Mars declared unsafe for humans to live as scientists explain why it’d never work

Despite the findings, NASA is still hoping to send humans to Mars.

Elon’s vision of a Martian colony. It’s a good recruiting poster, but the reality may mean living like Morlocks

The idea of living on Mars has peaked the interest of astronomers for many a year, but it may not be as feasible as we all think. After landing robots on the red planet with any hiccups, the next step for NASA is to get actual people on Mars. The space agency has said in the past that Mars is ‘one of the only other places we know where life may have existed in the solar system’. As a result, further exploration on the planet could help offer insights to the past and future of planet Earth.

So when are NASA hoping to get folks on Mars? Well, the space agency has suggested the tech could propel humans to the planet as early as the 2030s. But that doesn’t mean a long-term life on Mars is plausible or even possible.

Last year, researchers combined studies from the likes of UCLA, MIT, Moscow’s Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, and GFZ Potsdam to look into the potential impacts of life on the red planet. Researchers sought to answer two questions: one focused on the impact of particle radiation and whether it would pose too grave a threat to human life, and the second about whether the timing of a mission to Mars could protect astronauts and the spacecraft from radiation.

On the hunt for answers, scientists used geophysical models of particle radiation for a solar cycle and models of how radiation could affect both human passengers and a spacecraft. Following the study, which was published in the Advancing Earth and Science Journal, the researchers found that it would not possible for humans to stay on Mars long-term. They found that human exposure to radiation threats, including particle radiation from the Sun, distant stars, and galaxies, would exceed safe levels after four years on the planet. The scientists did determine that the spacecraft used to travel to Mars should provide enough protection for the trip to and from the planet – but if the material used to build the spacecraft is too thick, then it could actually increase the amount of secondary radiation.

Researchers also claimed the best time to leave Earth would be when the solar activity is at its peak and the most dangerous particles are deflected, thus shielding the astronauts from the worst of it. “We estimate that a potential mission to Mars should not exceed approximately four years,” the researchers explained. “This study shows that space radiation imposes strict limitations and presents technological difficulties for the human mission to Mars, such a mission is still viable.” In summary, there’s every possibility we may see humans on Mars in the coming years, but living there? Well, that’s a different story.

https://www.unilad.com/technology/space/mars-nasa-humans-live-safe-242588-20241024

Comment: I wonder how much thought Elon is putting into this question. A vast, self-sustaining research station manned by people serving a three year tour of duty is one thing, but a self-sustaining, permanent city of a million inhabitants is something totally different.

A few years ago Elon described his Mars colony in pretty pollyannaish terms. “As for the city itself, it will have “an outdoorsy, fun atmosphere,” Musk told Popular Mechanics in February 2019. So “you’d probably want to have some faceted glass dome, with a park, so you can walk around without a [space] suit.” 

Elon better think about moving his Boring Company to Mars first and build a labyrinth of Morlock tunnels..

TTG

https://qz.com/elon-musk-spacex-mars-colony-domes-starship-tesla-1851587648

https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/space-radiation-is-risky-business-for-the-human-body/

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9818606

This entry was posted in Mars, Space, TTG. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Mars declared unsafe for humans to live as scientists explain why it’d never work

  1. Yeah, Right says:

    I find is difficult to believe that the protective effect of nitrogen, oxygen, and not much else is impossible to replicate with a very thin layer of aluminum and/or chrome.

    Sure, I’m not a astrophysicist but, then again, neither was the collision of gravity, photosynthesis and happenstance that conspired to create the stuff that we call “air”.

    • elkern says:

      Earth’s atmosphere – specifically Ozone (O3) in the stratosphere/troposphere? – protects us from UV radiation (unless we screw it up again), but not “particle radiation”. Earth’s Magnetic Field handles that job, deflecting charged particles (mostly electrons & protons) toward the poles, with the lovely bonus of creating Auroras.

      That Magnetic Field is driven by Earth’s iron core, which is much bigger than Mars’ core. Earth’s core is still hot, and it rotates at a different velocity than the rest of the planet, but I’m not sure how that affects the magnetic field.

      Mars is smaller and further from the Sun, so it cooled down much faster than Earth has – no more liquid rock or iron in there, it all froze up millions of years ago.

      Also, IIRC, Mars’ weak Mag Field has allowed the Solar Wind to just blow a lot of gas away, leaving it with a surprisingly thin atmosphere. If we tried to Terraform Mars by adding (a LOT of) N2 and O2 to its atmosphere, most of it would just get blown away again unless we somehow managed to get a decent Mag Field running first.

  2. voislav says:

    With Mars you have the worst of both worlds. High radiation environment due to weak magnetosphere means everything needs to be buried. But you also have atmosphere with strong storms that destroy anything deployed on the surface, like launch and transport vehicles. So you are sitting inside a gravity well, imposing significant penalties, with no benefits.

    It’s better to skip straight to the asteroid belt, weak gravity allows fuel efficient maneuvering, mining is easier and there is strong evidence that some of these have significant water deposits. Millions of people can be housed by larger asteroids, so it’s not a space issue.

    Musk has good business sense but his technical expertise is way overblown and his massive ego won’t let him take a back seat and listen to people that know better. He is obsessed with colonizing Mars but it has as much of a chance of happening as Tesla’s having a fully functional self driving in the next 10 years. I just hope his bullshit doesn’t kill people on Mars the same way Tesla has been on Earth.

    • elkern says:

      Strongly agree, with one quibble: Mars has high-speed winds, but the atmosphere is so thin (roughly 5% of what we get here at sea level?) that it can’t really generate “strong” storms.

      Those winds can pick up a lot of dust, but that “dust” is generally really tiny particles, not big enough to break anything made of serious metal. IIRC, the instruments we’ve dropped there mostly stop working when the solar panels get clogged up with dust, not because anything gets smashed or tipped over.

  3. Jim. says:

    TTG…You Are Right..Elon is Writing Science Fiction Now….Like Werner Von Brauns Science Fiction Story about Star ships to Mars …The Main character was President Elon..of Mars…Science Fiction.He should Save His Money…Save Earth..Biden seems to have a Problem To Solve…A Ukraine Problem..Speaking of Rockets..Russia,,,and
    The Eastern Front..
    Jim

  4. leith says:

    Are they saying Arthur C Clarke’s terraforming of Mars will never happen?

    I disagree. There are some brainstorms out there on how to give Mars a magnetosphere to protect against dangerous radiation and solar winds. Some that are possible with present-day technology. Very expensive though. Won’t happen in our lifetimes. But never say never. Your great-grandchildren’s grandchildren might live to see Barsoom’s Kaolian Forest.

    • TTG says:

      leith,

      What I find odd about all the talk of terraforming Mars into something livable, is that it would be much easier to terraform Earth into a more habitable and productive habitat. When terraforming technology becomes possible on a planetary scale, we would surely create a paradise here before we try it on another planet.

      • leith says:

        TTG –

        Makes sense in theory. Good luck with the politics on that.

      • Stefan says:

        It is people like Elon’s average supporter that will never allow earth to be made into some sort of semblance of something more habitable and productive. They yearn for some other planet to destroy eventually.

      • elkern says:

        Huh, “Terraforming” Earth seems both counter-intuitive and dangerous. I’d rather see us just back off on the willy-nilly “de-Terraforming” we’ve been doing recently. We’ve already paved too much of the Paradise bequeathed to us across a billion years of hard work by previous generations of our various Cousins!

    • Fred says:

      Will they have to fight Sith’s with cold steel? Damage those mad scientists always messing with the gene pool.

  5. elkern says:

    I concur with leith’s “never say never”, but also with the warning that it will likely take many generations before we are ready to do anything on that scale.

    I actually agree with the Crazy Rich Guys – that “we” *should* start thinking and talking about expanding the boundaries of [known] Life beyond our beautiful Big Blue Marble.

    IMO, the best – and most doable – first step should be to build a *lot* of telescopes on the far side of the Moon, to get a better picture of the most likely threats: all those rocks wandering around the neighborhood which might cause some real trouble if they decide to drop in for a chat. Hey, it’s happened before, and it’s gonna happen again – just a matter of *when*.

    Voislav (above) is probably right about not attempting to terraform Mars until (long) after we learn to manage hollowed-out Asteroids, and again, colonizing the Moon would be a relatively safe & cost-effective first step.

    But Luna doesn’t seem to have a lot of highly valuable material resources, so there’s no financial incentive to invest there. Sadly, that’s why Chinese will likely be the main language spoken there a century from now.

  6. John says:

    At this pace we will not establish a Mars colony in the next 200 years.
    If we are really serious about this, we need to get going.
    Instead of planning every little detail of an “outdoorsy, fun atmosphere city” that can house many thousands, we need to start small and build up.

    – develop robust, redundant modules for power supply, life support, engineering etc
    – simultaneously find a reliable and cheap way to start sending these modules to Mars
    – plan for small living modules that you can easily install with crew quarters underground
    – start building a support station in orbit

    Start “small” and build from there. This is too much of a task for one man or even one superpower.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *