Alba Mora
WriterAn established tech journalist, I entered the world of consumer tech by chance in 2018. In my writing and translating career, I've also covered a diverse range of topics, including entertainment, travel, science, and the economy.
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk envisions transforming humanity into a multiplanetary species, with Mars serving as our second home and a “lifeboat” in the event of a catastrophic event on Earth. Musk’s vision drives the Starship program, which has mobilized billions of dollars to build a rocket capable of transporting people to the Red Planet.
Three Possible Scenarios
However, some scientists question Musk’s ambition to colonize Mars. Their skepticism doesn’t stem from the fact that Starship has exploded four times in a row. After all, it’s an experimental rocket. Astrophysicist Adam Becker told Rolling Stones, “There are so many reasons why it’s such a bad idea, and this is not about, ‘Oh, we’ll never have the technology to live on Mars.’ That’s not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is that Earth is always going to be a better option no matter what happens to Earth.”
Becker critiques some of the “messianic, sci-fi fantasies” of tech oligarchs, starting with Musk’s Martian dream. His argument is both straightforward and compelling. He says that no matter how dire conditions become on our planet, Earth will always be a paradise compared to the inhospitable environment of Mars. Becker goes so far as to call Musk’s idea one of “the very stupidest things that someone could say.”
To illustrate his point, Becker presents three apocalyptic scenarios: 1) The impact of an asteroid the size of the one that wiped out the dinosaurs, 2) The detonation of all the nuclear weapons on the planet, and 3) The worst-case scenario for climate change. “Earth would still be more habitable. Any cursory examination of any of the facts about Mars makes it very clear,” he says.
Devastated Earth vs. Mars as It Is
For an environment to be considered “habitable” for humans, without relying on perfect autonomous life support technology, it requires essential conditions that we often take for granted.
Even if Earth’s atmosphere were polluted, it would still be dense, rich in nitrogen and oxygen, and maintain a sea-level pressure of 1 bar. In contrast, today’s Martian atmosphere is extremely thin (just 0.6% of Earth’s), composed of 95% carbon dioxide, making it unbreathable. Additionally, its surface pressure is only 0.006 bar, which causes liquid water to boil away almost instantly, or sublimate from solid to gas.
Earth’s magnetic field would remain intact, deflecting most cosmic and solar radiation. The atmosphere, even if polluted, would offer an additional layer of protection. In contrast, Mars lacks a global magnetic field, resulting in its surface being continuously bombarded with radiation, which can become lethal to humans over time.
The average temperature on Mars is around -81 degrees Fahrenheit, and all water exists as frozen ice, either in the polar caps or beneath the surface. Although a nuclear winter or asteroid impact could drastically cool Earth, oceans would still function as a massive thermal regulator. With 336 million cubic miles of water available, it would still be present. It would be contaminated and partially frozen, but it could be treated with advanced technology.
While a catastrophic event would severely damage Earth’s biosphere, the soil would still contain organic matter and essential components for sustaining life. Moreover, there would be geothermal and oceanic refuges where microbial life could continue to exist even if other forms of life had vanished. In contrast, Martian soil is toxic, harboring high concentrations of perchlorates. These chemical compounds pose serious health risks to humans and complicate agricultural efforts.
Can Mars Be Terraformed?
Although SpaceX’s renderings depict a massive pressurized base beneath Mars’ surface, Musk has always envisioned terraforming the Red Planet as a crucial aspect of his plan. This goes beyond merely transporting millions of tons of cargo to construct a city on Martian soil. It involves a far grander project.
There are numerous diverse ideas for terraforming Mars, but the large-scale engineering required for any of these proposals presents significant obstacles. The first step would be to raise the temperature of Mars. Suggestions range from using nuclear bombs to installing giant orbital mirrors that concentrate sunlight on the poles. By heating the polar ice caps, both water ice and carbon dioxide would sublimate, which would thicken the atmosphere.
In theory, a denser atmosphere would trap more heat, resulting in the release of additional gases from the poles and the ground. This positive feedback loop could increase pressure and temperature until water can exist in a liquid state on the Martian surface. However, studies have raised doubts about whether Mars has enough carbon dioxide to achieve this effect.
Even if Musk could release all the accessible carbon dioxide from the polar caps and from minerals on the surface, Mars’ atmospheric pressure would only reach about 7% of Earth’s atmospheric thickness. In this context, Becker’s claim becomes particularly compelling.
If transforming Mars into a habitable planet is practically impossible, living there would necessitate complete dependence on incredibly complex and vulnerable artificial habitats. It stands to reason that efforts and resources would be better invested in preserving and, if necessary, repairing the only life support system that works perfectly: planet Earth.
Still, given the current state of our world, perhaps having a backup plan wouldn’t be such a bad idea, especially for the descendants of those who choose to live on a harsher planet, allowing them the option to return.
Images | Javier Miranda | SpaceX
Related | Scientists Thought They Knew Why Mars Was Red. New Research Changes Everything
View 0 comments