Down and Out on Mars and Venus

[Eotenses]

There are perchlorates in the Martian soil that are toxic to most plants, animals, and even bacterial life-and also can be a very important source of oxygen in the future. Additionally many plants can survive and extract these perchlorates-however becoming infected in the process. There are also bacteria that can survive off of perchlorates, but I personally do not welcome the idea of having a handful of highly-evolved terran bacteria molding mars over.

In short, the soil is poisonous to most life and poses a threat to permanent habitation of the planet and terraforming efforts.

Bluegreen algea can survive but they purify it in their bodyapparently

Thing about that is how algae typically needs oxygen and water, neither of which Mars can permanently provide or retain for an extended period at its current state.

[Luziyca]

Terraforming Mars doesn't seem like a great idea, not because of the technological challenges, but because I reckon most people who are going to colonize Mars want Mars to be the way Mars is. Maybe we can have a little biosphere habitat so we can survive, as a treat, but terraforming the entirety of Mars just seems like a bad idea, especially because it'll probably fuck over the microbial life that could exist on Mars.

[Eotenses]

Terraforming Mars doesn't seem like a great idea, not because of the technological challenges, but because I reckon most people who are going to colonize Mars want Mars to be the way Mars is. Maybe we can have a little biosphere habitat so we can survive, as a treat, but terraforming the entirety of Mars just seems like a bad idea, especially because it'll probably fuck over the microbial life that could exist on Mars.

as a treat

[Nakena]

O'Neil Cylinders are probably more useful. Also Phobos and Deimos could be colonized.

And by connected with teleporters.

[Eotenses]

O'Neil Cylinders are probably more useful. Also Phobos and Deimos could be colonized.

And by connected with teleporters.

Moon teleporters? go on...

[Nobel Hobos 2]

First you have to create an artificial magnetosphere to protect Mars from atmospheric loss and reduce solar radiation at the surface. The early Martian magnetosphere was sufficiently strong enough to protect the planet for at least some length of time; why it stopped is a total mystery but it's suspected major impact events might have had something to do with it. In any case, there was an extended period in which a water cycle existed on the planet along with a sufficiently dense and effective atmosphere to keep temperatures above freezing so it is possible.

I was under the impression it took millions of years for Mars to lose its atmosphere, and so even without a magnetosphere a practical atmosphere would last long enough for our purposes.

Even if that's wrong, replenishing the atmosphere continuously would I think come at lesser energy cost than maintaining an artificial magnetic field. That's going to be hugely expensive isn't it?

Thawing the CO2 ice caps with mirrors would release enough CO2 to start a positive feedback loop that could permit liquid water to be stable on the surface, although the atmosphere itself would need to be heavily modified to increase the amount of nitrogen and oxygen. Maybe terraforming Venus at the same time wouldn't be a bad idea in that regard.

Again, it's something I've heard. There's a lot of incompletely oxidized "rust" in the Martian soil that would use up oxygen as fast as it could be produced.

Shipping gasses from Venus would be, again, expensive.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

O'Neil Cylinders are probably more useful. Also Phobos and Deimos could be colonized.

And by connected with teleporters.

Shh don't tell them about the teleporters

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Bluegreen algea can survive but they purify it in their bodyapparently

Thing about that is how algae typically needs oxygen and water, neither of which Mars can permanently provide or retain for an extended period at its current state.

First link I found says algae need carbon dioxide rather than oxygen. Which is good because the first new atmosphere is going to be heavy on CO2 (people wouldn't be able to breathe it) and I have reason to believe no oxygen.

I see the role of algae to make oxygen, possibly fuel etc but not food for humans because for quite a while there won't be any. People rightly would prefer to live in a desert on Earth, or Antarctica, than on a partly terraformed Mars.

[Vetalia]

I was under the impression it took millions of years for Mars to lose its atmosphere, and so even without a magnetosphere a practical atmosphere would last long enough for our purposes.

Even if that's wrong, replenishing the atmosphere continuously would I think come at lesser energy cost than maintaining an artificial magnetic field. That's going to be hugely expensive isn't it?

It probably took billions of years, since the rate of atmospheric depletion would slow over time; there is evidence of outflow channels as recently as 20-30 million years ago which suggests the possibility the atmosphere was above the triple point in many places until very recently. Now, the kind of thick atmosphere that supported a water cycle that created the Noachian/early-Hesperian valley networks lasted for a much shorter period, around a billion years at most.

I recall reading an artificial magnetosphere wouldn't really be that costly or difficult, (relatively speaking), you would just need to put a strong enough magnetic dipole in orbit at the L1 point to keep the planet shielded. Once operational the costs to keep it up and running should be pretty minimal. The more important element of having a magnetosphere is shielding the planet from solar radiation, which is what makes Mars so deadly to life in its current state. Something like the first meter of soil and rock is pretty much continually sterilized due to the sheer amount of radiation hitting the planet.

Again, it's something I've heard. There's a lot of incompletely oxidized "rust" in the Martian soil that would use up oxygen as fast as it could be produced.

Shipping gasses from Venus would be, again, expensive.

I think you would need to introduce photosynthesizing organisms at that point along with an active water cycle in order to maintain any level of oxygen, but another concern is the lack of plate tectonics and active volcanism, which offset a lot of the "rust" formation on Earth and provided additional gases to the early atmosphere. And on top of that you would have to deal with Mars' lower gravity, which means a lot more atmosphere will inevitably be lost to space simply due to its lower escape velocity.

Really, Venus is the more promising target for terraforming than Mars and it also had a much longer period of habitability prior to its evolution into the furnace it is today.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Create giant laser to help in moving comets around for water. Achieve atmosphere goals. Settle planet. Establish governments. Promptly turn laser into death ray weapon. The makings for a great literary epic.

“The Martian Death Ray Saga”.

[Bombadil]

Attach two little rockets and shift it closer to the Earth's orbit.

I simply do not know what scientists are doing with their time given they can't come up with simple solutions like this, probably conjuring up climate change to get more money or something.

[Galloism]

Attach two little rockets and shift it closer to the Earth's orbit.

I simply do not know what scientists are doing with their time given they can't come up with simple solutions like this, probably conjuring up climate change to get more money or something.

Given we would need more than one comet (or a really really big one), a space based death ray is really a more practical long term solution.

Also, it can be used for asteroid defense.

And teaching tinpot dictators a valuable physics lesson.

[Bombadil]

Attach two little rockets and shift it closer to the Earth's orbit.

I simply do not know what scientists are doing with their time given they can't come up with simple solutions like this, probably conjuring up climate change to get more money or something.

Given we would need more than one comet (or a really really big one), a space based death ray is really a more practical long term solution.

Also, it can be used for asteroid defense.

And teaching tinpot dictators a valuable physics lesson.

Honestly, you and your fixation with planet destroying space based death rays, haven't you had enough blown up by now to reconsider, the insurance costs alone must be crippling you.

Little space rockets have a far less 'universe dictatorship' feel to them.

[Unstoppable Empire of Doom]

Why not make both sustainable? Why shot ourselves in the foot and say we must live on Earth or fuck it over to live on Mars?

I never understood that. Seems the #1 retort to space exploration and colonization is "explore the oceans, and if your destroying earth why destroy mars!" Which is about as logical as telling someone who wants to buy a second home "explore your crawlspace, and if you're burning down your house why burn down a cottage!". I'm always left with some serious confusion. It's like they have had an entirely separate conversation. I'm not pro destroying earth, nor am I against exploring the oceans. I simply think eventual colonization of the solar system would be a good idea. Since there is no guarantee we can do this in a century, let's not procrastinate. It's not like everytime we launch a rocket all scuba divers have to stay out of the water until it comes back.

[Galloism]

Given we would need more than one comet (or a really really big one), a space based death ray is really a more practical long term solution.

Also, it can be used for asteroid defense.

And teaching tinpot dictators a valuable physics lesson.

Honestly, you and your fixation with planet destroying space based death rays, haven't you had enough blown up by now to reconsider, the insurance costs alone must be crippling you.

Little space rockets have a far less 'universe dictatorship' feel to them.

Unironically though, the laser is both a better idea and a cheaper one. If a rocket goes bad, it could be months or years before we can get a replacement positioned right, whereas if the giant laser goes down we could fix it in a few days or weeks, and start getting our path on track again.

Also, you say “universe dictatorship” like it’s a bad thing.

[Neanderthaland]

Bring Jupiter in closer.

Then all of us terrestrial planets can be its moons.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

So magnetospheres - how do they work?

[Vivolkha]

A magnetosphere isn't really needed but it would not be that expensive either if it is set at a Lagrangian point.

The orbits of the different planets aren't nearly as stable as you would think, moving any of them from their current positions (especially Jupiter) would be disastrous. Regardless, one of the main points of Mars is precisely its position. Venus is barely inside the habitable zone or flat out outside of it, and harder to terraform than Mars (a lot of gas would need to be removed, which is more difficult than just adding it from another source. Current surface pressure in Venus is >90 atm, and humans can not survive pressures above 62 atm at all. With an Earth-like atmosphere, upper limits are at 4 atm - above that nitrogen becomes toxic - and 6 atm - above that oxigen itself is toxic). Being further away from the Sun it will remain in the habitable zone for much longer than Earth, let alone Venus, and we would need much less protection from radiation from an ozone layer.

Keep in mind that Mars's atmosphere is already mostly CO2. If we want to increase surface pressure, the best way would be to add nitrogen.

[Sarderia]

Bring Jupiter in closer.

Then all of us terrestrial planets can be its moons.

Or sucked straightforward to its impending doom inside the Jupiter's windy and gaseous hell. Or get bombarded by its rings and asteroids.

[Novus America]

I think we should actually look more at Venus.
It would probably be easier to terraform.

Basically you need to reduce the carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide to a reasonable level.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Venus

It is more suitable in terms of distance to the sun and size than Mars.

[Vivolkha]

Bring Jupiter in closer.

Then all of us terrestrial planets can be its moons.

Or sucked straightforward to its impending doom inside the Jupiter's windy and gaseous hell. Or get bombarded by its rings and asteroids.

Or even worse, Jupiter sends Mercury or Venus crashing towards Earth. No joke, it is definitely possible in such scenario (and even in the far future but Earth will not be habitable by then so who cares).

I think we should actually look more at Venus.
It would probably be easier to terraform.

Basically you need to reduce the carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide to a reasonable level.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Venus

It is more suitable in terms of distance to the sun and size than Mars.

Isn't removing the atmosphere harder than actually adding material to it? Also, Venus might be closer to Earth but broadly speaking being closer to the Sun is in a much worse position for habitability purposes.

[Sarderia]

Or sucked straightforward to its impending doom inside the Jupiter's windy and gaseous hell. Or get bombarded by its rings and asteroids.

Or even worse, Jupiter sends Mercury or Venus crashing towards Earth. No joke, it is definitely possible in such scenario (and even in the far future but Earth will not be habitable by then so who cares).

I think we should actually look more at Venus.
It would probably be easier to terraform.

Basically you need to reduce the carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide to a reasonable level.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Venus

It is more suitable in terms of distance to the sun and size than Mars.

Isn't removing the atmosphere harder than actually adding material to it? Also, Venus might be closer to Earth but broadly speaking being closer to the Sun is in a much worse position for habitability purposes.

Hey, at least we got to live on the Moon. Since Earth is technically a moon.

[Novus America]

Or sucked straightforward to its impending doom inside the Jupiter's windy and gaseous hell. Or get bombarded by its rings and asteroids.

Or even worse, Jupiter sends Mercury or Venus crashing towards Earth. No joke, it is definitely possible in such scenario (and even in the far future but Earth will not be habitable by then so who cares).

I think we should actually look more at Venus.
It would probably be easier to terraform.

Basically you need to reduce the carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide to a reasonable level.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Venus

It is more suitable in terms of distance to the sun and size than Mars.

Isn't removing the atmosphere harder than actually adding material to it? Also, Venus might be closer to Earth but broadly speaking being closer to the Sun is in a much worse position for habitability purposes.

Well you would not necessarily have to remove the whole atmosphere, just clean it.
Which is the good part, you do not have to build a whole new atmosphere.

And Venus is not so close to the sun as to be a problem, if not for the excessive carbon and sulfur levels, surface temperatures would be manageable.

It does not have the low gravity problems and being too cold that Mars does.

[DACOROMANIA]

We could build a massive magnetic field in front of Mars (i.e. closer to the Sun) and leave Mars in the magnetotail, allowing Mars to have less radiation and solar wind stripping than even Earth.

That won't work so well. Earthlings are not so far advanced to keep a long term operational space machine at such size even at least for few centuries to last long in space. The magnetic field should exist on the planet, not elsewhere. If you want to build it, then build it on the planet at its poles. Sure, you'll need solar panels for energy and connections between poles through 2 significant cables or tunnels across the planet, but it's cheaper and safer than a cosmic rain of meteorites.

Mars. It's a planet, it's quite big (surface area nearly the same as Earth's land), and as it is now it is very hostile to human life. If we're going to talk terraforming, understand that it's a big job.

Mars has a negligible magnetic field. Earth's strong magnetic field protects us from some of the sun's radiation, but more importantly (in the long term) our magnetic field protects us from having our atmosphere stripped away by solar wind. Mars once had an atmosphere, despite its smaller mass, and some theories have it that Mars had a magnetic field to protect that atmosphere. I tend more towards the theory that the Martian magnetic field never was enough and it just ran out of gas.

Giving Mars a magnetic field and waiting for it to capture its own atmosphere, doesn't seem like a practical course to me. But a magnetic field would be fantastic, if you can think of a way. The next section deals with ways of providing an atmosphere, and atmosphere itself protects against solar radiation. The added protection of a magnetic field would be bonanza.

Okay, atmosphere. I propose to intercept comets and crash them into Mars. Comets are mostly water.

An atmosphere of water vapour would be a great start. Wait you say, Mars is far too cold for that. Well actually. If you put enough ice on the surface it would sublimate, creating an atmosphere which captures and retains heat (water vapor is a greenhouse gas) which would melt the ice around the equator and evaporate some of it. With feedback like that, we'd have an atmosphere of water vapour in no time. Say a few decades.

Then solar radiation beats up on the water molecules, creating hydrogen and oxygen. Hydrogen is far more mobile and escapes the planet's gravity more easily than oxygen does (though even oxygen escapes more easily than H2O) and we have an unbreathable atmosphere with some oxygen and some oxides.

We have nowhere near made Mars habitable for humans, though. Mars is covered in reactive minerals. The available oxygen is going to get used up, for centuries, no matter how many comets we crash into it. In fact, we can't go too far with adding water that way or we'll make a deep atmosphere with clouds (like Venus has) and solar degradation won't do much to it.

Ideally we would add pure oxygen but I don't see where we would get that. Oxygen on earth is a product of life, it's scarce to us. While extracting oxygen (eg from water in Mars orbit) would take too much energy.

Is the terraforming of Mars a century out of our grasp? Or is there some clever way I haven't thought of?

With such a thin atmosphere that is nearly if not almost impossible. You can take enough hydrogen from our Solar system more than you think, from the gas giant planet (if you're lucky to not fall within its gravity trap). But you done nothing if all that water vaporize out in space due to the lack of gravity.

I made a simulation on how Mars was at the beginning, a far long time ago when it was habitable such as Earth.
Do you know of that massive crater at Hellas planitia? Open a simulator program, put the planet Mars and add a moon at the size of that Hellas crater. The first results can be impressive for the growth of a planet's gravity at the size of Mars.

I show you the results of my simulator program (Ancient Mars = 1 continent and 1 ocean):

If still hard to believe, then look at the moons of a gas giant within our solar system. Due to a high gravity force those moons are actively hot inside their cores. For example, one of those moons has ice at surface but liquid water deep inside.

The case of Mars is that its core is cooling a bit every day, day after day.
Building somehow a moon at a significant size, I mean larger than the 2 asteroids orbiting Mars, this will help a lot the core of Mars to warm up again. With a more active core, the planetary magnetic field of Mars will increase along with its gravity.

It shouldn't be so hard to create a new moon for Mars, just gather some minor asteroids to form the basic core of the future moon at the start, at a certain distance from Mars, then some other asteroids over them and try make them to merge, but not before to establish an orbital direction around the planet.
You'll need to make it in 10 steps, so don't put the tiny new moon too close to Mars because the mutual gravity should grow slowly step by step. While the moon grows in size it will have an invisible but significant impact in gravity. First, the core should warm up again, then gradually the gravity and magnetic field should improve a bit and as a result we should have volcanic activity on Mars. Then this activity may grow a bit the temperature on the surface. After this you'll need water to clean the atmosphere while the volcanic activity increases on the planet to be sure that it won't become a 2nd Venus. And be sure that all these planetary effects won't be just temporary or they won't have different effects than those wanted.
However, I'm not sure about how this will affect the planet and the other 2 moons. If I may suggest to improve these moons... but they may collide.

Otherwise you'll need a planetary shield with a lot of energy and maintenance to keep the water clouds on the planet. And that needs a far advanced technology instead of "normal" teraforming projects.

In comparison to Mars, the planet Venus is on the opposite side of effects due to its intense volcanic activity and the lack of water making it hotter than Mercury. On Earth the water is cleaning the dust of volcanic eruptions and most of that dust is deep below the oceans. Nat-Geo and Discovery documentaries said a lot about this.

Teraforming projects can have success on planets with significant gravity and magnetic fields while Mars doesn't have both of these, to keep the water's clouds and rains on the planet and to prevent their loss in the outer space. Otherwise all works may be just a waste of work and resources.

[DACOROMANIA]

Or even worse, Jupiter sends Mercury or Venus crashing towards Earth. No joke, it is definitely possible in such scenario (and even in the far future but Earth will not be habitable by then so who cares).


Isn't removing the atmosphere harder than actually adding material to it? Also, Venus might be closer to Earth but broadly speaking being closer to the Sun is in a much worse position for habitability purposes.

Well you would not necessarily have to remove the whole atmosphere, just clean it.
Which is the good part, you do not have to build a whole new atmosphere.

And Venus is not so close to the sun as to be a problem, if not for the excessive carbon and sulfur levels, surface temperatures would be manageable.

It does not have the low gravity problems and being too cold that Mars does.

With a good knowledge in chemistry and science, they could teraform both Mars and Venus.
The question is... How to proceed?

Indeed, Venus may be easier to clean its atmosphere. A step or a suggestion may be to extract the carbon and sulfur from the atmosphere but then how to increase H2O levels ? and how do we use the carbon and sulfur after that? The volcanic activity is more active on Venus than on Earth while on Mars it almost doesn't exist at all. On Earth the water cleans the atmosphere for free, but there's also yet a detail at Earth about its atmospheric shield.

The main problem of Mars is that it needs to warm up again its core and to recreate its own magnetic field along with gravity, otherwise in the next centuries its planetary gravity will decrease more.