The Opportunity rover endured a dust storm also. The main concern was reduced power from the solar panels due to the blocking and diffusing of sunlight. I do not believe that there were any concerns of physical damage.
I do not ever recall there being a serious issue with physical damage related to Mars dust storms and I have not been able to find anything via Google.
Martian dust storms are not anything like Earth dust storms. They are wimpy.
The impressive thing about Martian dust storms is that they can envelop the planet in a short time and remain for weeks. They are not the paint stripping sand storms of Terran deserts.
W9GFO, you make a good point about the wind speed on Mars. But one may not think Mars dust storms are wimpy if caught in one. It would be tough to survive one. I think colonists need to move underground. The data I referred to was based on telescopic dust storm data from the 1971 favorable Mars Opposition when it moved into a global planet wide dust storm. I never posted this to internet. There's a lot of scientific data that is not on internet.
I have also scanned the internet and each site comes up with a new wind speed value. I think these numbers can vary depending on the local conditions, such as planetocentric coordinates, season, time, storm or no storm, or DD. Mars has, in addition to dust storms, large and small dust devils (DD) that are claimed to have wind speed potential forces similar to Earth-based tornadoes. Some of these are photographed by Mars probes and indicate hurricane wind speeds. Mars probes are selected to traverse the most benign conditional locations to ensure their survival and successful return of data.
In one show on Discovery channel, they demonstrated wind forces and the effects of sand blasting at hundreds of miles an hour. As I recall, it can reshape metal, changing the surface of iron and steel. Most of us that have worked in tooling companies have seen the powerful effects of sandblasting at lower wind speed. I know of no static tent or inflatable structure that can withstand such high speed sand blasting forces. Some years ago, a joke was going around here at JPL, a colonist on Mars only needed to hang up dirty dishes outside to have a sterile sand blasted cleaning.
Indeed, the Earth has a jet stream which can reach hundreds of miles per hour, but no one ever put a stationary tent up there in the atmosphere that I know about. I frequently study and monitor the jet stream here to determine seeing conditions.
For data to be "scientific" it has to be accessible and disprovable. Claiming special access to data is meaningless.
A 100mph wind (dust devil) on the surface of Mars is not going to be anything like a 100 mph wind on the surface of Earth. The Mars atmosphere has a fraction of the density and the particles it carries are a fraction of the size of Earth based wind carried particulate. The size of the finest Earth sand is 60 to 100 times that of Martian dust.
Comparing a Martian dust storm to sandblasting may make for an entertaining article but it is not helping to educate anyone.
I mentioned Earth's jet stream and tents the same way you mentioned 300 mph winds on Mars and inflatable structures.
I think there is always a tendency to exaggerate the "extremeness" of anything new. Mars has plenty of extremes to be concerned about. High Q wind forces is not one of them.
I've been reading up a bit,and yeah, the speed sems 'somewhat' exaggerated...
But one thing that most sites seems to agree on is that a dust stom can easily last a(Earth) month or more, or at least the effects of it.
And that effect is a 40% reduction in available sunlight.
Now, reading up on the 'Mars One' project, they mention going into a 'low power' mode during storms, stopping Water/Oxygen extraction, limiting Rover usage to critical usage only, and even dimming the lights in the gardens...
Sure, they're going to have large tanks of water and Oxygen,and probably also Nitrogen(How much Nitrogen is there in the Martian atmosphere, really?), but putting the farms into low power mode?
They risk losing large parts of the harvest if it happens at a critical time for the plants.
I also wonder what kind of battery capacity they're planning to set up, and what type?
I would imaginethat they're going for a Fuel Cell system?
But those usually need Hydrogen and Oxygen.Yes, they get those when cracking the water they mine, but in a 'low power' situation, such as a Martian Storm, how much spare Oxygen would they have for power generation?
Normal battery tech may also be used, possibly as backup power sources for 'no fail' type equipment.
But most types of battery tech has a finite lifespan...
Until I see a lot more details about the 'colony' infrastructure, I won't believe that they can succeed.
There is a reason why explorers of new frontier are cautious or why flight test engineers are so methodical and cautious when testing new aircraft. Because people can die and billions of dollars of equipment can be lost. This can even be said about very dangerous jobs where a misstep can kill or maim you.
Almost every year at Yosimite and Yellowstone NP people die at the waterfalls because of inattentiveness and being stupid. The funny thing is the animals don't fall or drown. It's the humans who go up there, ignore all the warning signs and take a fatal dive. They think it's safe, but are too stupid to notice the environment around them. And this is at a park, it's not Everest or the Empty Quarter.
This is where screening and pressure testing prospects come in. Stick them in a sub for a year to simulate the travel time to Mars and see who cracks, who fights, whose anti-social, stupid, who the pill poppers are, weak, lazy, etc. The time at the South Pole to get them used to working in harsh conditions. I'd even put them to work in a steel mill doing the most dangerous and nasty jobs just to test their ability to handle stress and work at the same time.
You want to maximize chances of success and get your money's worth. Afterall these suiciders represent a massive investment perhaps to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars and a lot of political capital. You only want the very best.
I am arguing Humanoido's assertion that inflatable structures won't stand up to Martian dust storms. He has cited 300 mph winds and compared Martian dust storms to sandblasting. I say, and the data supports my claim, that Martian dust storms are weak and an inflatable structure is easily capable of withstanding both the force of 100+ mph Martian winds (approximately comparable to a 20 mph Earth wind) and the abrasive effects of Martian dust.
This is where screening and pressure testing prospects come in. Stick them in a sub for a year to simulate the travel time to Mars and see who cracks, who fights, whose anti-social, stupid, who the pill poppers are, weak, lazy, etc. The time at the South Pole to get them used to working in harsh conditions. I'd even put them to work in a steel mill doing the most dangerous and nasty jobs just to test their ability to handle stress and work at the same time.
This reminds me of all the testing that the Apollo astronauts were put through. Much of it unnecessary.
While both the surface of Mars and the South Pole can be described as harsh, they are harsh in completely different ways. On Mars you would never be exposed to the atmosphere so it does not matter how cold it is.
On Mars the weather is clear nearly all the time. You can don a space suit and go for a walk anytime you like. You can see your landscape. You can remotely pilot your rover and explore at your leisure, or go for a drive in a real rover. This is nothing like being in a submarine or on the South Pole. The biggest weather problem on Mars is reduced sunlight during the dust storms. More like smog than an Earth dust storm.
That reduction in available sunlight is a big problem, no argument there.
@W9GFO, your discussion of Martian dust reminds me of a Yahoo article I read concerning lunar dust. It insulates well and is hard to remove. The title of the article is; Nanoparticles May Explain Moon Dirt's Odd Behavior
Research: to find out why there would be discrepancy between values of Martian wind speed quoted in many places on internet.
Wind is subjectively based on many factors. The comparison of one observation to another can vary. We find highly specific determinations from a few landers at various positions on the surface. Dates, times, locations, seasons, pressures, temperatures, sublimation states, and other weather conditions are in effect.
Landers returning data during a fierce dust storm was unavailable. Landers are selected for "safe" sights in terms of weather. It's likely Martian colonists would also select safe sights where water could be extracted and habitats could survive better conditions.
Determinations made from Earth based telescopic observations of raging dust storms (visible top down) verify Cyclone wind speeds. Hubble Space Telescope data shows upper level atmosphere with cyclonic wind velocities. There is likely a difference between upper atmospheric wind speed and surface wind speed. This is a probable reason why quotes from different sets of observations have painted different models of wind speed.
This deserves more observational data from Mar's surface, and one reason that more spacecraft will be sent to Mars before going there. W9GFO makes a convincing case - Mars will be a more welcoming place than originally thought.
Will inflatable tents on Mars protect against cosmic radiation?
A 300 mph wind on Mars would feel like a 30 mph wind on the earth at sea level. This is because air resistance is proportion to the velocity squared, and inversely proportional to the air densisty. The martian air density is 1% of that on earth, which means that the velocity with an equivalent air resistance is 10 times higher on mars than on earth.
Note, this is why a sky diver jumping out of a balloon at 100k feet can survive falling at the speed of sound.
"Martian colonists"? Until an outpost is established on the moon I don't think it's credible. At the moment we don't have a shuttle to transport supplies.
I think Dave Hein has a very good point. If everything is constant except the air density and the air speed, then a Martian wind storm will be terrifying (300 MPH winds!) but relatively harmless.
"Martian colonists"? Until an outpost is established on the moon I don't think it's credible. At the moment we don't have a shuttle to transport supplies.
Actually, a shuttle would be a waste of fuel and cargo capacity for this kind of scenario.
(A shuttle implies reuse, and therefore also that it would have to return. The return trip requires fuel, which nds to be carried on the outbound trip, wasting capacity)
Unless the 'Moon outpost' produces rocket fuel it wouldn't have any influence on the project.
The theory behind this project is that everything is sent in 'cheap' one-use capsules, which will be 'recycled' as permanent parts of the colony infrastructure.
The whole project is set up as a one-way trip because it' prohibitively expensive to ship all the fuel and material for a return trip.
We don't have any real problem with the theory behind it, it's just the execution and the lack of any real numbers or 'Plan B' scenarios.
Frankly, if they try this, I don't expect them to be able to launch more than one crew of 4 before interest and funding drops out.
The '+' is to indicate any children born in the colony. By the age of 8 they really should be able to put on a suit and go outside.
(By this point, they're really to heavy to be carried in 'evac sacks' for long distances in case of emergency)
Let us be kind and assume that a suit lasts 10 years(not counting changing gaskets and seals as that's just maintenance)
Not counting suits for the children, they'd need to ship 4 suits on every other year from the colony is 10years old, to it's 20, when it changes to 8 suits, then 12 on every other year from 30 years... And that assumes no suits deemed unsafe before the 'official' best before date.
Hydroponics...
No matter how good the system is, compost/recycling will not be enough to secure a good crop. For that they need a much larger setup (see the Biosphere 2 project to get an idea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 )
This means they need to get nutrients shipped from Earth.
Again, the amount needed will depend on the number of colonists.
A lot of equipment will wear out sooner or later.
Would you trust an old O2 tank on your suit?
(They need to be regularly pressure-tested)
Or as storage for the habitat?
Battery packs for suits and backup power for critical systems?
(Fuel Cells tends to be too big to be practical as suit power)
What is the assumed lifespan of the inflatable structures?
I think Dave Hein has a very good point. If everything is constant except the air density and the air speed, then a Martian wind storm will be terrifying (300 MPH winds!) but relatively harmless.
* There's a possibility of using Martian soil to grow crops
* Food supplements like chickens could be raised for eggs
* A Mars suit kit will enable one to make new suits as needed (some for children) and repair damaged ones
* Power will be derived from nuclear or new technology fuel cell and not be dependent on the weak sun
* Water will come from frozen ocean beds
* Colonists will make a new fun kind of gym with new games in low gravity
* Unlimited dry ice will fuel scientific research with supercooled Propeller machines and telescopes
* Spacecraft fuel will be manufactured on Mars by a robotic station
* The number of colonists will increase by more people wanting to go there
* People living on Mars will become tall slender Martians
* Interest in Mars will skyrocket (no pun intended)
* Mars precious metals/souvenirs on Earth-return space barges generate huge money
Martian soil is slightly Alkaline, so will need to be treated, and as it's mostly finely powdered sand, I doubt many plants will like it as it is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars
Chickens are rather inefficient compared to other organisms such as fish(Tilapia) so my guess is that ome sort of Aquaponic system would be best for the gardens.
A suit kit?
I have trouble seing what that would look like.
Getting a nuclear reactor to Mars is the big problem.
No, the one in Curiosity doesn't count; it's a nuclear battery,and not only is it non-renewable(when it runs out of power in 20years?) it's also very weak.
Fuel Cell tech isn't a magic box that delivers endless power, either. They take Hydrogen and Oxygen gas as input, puts them in contact with a catalyst of some sort, and produces water and electricity. You either have to ship the gasses from Earth, or mine water and crack it into gasses.
@Gadgetman, Any outpost in space would be dependent on supplies from earth. No one would consider abandoning the astronauts on the international space station. Your muscles and sense of balance would atrophy over time. We cannot overlook the importance of earth's atmosphere and magnetic poles. I doubt the Martian atmosphere and magnetic pole remnants would provide adequate insulation from cosmic radiation.
It will be interesting to learn more about the radiation levels on the Martian surface. I would argue that humans would always have to come back to earth at some point.
There's a joke about simulating downhill skiing by sitting on your window ledge in the freezing cold for twenty minutes. I think you could simulate a Mars colony in a similar manner.
Move to Iceland and live in an RV that's buried underground. Drink Tang and eat reconstituted food. Put on a space suit on every time you go outside. Pretend Eyjafjallaj
But the ISS i the responsibility of NASA, ESA and all the other agencies. They have plans for recovering astronauts.
(Among other things,they always have a return capsule attached to the ISS, ready to go)
The Mars One is upposed to be a ONE WAY trip, financed privately.
Can you imagine if the project fails, and the colonists beg for rescue?
Which agency should they ask?
The (probably bankrupt) company that sent them there, NASA, ESA, the Russians, the Chinese?
Those agencies don't have the budget for a rescue any more. Probably never did...
Sure NASA could probably pool all their bugets and do it, but what will that do to the US economy?
(Most of NASA's budget goes straight out to companies that have research and development contracts, or to maintenance of infrastructure and equipment.)
And with a rescue taking years...
Which is just another reason that the 'Mars One' project will fail.
There' no way they can get any industry started to produce anything out of local reources, so everything must be imported at a too high cost for the project to work.
Imagine that they find some 'workable' ore, maybe copper as that's quite useful...
(It can be used for construction, wiring, lots of things. People are even working on copper-based solar cells... )
Where will they get the energy to refine and smelt it?
Being able to smelt the equivalent of a copper coin(pick your denomination) once very fortnight isn't exactly impressive when you could use several Kilo of it every day.
(And for structural work, we'd be talking half a ton, maybe that needs to be smelted and poured into a form at once, if you want to get anything worthwhile done)
And you'd need the machinery to roll or press it into usable formats.
'We can use it for wiring!'
Because copper can be stretched into thin wires...
Yeah, and what should they coat them with, to avoid shorts?
Maybe Mars will be colonised by a large corporation one day...
But they will have a proper plan for it, goals, a way to make a profit.
(Maybe if there's large deposits of Platinum or Titanium? Lithium might also be interesting)
Governments won't do it unless there's a strategic advantage in it.
At most they'll set up a research lab.
Also, we lack at least two technologies to make it economically viable;
1. Cheap transport to orbit.
2. A power source capable of delivering enough power to do some real work.
(A smelting plant would be good... Being able to run some sort of TBM even more so.)
If you want to live in a vacuum with low gravity and constantly be subjected to radiation from space it would be better to settle on the moon. I don't see us sending humans to mars until we've gone back to the moon and establish a station there.
@Gadgetman. I see your point. Mars is a one-way trip. That is until some future genius finds a way to synthesize fuel from compounds on the Martian surface...
...live in an RV that's buried underground. Drink Tang and eat reconstituted food. Put on a space suit on every time you go outside... Iceland or Mars?
I think you're making a case for going to Mars. One can find very luxurious and spacious RVs that would be fun to live in and who doesn't like Tang and TV dinners... For the new version space suit that's easy to put on, no problem, all winter long in the northern states, people put on big Parkas and snow gear every time they go out.
Comments
I do not ever recall there being a serious issue with physical damage related to Mars dust storms and I have not been able to find anything via Google.
Martian dust storms are not anything like Earth dust storms. They are wimpy.
The impressive thing about Martian dust storms is that they can envelop the planet in a short time and remain for weeks. They are not the paint stripping sand storms of Terran deserts.
I have also scanned the internet and each site comes up with a new wind speed value. I think these numbers can vary depending on the local conditions, such as planetocentric coordinates, season, time, storm or no storm, or DD. Mars has, in addition to dust storms, large and small dust devils (DD) that are claimed to have wind speed potential forces similar to Earth-based tornadoes. Some of these are photographed by Mars probes and indicate hurricane wind speeds. Mars probes are selected to traverse the most benign conditional locations to ensure their survival and successful return of data.
http://www.marstravel.org/2011/10/hurricane-force-winds-on-mars.html
Some of the sensors on Mars probes do not detect very high wind speeds. For example,
http://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/anablog/4391731/Get-ready-to-see-the-Mars-Rover--Curiosity--live-
In one show on Discovery channel, they demonstrated wind forces and the effects of sand blasting at hundreds of miles an hour. As I recall, it can reshape metal, changing the surface of iron and steel. Most of us that have worked in tooling companies have seen the powerful effects of sandblasting at lower wind speed. I know of no static tent or inflatable structure that can withstand such high speed sand blasting forces. Some years ago, a joke was going around here at JPL, a colonist on Mars only needed to hang up dirty dishes outside to have a sterile sand blasted cleaning.
Indeed, the Earth has a jet stream which can reach hundreds of miles per hour, but no one ever put a stationary tent up there in the atmosphere that I know about. I frequently study and monitor the jet stream here to determine seeing conditions.
http://humanoidolabs.blogspot.tw/search?q=jet+stream
A 100mph wind (dust devil) on the surface of Mars is not going to be anything like a 100 mph wind on the surface of Earth. The Mars atmosphere has a fraction of the density and the particles it carries are a fraction of the size of Earth based wind carried particulate. The size of the finest Earth sand is 60 to 100 times that of Martian dust.
Comparing a Martian dust storm to sandblasting may make for an entertaining article but it is not helping to educate anyone.
I mentioned Earth's jet stream and tents the same way you mentioned 300 mph winds on Mars and inflatable structures.
I think there is always a tendency to exaggerate the "extremeness" of anything new. Mars has plenty of extremes to be concerned about. High Q wind forces is not one of them.
This is the particle size (.001mm) that was predicted and then measured by the Phoenix lander.
But one thing that most sites seems to agree on is that a dust stom can easily last a(Earth) month or more, or at least the effects of it.
And that effect is a 40% reduction in available sunlight.
Now, reading up on the 'Mars One' project, they mention going into a 'low power' mode during storms, stopping Water/Oxygen extraction, limiting Rover usage to critical usage only, and even dimming the lights in the gardens...
Sure, they're going to have large tanks of water and Oxygen,and probably also Nitrogen(How much Nitrogen is there in the Martian atmosphere, really?), but putting the farms into low power mode?
They risk losing large parts of the harvest if it happens at a critical time for the plants.
I also wonder what kind of battery capacity they're planning to set up, and what type?
I would imaginethat they're going for a Fuel Cell system?
But those usually need Hydrogen and Oxygen.Yes, they get those when cracking the water they mine, but in a 'low power' situation, such as a Martian Storm, how much spare Oxygen would they have for power generation?
Normal battery tech may also be used, possibly as backup power sources for 'no fail' type equipment.
But most types of battery tech has a finite lifespan...
Until I see a lot more details about the 'colony' infrastructure, I won't believe that they can succeed.
There is a reason why explorers of new frontier are cautious or why flight test engineers are so methodical and cautious when testing new aircraft. Because people can die and billions of dollars of equipment can be lost. This can even be said about very dangerous jobs where a misstep can kill or maim you.
Almost every year at Yosimite and Yellowstone NP people die at the waterfalls because of inattentiveness and being stupid. The funny thing is the animals don't fall or drown. It's the humans who go up there, ignore all the warning signs and take a fatal dive. They think it's safe, but are too stupid to notice the environment around them. And this is at a park, it's not Everest or the Empty Quarter.
This is where screening and pressure testing prospects come in. Stick them in a sub for a year to simulate the travel time to Mars and see who cracks, who fights, whose anti-social, stupid, who the pill poppers are, weak, lazy, etc. The time at the South Pole to get them used to working in harsh conditions. I'd even put them to work in a steel mill doing the most dangerous and nasty jobs just to test their ability to handle stress and work at the same time.
You want to maximize chances of success and get your money's worth. Afterall these suiciders represent a massive investment perhaps to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars and a lot of political capital. You only want the very best.
I'm not sure what argument you think I am making.
I am arguing Humanoido's assertion that inflatable structures won't stand up to Martian dust storms. He has cited 300 mph winds and compared Martian dust storms to sandblasting. I say, and the data supports my claim, that Martian dust storms are weak and an inflatable structure is easily capable of withstanding both the force of 100+ mph Martian winds (approximately comparable to a 20 mph Earth wind) and the abrasive effects of Martian dust.
Oops. Whatever you do, don't Google drowned deer.
This reminds me of all the testing that the Apollo astronauts were put through. Much of it unnecessary.
While both the surface of Mars and the South Pole can be described as harsh, they are harsh in completely different ways. On Mars you would never be exposed to the atmosphere so it does not matter how cold it is.
On Mars the weather is clear nearly all the time. You can don a space suit and go for a walk anytime you like. You can see your landscape. You can remotely pilot your rover and explore at your leisure, or go for a drive in a real rover. This is nothing like being in a submarine or on the South Pole. The biggest weather problem on Mars is reduced sunlight during the dust storms. More like smog than an Earth dust storm.
That reduction in available sunlight is a big problem, no argument there.
Wind is subjectively based on many factors. The comparison of one observation to another can vary. We find highly specific determinations from a few landers at various positions on the surface. Dates, times, locations, seasons, pressures, temperatures, sublimation states, and other weather conditions are in effect.
Landers returning data during a fierce dust storm was unavailable. Landers are selected for "safe" sights in terms of weather. It's likely Martian colonists would also select safe sights where water could be extracted and habitats could survive better conditions.
Determinations made from Earth based telescopic observations of raging dust storms (visible top down) verify Cyclone wind speeds. Hubble Space Telescope data shows upper level atmosphere with cyclonic wind velocities. There is likely a difference between upper atmospheric wind speed and surface wind speed. This is a probable reason why quotes from different sets of observations have painted different models of wind speed.
This deserves more observational data from Mar's surface, and one reason that more spacecraft will be sent to Mars before going there. W9GFO makes a convincing case - Mars will be a more welcoming place than originally thought.
Will inflatable tents on Mars protect against cosmic radiation?
Note, this is why a sky diver jumping out of a balloon at 100k feet can survive falling at the speed of sound.
source
I think Dave Hein has a very good point. If everything is constant except the air density and the air speed, then a Martian wind storm will be terrifying (300 MPH winds!) but relatively harmless.
Actually, a shuttle would be a waste of fuel and cargo capacity for this kind of scenario.
(A shuttle implies reuse, and therefore also that it would have to return. The return trip requires fuel, which nds to be carried on the outbound trip, wasting capacity)
Unless the 'Moon outpost' produces rocket fuel it wouldn't have any influence on the project.
The theory behind this project is that everything is sent in 'cheap' one-use capsules, which will be 'recycled' as permanent parts of the colony infrastructure.
The whole project is set up as a one-way trip because it' prohibitively expensive to ship all the fuel and material for a return trip.
We don't have any real problem with the theory behind it, it's just the execution and the lack of any real numbers or 'Plan B' scenarios.
Frankly, if they try this, I don't expect them to be able to launch more than one crew of 4 before interest and funding drops out.
Some numbers...
The '+' is to indicate any children born in the colony. By the age of 8 they really should be able to put on a suit and go outside.
(By this point, they're really to heavy to be carried in 'evac sacks' for long distances in case of emergency)
Let us be kind and assume that a suit lasts 10 years(not counting changing gaskets and seals as that's just maintenance)
Not counting suits for the children, they'd need to ship 4 suits on every other year from the colony is 10years old, to it's 20, when it changes to 8 suits, then 12 on every other year from 30 years... And that assumes no suits deemed unsafe before the 'official' best before date.
Hydroponics...
No matter how good the system is, compost/recycling will not be enough to secure a good crop. For that they need a much larger setup (see the Biosphere 2 project to get an idea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 )
This means they need to get nutrients shipped from Earth.
Again, the amount needed will depend on the number of colonists.
A lot of equipment will wear out sooner or later.
Would you trust an old O2 tank on your suit?
(They need to be regularly pressure-tested)
Or as storage for the habitat?
Battery packs for suits and backup power for critical systems?
(Fuel Cells tends to be too big to be practical as suit power)
What is the assumed lifespan of the inflatable structures?
Yes, Dave does make a good point. ;-)
* There's a possibility of using Martian soil to grow crops
* Food supplements like chickens could be raised for eggs
* A Mars suit kit will enable one to make new suits as needed (some for children) and repair damaged ones
* Power will be derived from nuclear or new technology fuel cell and not be dependent on the weak sun
* Water will come from frozen ocean beds
* Colonists will make a new fun kind of gym with new games in low gravity
* Unlimited dry ice will fuel scientific research with supercooled Propeller machines and telescopes
* Spacecraft fuel will be manufactured on Mars by a robotic station
* The number of colonists will increase by more people wanting to go there
* People living on Mars will become tall slender Martians
* Interest in Mars will skyrocket (no pun intended)
* Mars precious metals/souvenirs on Earth-return space barges generate huge money
* Mars & Earth will exchange resources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars
Chickens are rather inefficient compared to other organisms such as fish(Tilapia) so my guess is that ome sort of Aquaponic system would be best for the gardens.
A suit kit?
I have trouble seing what that would look like.
Getting a nuclear reactor to Mars is the big problem.
No, the one in Curiosity doesn't count; it's a nuclear battery,and not only is it non-renewable(when it runs out of power in 20years?) it's also very weak.
Fuel Cell tech isn't a magic box that delivers endless power, either. They take Hydrogen and Oxygen gas as input, puts them in contact with a catalyst of some sort, and produces water and electricity. You either have to ship the gasses from Earth, or mine water and crack it into gasses.
It will be interesting to learn more about the radiation levels on the Martian surface. I would argue that humans would always have to come back to earth at some point.
Move to Iceland and live in an RV that's buried underground. Drink Tang and eat reconstituted food. Put on a space suit on every time you go outside. Pretend Eyjafjallaj
But the ISS i the responsibility of NASA, ESA and all the other agencies. They have plans for recovering astronauts.
(Among other things,they always have a return capsule attached to the ISS, ready to go)
The Mars One is upposed to be a ONE WAY trip, financed privately.
Can you imagine if the project fails, and the colonists beg for rescue?
Which agency should they ask?
The (probably bankrupt) company that sent them there, NASA, ESA, the Russians, the Chinese?
Those agencies don't have the budget for a rescue any more. Probably never did...
Sure NASA could probably pool all their bugets and do it, but what will that do to the US economy?
(Most of NASA's budget goes straight out to companies that have research and development contracts, or to maintenance of infrastructure and equipment.)
And with a rescue taking years...
Which is just another reason that the 'Mars One' project will fail.
There' no way they can get any industry started to produce anything out of local reources, so everything must be imported at a too high cost for the project to work.
Imagine that they find some 'workable' ore, maybe copper as that's quite useful...
(It can be used for construction, wiring, lots of things. People are even working on copper-based solar cells... )
Where will they get the energy to refine and smelt it?
Being able to smelt the equivalent of a copper coin(pick your denomination) once very fortnight isn't exactly impressive when you could use several Kilo of it every day.
(And for structural work, we'd be talking half a ton, maybe that needs to be smelted and poured into a form at once, if you want to get anything worthwhile done)
And you'd need the machinery to roll or press it into usable formats.
'We can use it for wiring!'
Because copper can be stretched into thin wires...
Yeah, and what should they coat them with, to avoid shorts?
Maybe Mars will be colonised by a large corporation one day...
But they will have a proper plan for it, goals, a way to make a profit.
(Maybe if there's large deposits of Platinum or Titanium? Lithium might also be interesting)
Governments won't do it unless there's a strategic advantage in it.
At most they'll set up a research lab.
Also, we lack at least two technologies to make it economically viable;
1. Cheap transport to orbit.
2. A power source capable of delivering enough power to do some real work.
(A smelting plant would be good... Being able to run some sort of TBM even more so.)
That's because it's ookyook!