Space exploration has arguably never been so exciting. My passion for all things NASA has exploded; what began as a vague frustration reading lunar landing conspiracy theories, has snowballed to serious procrastination, live streaming the Orion shuttle take off instead of running experiments in the lab. Although my PhD might be lacking attention, my critical outlook as a scientist hasnÔÇÖt dissipated. Is it really possible for humans to reach Mars in our lifetime?
2014 was a particularly eventful year in space investigation. The world held itÔÇÖs breath as the Philae probe bounced and finally landed on a giant comet, after travelling a distance of 500 million kilometres over 7 years. NASA successfully launched its new Orion spacecraft and it landed safely back on Earth, in a mission to test its exploration capabilities. Astronauts Reid Wiseman and Alexander Gerst space walked in low orbit, leaving the International Space Station for several hours to carry out essential repairs on the craft. All amazing feats of technology that have left many, like myself, excited for what is to follow.
According to the 2014 Strategic Plan, ÔÇ£humanityÔÇÖs future in space is bright and NASA is leading the wayÔÇØ. They have ambitious and bold plans for the next two decades; to capture an asteroid and send astronauts to explore it, and send humans to Mars.
In the next 10 years, the Asteroid Redirect Mission (ARM), aims to capture an asteroid, redirect its orbit to make it circle the moon, and send astronauts to explore the alien terrain. NASA chief scientist Ellen Stoffan says ÔÇ£The mission has critical technologies that we need to develop for our ambition to get people to Mars.ÔÇØ Sounds a little like the blockbuster Armageddon, and much like the film, the organization plan to demonstrate planetary defense techniques to deflect asteroids and protect Earth if need be.
The asteroid retrieval mission has already caused raised eyebrows and received widespread criticism. Committees chairman Lamar Smith of the NASA Advisory Council made this particularly damning statement: ÔÇ£ARM has many skeptics within the scientific community. And the experts who advise NASA recently stepped up their criticism. The NASA Advisory Council warns that NASA ÔÇÿruns the risk of squandering precious national resourcesÔÇÖ if they move forward with ARM. One expert, Mr. Tom Young, went so far as to say that the ARM proposal ÔÇÿdumbed down NASA.ÔÇØ
ItÔÇÖs not just the ARM under scrutiny. Private organisations are now claiming that a human mission to Mars will be closer than NASA anticipates. Elon Musk, the CEO of American space transport company SpaceX, says, ÔÇ£IÔÇÖm hopeful that the first people could be taken to Mars in 10 to 12 years, I think itÔÇÖs certainly possible for that to occur. Bu the thing that matters long term is to have a self-sustaining city on Mars, to make life multi-planetary.ÔÇØ
SpaceX have been linked to the audacious private not-for-profit company Mars One, which rose to fame after announcing it had received over 200,000 applications for the chance to visit Mars on a one way trip with no return. The company claims that by 2025 it will send 4 members of the public to begin colonizing the planet, sending further groups every 2 years. It suggests costs will meet the $6 million mark, despite NASA suggesting it would cost hundred of billions more.
Of course, this mission caught the attention of the public around the world, which poured in donations and uploaded their video applications, pleading to sacrifice their lives to take part in deep-space exploration. But after examination, the Mars One objective and the company itself seems ominous to some. It has a core staff of only 3 people and details remain vague about the technology required to travel the 400 million kilometers from Earth. Most proposals on their website are theoretical, with companies listed as suppliers, including SpaceX, holding no current contracts with Mars One.
Commander Chris Hadfield, the astronaut famous for singing David Bowie on the International Space Station, is particularly critical of the Mars One project. I fear that its going to be a little disillusioning for people, because its presented as if its for sure its going to happenGoing to Mars is hard. An independent assessment of the feasibility proved his skepticism well founded, when it concluded that the oxygen required to grow plants on Mars would rise to deadly levels, and colonists would die from asphyxiation only weeks after arrival.
If we do make it to Mars, whether it is with Mars One colonizing the planet, or with NASA as a flying visit, will humans be capable of surviving? Is it ethical to send us there?
The health implications of spending time in outer space have already been well documented. The list is extensive. Long-term weightlessness due to a lack of gravity causes muscles to waste, bones to thin and body mass to decrease significantly. The cardiovascular system slows as a drop in blood volume shrinks the heart muscle, with less to pump around the body. Fluid redistribution forces bodies to change shape, astronauts looking a little like the cartoon Johnny Bravo, top heavy, with ÔÇÿmoon-facesÔÇÖ and struggling to balance.
Furthermore, the risk of going blind is all too real: cosmonaut Valentin Lebedev lost his eyesight to progressive cataracts, brought on by a crushed optic nerve during his 211 days in orbit. This is all without mentioning the crippling space adaption syndrome that the majority of space travellers suffer, with nausea, hallucinations and disorientation blighting them for days.
The unpleasant afflictions mentioned are far from a comprehensive list and itÔÇÖs worth noting that the environment on Mars is very different to that of the Moon or EarthÔÇÖs low-orbit. Galactic cosmic rays are a key issue for NASA to tackle, with ÔÇ£unacceptably high dose of radiation, mostly due to cosmic radiation on the journeys between Earth and MarsÔÇØ, according to Ellen Stofan. In the outbound trip alone, an astronaut would be exposed to 15 times the annual radiation limit for a nuclear plant worker, in just 180 days.
Technical incidents with risk to humans occur in space, too. Although 2014 was an unquestionable feat of space technology, there were several accidents that cannot be ignored. VSS Enterprise, a Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo test flight vehicle, catastrophically broke apart mid-take off, injuring the pilot and killing his colleague. The Falcon 9 of SpaceX crashed after attempts to land the reusable rocket on a floating barge failed, scuppering plans to recycle parts. Even this month, 3 astronauts had to take refuge in the Russian segment of the International Space Station, after the detection of a potentially hazardous ammonia leak threatened their safety.
Catching an asteroid and landing humans on the moon are clearly difficult missions that many argue, at this moment in time, are not feasible, or safe. As David Parker, Chief Executive of the European Space Agency points out, ÔÇ£The history of space exploration is marked by both success and failure.ÔÇØ The sentiment from John F Kennedy in 1962, is as relevant now in 2015 as it was then: ÔÇ£We chose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.ÔÇØ
Cosmonaut Valentin Lebedev lost his eyesight to progressive cataracts, brought on by a crushed optic nerve during his 211 days in orbit.