Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mars NASA

NASA's Retiring Top Scientist Says We Can Terraform Mars, and Maybe Venus Too (nytimes.com) 159

Posted by EditorDavid from the plants-on-planets dept.
"Since joining NASA in 1980, Jim Green has seen it all," writes the New York Times. He has helped the space agency understand Earth's magnetic field, explore the outer solar system and search for life on Mars. As the new year arrived on Saturday, he bade farewell to the agency.

Over the past four decades, which includes 12 years as the director of NASA's planetary science division and the last three years as its chief scientist, he has shaped much of NASA's scientific inquiry, overseeing missions across the solar system and contributing to more than 100 scientific papers across a range of topics... One of Dr. Green's most recent significant proposals has been a scale for verifying the detection of alien life, called the "confidence of life detection," or CoLD, scale. [Green says scientists have to "stop screwing around with just crying wolf."]
Green has also published research suggesting it's possible to terraform Mars with a giant magnetic shield blocking the sun (to stop it from stripping the Mars atmosphere and creating habitable temperatures).

"Yeah, it's doable," he explains to the Times:

"Stop the stripping, and the pressure is going to increase. Mars is going to start terraforming itself. That's what we want: the planet to participate in this any way it can. When the pressure goes up, the temperature goes up... If you didn't need a spacesuit, you could have much more flexibility and mobility. The higher temperature and pressure enable you to begin the process of growing plants in the soils.

"There are several scenarios on how to do the magnetic shield. I'm trying to get a paper out I've been working on for about two years. It's not going to be well received. The planetary community does not like the idea of terraforming anything.

"But you know. I think we can change Venus, too, with a physical shield that reflects light. We create a shield, and the whole temperature starts going down."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA's Retiring Top Scientist Says We Can Terraform Mars, and Maybe Venus Too More

NASA's Retiring Top Scientist Says We Can Terraform Mars, and Maybe Venus Too

Comments Filter:

  • English, it's hard (Score:3, Informative)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Monday January 03, 2022 @04:02AM (#62137845) Homepage

    ...to stop it from stripping the Mars atmosphere and creating habitable temperatures

    That's not even a garden-path sentence, it's just plain wrong. Unless we really want to stop the sun from creating habitable temperatures? A correct sentence, if still difficult to read, would be: "...to stop it from stripping the Mars atmosphere and to create habitable temperatures".

    Editors are supposed to catch this kind of stuff. Assuming, of course, they passed undergrad English.

  • Interesting, and as feasible as the next ISS (Score:3)

    by Calinous ( 985536 ) on Monday January 03, 2022 @04:03AM (#62137847)

    The ISS is old and creaking on all its joints.
    The astronauts are doing more maintenance than science.
    The first module was launched in 1998, and the station has now 16 pressurized modules, and has sleeping stations for 7 astronauts.
    23 years for 16 pressurized modules and 7 long-term bunks for astronauts.
    And 160 kW of maximum power.

    A device generating a planet-sized magnetic field will take us a million years.

  • Creating a giant sunshade for the planet is all well and good, but how do you get rid of the 93 bars of surface pressure? And atmosphere full of corrosive elements?

    If anything, the planet should first be made even hotter (so that atmosphere would boil off into space). Of course, there are some scenarios where instead of living on the surface, you'd instead have these giant airships floating in places where the pressures are more tolerable...but in such a scenario, why go there at all?

    • Send up a few sacks of bicarbonate, job done.

    • Creating a giant sunshade for the planet is all well and good

      It is not a sunshade. It is a magnetic shield: A superconducting dipole at the Martian L1.

      Here is the proposal [nasa.gov]

      Disclaimer: I think this is nuts. O'Neill Cylinders [wikipedia.org] make much more sense for off-Earth colonies.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tsqr ( 808554 )

        Creating a giant sunshade for the planet is all well and good

        It is not a sunshade. It is a magnetic shield: A superconducting dipole at the Martian L1.

        Here is the proposal [nasa.gov]

        Disclaimer: I think this is nuts. O'Neill Cylinders [wikipedia.org] make much more sense for off-Earth colonies.

        He was referring to the plan for Venus, not the plan for Mars.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Megane ( 129182 )
      I've read that if you froze out all the CO2 in the Venus atmosphere, it would be miles deep. That's how much has to be dealt with. If portal guns were a real thing, using one to make a wormhole between Venus and Mars would solve both problems at the same time.
    • If the temperature were cooled 400C, its likely a lot of those elements in the atmosphere would condense and become liquids or solids rather than gases - making the atmosphere much easier to deal with.

    • Creating a giant sunshade for the planet is all well and good, but how do you get rid of the 93 bars of surface pressure? And atmosphere full of corrosive elements?

      If anything, the planet should first be made even hotter (so that atmosphere would boil off into space). Of course, there are some scenarios where instead of living on the surface, you'd instead have these giant airships floating in places where the pressures are more tolerable...but in such a scenario, why go there at all?

      If you block all solar energy from reaching Venus then on the order of 1000 years the atmosphere will condense into oceans of liquid carbon dioxide. You build two polar dykes to impound the CO2, then pump the liquid CO2 to create two polar CO2 oceans.

      A problem though is that every bit of the crust is at 464 C or hotter, so there will be an enormous heat outflow from the surface basically forever (on human timescales) which must be disposed of and also makes the crust quite plastic.

      The oceans will be quite d

  • The example we already have of terraforming here on earth shows it is not simple to forecast what will happen.

    • Yes - I'm often annoyed by the "we need to solve our problems back home before we go to space" sentiment, but in this case: unless we can sequester all CO2 we've added to our own atmosphere its not even worth thinking about terraforming another planet. It's the same type of task but on a scale that is trivial by comparison - and we can't do it yet.

      It's like a guy who can't put together an Ikea desk dreaming about hand-building an apartment building.

      • I would say more like a skyscraper. By hand and AND without funding.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by wiggles ( 30088 )

        This kind of zero sum thinking is what keeps us in the dark ages.

        "We shouldn't go to space until we solve world hunger!" :"We shouldn't do science until we achieve world peace!"

        This is a classic false dilemma fallacy.

        We can certainly do both.

        • Generally I would agree with you. But in this case, it is different. It is not saying we shouldn't go to space until we solve world hunger. It is saying we shouldn't consider planet wide atmospheric manipulation on another planet until we can figure out planet wide atmospheric manipulation on earth.

          I mean, we've figured out how to manipulate the planet wide atmosphere for the worse as an accidental side effect of modern civilization, but we still don't have a clue how to intentionally improve a planet's atm

      • I feel like the main source of the problems on Earth is too many people. If we look at colonizing mars as shipping a bunch of people off of Earth, we ARE addressing local problems.

  • Not just technical problems (Score:5, Interesting)

    by OpenSourced ( 323149 ) on Monday January 03, 2022 @04:27AM (#62137861) Journal

    Ignoring for the moment the technical problems, I'd like to rise the political-economical ones.

    Who's going to pay for that? The costs will be huge. Will the countries paying for that shield "own" Mars? Who will control that shield? Will other countries settle in Mars profiting from the shield? Will they have to pay fees to the shield maintainers? Or perhaps better called protection-money (You know, is a nice little colony you've got there, it would be a pity if something happened to the atmosphere around it) Would anybody want to live in a planet where the livability is linked to a human-created device? Would bombing / lasing the shield become a realpolitik option?

    I don't think humanity is remotely ready to make reality a project like that.

    • Re: Not just technical problems (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ethanms ( 319039 ) on Monday January 03, 2022 @06:37AM (#62137975)

      I realize this is not the same, but consider Phoenix...

      It would kill the majority of residents without man made devices bringing water in, generating electricity, cooling them...

      a personal/small space craft capable of getting you to Earth would be the equivalent of the car that most people would use as an escape plan from Phoenix if the power/water were out during summer.

      While Mars is not as intrinsically safe, but it does share common issues with many places we've settled on Earth.

      Hell most of Canada would probably be dead in their winter if power/fuel stopped for an extended period... or they'd all evacuate to somewhere else.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by MTEK ( 2826397 )

      I don't think humanity is remotely ready to make reality a project like that.

      Imagine a future of self-replicating autonomous robotic spaceships that mine asteroids, converting their raw materials into planetary space shield components. In 2020, worldwide motor vehicle production was about 78 million (!). Think how many self-assembling robots could be constructed if raw materials and an untiring labor force were free and limitless. The only thing us meatbags would have to do is orchestrate the operation-- and much of that can be automated.

    • If such a device were created and installed an apt name would be the Green Machine, for its creators last name, and for turning the plane green.

  • Wy terraform it? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak&yahoo,com> on Monday January 03, 2022 @05:15AM (#62137883) Homepage Journal

    Leave the surface alone. The lava tubes on Mars will each have surface areas comparable to Britain. To utilize, you need only seal at two points and pressurise a volume you can specify at the time, allowing you total control over costs. You then create additional segments as needed. This is much more manageable as you're likely to want to experiment with colonising with very small numbers initially. Why alter a planet at vast expense for the benefit of maybe 200 people?

    If it goes well, and it is unproven that it would, you've space for hundreds of millions without touching the surface. And once you've tens or hundreds of millions there, let them decide what to do with the surface.

    • Leave the surface alone. The lava tubes on Mars will each have surface areas comparable to Britain. To utilize, you need only seal at two points and pressurise a volume you can specify at the time, allowing you total control over costs. You then create additional segments as needed. This is much more manageable as you're likely to want to experiment with colonising with very small numbers initially. Why alter a planet at vast expense for the benefit of maybe 200 people?

      If it goes well, and it is unproven that it would, you've space for hundreds of millions without touching the surface. And once you've tens or hundreds of millions there, let them decide what to do with the surface.

      All of this. This is the only sensible response tbh.

    • And here I can't even Terraform Azure or AWS, and they are only in the cloud. Grr.

    • Why terraform it?

      Planets regularly experience asteroid impacts that wipe out 99% of life on it. Not wanting to go extinct because a rock was destined to run into our home is a sane thought.

      The lava tubes on Mars will each have surface areas comparable to Britain. To utilize, you need only seal at two points and pressurise a volume you can specify at the time, allowing you total control over costs.

      This also does nothing to help the vast thermal swings that occur on Mars because of it's thin atmosphere.

      Why alter a planet at vast expense for the benefit of maybe 200 people?

      The idea behind terraforming is to create an inhabitable world for all of humanity, not "maybe 200 people". This is would just be the first step of a much larger project.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jd ( 1658 )

        Planets regularly experience asteroid impacts that wipe out 99% of life on it. Not wanting to go extinct because a rock was destined to run into our home is a sane thought.

        So being deep underground rather than on the surface offers a considerable advantage, in that you need a direct impact on the lava tube (as opposed to a direct hit anywhere on the planet) to be a serious threat. Further, since you're looking at segmented environments, acting like bulkheads, the worst that even a truly massive impact can do is destroy two segments. It will have minimal effect on the rest of the lava tube and no effect at all on the others.

        This also does nothing to help the vast thermal swings that occur on Mars because of it's thin atmosphere.

        You're in a thermally isolated pocket deep undergroun

  • While we're dreaming, how about reducing the population on this planet?
    • If mars is terraformed, we could ship em there. Just convince people there is plenty of gold on mars.
      • If mars is terraformed, we could ship em there. Just convince people there is plenty of Bitcoin on mars. Gold is so last century.

  • Before we entirely fuck the place?

  • First (Score:2)

    by Zemran ( 3101 )
    ...can we terraform Earth?
  • There are no fossil fuels there. So no incentive for the captains of our industry to go marching boldly where angels fear to tread and totally mess up a planet.

    No natural process that transformed our planet (barring asteroid collisions) happened in less than 100,000 years. What we call the "Cambrian Explosion" actually was spread over 10 million years.

    Carbon that was sequestered from the atmosphere over 100 million years, a period when there were no microbes capable of digesting wood or even the soft bod

  • The guy is obviously an accomplished scientist, so it is worth not immediately dismissing his ideas.
    This being said, I can only find mention of "The shield structure would consist of a large dipole—a closed electric circuit powerful enough to generate an artificial magnetic field." . But how large should this be have the desired effect? It would be immense, like the size of a country, is what I expect.

    • Right, if he can describe a plausible way (even with future tech) to construct such a dipole then I will be interested in the idea.

      For comparison, although we can't do it yet, constructing a solar shield for Venus is relatively easy to imagine - if you can make a single device that is positioned just inside the orbit of Venus, traveling at sub-orbital speed, but maintained in position by the solar radiation pressure, then you just make a lot of them to provide complete screening. Modular approaches are inhe

  • Venus is easier to colonize (Score:5, Interesting)

    by FeelGood314 ( 2516288 ) on Monday January 03, 2022 @08:17AM (#62138063)
    At 50km above the surface of Venus the temperature is 20-25C, the pressure the same as sea level on Earth and a balloon of air will float. The atmosphere of Venus will give you all the main elements of life and to make plastics and graphene. Solar energy is 4x greater than on Earth and the atmosphere below your floating colony is so reflective you can also put solar cells below your floating colony. To work outside your colony you need a non pressurized suit to protect you from the corrosive atmosphere of Venus. A suit that need only be washed off when reentering your colony

    Compared to Mars, Venus is paradise. On Mars the gravity is likely to low for humans to live long term. You need meters of protective radiation shielding above you most of the time. To go outside you need a suit that provides heating and pressure, a suit that you have to thoroughly clean on reentry because the soil on Mars is toxic even in tiny quantities. Solar energy will be 1/4th that of Earth and gathering the elements for life from the soil and atmosphere will be orders of magnitudes more difficult than on Venus.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • If you are in a floating balloon you need only travel at 13km per hour to stay in the daylight at the equator of Venus. You could go even slower near the poles.

    • Venus is easier to colonize

      Sure but that's only a short-term goal.

      On Mars the gravity is likely too low for humans to live long term.

      Well this is a huge assumption because Mars has a decent amount of gravity. Frankly, I think it's like that native martians would be just fine with the gravity while visiting earthlings may have issues with time. If there are issues, they are likely to start clearing up within 10 generations. Evolution happens rapidly when it must.

      You need meters of protective radiation shielding above you most of the time.

      You do realize the magnetic shield they talk about solves that problem, right?

      • You do realize the magnetic shield they talk about solves that problem, right?

        That's a rather hard chicken and egg problem. You need a colony to build this giant shield but to have the colony you need the shield. Unless you think the Earth and Venus tax payers will build it for you.

        • Pff... it's a satellite. We already send those to Mars, so why would you think it need to be made on or launched from Mars? We might just build it purely to enable colonization without needing to send extra shielding. Depending on how it works out, it could be money saver, no chickens or eggs involved.

    • Each environment has its charms. Watch out for those sulfuric acid clouds at 65km on Venus.

      Maybe we can bioengineer a lifeform that eats those H2SO4 clouds and and precipitates the S and creates lots of H2O and O2. There's also the fact that Venus' atmosphere is something like 96% CO2. Maybe once we figure out what to do with our catastrophic 412.5 PPM of CO2 here, we can address that as well

      We should first explore and document the existing environment. It would be a shame to destroy life there if it ex

  • Very interesting and hope it can work, but that brings up a couple of things:

    First I never understood why Mars lost its Atmosphere but Venus kept theirs. Venus does not have a Magnetic Field but has a very thick atmosphere and is much closer to the Sun. Yet it is able to keep its Atmosphere while Mars lost it. I did a number of searches over the years but I could not find an answer. All the science says Mars lost it due to the Sun.

    Second, after thousands of years lets pretend Mars is terraformed, what m

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tsqr ( 808554 )

      Maybe you should work on your search skills; I found the answer for you with one Google search (venus magnetosphere). Here you go [aasnova.org]; look at the paragraphs under With a Little Help from the Sun.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jmccue ( 834797 )
        Yes, I ran across those, but it did not make sense to me due to how close the sun is to Venus in relation to Mars. But still, why couldn't Mars do such a thing being so far from the Sun with people saying it had a decent Atmosphere at one time. But I guess I will never fully understand that.
    • Mars gravity is weaker than Venus. Maybe there is a sharp turning point of how much gravity a planet require to sustain atmosphere (given a particular strength of solar wind). When the surface gravity is above x, it is okay. When it is below, the atmosphere got blown away.
  • All the money and time needed to terraform another planet should be spent fixing Earth. Obviously a scientist whose job depends on constant investments into space would say these things, but it is a colossal waste of money. We already spend a fortune on sending solar powered cars to Mars, that's where the line should be drawn.

  • We've already terraformed Earth. Look how well that turned out.

    Maybe what we need first is huma-forming.

  • "Green has also published research suggesting it's possible to terraform Mars with a giant magnetic shield blocking the sun (to stop it from stripping the Mars atmosphere and creating habitable temperatures).

    As soon as I saw the Mars atmosphere loss data some years back, then noted how earth's atmosphere is protected by our own magnetism, the synthetic magnetosphere concept hit me like a bag o' bricks. This is the very foundation of any terraforming effort. With out it, its just pissing in the wind. Li

    • We easily have this capability right now. In a bit of irony, it would take a few 1 Tesla magnets in orbit.

      Show your work, how a) this would suffice to shield Mars, and b) how we have this capability right now.

      Green describes [usra.edu] a shield that is in the Mars L1 position (320 Mars radii away), not in orbit and has no description of how this magnetic field would be generated. Both he, and you, need to at least sketch in a plausible manner how such a thing can actually be made. I suspect his description of what is necessary to block the solar wind is more reliable than your notion of just putting some magnets in orbit

  • If Starship gets off the ground, they will be in charge there.

  • Another genius who believes there is an infinite supply of other people's money.

  • Green talks about "the process of growing plants in the soils" without addressing the high level of toxic perchlorates found throughout the Martian soil. This inconvenient fact seems to be lost on just about everyone who talks of settling Mars.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AJWM ( 19027 )

      When "an inconvenient fact seems to be lost on ... everyone" maybe it's not actually a fact.

      There are places on Earth with higher percentages of perchlorate in the soil, and we have hardly explored Mars enough to say that they exist "throughout the Martial soil," much less at a "high level."

      Perchlorates are a mild concern, not a show-stopper.

  • If you can terraform Venus, that implies to me that you can terraform Earth. So you're going to be a trillionaire (or at least permanently famous) since a fuckton of voters have been asking for that lately. That is, unless, you can't really do it.

  • I really appreciate it when people think big.

    But I'd like to ask Jim Green whether he has any ideas how we could terraform Terra. Specifically, return the atmosphere to the state needed for a long-term thermodynamic equilibrium. And maybe also resolve some other, comparatively minor problems.

    Given that we already have 9 billion people on this planet who could potentially work on such a project (compared to zero on Mars), terraforming Terra should be several orders of magnitude easier than terraforming Mar

  • It always boggles my mind how so many people look at problems in such simplistically erroneous ways as to make arguments like, "Do you realize how hot it is on Venous?" or, "It's filled with poisoneous gases.", or even "You cannot even breath there!". Like we don't know these things?

    The magnitude of something may or may not be relevant to given solution. Sometimes, we can find simply solutions that work around seemingly impenetrable obstacles like, not being able to smash through a brick wall so we just,

  • What fucking chance do we have if we don't even start off with a habitable world?

  • On Mars: Muskville.
    On Venus: New Scottsdale.

Slashdot Top Deals

C for yourself.

Close