By Shreyan SatheeshThe Mars colony has become one of the most well-known ideas for the economic use of the planet. This scheme, spurred on by the onset of privatized companies such as SpaceX and Blue Origin, aims to create a working, economically viable colony on Mars. “Why Mars?” one may ask. Some scientists such as Douglas W. Gage, author for the Washington Journal of Academic Sciences, as well as economists would reply with a multitude of answers, some of which include: the proximity of Mars to Earth, the presences of precious metals such as traces of Magnesium and Titanium, and the availability of Earth’s elements such as nitrogen, which makes the possibility of agriculture growth more feasible. Also with the invention of the reusable rocket, such as SpaceX’s Starship, projected to bring down prices by 66 percent, the economic possibility of interplanetary trade opens up, which further makes the case for the Mars colony. This perspective seems to imply that Mars is not very dissimilar to Earth and the modifications needed to adjust the planet to our needs are minute and negligible. It is obviously coming from a pro Mars colony point of view, but somewhat surprisingly this is the view that most economists take on the issue. Many seem to see the viability and economic potential on Mars and believe the best way to harness it is to create a functioning economic colony on the planet.
On the other hand, many people, mainly ecologists and mechanical scientists, believe that the Mars colony is not as economically viable and in the process harms the spatial environment of the planet. For the planet of Mars to fit the needs of its human colonists, according to people like engineer and researcher Kim Drexler, would require the use of terraforming. This practice would include the artificial addition of “heat trapping greenhouse gases” to create an atmosphere, the reduction of natural carbon dioxide levels, and eventually the diminishing of the red look of mars due to the mining of iron reserves for both economic and space clearing purposes (1). Also many engineers say that the trip alone would cost trillions of dollars from the infrastructure of the space ships, to the fuel and energy needs of both the transportation unit and the residents of the colony, and finally to the technological advancements needed to stay in touch with the colonists. This side of the argument takes a more fundamentalist sighted perspective on things, taking the environmental implications and the economic reality into massive consideration. Those who have been long time patrons of the space community, such as Buzz Aldrin, seem to often take this side of the issue and actively demote the idea of a spatial community and the privatization of Space itself. The Mars colony is one of the most ambitious designs in modern history, but regardless the complexity of the pros and cons of the developmental feat is still widely contested.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
ABOUTSubmit your work to be considered for publication in the Newly Created SNHS Newspaper! CategoriesOuter Space History Biology
|