]

let's ship all of our excess CO2 to mars and then plant a bunch of plants there (genetically altered to live there) and have them convert it to O2.

 

i don't much like the idea of living underground though.

 

I'm not sure if it's really such a good idea to mess with the mass of mars either because then you might mess up the whole solar system.

 

mars is about 1/3 the gravity of earth.. how much more would it need to be to be usable? How much more can it increase before putting mars on a messy trajectory?

 

that gets me wondering too... we all know that the earth could be hit by a deadly asteroid.. but what are the changes that an asteroid indirectly destroys us by colliding with another small planet? I guess the bigger the planet the bigger the asteroid needs to be to really cause some raucous, which is kinda good cause the bigger ones are the easiest to hit. I guess the chances must be pretty remote since i think our solar system has been pretty much the same for quite a while. anybody know how long has it been pretty stable for? are we due?

[Sayonara]

let's ship all of our excess CO2 to mars and then plant a bunch of plants there (genetically altered to live there) and have them convert it to O2.

That won't really work as well as you think. Plants use oxygen as well as carbon dioxide.

 

There is also the issue of physically transporting gasses across the solar system, which is going to be prohibitively expensive.

 

what are the changes that an asteroid indirectly destroys us by colliding with another small planet?

Pretty small, I'd imagine. Tiny.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

let's ship all of our excess CO2 to mars and then plant a bunch of plants there (genetically altered to live there) and have them convert it to O2.

Genetically altered to live in soil (not soil, just ground-up rock, probably) with no nutrients in it?

 

Might be a bit of a challenge.

[SkepticLance]

Sayonara said :

 

The sources I have read state that the bulk of the damage done by the solar radiation takes place in the upper atmosphere, and that explorers on the surface would be exposed to high levels of radiation only during solar eruptions (from several a day to perhaps one a week).

 

If you have different data it would be helpful if I could see it.

 

It has been a while since I read up on this. There was a Scientific American article on the effects of radiation on the health of astronauts etc. I recall that the radiation was dangerously high even on a day to day basis, though there are times when it is much worse.

 

As I understand it, though, it makes no difference whether the radiation hits over a period of time, or only when a solar storm is in progress. If a person is exposed for a long period - say a couple of years - then they can expect to die of cancer while still young. If the exposure is only for a couple of months, they have an increased lifetime risk of cancer, but not a sure death sentence.

 

Certainly, if we are talking about a permanent Mars colony, that means radiation protection is essential. And the best way is to go underground. A dome would need a layer of something like ice or cement perhaps ten metres thick to screen out most of the radiation.

[Sayonara]

I will have a more intensive dig about for recent ground-level readings later on, when I get back from the shops.

 

I am of the opinion that digging out underground systems is dangerous and effort-intensive enough on Earth, never mind in such a hostile environment as Mars, and that we are not simply limited to either caverns or metres of shielding. Magnetic repulsion in orbit, for example, is a viable alternative.

 

Having said that, the recently discovered caves on Mars might make very convenient staging areas from which primary colonists could build outwards and tunnel inwards.

[Klaynos]

Certainly, if we are talking about a permanent Mars colony, that means radiation protection is essential. And the best way is to go underground. A dome would need a layer of something like ice or cement perhaps ten metres thick to screen out most of the radiation.

 

Or just a very clever material, what type of radiation is the major problem on the surface of mars? Is it something we can make easy shileds for, or in the domain where metamaterials are feasible?

 

If we only send old people there, there's no problem with dieing young...

[Sayonara]

We are having problems finding good data on precisely what kinds and levels of radiation are a problem on the surface. It's a bit of a stumbling block for this thread!

[YT2095]

Large chunks of Calcium (Hydr)Oxide, sent crashing into the poles wouldn`t be a bad start, the heat would Liquify the ice to water and that in turn with the Calcium would absorb and lock-up plenty CO2 also.

 

now it`s just a question of finding some in the asteroid belt and moving it...

 

I think I`ll stay on Earth

[jackson33]

It would be very difficult to alter the orbits of planets or any disruption of gravitational effects. The total mass of everything in our solar is 99.80% of what is called our sun. 1/5th of one percent makes up all the planets, asteroids, comets or debris.

 

Mars is said to have quite a few caves or what appears to be caves. Logically this should be, as the planets mountains, valleys are higher lower than anything found on earth. Might add, the largest known volcano, is also found on Mars.

 

Rather than going into gravity on the Mars; a 200 pound person on earth would weight 180# on Venus, 75# on Mars and 33# on the Moon. Earth is the most dense object in the solar system, but has nothing to do with gravity or what atmosphere can be held. As for long term problems, this might be the worst to solve. Your organs have evolved to your form and the gravity which they evolved in...

 

Harmful radiation emitted by the sun or for that matter the good values are diminished somewhat by distance. Venus is 67 million miles from the sun, Earth/Moon about 93 Million Miles away and Mars about 142. Its said our current solar technology for power, would not work on Jupiter's Moon, which is about 484 Million miles away.

 

IMO; I feel they could develop a light weight material to make domes, similar to a clear plastic. The major problem, until terraforming were near completion, would be from the dust storms which are massive and at very high speeds. This dust, no doubt has larger objects moving at 100m/p/h speeds and would tear up or damage most any dome construction.

[SkepticLance]

If Mars has caves, they might be able to be modified into habitats. If not, we could dig trenches, and roof them over with air tight structures, plus thick foam for thermal insulation, and then spray liquid water on top. It would set as ice immediately. A sufficient thickness would be enough for radiation protection. There is some evidence that Mars may have sufficient water.

[jackson33]

If Mars has caves, they might be able to be modified into habitats. If not, we could dig trenches, and roof them over with air tight structures, plus thick foam for thermal insulation, and then spray liquid water on top. It would set as ice immediately. A sufficient thickness would be enough for radiation protection. There is some evidence that Mars may have sufficient water.

 

IMO; The first human explorations of Mars will be from short shuttle trips from an orbiting craft, suitable for longer term habitations. Much like the current Space Station now orbiting earth. Many years, rotating crews in much the same manner, back and forth from the Moon or even Earth.

 

NASA, has a recent article fearing there little Rover's now on Mars may be coming to there end for the current 3-4 week dust storms. Hidden in the article was the fact, temperature have risen from there usual -60 to + 60 degree C and the rise should continue with increased retention on solar heating. Keeping to OPINION, I see no reason, in a hundred years or so where solar powered heat units placed around the surface of Mars, could produce heat sufficient enough to start some form of plant life, stimulating the storage of carbon and production of oxygen.

 

As for Solar Wind Storms, the primary deflections coming from a planets Magnetic Fields, these play with the Ionosphere or outer layer of an atmosphere. During peak activity ours will reach 2000 degree, even with this protection from our MF. Mars still has some Ionosphere, with a atmosphere not currently suitable for humans (depth of which is no importance). The lack of a strong MF, is said to have created a patchy ionosphere, not a total collapse of all. Every thing I read tells me there lower atmosphere could be altered, recreating the upper. Remember you have a greater distance from the sun 50% over Earths distance.

[Realitycheck]

On the other hand, if the Earth actually has a good atmosphere and its temperature has never varied by more than 30 degrees, what makes anybody believe that any other planet in our solar system actually could be terraformed to Earthlike conditions? I see a bunch of people who throw in their ideas about how to manipulate the system, but the only way it will work is in tiny little microcosms. Is it really worth it, other than for mining purposes? The cold, hard facts are that it is really cold or really hot everywhere else in our solar system, and it is not going to change, except for in the realm of our imagination. Why would we even consider such plans, other than for mining purposes? Of course, moons and asteroids and maybe Mars will be the only suitable candidates for mining until we have motherships capable of landing and taking off of planets. Until then, we obviously just follow China's lead and instate the one baby rule when the time comes. But, it's entertaining to see the input.

[bombus]

I think Venus is a far better bet than Mars

[SkepticLance]

bombus

Venus would take an awful lot more modifying than Mars. The surface temperature would melt lead, which means there is no way people could set up any kind of habitat there. Such habitats on Mars are at least possible in theory.

 

I agree with agentchange that there is little incentive to try to terraform Mars. There is no reason in theory why we cannot have even cities on Mars, all enclosed as artifical habitats screened off from the nasty Martian cold and toxic atmosphere.

 

I could envisage, some time in the next 100 years, special robots being designed and built to excavate on Mars to create massive habitat spaces. With a nuclear reactor to provide unlimited electricity for the new colony, there is no reason why they cannot live quite comfortably without terraforming.

[Pat Says]

bombus

Venus would take an awful lot more modifying than Mars. The surface temperature would melt lead, which means there is no way people could set up any kind of habitat there. Such habitats on Mars are at least possible in theory.

No way they could set up a habitat on the surface, but that doesn't mean they couldn't establish a habitat on Venus. Check out this article on colonizing Venus.