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.