|
|
|
|
| The Case Against Terraforming Mars |
Ryder W. Miller
Space Policy Digest
May 22, 2003 |
|
Abstract:
Due to recent developments in Astronomical Engineering, journeying to Mars and Terraforming (planet altering) Mars is no longer a science fiction fantasy, but is now realistically being considered. Terraforming would involve creating an atmosphere on Mars by releasing greenhouse gases into the Martian atmosphere, an act of planetary alteration comparable to thermonuclear war. At the forefront of this endeavor is Robert Zubrin and The Mars Society who wish to send people to Mars and ultimately Terraform the Red Planet. Unfortunately, Aldo Leopold?s Land Ethic does not fully work as an argument against Terraforming. But forces have assembled to argue that Mars should be considered a wilderness and Terraforming should be postponed for the time being, if not indefinitely. Research money spent of Terraforming research also will interfere with more important astronomical research endevours. If environmentalists and astronomers fail to make this argument, more battles will be lost to preserve the belief in the importance of a pristine Mars in the mind of the public, the astronomical community, and the science fiction fandom.
"....And all of these tales are told in an attempt to give Mars life, or to bring it to life. Because we are still those animals who survived the Ice Age, and looked up a the night sky in wonder, and told stories. And Mars has never ceased to be what it was to us from our very beginning-a great sign, a great symbol, a great power.
And so we came here. It had been a power; now it became a place."
-Red Mars by Kim Stanley Robinson (page 3).
Kim Stanley Robinson?s award winning science fiction trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars and Blue Mars) recounts the future Terraforming or planet altering of Mars. In the early years of the Twenty First century, scientists are sent to the Red Planet, but they are overrun by industrialists. The machinery is put in place to change the Martian atmosphere before a thorough search for Martian life is conducted. Mirrors heat the surface releasing greenhouse gasses. Microbes are genetically engineered to alter the atmosphere by adding to the greenhouse effect. The protagonists believe they are bringing Nature to Mars and in the final book they also create an ocean there. There are protesters, some even willing to risk their lives, but the plans to colonize the Red Planet have already gone awry. Only small portions of Mars are preserved in the end. It is an act of environmental destruction that is on par with thermonuclear war. Maybe Robinson is prophetic, warning us of the potential devastation of the pristine habitat of Mars, or maybe he thinks environmentalism only applies to Earth? His award winning works, based on the thinking of some at NASA and the Mars Society is alarming. It is surprising more environmentalists didn?t think of Terraforming as an issue, in that it is the beginning of a new millennium and it may someday soon be possible. Environmentalists are losing battles to preserve the belief in the value of a pristine Mars in the mind of the public, the astronomical community, and the science fiction fandom. Astronomers with more important questions about Mars are losing time and research money to the would be Terraformers.
Robinson?s work and the lack of concern by environmentalists suggests we believe that Nature exists or is defined by the exploitable or recreational role it provides. The warm green world is therefore more natural than the barren, frozen red rocked terrain of Mars. But is Nature equal to green life? The environmental movement is partly responsible for the lack of concern about the plans to Terraform the Red Planet. Mars is so far away in space and time. Aldo Leopold in The Land Ethic equated the Land with the biomatter and ecology it contains in his famous essay. But what about the barren but pristine territories of Mars? Are they not Nature also? In Green Mars it seems as if Robinson is arguing that the values of environmentalism don?t apply to Mars. But doesn?t it depend upon how you define Nature? There is a strict definition of Nature as that other which is better off without our presence (which does not equate with there isn?t a need for preservation). In this definition, once we encrouch upon an area it is no longer Nature or wilderness. There is also a broad definition which includes everything and can easily be applied to the barren topography of Mars. When we consider terraforming we are considering destroying the pristine but barren wilderness which exists on Mars to replace it with a more suitable idea of Nature which includes plants and animals. Terraforming is different than restoration, because restoration seeks to re-create what once existed. Terraforming denies the value of what exists. The objection to Terraforming or the idea to Terraform, is more than just about protecting the frozen rocky plains, it is an ethical argument to try to do better by the next planet we have access to. It is a decision to acknowledge what we have learned from our troubled record on the planet Earth, and try to proceed into the solar system in a more responsible way. For astronomers, the argument against Terraforming, is an argument that research should be done first before we change the planet.
The idea of Terraforming is not new. It is an old idea from science fiction, coined by Jack Williamson. But NASA is presently studying life in extreme climates, some of which could be genetically bred to withstand extreme climates on the Red Planet. Given the potential for exponential growth, bacteria, if it could survive, could overrun the barren terrain and alter the atmosphere. There have been studies, papers and Chris McKay at NASA is planning a Mars Terraforming ethics conference. The Mars Society and NASA are researching ways to send people to Mars. The previous George Bush proposed the year 2018 to send people to Mars. The Mars Society argues that it is easier to send people to Mars now than it was to send people to the moon in 1969. As Robert Zubrin, a space engineer, founder of Pioneer Astronautics, and the president of The Mars Society writes in The Case for Mars, Mars is closer and maybe sooner than we think:
"Mars is the fourth planet from the Sun, about 50 percent farther out than Earth, making it a colder place than our home planet. While daytime temperatures on Mars sometimes get up to 17 centigrade (about 63 Fahrenheit), at night the thermometer drops to -90 C (-130 F). Because the average temperature on Mars is below the freezing point, there is no liquid water today on its surface. But this was not always the case....At its closest Mars comes within 60 million kilometers of our world; at its farthest, about 400 million kilometers. Using present day space propulsion systems, a one-way voyage to Mars would take about six months-much longer than the three-day trip required by the Apollo missions to reach the Moon, but hardly beyond human experience. In the nineteenth century immigrants from Europe frequently took an equal time to sail to Australia. And, as we?ll see, the technology required for such a journey is well within our reach." (Robert Zubrin, The Case For Mars, page xiv).
In Science Fiction, which sometimes predicts correctly, and is always a welcome vehicle for speculation and exploration of potentialities, Mars was once the home of potential invaders. The War Of The World by H.G. Wells, where the almost invincible martians attack the Earth, was not that far fetched of a fantasy at the turn of the century. Scientists like Percival Lowell argued that there could be civilizations there. Martian civilizations existed in science fiction to past the mid century, but the later tales presented humankind as the invaders of Mars. C.S. Lewis and Ray Bradbury, respectively in Out Of The Silent Planet and The Martian Chronicles created storylines where human beings invade Mars. Later, science found Mars to be a barren world and with no advanced life as we know it. Gone were the canals and the vegetation. Mars, named after the god of war, ceased to be a fantasy world where civilizations once existed. In science fiction it is still a place to explore, and maybe there is life there and maybe civilizations once existed there, but now some dream of bringing the planet to life by bringing Nature there, but arguably Nature is already there. There is also evidence that life may have existed on Mars as well, but this hasn?t stopped the would be Terraformers from exploring the possibilities.
The scientists exploring ways to Terraform Mars make it seem like it is not that difficult. The Terraforming process in cyclical. Terraforming would involve heating the surface of the planet so carbon dioxide could be released from the ice caps and the Martian regolith. The warmer it gets, the more carbon dioxide is released, thereby thickening the atmosphere. When the atmosphere becomes thicker with carbon dioxide the planet will become warmer due to the green house effect. Eventually the ice will melt and form bodies of water.
As Zubrin relays:
"Once significant regions of Mars rise above the freezing point of water on at least a seasonal basis, the large amounts of water frozen into the regolith as permafrost would begin to melt, and eventually flow out into the dry riverbeds of Mars." (Zubrin, The Case For Mars, page 261)
As Zubrin points out, the three most "promising" ways for increasing the temperature on Mars are use of orbital mirrors, releasing artificial halocarbon (CFC) gas into the atmosphere, and the creation of bacterial ecosystems which will emit greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. (Zubrin, The Case for Mars, page 263)
Mars needs to be more Earthlike in order for people to have a better chance to survive and also so they will want to go. Zubrin also argues that we "must" go. Zubrin writes of the importance of the frontier in our experience, Mars being the next frontier:
"The creation of a new frontier thus presents itself as America?s and humanity?s greatest social need. Nothing is more important: Apply what palliatives you will, without a frontier to grow in, not only American society, but the entire global civilization based upon values of humanism, science, and progress will ultimately die." (Zubrin, The Case For Mars, page 297).
The Frontier provides a new start.
"People who had no role in the old society could define their role in the new. People who did not "fit in" in the Old World could discover and demonstrate that far from being worthless, they were invaluable in the new, whether they journeyed there or not." (Zubrin, The Case For Mars, page 299)
Zubrin in The Declaration Of The Mars Society makes it clear why we and the Mars Society should be interested:
"The time has come for humanity to journey to Mars.
We?re ready. Though Mars is distant, we are far better prepared today to send humans to Mars than we were to travel to the Moon at the commencement of the space age. Given the will, we could have our first teams on Mars within a decade.
The reason for going to Mars are powerful.
We must go for knowledge of Mars....
We must go for the knowledge of Earth....
We must go for the challenge....
We must go for the youth....
We must go for the opportunity....
We must go for humanity....
We must go for the future.....
Believing therefore that the exploration and settlement of Mars is on of the greatest human endeavors possible in our time, we have gathered to found this Mars Society, understanding that even the best ideas for human action are never inevitable, but must be planned, advocated, and achieved by hard work. We call upon all other individuals and organizations of like-minded people to join with us in furthering this great enterprise. No nobler cause has ever been. We shall not rest until it succeeds."
Elsewhere he qualifies his opinion on Terraforming: "Some people consider the idea of terraforming Mars heretical-humanity playing God. Yet others would see in such an accomplishment the most profound vindication of the divine nature of the human spirit, exercised in its highest form to bring a dead world to life. My own sympathies are with the latter group. Indeed, I would go farther. I would say that failure to terraform Mars constitutes failure to live up to our human nature and a betrayal of our responsibility as members of the community of life itself. Today, the living biosphere has the potential to expand its reach to encompass a whole new world." (Zubrin, The Case For Mars, page 248).
But there is financial, moral and political resistance to going to Mars. Zubrin argues it will cost less money to go to Mars than we think. But a new world with a human habitation is bound to make anyone concerned. The future of the human race is at stake. The plans can be right or wrong. They can work out or not work out. It is hard not to worry about the deliberations necessary. Meanwhile, Mars offers itself as a new frontier. Sadly, we do not think of it as a new wilderness. Environmentalists should strive to convince others to see Mars as a wilderness. Asronomers should want to do research before we Terraform the planet.
But environmentalism, focused on more immediate concerns does not stand in the way of the exploration or the Terraforming of Mars. Even Leopold?s Land Ethic does not seem to present an argument against this: "....the problem we face is the extension of the social conscience from people to land." (Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac, page 246)
The social change Leopold wrote was needed is not enough to save Mars in most imaginary storylines:
"An ethic to supplement and guide the economic relation to the land presupposes the existence of some mental image of land as a biotic mechanism. We can be ethical only in relation to something we can see, feel, understand, love, or otherwise have faith in." (Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac, page 251).
"A land, ethic, then, reflects the existence of an ecological conscience, and this in turn reflects a conviction of individual responsibility for the health of the land. Health is the capacity of the land for self-renewal. Conservation is our effort to understand and preserve this capacity." (Aldo Leopold, A Sand County Almanac, page 258).
Arguably we need more than a Land Ethic or we should apply the spirit of the Land Ethic to Mars. We need to extend our conscience to protect the barren and probably dead habitats. Not only for the life that may exist there, but for what taking this stand means.
Mars is a new opportunity. A new world could be a utopia. It could be a place to start again. A place to challenge the entrenched political system. As Zubrin reminds: "As Americans showed Europe in the last century, so in the next the Martians can show us the path away from oligarchy and stagnation." (The Case For Mars, page 303) . Mars is a step into this vast astronomical wilderness, and it so large and mystifying, it is hard to ignore and even to leave unattended.
Exploration of Mars would also jump start our future history and exploration of space. As Zubrin stresses: "If the Martian frontier is opened, however, this same process of technological advance will also enable us to establish a new, distinct, and dynamic branch of human culture on Mars and eventually more on worlds beyond." (The Case For Mars, page 300)
Learning a lesson from history Zubrin reflects:
"The technological capabilities achieved during the twentieth century would dwarf the expectations of any observer from the nineteenth, exceed the dreams of one from the eighteenth, and appear outright magical to someone from the seventeenth. The nearest stars are incredibly distant, about 100,000 times as far away as Mars. Yet, Mars itself is about 100,000 times as far from Earth as America is from Europe. If the past four centuries of progress have multiplied our reach by so great a ratio, might not four more centuries of freedom do the same again? There is ample reason to believe that they would." (The Case For Mars, page 305).
Zubrin argues that Mars is an important step forward:
"Settling the Red Planet will drive the development of ever faster modes of space transportation; terraforming Mars will drive the development of new and more powerful sources of energy. " (The Case For Mars, page 305)
But forces are assembling to confront Zubrin. At the end of the utopic White Mars Or, The Mind Set Free by Brian Aldiss and Roger Penrose, Aldiss as president of APIUM: Association for the Protection and Integrity of an Unspoilt Mars, outlines the goals of his group (1997):
" Planets are environments with their own integrity. Any vast engineering schemes would be invasive.....
APIUM stands form humanity?s right to walk on Mars, and is against its rape and ruination. Mars must become a UN protectorate, and be treated as a "planet for science", much as the Antarctic has been preserved - at least to a great extent - as unspoilt white wilderness. We are for a WHITE MARS!"
....From Mars, traditionally the God of War, a myth of peace will spread back to Earth, supplanting the myth of energy/power/exploitation that has so darkened the twentieth century.
APIUM believes that great good will come to both planets if we have the courage to sustain a WHITE MARS."
Though a member of The Mars Society, I believe we should explore Mars or even have a human presence on Mars, I also believe it is essential that we go as an enlightened people. Terraforming is comparable to thermonuclear war. We can apply the values of environmentalism to space exploration by embracing some of the precepts of environmentalism as Astroenvironmentalism, an umbrella term for space exploration ethics which hasn?t been formalized yet, but is ripe for development. Astroenvironmentalism can seek to apply the values and perspectives of environmentalism to developments in space exploration and commercialization. Some of the ways we can apply these values is through the following precepts:
*Keeping the space surrounding the Earth clear of pollution, debris and garbage;
*Remembering and teaching the lessons learned from terrestrial conservation and preservation struggle of the past and applying them to the new frontier of space;
*Tracking and monitoring the environmental damage caused by the fuels used for space expeditions;
*Treating the Moon, Mars, and other planetary bodies as wildernesses that need to be protected;
*Creating a set of ethical guidelines to protect the life that we encounter elsewhere;
*Creating safeguards to insure there is no contamination of celestial bodies;
*Counteracting the efforts of national and private agencies to terraform other planets;
*Prohibiting national, international, and private agencies from owning property in space in the interest of avoiding military conflicts;
*Creating the legal power to enforce these concerns.
(*from Ryder W. Miller, "Commentary: Explore and Protect", Mercury Magazine, March/April 1999)
Astroenvironmentalism isn?t a "new" idea. Beyond Spaceship Earth, Environmental Ethics and Solar System by editor Eugene C. Hargrove explores many of these issues. Gar Smith at The Earth Island Journal has been covering this issue for years. Karl Grossman, the author of The Wrong Stuff is also on this beat. The United Nations has a committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space with a well developed body of idealistic International Space Law to guard against some of these things. Naturalist have been calling space Nature for ages. Science fiction writers have called space a wilderness. Space artists and science fiction writers are on the lookout for exploiters. White Mars capstoned the century of science fiction writing about Mars by arguing it is a wilderness and potential utopia. But you don?t hear a lot about these issues in environmental circles because they are not highly publicized, some of the defenders of space are underground or not known, and the issues is of less immediate concern than other environmental issues. But the forces are also gathering in science fiction, The Mars Society and NASA to argue that we should Terraform Mars.
There are many reasons to go Mars. One is exploration. Another is science. But the reason is really more than just exploration. Confronted with the vastness of space it is hard to ignore it. It is difficult not to want to know more at least for the sake of not feeling vulnerable to the vast universe on the other side of the light pollution and space debree. As recently as one hundred years ago, we believed we could be attacked by martians. The radio broadcast of The War Of The Worlds sent people running into the streets in panic in the late 1930?s. We now know that Mars doesn?t present such a threat, but somewhere out there, there may be something that finds us interesting and knows things that we don?t know yet. In H.G. Wells words: "Intellects Vast, Cool and Unsympathetic". It is easy to feel uncomfortable with the thought of what we may be vulnerable to, especially when we reflect upon how much we have learned over the last 100 years. Who knows where human technological society will be in a hundred years from now? Going to Mars is a way of confronting this vast other beyond the light pollution and space debree. But we also need to make sure that we do not cease to be concerned about our steps into space because of our feeling of vulnerability. The search for life on other planets is also compelling and becomes secondary to human expansion if we choose to focus on Terraforming. But what is not questionable is that we now pose the threat to the Red Planet.
Zubrin writes in Entering Space: "The human desire to explore is thus one of our primary adaptations. We have a fundamental need to see what is on the other side of the hill, because our ancestors did, and we are alive because they did. And, therefore, I am firmly convinced that humanity will enter space. We would be less than human if we didn?t..." (page 275).
"....When we cease exploring, we die-first in soul, then in body. To be really alive as individuals, to be really alive as a civilization and as a species, we must be willing to continually seek out and experience the new...." (page 276)
Zubrin?s argument is debatable. But when we go to Mars, we need to go in a humane way for scientific and environmental reason. We need to have learned from our past and try to do better by the next planet we have access to. We should explore Mars thoroughly for life before we even consider Terraforming. We should consider it a wilderness so we don?t feel we have the right to alter it, especially in as extreme a way as Terraforming. What we have learned from environmentalism, the adjustments we need to make to protect the land-even if barren, should also be applied to Mars. Mars is a place already with its own inherent worth. Robert Zubrin can be over ruled by a vast enlightened membership. Zubrin wouldn?t have a choice if say the whole Sierra Club or Audubon Society or Nature Conservancy or Greenpeace or Astronomical Society of the Pacific wanted to join The Mars Society with the condition that Terraforming would not be part of the plan. Rather than reading Robinson, one can imagine the utopia Mars can become by reading White Mars by Aldiss and Penrose. If environmentalists don?t act we can lose the battle in the mind of the public. Science fiction writers reacted to Robinson?s Mars trilogy and saved the Red Planet in many of the recent science fiction books about Mars, but the battle against terraforming, which the scientists will want to win, is not over.
At the beginning of a new century, the public, with concerns about space would probably like some leadership from environmentalists on this issue. We should say no to the idea of Terraforming Mars. We should be concerned about light pollution, space debree, plutonium, and fuels the space shuttles use. Environmentalism will be losing battles if we don?t. Astronomers will be losing respect if they don?t. We have plenty of green wild planet left. We have enough problems protecting one ocean without creating another one where it doesn?t belong. Mars will have its own aesthetic values. Respecting Mars as it is, will be proof that we have become an environmentally literate people.
Sources:
Aldiss, Brian and Penrose, Roger. (1999) White Mars, Or The Mind Set Free. New York: St. Martin?s Press.
Bradbury, Ray. (1950). The Martian Chronicles. New York: Bantam Books.
Earth Island Journal. Earth Island Institute: San Francisco.
Grossman, Karl. (1997). The Wrong Stuff: The Space Program?s Nuclear Threat To Our Planet. Maine: Common Courage Press.
Hargrove, Eugene C.. (1986). Beyond Spaceship Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.
Leopold, Aldo. (1949). A Sand County Almanac. New York: Ballantine Books.
Lewis, C.S.. (1943). Out Of The Silent Planet. New York: Scribner.
Miller, Ryder W. Commentary: Explore and Protect. Mercury Magazine (March/April, 1999) page 33-34.
Robinson, Kim Stanley.(1996). Blue Mars. New York: Bantam Books.
Robinson, Kim Stanley.(1994). Green Mars. New York: Bantam Books.
Robinson, Kim Stanley. (1993). Red Mars. New York: Bantam Books.
Sheehan, William. (1996). The Planet Mars: A History of Observation & Discovery. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Wells, H.G.. (1898). The War of the Worlds.
Zubrin, Robert. (1999). Entering Space. New York: Tarcher/Putnam.
Zubrin, Robert, with Wagner, Richard S.. (1996). The Case For Mars: The Plan To Settle The Red Planet and Why We Must. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Ryder W. Miller has been published in Mercury (Astronomical Society of the Pacific), Sierra Magazine, California Wild, Coast & Ocean, The Urban Ecologist, San Francisco Frontlines, The Electronic Green Journal, Ad Astra and on New Mars (www.newmars.com) the e-zine of the Mars Society. |
|
|