Category Archives: Mars Colonization

Skidrowrepacks.com Download Sol 0: Mars Colonization FullCracked PLAZA and this gameis all about building a colony, finding the necessary resources and then sustaining it. Sol 0: Mars Colonization Full Version Free Download is a colony building simulation game from one-man developer, Chondrite Games. Humans have at last advanced beyond sending astronauts to the moon, we are now capable of sending humans to Mars. You are in charge of the first mission to Mars, its your job to choose a suitable location on the Martian surface and establish a self-sufficient colony. Youll need to manage your resources while expanding your colony and performing research. If you run out of food and/or water your astronauts and colonists will perish. This is a momentous event for all of humanity, make sure you dont screw up!

System Requirements forSol 0 Mars Colonization Full Version :

MINIMUM:

RECOMMENDED:

Game Title: Sol 0: Mars Colonization SKIDROW Genre: Indie, Simulation, Strategy Developer: Chondrite Games Publisher: Chondrite Games Release Date: Jan 16, 2016 Free Download LinkSol 0: Mars Colonization Full Version 225 MB:

See more here:
Sol 0: Mars Colonization Full Version - SKIDROW Repacks

To guarantee the success of a Manned Colonization mission we must send a fleet of space ships. Wernher von Braun envisioned a fleet of ten spacecraft . The exploration of mars could be done with a couple of ships, but the colonization of mars will require more than half a dozen people.

Wernher von Braun also worked out preliminary concepts for a manned Mars mission which used the space station as a staging point. His initial plans, published in The Mars Project (1952), had envisaged a fleet of ten spacecraft (each with a mass of 3,720 metric tons), three of them unmanned and each carrying one 200-ton winged lander[29] in addition to cargo, and nine crew vehicles transporting a total of 70 astronauts. Gigantic as this mission plan was, its engineering and astronautical parameters were thoroughly calculated. A later project was much more modest, using only one purely orbital cargo ship and one crewed craft. In each case, the expedition would use minimum-energy Hohmann transfer orbits for its trips to Mars and back to Earth. from Wikipedia

See the rest here:
Mars-Colonization

The first NASA astronauts to set foot on Mars will aim to establish a research-and-operations base, not a permanently inhabited colony, agency officials say.

According to NASA's current plans,the Mars outpost which NASA hopes to set up by the end of the 2030s will serve as a hub that accommodates astronauts on a temporary basis, said Ben Bussey, the chief exploration scientist in NASA's Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate.

A colony is "a long way down the road. No one's thinking of, on the NASA side, like a permanent human base," Bussey said Wednesday (March 16) during a presentation with the space agency's Future In-Space Operations (FISO) working group. [Red Planet orBust: 5 Crewed MarsMission Ideas]

"The idea here is that you would have your exploration zone that you set up for the first crew," Bussey added. "And that crew would leave, and then you send another crew at the next good launch opportunity. So it isn't permanently occupied, but it is visited multiple times." A permanently occupied Mars settlement may eventually grow out of NASA's crewed activities. But for several other organizations, a Red Planet colonyis the explicit goal.

One of these groups is SpaceX, the American spaceflight company founded in 2002 by billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk. Musk has stressed many times over the years that he established SpaceX primarily to help make humanity a multiplanet species.

Musk envisions thousands of people living on the Red Planet in the not-too-distant future. The key to making this happen, he has said, is to develop fully and rapidly reusable rockets, which could slash the cost of spaceflight by a factor of 100 or more.

So SpaceX has been conducting a series of increasingly ambitious reusable-rocket tests over the past few years. For example, the company has repeatedly attempted to land the first stage of its Falcon 9 rocket back on Earth during launches.

Most of these tries have been near misses. On multiple occasions, the rocket stage successfully hit the deck of its target "autonomous spaceport drone ship" in the ocean but ended up toppling over and exploding. But a Falcon 9 stage did land softly on terra firma at Florida's Cape Canaveral Air Force Station this past December the first time this had ever been done during an orbital launch. (Blue Origin, the spaceflight company established by Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, has also pulled off rocket landings, but so far, only during suborbital launches.)

The Netherlands-based nonprofit Mars One is also shooting for a Red Planet colony. The group aims to land four pioneers on Mars in 2027 and then send more settlers every two years thereafter. (There are no plans at the moment to bring anyone back to Earth.) Mars One aims to pay for these activities by staging a global media event around the colonization process.

Follow Mike Wall on Twitter@michaeldwallandGoogle+.Follow us @Spacedotcom, Facebookor Google+. Originally published onSpace.com.

Read more here:
Permanent Mars colony is 'long way down the road,' NASA ...

ABOUT THE GAME

Sol 0 is a real time strategy game where you establish the first Martian colony. From the first human footprints on Martian soil to a thriving and self-sustaining colony, Sol 0 imagines a near future using technology that could be available within the next few decades.

Title: Sol 0: Mars Colonization Genre: Indie, Simulation, Strategy Developer: Chondrite Games Publisher: Chondrite Games Release Date: 15 Jan, 2016

Sol 0 Mars Colonization-PLAZA Size: 284 MB -

ONE FTP LINK

DIRECT LINK

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

OPENLOAD

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

UP07

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

1FICHIER

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

UPTOBOX

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

CLICKNUPLOAD

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

HUGEFILES

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

MEDIAFREE

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

USERSCLOUD

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

JHEBERG

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

GO4UP

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

MULTI LINKS

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

TORRENT

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.Torrent

Link:
Sol 0 Mars Colonization-PLAZA - Skidrow & Reloaded Games

ABOUT THE GAME

Sol 0 is a real time strategy game where you establish the first Martian colony. From the first human footprints on Martian soil to a thriving and self-sustaining colony, Sol 0 imagines a near future using technology that could be available within the next few decades.

Title: Sol 0: Mars Colonization Genre: Indie, Simulation, Strategy Developer: Chondrite Games Publisher: Chondrite Games Release Date: 15 Jan, 2016

Sol 0 Mars Colonization-PLAZA Size: 284 MB -

ONE FTP LINK

DIRECT LINK

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

OPENLOAD

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

UP07

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

1FICHIER

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

UPTOBOX

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

CLICKNUPLOAD

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

HUGEFILES

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

MEDIAFREE

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

USERSCLOUD

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

JHEBERG

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

GO4UP

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

MULTI LINKS

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.iso

TORRENT

Sol.0.Mars.Colonization-PLAZA.Torrent

See original here:
Sol 0 Mars Colonization-PLAZA - Skidrow & Reloaded Games

Sol 0: Mars Colonization is a fun little, well, Mars Colonization game. You need to explore the surface of Mars, send your explorers and supplies, and learn to build a colony on the inhospitable atmosphere of the Red Planet. Personally? I like Mars. And I like colonization type games. And it was only $5.99!! The is the best game for that price that I've played in a very long time. Well done! This is a MUST BUY for that price!

From the developers:

"Sol 0 is a real time strategy game where you establish the first Martian colony. From the first human footprints on Martian soil to a thriving and self-sustaining colony, Sol 0 imagines a near future using technology that could be available within the next few decades. Make use of minerals and resources across the Martian surface to expand from the first exploratory rover to an independent frontier.

From Chondrite Games, Sol 0 gives players the ultimate chance to take on the challenges inherent in pushing the boundaries of space exploration and habitation. Grow food, extract water, build habitats, generate electricity, evade unpredictable Martian weather, mine natural resources, and construct increasingly complex and sophisticated colony bases. Challenging simulation Youll be faced with balancing food and water needs, oxygen and energy supplies, natural resource collection, and preparing for weather disasters including meteorite impacts and dust storms. Prioritize the supplies you bring to ensure your colonys survival. Become independent from Earth The technology featured in Sol 0 is inspired by concepts currently being developed and deployed for Martian exploration. From water and mineral extractors, rovers with fine-tuned instruments, and biology labs that cross-breed bacterial strains from Earths extreme environments to increase food production on Mars, the available tools reflect an ever closer reality. Explore Mars and worlds beyond Ice caps, lava plains, and arid equatorial regions each offer distinct challenges to success, and randomly generated maps provide extended playability. Build custom maps using the Sol 0 Map Editor, and share your creations with other players."

Buy your copy on Steam today: http://store.steampowered.com/app/387370

BE SURE TO FOLLOW ME ONLINE!!!

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Bradm73Gaming Twitter: https://twitter.com/BradM73 Twitch TV: http://www.twitch.tv/bradm73/profile Google Plus: https://plus.google.com/+BradM73

New 2015 PC Specs (Since so many of you asked):

CPU: Intel i7-5960X Motherboard: Asus X99 Deluxe RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 2800mhz CPU Cooler: Corsair H105 water cooler Graphic card: Asus NVidia GeForce GTX 980 Poseidon w/4GB DDR5 Video Memory (Also optional water cooling on board) Power Supply: Corsair HX1000i (1000Watt) Primary Hard Drive: Samsung 850 EVO 1TB Secondary HDD: Western Digital 2TB Black HDD Case: Cooler Master Cosmos Monitor: Asus 27" Republic of Gamers SWIFT - 1ms response time @ 144Hz Mouse: Logitech G502 Keyboard: Logitech G910

See original here:
Sol 0: Mars Colonization - Episode 2 - YouTube

Cost of a Manned Mission?[edit]

Is there any reliable information about the cost of a manned mission to mars? I think it would be useful to include in the article.

For anyone who digs this up, two ideas would be:

Q: How much will sending humans to Mars cost? A: Estimates of the cost of a human Mars exploration program over the years have been wildly disparate, leaving much confusion in their wake. On the high end of the scale was the Space Exploration Initiative proposed by President George H. W. Bush in 1989 at $450 billion; Mars Direct occupies the low end of the scale at roughly $30 billion. - http://www.marssociety.org/portal/c/faq

-Lexspoon 12:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I know many are already aware that both "colonization" and "colonisation" are valid ways of spelling the word. Nevertheless, I thought it would be nice to make a note of it here since I noticed some people changing things to reflect one particular spelling. This may be done for the sake of consistency, but, in that case, it should be noted that the wikipedia article for the term is listed under Colonisation. --Xaliqen

Consideration ought to be given to retitling this entry "Settlement of Mars" rather than coloniz/sation, given the negative connotations the word "colonization" engenders in political discussion. Inevitably -- amazingly -- such diversionary concerns arise when discussing Martian settlement. Ericmachmer (talk) 21:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

The possibility of terraforming plays a great part all over the article. However, I'm in doubt about its feasibility. For one thing I believe it takes too long to wait for the results, and nobody is willing to invest a dollar into something that possibly (!) returns in some hundred or may be thousand years. For another, there is good reason Mars having such a thin atmosphere today. The long term stability of a terraformed environment is pretty unlikely. All this about the terraforming thing seems to be science fiction, while the colonization is not. So, how about reducing the idea of terraforming to a small paragraph with a link to the main article Terraforming of Mars? The whole article would be more believable if it concentrates strictly on technology that is in reach of men. -- The Cascade (talk) 08:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, our presence will change the Martian environment, there is no doubt about it. I would not call this unintentional influence terraforming, because it surely does not aim to make Mars resemble Terra. Neither I would expect the unintentional changes to leed even into this direction. No, our presence will not terraform Mars. Probably, our presence will dirtyform it.

Still this is not what I meant. The article describes intentional terraforming. Sure, it is much easier to live on a terraformed Mars, but yet it is not possible with our current knowledge and technology. There are ideas, but nobody knows about the viability. It's too premature. I find it nice to have that article Terraforming of Mars. It is a good article, and I definitely want to keep it, even grow it bigger, concentrate all available info in it. However, the article Colonization of Mars points to a more realistic scenario. It describes many ideas to colonize the planet without the need for terraforming, which is possible with known technology. I wouldn't want to describe terraforming here as inevitable, which is not at all. I find terraforming too fantastic, and my impression is that it makes the article somehow fantastic, too. I'd rather want the article be realistic. -- The Cascade (talk) 14:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for being rude. And offensive for that matter... first of all the green house gases: Mars has a lots of it. atmosphere consists of >95% CO2. and there is frozen CO2 all over the planet... thats just not the reason why the atmosphere is so thin.

there are mainly two reasons:

1. mars is too small to keep a dense atmosphere. just not enough gravity to keep it.

2. no magnetic field. the charged particles from the sun (sun wind) just "blow" away the atmosphere.

We can think about a solution for (2), like building a superconductor coil around the equator. But because of (1) this wont help in the long run... terraforming mars is a nice dream. but as long as we dont invent a seriously new kind physics, it will be a dream..

Anyway i think it is good to mention the historical ideas about terraforming, just please also mention that it is just nowhere close to be imaginable for someone who studied physics.

135.196.213.146 (talk) 17:17, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

CAN MARS KEEP AN ATMOSPHERE?

Mars surface gravity is high enough to keep all gases except Hydrogen, Helium and Water. Further, water stays in the troposphere, (because of the cold trap), and is not normally lost to thermal escape. Mars HAS lost about 15 meters of water globally, but most of this was from UV light disassociating water into hydrogen and oxygen, with the hydrogen being quickly lost. If Mars was to have an oxygen atmosphere (and an ozone layer), it would keep its water for billions of years. In fact, even with out an oxygen atmosphere, Mars has kept its water for billions of years. Plenty of water is in its ice caps and as permafrost. It has not lost all of its water from thermal escape or any other method.

Scientists have shown that worlds with no magnetic field lose tiny amounts of air from solar wind erosion. This adds up over billions of years. However, it is not something that terraformers have to worry about over hundred of millions of year time scales. (100 million years is far longer than the lifetime of our species.)

Venus has no magnetic field and a solar flux more than 5 times what Mars has but it has not lost its atmosphere. Mercury has quite a strong magnetic field and basically has no atmosphere. The meme that no magnetic field = no atmosphere is far too simplistic. Venus is an obvious disproof of this idea.

Scientists think Mars had a 3 or 4 bar atmosphere early in its life and estimate that about 75% to 80% of this was lost to the solar wind. (The solar wind was ~100 times stronger at the start of the solar system and ~6 times stronger ~2.5 billion years ago.) Since it now has an atmosphere of 1/100th of a bar, where is its air?

In the soil. Lightning and UV radiation will form nitrates. On Earth these are recycled quickly by life. But in some regions like the Gobi desert, the nitrate beds are very deep. (Dozens of meters deep if I remember correctly, don't quote me.) On Mars, most of the nitrogen was not lost, it has been deposited in the soil. Oxygen is too heavy for thermal escape, but will react with rocks or with salts to form perchlorates. Carbon dioxide will form carbonate rocks, be absorbed into CO2 clathrates, and be dissolved in ground water and form ice caps. Further, clays which are common on Mars will absorb carbon dioxide when they get cold, typically 4 to 6% by mass. Most of Mars' atmosphere is in its soils and rocks.

If terraformers brought Mars atmosphere up to 1 bar pressure by dropping comets onto the planet, it would take 2 to 3 billion years of solar wind sputtering to reduce its air pressure to the point where humans still would NOT need a pressure suit. (Tho the pressure would be too low for humans to breath.) (This assumes that the Sun's solar wind continues to decline or at least stays the same.) Claiming that we can't live on a Terraformed Mars because the solar wind will erode the atmosphere in 2.5 billion years when the Earth's biosphere won't survive 800 mi
llion years (because the sun is warming) is silly. Let's focus on the next two hundred to 200,000,000 years and let someone else worry about the time after that.

I'll track down more references for these statements later. Out of time.

http://people.virginia.edu/~rej/papers03/Leblanc01.pdf

"Life and Death of Planet Earth, The: How The New Science Of Astrobiology Charts The Ultimate Fate" by Peter D Ward & Don Brownlee. // They show multicellar life likely won't last 1/2 a billion years on Earth as the sun warms.

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast121/lectures/lec14.html

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v272/n5656/pdf/272803a0.pdf

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1980LPSC...11.2479W

"Mars: A Warmer Wetter Planet" by Jeffrey S. Kargel // Discussed MEGAOUTFLO events in the past when the atmosphere in the soil out gases. Also talks about the 3 to 4 bar early Martian atmosphere & the martian water budget.

Warm regards, Rick. 65.110.28.47 (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I think that the discussion of economics on this page pays too much attention to ways that Earth could economically supplement life on Mars, and not enough attention to how Mars could supplement Earth. It mentions trade between Earth and Mars without mentioning what exactly Mars would have to offer Earth. I think the entire feasibility of Mars colonization rests on Mars having something that Earth does not have, and at this point, I have a great deal of trouble seeing what that might be, except cheap land, which doesn't seem to me to make up for the transportation and development costs that would go into it. Maybe a tourist industry, but I don't think you could build anything bigger than a small city on the basis of the tourist industry. Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.230.223 (talk) 18:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the above. The moon advocates have a myriad of ways to provide services/products to earth in a fiscal timetable, and value for value trades. However, this section on mars economics focuses mainly on earth providing economic benefits to mars and not an even exchange of value for value.Moonus111 (talk) 20:38, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

VIABILITY OF MARTIAN TRADE:

We know Mars has water enriched with deuterium (5 times more so than Earth). which is a viable export for cash. Strategic metals worth $10,000 / kg or more (gold and more expensive metals) can be shipped to Earth for a profit. Also, if there are asteroid bases, it is FAR cheaper to supply them from Mars than from Earth. Robert Zubrin suggested a triangle trade. High tech parts from Earth to Mars. Fuel, light industry supplies and food from Mars to the Asteroids. Asteroids send strategic metals back to Earth.

It is also easier for Mars to send stuff to Luna than it is to go from Earth to Luna. So if we get an industry collecting Helium 3 from the Moon, a similar triangle trade can be set up between the Earth, Mars and the Moon.

It won't be profitable to go to Mars to get Platinum (for example). It would be cheaper to re-open marginal mines on Earth. But the platinum on Mars won't have been picked over for hundreds of years - it will be right on the surface. If there are Martian colonists, they will be able to easily collect iridium, deuterium, rubidium, palladium, gallium, gold, etc, since there will be vulcanism and water created deposits right on the surface. These could be sold for a profit to get high tech, low mass supplies from Earth.

Mars has all of the elements needed for rocket fuel, plastics, industrial metals, computer chips and food. It also has a ~24 hour day night cycle which allows growing food economically. Coupled with Mars' greatest resource (a shallow gravity well) it can supply needed materials to bases in the inner and outer solars system more cheaply than Earth can.

For example: On page 230 of "the case for Mars" Robert Zubrin shows that a mission to Ceres requires 50 times less mass to be launched from Mars rather than Earth. (If the mission requires 1,000 tonnes of supplies it can be done with two launches from Mars or 107 launches from Earth.) This assumes that no propellent has to be hauled to Ceres. If we have to bring return fuel as well, then the Earth based mission becomes even more hopeless. Even if space launches from Mars are 10 times more expensive than Earth, it would still be much more profitable to send supplies from Mars.

Luna has severe disadvantages for a self sustaining colony. It lacks 24 hour day night cycle which is a huge problem if you have to grow plants there. (Plants require a really tremendous amount of energy to grow with artificial light.) Its lack of atmosphere means that plants will die from solar flares unless you have thick glass walls which will crack from the day / night heat stress. It lacks ores since the moon is made up of junk rock (see page 220 ibid for why ores are rare on Luna but likely common on Mars). Elements like H, C, N, P, K & S are all rare or very rare on Luna and must be imported from else where. There is plenty of oxygen and silicon but they are tightly bound to the rock and require a huge amount of energy and hydrogen and carbon to extract.

For references to what I've said above (and far more details), see "The Case for Mars" and "Opening Space" by Robert Zubrin. 65.110.28.47 (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)Warm regards, Rick.

WHY WAS COMMENTS ON ROCKET SLEDS / ROTATING SKY HOOKS DELETED? Space elevators are far more difficult to build than a rocket sled / sky ramp and or a rotating sky hook. If you are looking for cheap ways for a martian colony to make getting into space both methods are far more practical than a space elevator. Further, a sky ramp can put things into low Mars orbit, which a space elevator can't do, unless you haul rocket fuel up and launch from part way up the the elevator. I suggest that a rocket sled or Mag Lev style sky ramp located on Pavonis Mons is so many more times more practical than a space elevator (especially for a small colony struggling for capital) that the space elevator reference should be considered to be removed as a remote fantasy. I did not site sources in this article, but provided links to Wiki pages where there ARE references. 65.110.28.47 (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2011 (UTC)Regards, Rick

While interesting, I'd not stress this too much until 1) the results are duplicated independently, and 2) a longer time period is tested. 34 days is hardly long enough to ensure the survival of earth-life in Martian conditions. Cumulative radiation affects, for example, could prove disastrous over the course of months/years. Additionally, one good solar flare would probably destroy any life exposed to it in the same environment that this lab used, which due to its lack of a magnetosphere, Mars would be greatly affected by (locally.) I don't have a paper to cite, but discussions with some profs at the local university were not very positive on the long-term success of such tests. Note that hard questions were not asked/answered in the news articles cited, either. HammerFilmFan (talk) 12:20, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

On the 10th of November 2011 R.Schuster called for a citation for the statement: "It is not known if this is enough to prevent the health problems associated with Weightlessness." However it is well known that no experiments were done in which human beings were subjected to fractional g accelerations for weeks or more at a time. The experimental evidence is from free fall in orbit. There does not need to be much documentation to show that we do not know something. So it seems we could just drop the citation nee
ded template on the basis of common knowledge. We should do that or get rid of the statement. - Fartherred (talk) 02:18, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

In a number of edits on the 19th of July, Robertinventor among other things removed the sentences: "It's impossible for any manned mission to Mars to keep to the requirements of the [[COSPAR]] (Committee on Space Research) guidelines for planetary protection. NASA currently follows COSPAR guidelines." He replaced these with a second link to [[Manned_mission_to_Mars#Critiques]] and his comments about introducing Earth organisms to Mars affecting Mars' biologically pristine condition. I have added the comment about NASA following COSPAR guidelines of planetary protection to the [[Manned_mission_to_Mars#Critiques]]. However, this is better addressed directly in the [[Colonization of Mars]] article because it is a direct concern of colonization. The time of a colonization mission cannot be until nations supporting launches to orbit consider that the research question of life developing independently on Mars or not has been sufficiently addressed. Technologies necessary to the colonization of Mars have not been sufficiently developed to have a one-way mission to Mars yet, so we are not waiting just for the COSPAR requirements to expire; but it is a definite road block. There are some advocates of colonization that want colonization started in their lifetimes, as do the backers of Mars One. So this is an item of interest to them. For a neutral point of view, we should not be promoting Mars colonization or minimizing or ignoring the problems. We should present significant facts that are published. - Fartherred (talk) 17:53, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

The article fails to point out how easy it is to colonize mars. It has wind, a steady stream of wind will blow on mars as a faint wistle effect. Mars is a dead planet. It can easily be colonized and solar power is not an issue. Ever here of electro-magentic generators? Its called free energy. They would be quite sufficient.--Asfd777 (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

People can get the idea of domes for Mars colonies by looking at many old science fiction magazine covers, but a transparent dome is impractical for Mars. Temperatures down to -143 degrees Celsius just overwhelm the limited heating available from a dome greenhouse. It is more practical for a greenhouse to be a buried cylinder with a portion of the curved roof made of glass and steel exposed to sunlight from mirrors that concentrate it as much as is needed to maintain operating temperature, and the skylight covered by insulation at night. I cannot give a reliable source for this but it is rather obvious to someone who knows a little physics. I would like to see a reliable source for the statement that domes are useful for trapping heat for greenhouses on Mars so that if it comes from a graduate student I can urge that they flunk out and if it comes from a professor I can urge that his research funds be cut back. - Fartherred (talk) 21:23, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

There has been the direct observation of many of the elements necessary for life and this could be supported by citation. However some of the elements necessary for life are necessary only in trace amounts and have not been directly measured yet. We have from the theory of the solar system forming from a cloud of gas and dust that Earth and Mars formed from planetesimals that formed from dust in neighboring regions of the cloud. Therefore the elemental composition of Earth and Mars should have been similar to start with and only limited differences in environment caused changes in composition over geological ages. That Mars is expected to have all of the elements necessary for life can be arrived at by synthesis from sources that I have found, but maybe someone can find the synthesis published. Then it could be included in the article. - Fartherred (talk) 10:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

The result of the proposal was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 17:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Colonization of Mars Settlement of Mars Reflects modern terminology in the space advocate community without the distracting cultural baggage accompanying the term 'colonization' Relisted. BDD (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2013 (UTC) Ericmachmer (talk) 15:56, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Comment I think consensus was quite clear, it was to not move. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Settlement of Mars , Mars settlement , Mars settlement should all redirect here. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 02:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Why is this useful? It seems to me that any worries about colonization should be addressed in the relevant sections up page. A lot of the info is literally duplicated from above. Also, it contains unsourced SYNTH from Robert Walker. Already have deleted some of the obvious duplication of info and unsourced opinions. The telerobotics paragraph is irrelevant so that was deleted as well. I have half a mind to delete the whole section. Warren Platts (talk) 17:14, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

This article now has an Advocacy section but no balancing Concerns section.

I kept a copy of the original Concerns section in my user space here: User:Robertinventor/Colonization_of_Mars_-_concerns

I expected this to happen as the author said he is nauseated by all the concerns sections on Project Mars and is on a cleanup mission, also to remove all content written by myself on contamination issues. I did not write this now deleted section, just contributed some material to it. Robert Walker (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Please be aware that a Request for Arbitration has been submitted to address the long-standing user conduct issues that prevent the resolution of content disputes. The RFAR is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Mars Robert McClenon (talk) 23:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Can we include a more realistic-looking image (like CGI or something like that) as the lead one? The current one looks a little like it's from a children's magazine... --Againme (talk) 19:56, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

___________

Why not just stage something in Arizona, to convey the illusion that there are already people on Mars? It seems that this "childish" picture is sufficient to mislead the uninformed that Mars is already colonized. WikiEditor2563 (talk) 18:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

This is in response to a personal email I received from wikieditor Grayfell, who asked that I discuss this here. I need instruction from him or anyone so I can email him personally, I find communicating this way to be overly complicated and incoherent First, I'm writing the final pages of a non-fiction book, which includes several chapters on the colonization of Mars, exoplanets, etc, so I'm somewhat of an expert on the subject, regarding the real potential of a colony on Mars.

Now, the Colonization of Mars is a particularly unique subject, in particular regarding its inclusion in an encyclopedia, because there isnt actually a colony on Mars! And such a thing is certainly not inevitable. EVERYTHING about the colonization of Mars is opinion and highly speculative. The case can easily be made that nothing about this wiki page is encyclopedic! and that this web page is nothing but a bullhorn for the Mars advocates which certainly seems to be the case when some of the edits Ive made are undone before Ive even logged off! I mean, why would anyone be so vigilant about (of all things) the colonization of Mars?

Your sense of how things can be edited is too strict. Even your sens
e of what constitutes an encyclopedic tone is subjective and about which you dont have the last word. You and a few others are way too quick to simply undo others edits, and is arrogant.

First, why do you insist on using the word hospitable in describing Mars? That is entirely propagandistic. In no sense of the word, relatively or absolutely, is Mars hospitable. That might have been a matter of speculation to people in the stone ages, who gazed up in wonder but who couldnt have known any better; to Galileo; or even to early 20th century manbut NOW? given all that we know, in all its degrees of precision?

The sources that you are protecting belie the facts, and have no place in this wiki page. Anyone can write a science article these days and theres no reason their opinion is more relevant than mine. Even science articles are biased and often have a case to promote, and this is especially true for articles about Mars and the exploration of space. Furthermore, there are no sources that say that Mars has been colonized (regardless of unmanned research - which is truly amazing and gives me goose bumps), so maybe the entire Colonization of Mars page should be removed.

For the intro paragraph for this webpage, you need something for a general audience, not bogged down in misleading data. The fact is, a colony on Mars is science-fiction, and there are HUGE obstacles that prevent this from ever happening. this should be conveyed somewhere in the wiki page, preferably at the top, rather than cater to the dreamers and fantasists in some form of agenda.

For example, its FAR better to say that circumstances on Mars in fact would be deadly to all life as we know it (except for perhaps some extremophilic microorganisms) THAN deadly to most life because that implies that there are some forms of life on Mars, which is an OUTRAGEOUS implication, and propagandistic. Things that can be grown in simulated conditions on Earth do NOT change this simple fact! Mars is absolutely NOT hospitable to life and it is propagandistic to suggest that it does or might. Its not encyclopedic to suggest that there MIGHT be life on Mars when after the last 50 years of reconnaissance and actual soil and air analysisNO LIFE HAS BEEN FOUND ON MARS. Its very irrational at this point in the research - given all that we know, and we know a lot, and to a great deal of precision that there might be life on Mars. Thats a serious hang-up that is not supported by science, only by science-fiction fans and fantasists. Science doesnt HOPE or DREAM. Science simply collects facts.

The discovery of life on another planet would be the biggest breakthrough OF ALL TIME. That milestone has not been reached, so to imply that life may exist on Mars because of some dumb simulation here on Earth, or the unrestrained enthusiasm for such, does NOT belong in an encyclopedia. Maybe in Bizarre Fantasy Weekly, but not an encyclopedia.

This wiki page should not be used as a voice for dreamers, fantasists, or space tourism promoters. Now, I should be free to say THIS in the introductory paragraph maybe now you can appreciate how much restraint Ive been exercising.

The intro para to this wiki page should say, or convey, this specific point, because its realistic, not bogged down with misleading data, doesnt promote an agenda, and is entirely, as you say, encyclopedic:

It is absolutely true that This does not preclude the possibility that man might one day step foot on Mars and scout around, but whether or not we ever get to Mars seems less a matter of scientific progress, than the balance of power between sane and crazy which is properly referenced by National Geographic but which you reject because YOU HAVE AN AGENDA TO PROMOTE, which is in complete violation of the Wiki terms of service.

Its not scientific or encyclopedic to HOPE for something, just to state the facts or what can be reasonably surmised where scientific proof of something may be impossible, which seems to be the case, to a large degree, in this arena.

Given what we know, it makes more sense, at this point, to surmise that man will NOT colonize Mars, even though of course theres nothing to stop him from trying. This opinion should be conveyed, somehow, in the wiki page for this topic.

Bearing in mind that if someone wants to learn about Mars they are better served by the wiki page for Mars, because as a planet there is, of course, much to be said. WikiEditor2563 (talk) 20:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

As I indicated above, there are really no facts regarding a colonization of Mars, only opinions - much of which is wild speculation - so the idea of "reliable sources" regarding this is somewhat meaningless - since no one's been to Mars! One could challenge anyone who claims to be an expert on this subject. For that reason I don't understand why this webpage is so bulky! There seems to be nothing on the plus side for Mars! So where does the optimism come from?

Even for reliable sources, some things are still a matter of subjective opinion, or involve tremendous amounts of speculation, particularly about a colony on Mars. Such opinions are very biased, it's nave to deny this. This occurs, for example, when a "specialist" says something will happen in 20 years - which gets them off the hook, and implies "let the next generation do it while we still collect a paycheck." Engineers are not magicians, they can't turn lead into gold. There's an incentive to push things ahead 20 years and not a more realistic 50 - or 100. 20 years seems more within reach, so project funding is maintained. Imagine if they said 50 years - funding would stop! When a specialist at NASA says "something can be done" its because if he said "it can't be done" he and the rest of his pals would lose their jobs! So this website CAN'T be a bullhorn for NASA or the Mars advocates. AND IN THIS ARENA, MANY THINGS MUST BE SURMISED, and this Wikipedia page includes a lot of surmising and speculating. Who do you think has their fingers crossed the hardest? NASA. When we read their articles we need to take everything they say with a few grains of salt, and be skeptical of their optimism, because the idea of a colony on Mars IS outrageous, for many reasons (and hence the book I'm writing). For starters, heavy payloads can't land gently on Mars - but that's just a distraction, that's not even one of the REAL obstacles. Maybe these reasons are just more intuitive to me than you, based on years of reading and my own point of view, for which I have 2 science degrees to support, but you have a point of view too, it's hard for ANYONE to be completely objective, we're all rooting for one side or another.

Also, there are a lot of "opinions" on Wikipedia, everything isn't sourced. Everything I've contributed to Wikipedia is objective, restrained, suitable for a general audience, and free of promotion. Even the part about "balance between sane and crazy" but I knew that would be deleted, even though some science articles are describing some things in this arena as just that. The content I've repeatedly posted to introduce this Wikipedia page is both historically correct, succinct, insightful, and captures the spirit of the concept without going overboard.

_____________________ I only

What's interesting is that you haven't substantiated any of your disagreements with me, just condescending threats and warnings.

As I just said to another editor,

So saying that something is "sourced" is, in the end, somewhat meaningless. Which is why I put a higher priority on relevance and readability than the source material. It goes without saying tha
t ALL of my edits are informed through the research I've been doing the last 15 months - and which is ongoing.

And again, regarding the "warring," it takes two to tango. WikiEditor2563 (talk) 19:37, 13 November 2013 (UTC) __________________________

WikiEditor2563, why are you removing sourced, relevant text and wikilinks? [2] --NeilN talk to me 18:30, 13 November 2013 (UTC) _______________________

Note: this editor has now been indefinitely blocked. andy (talk) 22:56, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I have no particular expertise in the area but as an ever-curious reader here is what struck me about the article:

My two cents anyways. --NeilN talk to me 00:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

As far as I can see the article now has no mention of the requirements for planetary protection of Mars. Particularly, increasing evidence of possible habitable regions on present day Mars surface for microbes. This is a recent news story in Nature about the warm seasonal flows now found in equatorial regions: Water seems to flow freely on Mars - Any areas of water could be off-limits to all but the cleanest spacecraft.

Current guidelines for Planetary protection require us to keep Mars free of Earth life so that we can study it in its pristine state. This is an international requirement under the Outer Space Treaty which all space faring countries and countries with space ambitions except N. Korea have signed and nearly all other countries as well.

There is much published on planetary protection issues for rovers on Mars, as of course is an ongoing thing - there is not so much published on planetary protection for future human missions to Mars, although the issues are of course far greater for humans.

This is one article Human Missions to Mars a Challenge for Planetary Protection:Gernot Groemer

There are also general statements in some of the COSPAR documents but no detailed discussion or technical details.

I think the general assumption is that the humans would be sent to Mars only after the current exploration phase is already completed, at a point when requirements for protection can be relaxed somewhat, but there is no set criterion for the end of the exploration phase (which I personally think must surely last at least several more decades, probably longer, before we have a reasonable understanding of Mars by way of ground truth).

On the idea that perhaps it might be a major issue for human missions to address, there is this 2012 space.com article, with remarks from Cassie Conley planetary protection officer. Manned Mars Missions Could Threaten Red Planet Life - which of course is a bit out of date not mentioning the newer 2013 resuults.

Suggestion: to say that

Robert Walker (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello everybody! I'm interested in reading about the feasability of a martian space elevator, such as mentionned by the end of the Tranportation section of this article. I already found an articles about the Space Elevators on Earth and the Moon. Now I need data about the martian one. Can anybody find them and add them to the article? Thanks. 80.82.235.62 (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2015 (UTC) A Martian lost on Earth;)

In the section, Economics, there is a link to Economics of extraterrestrial resource extraction which at first sounds pertinent to colonization of Mars, but when one follows the link it leads by redirect to the asteroid mining article which is only indirectly related to Mars colonization. This link is particularly distracting because although it is attached to the words "economic problem" it does not elaborate the economic problem of the Colonization of Mars. - Fartherred (talk) 04:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Magnetosphere does nothing to UV or gamma rays, only to charged particles like beta and alpha rays. Now the sentence is misleading, but magnetosphere is good to mention in context of other radiation. I just don't have clue what is the effect size..? 91.159.81.20 (talk) 01:58, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

See more here:
Talk:Colonization of Mars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The new episode of PBS Space Time asks, "Should we colonize Venus instead of Mars?" Fine with me, so long as we stay away from Europa, and don't attempt any landings there.

Youd be forgiven for thinking the videocassette format long-dead, but it turns out that Betamax is still around. Sony is finally going to withdraw tapes from sale, bringing a 40-year story to an end. The last recorders were sold in 2002. MV [Sony; via The Verge]

A leaked Comcast memo discloses that the companys consumer data caps have nothing to do with network congestion, contrary to its public claims. The internet service provider has often complained (such as when lobbying against net neutrality) that it must impose limits on service to prevent network congestion. The argument suggests that these measures are []

LA Makerspace co-founder Tara Tiger Brown shares a project that her kid-friendly maker workshop is trying to make a reality.

Cables fray, and chargers disappear into thin air. Even if you dont need a replacement, snag a backup to store in your bag while youre on-the-go. This MagSafe 2 Power Adapter for MacBook Air is so smart that its magnetic DC connector disconnects without harm should you snag it or trip over it, and its []

Efficiency, productivity, and agility are increasingly valued career skills. Cultivate your own with this e-learning bundle from the expert instructors at eduCBA.

This tiny drone is a mighty flyer.

See original here:
Colonization: Venus better than Mars? / Boing Boing

1. INTRODUCTION

Far from being a purely theoretical science, Biology has many practical applications. This science will have a huge importance for the future of humanity. What can Biology bring to mankind? There are three main answers:

Health Biological sciences will play an important role in fighting various infectious agents (viruses, bacteria), in curing other diseases (cancer, for example) and in "repairing" wounded tissues, thus increasing peoples life expectancy.

Food Considering the rapid demographic growth, the traditional food sources will become insufficient for feeding Earths population. Biologists will have the duty to search for organisms that are more nourishing and easier to be cultivated (algae, crustaceans etc.), and also to improve the species already cultivated, in order to increase their productivity, their nutritiousness and their resistance to pests.

Space While the human demographical growth is unlimited, our planets resources are limited. Mankind will have to conquer and colonize the extraterrestrial space. We know that none of the planets in our Solar System has the natural conditions necessary to human colonization. The solution is to modify these conditions and to gradually implant terrestrial life forms on these planets, in order to create habitats for the future colonists.

This essay is regarding the latter subject.

The idea of implanting terrestrial life on other planets (a process called

This essay will treat the case of planet Mars, the closest, from all points of view, to Earth. Also, it will focus mostly on the biological aspects of terraformation.

2. MARS: PREMISES FOR TERRAFORMATION

A. Natural conditions

Mars belongs to the group of the luric planets, together with Mercury, Venus and Earth. From all the planets of the Solar System, it is situated at the shortest distance from Earth. Its diameter is slightly larger than half of our planets diameter. Its orbit is exterior to Earths orbit. The rotation period is of 24 hours and 40 minutes (a martian day is almost equal to a terrestrial one) and the duration of the revolution movement (the martian year) is 687 days. Mars has seasons, like our planet. Because the distance from the Sun is longer, Mars receives only 43% of the sunlight that reaches Earth. The gravitational force is 38% of the terrestrial one. The planet has no magnetic field and no tectonic activity. There is, instead, some volcanic activity.

The atmosphere is extremely rarefied, having a pressure of only 7.4-10

The average temperature is about -60C, but temperatures can vary between -75C and +25C, according to the latitude and season. By comparison, the average temperature on Earth is about +15C.

The quantity of ultraviolet radiations that reaches the surface of Mars is much larger than on Earth, being deadly for almost any life form.

The relief forms are inequaly distributed on the surface of the planet. The southern hemisphere has high altitudes, with many impact craters, volcanic mountains and three large depresions: Hellas, Argyre and Isidis (probably huge craters). The northern hemisphere has, predominantly, low altitudes. There are two polar caps composed of frozen water and carbon dioxide. There is no liquid water on the planets surface.

The upper layer of the martian crust, a few kilometers thick, is called regolith and is composed of rocks, dust and ice. It is, probably, porous (due to the low gravity). The entire planets surface is covered with a red dust.

The samples taken by the Mars Pathfinder mission from the surface, together with the analyses of several meteorites, of martian origin, show the following chemical composition:

Probably, the analyses must be redone for K2O and MnO2. This composition is similar to that of the terrestrial rocks, except for the iron compounds, much more abundant on Mars. In the primary rocks iron is found in its reduced form (Fe2+), and in the soil, in its oxidized form (Fe3+). The predominant minerals at the surface are haematite (Fe2O3), jarosite (KFe3(OH)6(SO4)2), goethite (FeO(OH)). It seems that the upper layer of the regolith contains oxidizing agents.

Apparently, the environmental conditions on Mars are improper to any living organisms. However, there are more and more evidence that indicate these conditions were not always the same. Most scientists think that, in the past, there was liquid water on Mars and, obviously, the temperatures were higher and the atmosphere was denser. This poses a problem: where and why most of the martian atmosphere disappeared? There are two theories. One of them says that the planet lost its atmosphere due to violent impacts with other celestial bodies (comets, asteroids). In this case the atmospheric gases were lost in space and trying to recompose the martian atmosphere would be almost impossible with our current technical means. The second theory says that the atmosphere was slowly eroded, during geological eras, by the solar wind, after the volcanic activity slowed down, causing the atmospheric gases to stop recycling. This way, most of the gases would have infiltrated, under various forms, into the martian crust. If this theory is true, there is a big chance that the planets atmosphere could be modified, allowing the implantation of life on Mars.

B. Resources for terraformation

Planet Mars has, under various forms, all the chemical elements necessary to life.

Water

The most obvious water reserves on Mars are located in the polar caps. According to some estimations, these contain around 5,000 km3 of water (equivalent to a 4 cm layer on the entire planets surface).

It seems that other water reserves exist in some stratified deposits (alternate layers of dust and ice) in the territories around the caps.

Apparently, there are, in the regolith, in the regions situated north and south of 40 latitude (North and, respectively, South), ice lenses (somehow similar to the terrestrial permafrost).

Squires and Carr (1986) estimated the total water quantity in the caps and regolith to the equivalent of a 13-100 m thick layer of liquid water on the entire planet.

Also, liquid water is supposed to exist in the lithosphere. Wittome says that the regolith, due to its porous structure, allowed water to infiltrate. This means that in the regions situated at more than 40 latitude, at a few kilometers depth, there sholud be thermal waters, at very high pressures. A recent model of the hydrological cycle on Mars (Clifford, 1993), shows that in the lower areas of the planet, there could be subterranean waters, at artesian pressures. Also, some minerals should contain water.

Carbon

It is known that the polar caps contain solid carbon dioxide. Some of this sublimates during the martian summer and solidifies in the winter, causing variations of the caps area. Initially, it was thought that most of the southern cap was made of CO2 (estimated to the equivalent of 10-100 mbar of gaseous CO2). However, recent data show that this cap is composed mostly of water.

Also, it is estimated that the regolith contains large amounts of CO2. Zent et al. mentioned the equivalent of 30-40 mbar, while other estimations indicate as much as 300 mbar. Some chemical tests showed that the martian regolith is capable of absorbing large quantities of CO2.

On Mars, carbon is also found in carbonates (of calcium, iron, magnesium etc.). It was observed the existence of layered deposits (calcium carbonate sediments). It is supposed that these are located in former lakes and evaporation basins. Such deposits were also discovered in Valles Marineris (a huge canyon system). Based on the low value of the Ca/Si ratio in the regolith, Warren (1987) says that there are large amounts of CaCO3 on Mars (there is only a little calcium in the regolith because most of it is concentrated in carbonates). According to some estimations, the carbonate reserves should contain the equivalent of 30 mbar of gaseous CO2. The presence of CO2 is extremely important for modifying the environmental conditions on Mars, as it will be shown below.

Nitrogen

Nitrogen is a vital element for every organism, being an important part of the composition of proteins, nucleic acids and other organic substances. The quantity of this element on Mars is unknown. This poses a big problem to those interested in the possibility of terraforming the planet. The atmospheric dinitrogen quantity is very small (2.7% of the atmosphere). Still it is preconized the existence of substantial amounts of nitrates in the regolith (according to some estimations, the equivalent of 300 mbar of gaseous N2), in former evaporation basins from the equatorial regions, together with the presence of underground ammonia deposits. Analyses done on martian basaltic meteorites show that these contain an amuont of nitrates and phosphates larger than the terrestrial basaltic rocks (scientists tried the experimental cultivation of some plants on soils containing martian meteoritic rocks, with spectacular results). Generally, it is accepted that there are important nitrate reserves on Mars, but their quantity is unknown.

Organic matter

Some specialists think there are some organic material deposits located at 3-40 meters below the planets surface (Bullock et al., 1994) or in the polar zones (Bada and McDonald, 1995).

In space, large amounts of organic compounds (especially hydrocarbons) are found in celestial bodies called carbonaceous chondrites (meteorites, asteroids, satellites). Still, it appears that on the planets surface there are no organic substances. This fact is probably due to the strong oxidizing agents in the upper layer of the regolith, that quickly oxidized the hydrocarbons, forming CO2. That is why, if there really is organic material on Mars, it should be found buried in the regolith. Also, the two natural satellites of the planet, Phobos and Deimos, belong to the carbonaceous chondrite class.

Recently, the Mars Express probe discovered some methane emissions of unknown origin.

Other elements

According to spectrometric analyses, sulphur is found in the martian "soil" in 10-100 times higher concentrations than on Earth. It is found in the form of sulphates (like jarosite), extremelly abundant on Mars. On Earth, large reserves of sulphur compounds are associated with volcanic activity.

Spectrometric analyses for phosphorus could not be effectuated, but it is thought that this is abundant, as the composition of martian meteorites show.

Other elements, like iron, manganese, potassium etc., exist in large quantities on Mars.

Additional chemical and mineralogical analyses are needed in order to know the exact quantities and locations of the various substances necessary to ecopoiesis.

C. Conditions necessary to life

To the proper going of metabolic activities of terrestrial organisms, envinronmental temperatures higher than 0C are required, although there are organisms that can resist for a long time at negative temperatures. It is known that during the martian summer, in the equatorial regions, temperatures can grow up to +25C, but this is not enough.

Generally the atmospreric pressure should be higher than 10 mbar, although some plants and anaerobic bacteria can withstand pressures below one millibar. The partial pressure of CO2 must exceed 0.15 mbar (on Mars, it is much higher than this limit). O2 partial pressure must be higher than 1 mbar. Many anaerobic and even aerobic microorganisms can grow in pure CO2 atmospheres. Some cyanobacteria and algae like Cyanidium sp. or Scenedesmus sp. produce, by photosynthesis, the oxygen needed for their respiration and, in the dark periods, they become anaerobic (Seckbach, 1970). It was found out that in the cyanobacterial and algal colonies grown at high CO2 concentrations will appear mutants that require larger and larger concentrations of this gas (Spalding et al., 1983; Marcus et al., 1986). This way mutants could be selectionated for colonizing Mars. Plants need, for photosynthesis, 20-210 mbar of O2 (mythochondrial enzymes need oxygen) but can be adapted to as little as la 0.1 mbar. Nitrogen fixing bacteria can begin their activity at 5-10 mbar of N2. The solar light that received by Mars is more than sufficient for photosynthesis.

For humans, requirements are much higher. The atmosphere must have a mass three times larger than the terrestrial one, in order to compensate the low gravity. The atmospheric pressure must exceed 500 mbar (on Earth it is around 1,013 mbar, at the sea level). CO2 partial pressure needs to be below 10 mbar (otherwise, it becomes toxic). O2 pressure must be between 130 and 300 mbar (too little oxygen causes hypoxia, too much, causes combustion). Additionally 300 mbar of buffer-gas are needed. This is necessary to prevent combustion, due to the presence of O2 in the atmosphere. The ideal buffer-gas is N2 (on Earth, it constitutes more than three quarters of the atmosphere), but, between certain limits, it can be replaced by He, Ar, Ne, Kr,Xe, CH4, H2O, CO, HCN, SF6.

3. ECOPOIESIS

The terraformation of a planet has two stages. The first stage was called by specialists ecopoiesis or ecosynthesis and its finality is the implantation of the first life forms on the planet and the creation of self-regulating anaerobic ecosystems. The second stage is the true terraformation and consists of creating an aerobic biosphere that will allow humans to colonize the planet.

As shown above, the main factors that prevent life implantation on Mars are too low atmospheric pressure, too low temperatures, lack of a protection against ultraviolet radiation, lack of liquid water on the planets surface. For all these problems there is only one solution: greenhouse effect.

The greenhouse effect is based on the property of certain gases (called greenhouse gases) to retain the solar heat reflected by the planets surface. The solar radiation directly heats the surface. Without greenhouse gases, a large part of the resulting heat would be lost in space. The greenhouse gases absorb it, heat the atmosphere, the atmosphere heats furthermore the planetary crust and the cycle goes on.

The best-known greenhouse gas is CO2. This constitutes most of the martian atmosphere, but it is insuficient because of the low atmospheric pressure (although it appears that, indeed, Mars is going through a warming process). Still, as shown above, CO2 is, probably, quite abundant on Mars, either as carbonic ice or as carbonate deposits.

Ecopoiesis on Mars could be realized by a human mechanical intervention that would produce a chain reaction. An artificial heating would release CO2, that, through the greenhouse effect, would release other quantities of CO2, H2O (water vapor is a greenhouse gas), maybe NH3 etc.

Several mathematical models of a greenhouse effect on Mars were done. One of them, created by McKay et al., show that an artificial temperature growth of only 4C could sustain a chain reaction, causing the southern polar cap to completely melt down (an initial 25C impulse would be needed). The release of 800 mbar CO2 in the atmosphere would bring the average temperature on the planet to 250 K (-25C), compared to the actual 213 K (-60C). Releasing 2 bar CO2 would increase the temperature to 273 K (0C), and 3 bar CO2, to 280 K. The last estimations of the southern caps composition infirm the presence of such large amounts of CO2, but the model remains valid. The sublimation of the CO2 from the polar caps would be followed by the release of this gas from the regolith (where CO2 is more abundent than in the caps). An additional 10C increase is required (Zubrin, McKay), producing a chain reaction. Other amounts of CO2 can be released from the carbonate reserves, using more aggressive methods, as shown below.

Even if McKays previsions would prove to be too optimistic, temperatures on Mars would still increase enough to allow the colonization of terrestrial organisms. The presence, in the atmpsphere, of several hundred millibars of CO2 would have many effects. First, the total atmospheric pressure would increase to acceptable values. Then, the atmospheric temperature would increase, allowing the existence (temporary or even permanent) of liquid water, at least in the equatorial regions. Finally, an ozone layer would appear and it would absorb most of the deadly radiations that reach the surface. In the upper layers of the atmosphere, under the action of ultraviolet radiation, carbon dioxide, goes through a simple splitting reaction, producing ozone.

Linda and James Graham show that all that life needs in order to be implanted on Mars is 90-300 mbar CO2 and 2 mbar O3 (for protection against radiation). These objectives are perfectly realizable.

If the theory of ecopoiesis, shown above, is rather simple, its practical realization is more problematic. Several solutions were proposed:

A. Orbital mirrors

The artificial heating of the polar caps and of the regolith could be done by placing large mirrors on the planets orbit. These would reflect the sunlight towards certain areas on the planet (especially the southern cap), triggering the greenhouse effect.

A mirror with a diameter of 20 meters was already placed in orbit around Earth in the 1980s (the "Znamia" project) in order to illuminate Russias northern territories during the polar night. It is preconized the launch, in the next future, of a mirror of 200 meters in diameter, with the same purpose. Most of the specialists say that a mirror that would heat enough the southern cap must have at least 125 kilometers in diameter (and a mass of about 200,000 tons). It would be built of aluminized mylar. The technology for building it is known, being the same as for producing the "solar sails" (that, in the future, will be used for the propulsion of spaceships). Its ideal location would be a stationary one, at the equilibrium point between the solar winds force and the planets gravitation.

Building such a mirror is not such a big problem (it would be the equivalent of Earths aluminium production for five days) but transporting it to the martian orbit is. Perhaps it should be built of small modules or replaced with many small mirrors. Using simultaneously more heating methods would greatly reduce the mirror's necessary dimensions.

B. Nuclear explosions

Using nuclear weapons to release carbon dioxide seems to be a easier solution for our current technological possibilities. Also, this would, finally, give Earths huge atomic arsenals a real utility for mankind.

Nuclear warheads could be used in two ways. First, they could be detonated at the planets surface, in the polar zones, in order to melt the caps. According to some estimations, it would be sufficient if, during four martian years (about seven terrestrial years), at the beginning of each martian spring, a nuclear warhead of 20 kilotons (thus, not a very powerful one) would be detonated in a dusty area near the southern cap, for the entire cap to melt. This would cumulate the direct effects of the explosions heat with the creation of dust storms that would cover the cap, reducing its albedo (this aspect will be discussed below). Probably, these estimations are too optimistic, but the idea is valid.

Second, subterranean nuclear explosions could be used to release greenhouse gases (CO2 and water vapor) from the carbonate deposits and from the "permafrost". Detonating nuclear warheads in nitrate deposits would release N2 and O2.

This solution is criticized for two main aspects. The first is the quantity of radiations that would appear after the explosions and that would make vast regions of the planet inhospitable to life. Yet, there are many ways of reducing the radioactive contamination. Using thermonuclear warheads (based on hydrogen fusion), that produce less radiations than fission weapons and detonating them, mostly, underground, would limit the afffected area. Also, it sould be considered the fact that terraformation would be a long process that will take, probably, tens of thousands of years. In this time, radioactivity would be greatly reduced, so that the future human colonists would not be affected. The second aspect, more problematic, is the number of nuclear warheads needed, which, according to some estimations, would be to big compared to the available atomic weapons.

C. Greenhouse gas production

Another solution is the artificial enrichment of the martian atmosphere in greenhouse gases. There are greenhouse gases much more efficient than carbon dioxide: halocarbons, ammonia, methane. Releasing these in the atmosphere in sufficient quantities would heat the planet and would sublimate the carbon dioxide, triggering the chain reaction necessary to ecopoiesis.

Halocarbons

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), responsible of destroying the ozone layer on Earth, are extremely strong greenhouse gases. It is estimated that a very small concentration of CFC, of one part in a million, would be enough to heat the atmosphere with 60C.

Yet, they are useless on Mars, for two reasons. First, they would destroy the ozone layer, the only defense against radiations. Second, ultraviolet radiations photolise CFC. The life of CFC would be very short (estimations indicate something between a few days and several tens of years) and they should be produced continously.

Releasing these gases in the martian atmosphere would mean their production in situ and, thus, the existence on Mars of the necessary industrial instalations. The main problem is finding raw materials. Fluorine can be extracted from minerals like apatite and fluorite and then, in reaction with atmospheric CO2 would form PFC. It was calculated that, in order to release a quantity of halocarbons sufficient for raising the temperature by 5C, an energy of around 1,315 MW is needed, equal to that produced by an ordinary nuclear power plant (Zubrin, McKay).

Ammonia

Ammonia is a strong greenhouse gas. It is unlikely that it could be produced, in short time and in sufficient quantities, on Mars. It could be "imported" from other regions of the Solar System. Comets and some asteroids contain large amounts of ammonia.

Deviating these celestial bodies towards Mars would be a problem. Although not far from the planets orbit there is a large asteroid belt, it would be easier that asteroids containing NH3 to be brought from the regions beyond Pluto, because their revolution speed is lower and they are easier to deviate. Some of the ammonia that they contain could be used for propulsion. It was calculated that for transporting an asteroid of 10 billion tons (2.6 kilometers in diameter) constituted entirely of NH3 and situated at a distance of 12 astronomical units, four 5,000 MW thermonuclear propellers (tested since the 1960s) would be enough. These would heat the asteroid, sublimating 8% of the ammonia quantity and using it for propulsion.

The transport would take ten years and would increase the temperature on Mars by 3C. In order to avoid causing great damage to the planet, the asteroid should not be crashed directly into the planets surface, but aerobraked.

Yet, the practical realisation of such transports would be quite difficult at the current technological level. Also, it is extermely improbable that an asteroid would be formed entirely of ammonia. Known asteroids and comets do not contain more than 10% ammonia.

Methane

Methane can be, in theory, "imported" from the Solar System, just like ammonia.

Finding a hydrogen source for this reaction would be problematic.

D. Using thermal waters

As shown above, the martian regolith is porous, due to the low gravitational force and, thus, permeable to water. This caused liquid water (which in the past was, probably, abundant on Mars) to infiltrate at various depths in the planets crust. Water temperature and pressure are high at great depths. Wittome says that at 6 km depth there should be water reserves at 300C. Also, colder water should exist at one kilometer depths, in the regions beyond 40 of latitude, especially in the Tharsis zone and, maybe, in Valles Marineris. If Cliffords model was correct, the lowlands (mostly in the northern hemisphere) could have accesible subterranean waters.

In order to exploit these water reserves, drilling is required. Thermal waters could be used in many ways. They could be transported by pipelines to the ice deposits in the regolith contributing to their melting and releasing CO2. Acidified thermal waters could be used for dissolving carbonate deposits, forming CO2, and nitrate deposits, forming N2 and O2.

Due to its enormous pressure, water could be let to flush in the atmosphere, vaporizing itself (because of its high temperature and low atmospheric pressure) and coming back at the surface as snow. Due to impurities contained by subterranean water, this snow would have a darker colour and, if it falls on the polar caps, it would help reducing their albedo and melting them.

Thermal waters could be used for producing the electricity needed by other installations necessary to ecopoiesis (drills, PFC factories etc.).

Finally, if thermal waters were directed to the bottom of a crater or of a depression in the crust, a lake would appear. These lakes would be covered by an ice crust and, below it, liquid water. If such lakes were located in the equatorial regions, it would be possible that, during the summer, they would not be frozen. In these lakes, living organisms could be introduced, preparing them for the moment when the natural conditions at the surface would be suitable to life. There are cyanobacteria and unicellular algae that can grow and photosynthesize even under thin ice crusts. Various chemosynthesizing organisms could grow in these lakes. The existence of artificial thermal springs would favorize the growth of microorganisms, such as methanogen bacteria, that prefere this kind of habitats and that would produce methane, a strong greenhouse gas.

The main problem for exploiting thermal waters is that of transporting to Mars and keeping in function installations like drills, pipelines, power generators etc. There are quite many such devices needed for obtaining significant results. Knowing the exact location of the subterranean water reserves is also necessary.

E. Reducing the albedo

The word "albedo" means the amount of light reflected by a certain body. A low albedo means that the body absorbs more solar radiation and, thus, it heats more. The martian ice caps reflect much solar light. If their surface was covered with darker substances, their albedo would decrease and the ice would heat, allowing the carbon dioxide to sublimate.

The easiest way of doing so is by creating dust storms. As shown above, the planets surface is covered by a red dust (it is red because of the iron oxides). The red dust would cover areas of the polar caps, helping them to melt.

Furthermore, dust storms would have another importance for ecopoiesis. It was observed that the distribution of the small ozone quantity in the martian atmosphere varies with the season and latitude (Lindner, 1988). These variations can be as large as 40%. During the first stages of ecosynthesis, until a sufficiently thick ozone layer would be formed, these variations would let entire regions of the planet without protection against ultraviolet radiations. Dust storms, not only would help the chemical process of forming ozone, but would absorb themselves part of the radiations.

As shown above, reducing the albedo could also be done with the "dirty" snow produced by using thermal waters.

Another possibility would be reducing the general albedo of the planet. This way, Mars would absorb more solar radiations and the whole atmosphere would become warmer. This could be done by covering large areas of the martian surface with dark substances (such as hydrocarbons). As shown above, it is possible that, at various depths in the regolith, hydrocarbons would be found. However, locating and extracting them would pose big technical problems. Furthermore, their quantity is unknown and neither their lifespan in the oxidizing environment at the regoliths surface.

It would be more economical to use the planets natural satellites. These have relatively small dimensions (they are probably former asteroids) and belong to the carbonaceous chondrites class, containing ice and black rocks, rich in hydrocarbons. Temperature at their surface is around 313 K (40C). Phobos has 22 kilometers in diameter. Its revolution speed around the planet is very high. Its orbit is continously closening to the planet and, in the far future, it will crash into Mars. Deimos has only 12.6 kilometers in diameter and a much lower revolution speed. Deviating and disintegrating these satellites in the martian atmosphere, using powerful nuclear explosions, would cover large territories with dark organic material. The impact of large satellite fragments (that, as shown above, have a high temperature) with the planets surface would release certain amounts of CO2 from the regolith, ausing, this way, a slight global warming.

The resulting organic material could become food for heterotrophic microorganisms, either under this form, either as intermediary products resulted after their oxidation by the regolith (salts of the acetic, oxalic, benzenocarboxilic acids etc.).

Pure carbon (black) can be obtained by reacting carbon dioxide with hydrogen, using, as catalyzers, iron, rubidium etc.:

Again, the problem is finding a hydrogen source.

These would be the main solutions for modifying the natural conditions on Mars. Of course, many other ones were proposed. For example, building small human colonies (isolated from the environment) and developing industrial activities capable of realising ecopoiesis. These colonies would also have artificial biospheres where organisms could be prepared for colonizing the planet. However this would take a long time and would pose technical problems.

Another idea would be building satellites that would receive solar energy and send it to the polar caps under another form (laser, microwaves).

As one could observe, for each of the solutions shown above, the technical requirements are relatively large. They would be reduced by using more, or even all of these methods, simultaneously. This way, the orbital mirrors needed would be smaller, so as the number of the nuclear warheads, of the drilling installations, or the amount of artificially produced greenhouse gases.

When can ecopoiesis start? As soon as possible, strictly depending of the technical means. When it would be over? There are various estimations. Generally, it is thought that one hundred years, or even less, would be enough for the first anaerobic ecosystems to be installed on Mars. After introducing the first organisms, the global warming due to human intervention, would continue until the martian atmosphere would have an acceptable pressure and temperature for superior organisms, including humans.

The rest is here:
Some Ideas Regarding the Biological Colonization of The ...

(Article by Richard Heidmann, English translation by Pierre Brisson)

In the second half of 2014, we ventured into the perilous exercise of a Mars Colonization Transport (MCT) study, on the basis of the few hints that SpaceX released about its intent (study published (French) on planete-mars.com, the APM website). The major point among the few available data, was a definition of the launcher then apparently considered, a three core Falcon Super Heavy, reusable, with cores of 10 m in diameter each, equipped with 9 Raptor engines of 450 tons unit thrust and capable (we checked) of putting 300 tons into low earth orbit (LEO). This performance level allows sending about 100 tons towards Mars and, ultimately, if we assume that the ship is a fully reusable shuttle, to land on the surface of Mars a payload of a little less than 20 tons.

These results led to a conclusion of inconsistency with the very objective assigned by Elon Musk, of landing a payload of 100 tons. But the announced launcher looked already such a daring size that one could wonder whether the scope of the project should not, by necessity, be scaled down.

The statements of Elon Musk at the beginning of this year 2015 show that this is not the case, at least for the time being:

While remaining aware of the limits of the exercise, we wondered about the consequences of these new guidelines, trying to figure out the concept to which they could lead. The result we get leads to very odd proportions, up to the point that we may wonder whether other innovations should not be introduced for the sake of making the project more realistic.

Table of Contents

1. Single core MCT launcher Concept 1.1. The shuttle 1.2. Single core launcher 2. Multi core MCT launcher Concept 2.1. The shuttle 2.1.1.Classic return option 2.1.2.Immediate return option 2.2.Multi core launcher Conclusion

Read this article:
What Could the Mars Colonization Transport (MCT) SpaceX ...