The Moon versus Mars

    Among manned space exploration advocates there is much debate over where to go next. For the last few years it was assumed NASA would follow through on President Bush’s vision to return to the Moon. Now maverick scientists are proposing an alternative plan also reported at Spaceflight Now. Their hope is for manned missions to asteroids with the underlying assumption that this will lead to manned flights to Mars quicker than the Moon first approach. Basically it comes down to a battle between the Reds and the Whites, those people who want to go to Mars and those people who want to colonize the Moon. Mars advocates have always believed we have been wasting decades in low Earth orbit. Lunar explorers appear to believe we’re not ready for manned missions to Mars.

    For most of my life I’ve been waiting for manned missions to Mars. Growing up in the 1960s all the books about space exploration assumed Mars was the ultimate goal. The pioneers of Mercury, Gemini and Apollo missions assumed at that time that Americans would be on Mars by the 1980s because of the momentum of the space race. It was hard to imagine at the time that the public would give up so quickly on the final frontier. After 1972 instead of moving outward the space programs of the U.S. and Russia moved to LEO and parked for decades.

    I still think the ultimate goal is Mars, but I’m no longer a supporter of plans like Robert Zubrin’s Mars Direct. If manned missions to Mars end up like the Apollo missions to the Moon, just a dash over and grab some rocks, I think it will be counter-productive for long term manned space exploration. We know the public doesn’t want to fund expensive missions, and long term missions are always vulnerable to budget cuts and political change. I think the goal needs to be changed. Instead of arguing over where to go next and ending up dividing our forces, we should unify under the goal of colonizing the Moon, with the focus on living off the land colonization. If we can achieve that on the Moon, Mars and asteroid living will be a logical follow-up.

    By colonizing space I mean near self-sufficient living off the land. There are more natural resources on Mars, but its distance make getting started much harder. The Moon is conveniently close and I think the perfect destination for getting started. There’s not much on the Moon, but there might be enough of the essential elements to process what we need. I believe the colonization process is important because anything else will be just visiting, and very expensive vacations at that. Like I mention in “Will Robots Have All the Fun” is the idea of sending robots to prepare the way.

    The first thing to do is send robots to explore the Moon and find that theoretical ice. Not only does ice mean water, it means oxygen and hydrogen. Work on the Moon will be hard because of the extreme temperatures and all that pesky dust. The dust is so bad that it could be a show-stopper. Long term stays on the Moon means engineering dust avoidance. Working with ice at hundreds of degrees below zero isn’t like working with cubes out of the freezer. Once ice is located, and pray that it is, robotic miners could be set up to prove that we can extract and store water, hydrogen and oxygen. Even this initial success will be tempered with the fact that we don’t have any storage containers to use. When you have to build everything from scratch things get very complicated.

    Another fleet of robots can start work on carving rock. If they can build air-tight rooms and tunnels underground they can mix nitrogen or helium with oxygen to make breathable air and create a storage system that people can also live in. This brings up the need for metal for doors and locks, unless we’re bright enough to create everything out of rocks like the people did on Gilligan’s Island did with coconuts. If we have to ship everything we need from Earth colonizing will fail. That means robotic mining of metals and minerals.

    From there we need to find ways to extract carbon and nitrogen. The list goes on and on. Is it even possible to do all of this? That’s still theoretical. I do believe that if all NASA does is collect rocks the public won’t support manned missions. Space exploration needs more purpose and challenge than just going somewhere. It is my belief the public will only spend so much on space exploration. Even if the public got excited about the challenge of designing a self-sustaining system on the Moon, there will still be limits to what we can do. Let’s say Americans do get excited and support one rocket mission a month, a pace never supported by the Shuttle program, how much can be achieved at this pace? How long will the public continue to spend their tax dollars?

    If the public is only going to buy ten missions, then all we can do is little more than recreating Apollo 1969-72. What if we got 120 missions – 12 monthly missions times ten years? What if the first 100 missions sent robots that prepared the way for the final twenty that were manned? How much could 100 robots build on the Moon?

    Would the infrastructure be built faster with men or machines? If you send humans you have to ship air, water and food, as well as all the machinery they need. The colonizing of space maybe just a fantasy, but to test it will be a great engineering challenge. Developing teleoperated and fully autonomous robots to do this work will be a quantum leap in technology. I think having a bigger challenge, especially one so gadget oriented, might be more inspiring to taxpayers.



6 thoughts on “The Moon versus Mars”

  1. The cynical me doesn’t hold out much hope for either. In the short term if massive changes aren’t made to our dependence on oil and petroleum based products I think the future of our country is in dire trouble. The future of Medicaid, the possibility of a future war with Iran, etc, etc, etc. all need to be priorities and will become priorities in the future whether we want them to or not.

    The optimistic me says that there is more than enough money to mount these type of missions if the government would spend a little time becoming more efficient and using its money more wisely.

    I’d love to see both actually. Even if there is no practicality in it right away, don’t you just want to see at least one manned mission to Mars in your lifetime? I know that I do. The ‘wow’ factor alone may boost the public’s interest in pursuing more feasible and worthwhile space projects.

    Beyond that I’d also like to see a moon base in my lifetime. All it takes in some ways is for us to be successful and a new space race could begin that would push growth in this area like it hasn’t been pushed in decades.

    Though I would settle for either at this point, I would much rather have both!

  2. We have colonized the sky with airplanes and we import everything there except air. Before a Lunar economy gets going to create oxygen and building materials (especially shielding), we will need to import oxygen. This is no big deal–we do this underwater. Later, the main import may be hydrogen for water and food. Antarctica has a lettuce farm. Some decades after that, the main import may be machine tools if an economical source of all bulk consumables can be found (e.g., drilling for gas deposits–rocks deep in the Lunar crust are under as much pressure as rocks on Earth if you go six times as deep. The rocks will likely burst like rock bursts in mines on Earth. The wells will be gushers.

    I understand that I am talking about an industrial-sized cargo operation. But we have brought human life to the deep ocean, the sky, the desert and Antarctica. Economically sustaining life to the sky and the desert and may parts of the Arctic north.

    The same will eventually be true of the Moon and Mars.

  3. Sam, there is a big difference in scale from Antarctica and the Moon. We can fit stations down there inside of regular science budgets, but working on the Moon means chunks out of the national budget. Most people will be like Carl and want to spend the money on problems nearer to home and family.

    My fear is we will never go back to the Moon. I’m encourage by China, India and Japan, but they may suffer the same fate as Apollo. They may prove that they can do it and then stop.

    Finding a reason to go to the Moon and stay will be tremendously difficult.


  4. In 500 years at 3% per-capita GDP growth, per-capita annual income will be $1 billion/year in current dollars. If everyone is as rich as Bill Gates is today in 500 years, it will have happened by then. It better because waste heat is growing fast enough to equal the solar flux hitting the Earth in 400. It will be the New New World. It’s only a matter of time.

    For a more impressionist argument about technological change see

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

A Deep Look by Dave Hook

Thoughts, ramblings and ruminations


A story a day keeps the boredom away: SF and Fantasy story reviews


Pluralism and Individuation in a World of Becoming

the sinister science

sf & critical theory join forces to destroy the present

Short Story Magic Tricks

breaking down why great fiction is great

Xeno Swarm

Multiple Estrangements in Philosophy and Science Fiction

fiction review

(mostly) short reviews of (mostly) short fiction

A Just Recompense

I'm Writing and I Can't Shut Up

Universes of the Mind

A celebration of stories that, while they may have been invented, are still true

Iconic Photos

Famous, Infamous and Iconic Photos

Make Lists, Not War

The Meta-Lists Website

From Earth to the Stars

The Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine Author & Editor Blog

SFF Reviews

Short Reviews of Short SFF

Featured Futures

classic science fiction and more

Sable Aradia, Priestess & Witch

Witchcraft, Magick, Paganism & Metaphysical Matters

Pulp and old Magazines

Pulp and old Magazines

Matthew Wright

Science, writing, reason and stuff

My Colourful Life

Because Life is Colourful

The Astounding Analog Companion

The official Analog Science Fiction and Fact blog.

What's Nonfiction?

Where is your nonfiction section please.

A Commonplace for the Uncommon

Reading, Ruminating, Writing, & Other Neurological Disorders

a rambling collective

Short Fiction by Nicola Humphreys

The Real SciBlog

Articles about riveting topics in science

West Hunter

Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat

The Subway Test

Joe Pitkin's stories, queries, and quibbles regarding the human, the inhuman, the humanesque.

SuchFriends Blog

'...and say my glory was I had such friends.' --- WB Yeats

Neither Kings nor Americans

Reading the American tradition from an anarchist perspective


Speculations on the Future: Science, Technology and Society

I can't believe it!

Problems of today, Ideas for tomorrow


Peter Webscott's travel and photography blog

The Wonderful World of Cinema

Where classic films are very much alive! It's Wonderful!

The Case for Global Film

Films from everywhere and every era

A Sky of Books and Movies

Books & movies, art and thoughts.

Emily Munro

Spinning Tales in the Big Apple


hold a mirror up to life.....are there layers you can see?

Being 2 different people.

Be yourself, but don't let them know.

%d bloggers like this: