The Pros and Cons of Human Missions to Mars

  

It has been an active time for arrivals at Mars, with several spacecraft from different nations taking up position in orbit and the Perserverance Rover, the first step in sample return, due to land this week. The relationship between human and robotic missions has always been an interesting one. Strictly speaking, the two are managed by different divisions within NASA (The Science Mission Directorate and the Human Exploration Operations Mission Directorate) and it's a popular party topic to discuss the merits of each kind of exploration. MSc student Grace Bischof takes up this conversation in her post this week.
(Image Above: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Concept_Mars_colony.jpg)

by Grace Bischof

With Perseverance set to touch down on the Red Planet in less than 10 days, I’ve been thinking a lot about Mars exploration. In addition to the Mars 2020 mission led by NASA, the Hope Orbiter launched by the United Arab Emirates Space Agency and the Tianwen-1 orbiter, lander, and rover sent by the China National Space Administration will soon be arriving to Mars. In a previous blog post I’ve detailed the family of Martian rovers currently on the planet, but the list continues to grow with these new missions. There are more missions planned moving forward (ExoMars 2022, for example) but a topic that’s on everyone’s mind still remains unanswered: when will humans be sent to Mars?

There are many unique challenges that arise when imagining the idea of human missions to Mars. In this post, I’m going to highlight some of the pros and cons of sending humans to Mars, for both short-term missions and long-term colonization.

Pro #1:

While incredible science and engineering activities have been achieved by landers and rovers, humans may be able fill in some of the gaps left by robotics.  Humans can work faster than the technology currently on Mars, not needing specific commands sent from Earth to complete a task. Additionally, rovers and landers have very specific designs. For example, a rover may only be able to dig 1 meter into the surface because of the length of its robotics arm. Humans would be able to dig further, perhaps making discoveries that a rover could not.

Con #1:

An issue pertaining to both shorter missions and permanent settlement is that Mars could be dangerous. Firstly, the journey to Mars is not a quick trip. The Apollo missions reached lunar orbit nearly 52 hours after launching; Missions to Mars typically take upwards of 200 days. That is a very long time in the space environment, where radiation could have extremely adverse effects on the astronauts. Once humans are on the planet, the intense conditions could pose many problems. Notably, freezing temperature conditions, an unbreathable atmosphere, ultraviolet radiation, and massive dust storms all pose a threat to humans on the surface of the planet.

Pro #2:

The colonization of Mars has been a theme in many science-fiction works throughout the years, and many people are pushing for it to become a reality. Leading the pack on the Mars settlement goal is SpaceX, an American aeronautics company. The major push to move humans to Mars, according to SpaceX’s founder, is an attempt to avoid a future extinction event. It is no secret that human activity has greatly affected the Earth, and by starting a colony on Mars, we may ensure the survival of humankind for thousands or millions of years to come. Additionally, putting humans on Mars is a huge task (as outlined in Con #1), therefore by doing so, we would massively enhance our knowledge of technology, engineering, and science.

Con #2: 

To round out the list, it’s very important to discuss the ethics of human missions to Mars. One of the biggest problems with landing humans on Mars is potential contamination (known as Planetary Protection). This works both ways – there is a risk that humans may bring terrestrial contaminates to Mars’ surface or that scientists might bring Martian contaminates back to Earth. If microbial life does exist on Mars, the possibility of doing damage to that life has grave ethical implications. If Mars were to become the next habitat for humans, the environment would be completely changed, potentially ruining the opportunity for astrobiologists to learn more about the planet. Humans do not have a good track record for treating the Earth kindly. Using Mars as a backup plan for human survival only moves our problems further from the sun. Plus, to live on Mars people have suggested “terraforming” the planet to make it livable. Do we have the right to alter another planet so severely? 

The are no easy answers when it comes to the future of Mars exploration. Humans landing on Mars could lead to discoveries never thought possible using current technology. However, there are many logistical and ethical issues surrounding this idea. For now, all we can do is rewatch “The Martian” again while we wait.