قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Science https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Who knew clean energy could be so controversial?

Who knew clean energy could be so controversial?

I have to admit, I've been fascinated by the idea of ​​horrible Mars ever since seeing an IMAX film discussing the topic of my week at Space Camp, um, a few years back … or so. While I was more interested in the permanent colonies of space (for example, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine ), I was also interested in more aware habitat for humans, and changing the Martian environment than ever before. fighting to survive in it keeps me open to the idea.

That, and the fact that Elon Musk has a successful rocket company established with long-term work on Mars as its main purpose are easy-to-use motivators. T-shirts are a great plus too. The topic is now in the titles again (with a brand new t-shirt to boot), and players have taken their usual places on the game board.

Musk doubled down on his approach to terraforming, tweeting “Nuke Mars!” And then, “T-shirt soon.” He explained a little more than a few days after addressing concerns in radiation included, "Nuke Mars refers to a continuous stream of very low nuclear fusion explosion above the atmosphere to create artificial suns. Just like our sun, it would not cause radio on Mars." Many articles have been written or referred to in response, all arguing that calculations for such a prospect are highly unlikely or near impossible as a viable terraforming solution. I would not pretend to have opinions based on numbers on this matter because, frankly, I always wondered if this might happen.

Working through the politics of clean energy is hard enough when we are just talking about converting to battery-powered vehicles like Tesla does to reduce usage of fossil fuels. Then, when you integrate nuclear energy into the mix as a zero-emissions option, the fights really break down thanks to the horrible consequences that come from nuclear plant failures of the past and the long-term effects of weapons. nuclear war. It doesn't matter if science says it is safe with current technology – fear of the consequences of reaching any data-driven discussion. So, when someone like Elon Musk says he wants to use a technology on Mars that exacerbates the Earth, it really feels like nothing because it can't get the green light in the first place let alone gather the resources needed to execute.

A variety of other concepts that seem relatively acceptable to the science community involve observable satellites. Muscle floated this option in a tweet, saying "It might make sense to have thousands of solar satellite reflectors 🛰 to warm up to Mars vs artificial days (tbd)." Since SpaceX is in the business of producing satellites at the scale needed for such a prime with Starlink, the probability factor has more points than the thousands of nuclear bombs needed for an artificial one. sun near Mars. And, hey! Solar power (boosting) for the win, right?

However, I am not sure if NASA would recognize this approach, either, as it is true that they have scrubbed terraforming as an option in their opinion. A study released by the agency in July 2018 is quite clear in its conclusions:

"Mars does not maintain enough carbon dioxide that can be returned to the atmosphere to warm Mars, according to a new study, NASA-sponsored study The transformation of an unknown Martian environment into an area astronauts can explore without life support is not possible without technology beyond today's capabilities. ”- Bill Steigerwald / Nancy Jones for NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

Photo: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center [19659009] Usually, neither nuclear energy nor solar power can destroy Mars as much as it seems, or at least do for in a time frame that reaches the patience of most dreamers, however, pretend that science is not fatalistic for a minute. After all, we don't really know does not have a specific detail about Musk's thought process and why he does not think NASA is right on this issue. Suppose NASA and others say that this is something that is entirely possible and will do exactly what Musk et al. want to do it. Our next problems are human supporters and advocates of planetary protection.

There are a good number of people, or at least a good number of very vocal people, who do not think that people are entitled to colonize Mars. We have enough problems to solve on Earth, they said to some effect. Even Kim Stanley Robinson, author of the influential Martian terraforming trilogy with the titles of Red Green and Blue Mars said that the & # 39; 39; It's not a backup planet 'and we need to fix our problems here before describing them in our red neighbor. I am not saying that Stanley hates humans, but rather points out that even a person with a good vision for our species does not think we have a current business acting as steward of another planet. This kind of opposition can be contagious once the debate becomes serious.

If you've been following the story of the Israeli spacecraft crash on the Moon with some tardigrades aboard, you've probably seen the fiery debate that followed about the suppression of another planet of the body. Actually, I hear about concerns of spacecraft contamination that could interfere with the accuracy of, say, regolithic analysis (how do we know what we found wasn't a hitchhike from Earth, etc.), but nothing on the scale that followed the tardigrades. It reminds me of an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation (sorry for all the Trekkie references) where a terraforming team was so angry that they interrupted the environment of a crystal, bridgeless life forms that possess intelligence. A staff member is in tears even when one of his staff members is killed by creatures whose equipment cannot be seen.

The whole shout about tardigrades goes down in an anti-private space exploration, actually. Musk's followers know how much the challenge came from challenging the story in this arena, but SpaceX has finally made enough headway in terms of achievements to overcome some of the biggest detractions. Not all of this, of course, but today's successes provide hope for future plans. Seeing that there is a rabid & # 39; Planetary Protection Police & # 39; there (way beyond basic science concerns) is kind of depressing. How many others will come out of the woodwork once SpaceX is really ready to get to Mars? And to private citizens who want to move there, less?

Putting all these things together I discussed the type of paintings of a bloody picture that ever came down to the planet and / or created another home for people to live. I still believe. As fellow writer Eric Ralph suggested to me, it would probably all fall to the wayside when there were actual boots on the ground. The film may be in the works after all:

How I Learned to Stop Concerned and Loving the Martian Bomb.

Source link