

The Economic Viability of Mars Colonization (1995) [pdf] - houseofshards
http://www.4frontierscorp.com/dev/assets/Economic%20Viability%20of%20Mars%20Colonization.pdf

======
CapitalistCartr
I do not understand the obsession for focusing on colonizing only planets. We
won't be viably "in" space until we produce mass quantities of raw materials
from The Moon and asteroids. Lifting from Earth is always more expensive in
energy. Once we build space stations, why would people who grew up in them
want to live "dirtside"? Why would people who grew up on Earth want to live on
Mars instead of a nice climate controlled habitat? I'm sure some will, but I
bet most won't. Beyond mining and tourism, I doubt Mars will be heavily
populated.

~~~
lmm
To survive long-term without getting massively irradiated you need, at a
minimum, metres of rock between you and the sun (and as you say, lifting them
from Earth is going to be expensive). Ideally a magnetosphere too. Gravity is
also desirable for health reasons and random practicality things (e.g. in
zero-g you have to sleep in a draught, as otherwise there's a risk of a
dangerous bubble of CO2 forming around your head). And temperature can be a
huge problem for spacecraft that aren't attached to a big heat reservoir -
scorching in the sun, freezing in the shade.

Maybe ultimately we'll be able to construct nice habitats for orbiting
stations, but with current engineering capabilities rocky bodies are the only
safe places to stay long-term. I certainly expect we'll get to asteroids
eventually. But for now, Mars is closer than the asteroids, closer in delta-V
terms than the Moon, and much more promising in terms of having organic-y raw
materials available for farming and fuel. It makes sense to go there (or maybe
Venus, but aerostats would be a big chunk of new engineering) first.

------
arethuza
There is also the book length "The Case for Mars" by the same author:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars)

[I've had a romantic obsession with the colonization of Mars ever since I read
the KSR Mars Trilogy]

~~~
Udo
Also worth mentioning is the Mars Underground documentary, detailing Zubrin's
work and mission over the years:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcTZvNLL0-w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcTZvNLL0-w)

------
pcrh
If economic exploitation of Antarctica, which is only a few hours away from
"civilization", has water literally everywhere, and where the air is perfectly
breathable is currently not viable, I can't imagine what it would take to make
Mars, or mining asteroids, viable.

~~~
epaladin
It's also kind of vital for the balance of the planet's ecosystems, as we're
slowly finding out. If we melt it to get materials under there, there's a
sizable chance of long term regret.

Whereas Mars doesn't have an ecosystem at present and no species to endanger.

I want to make other planets livable so we can stop killing this one so much.

~~~
dragonwriter
> I want to make other planets livable so we can stop killing this one so
> much.

What (insufficient thought it might be) political support there is for efforts
to stop killing this planet is based largely on the idea that "its the only
one we have", so I'm not sure that really works.

------
superobserver
Isn't the main issue with Mars not it's atmosphere or landscape but rather the
fact that it has no magnetic field to speak of? That poses an issue for
electronics as well as any living beings that aren't tardigrades.

Edit: the only solution to this that I can think of would be to have any and
all housing underground, since I don't think it will be possible to restore
Mars' magnetosphere.

~~~
stephancoral
Forgive my ignorance but what are the implications of no magnetic field on
humans, mammals etc? Does it regulate some crucial biological function(s)?

~~~
moridin
A planetary magnetic field acts as a shield for space-based radiation that may
otherwise interfere with biological processes. There's some really nasty stuff
out there that the earth's field deflects for us :
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field#Magnet...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_magnetic_field#Magnetosphere)

------
Symmetry
Regarding food growing, I sort of expect that on either Mars or the Moon you
would end up using solar panels to feed grow lights. You lose power via solar
cell inefficiency but you make some of that back by shifting the spectrum of
the light you emit into the wavelengths plants can absorb most easily. It's a
hassle, but potentially less so than all the dangers your plants could be
running into above ground.

And I figure the only viable colonization sites on the moon are the north and
south poles, where you can get solar power continuously.

~~~
jp555
Why not use an orbital mirror that reflects only the wavelengths desired?

~~~
Symmetry
The idea is that you want to keep your plants away from the radiation, low
pressure, and micrometeorites on the surface.

------
BaptisteGreve
"It is shown, that of all bodies in the solar system other than Earth, Mars is
unique in that it has the resources required to support a population of
sufficient size to create locally a new branch of human civilization."

~~~
gambiting
Except that despite beautiful renderings of cities on the surface of Mars, the
radiation would force everyone to live underground. And if we are going to
build huge cities under the surface of Mars, we might as well try it here. But
no one is doing it,because there is no point.

