In a story that reads like the kinds of colonization pitches for the New World in the Americas that our European ancestors must have heard and responded to hundreds of years ago, CNN reports on the quest to colonize Mars:
"All companies set goals, but newly formed 4Frontiers Corp. is eyeing some expansive horizons. The company’s mission: to open a small human settlement on Mars within 20 years or so.
"Sure, it may sound far-fetched. And the company’s initial plans are a lot more terrestrial than ethereal, like developing a 25,000-square-foot replica of a Mars settlement here on Earth, then charging tourists admission.
"But the people behind the venture are quite serious — as serious as the $25 million they want to raise from investors.
[…]
"That still leaves a lot of questions: Why should people live on Mars? And if it’s going to be done, should a private enterprise engage in what would be one of humanity’s defining moments?
"Besides, what’s in it for investors?
"[4Frontiers Corp. CEO Mark] Homnick and his co-founders — a longtime Mars aficionado named Bruce Mackenzie and a 25-year-old Massachusetts Institute of Technology master’s student, Joseph Palaia — are ready with several answers."
I’ve occasionally speculated on whether I would have been willing to strike out for the New World had I been an Old World European during the Age of Exploration several hundred years ago. If my reaction to this story is any indication, I now know that my answer would have been a resounding "No!"
There’s huge difference between this and old world exploration. The “New World” naturally supported life. Mars doesn’t.
It’s a lost hope. It’ll cost billions to put a self-sustaining colony on Mars or Luna.
The broadcast rights to the reality show alone would pay for the trip.
Just put cameras everywhere and choose conflicting personality types to go on the mission.
“Real World on Mars”
Paul: “Luna” is just what they say on Earth. Everybody who lives on the Moon calls it “the Moon.”
Chief Collins in the DS9 episode Valiant.
Well, one thing corporations could do is base their operations legally at Mars Colony, and then declare independence. Much better than an off-shore island.
As to the Communist space treaty, who is going to enforce it?
Free Mars!
A start-up self-sustaining Mars base runs about 40 billion, provided NASA doesn’t do it. Now, think about the tax savings. And the glory.
Everything we need is there, including water within a few feet of the surface.
Yes, but the head of a corporation would have to spend at least 51% of the year on Mars in order to qualify as a Mars resident and get the tax break.
It’d also be awfully expensive to import fresh oranges and make fresh-squeezed orange juice for breakfast.
There are possible solutions to the problem of a self-sustaining Martian colony detailed in the Bob Zubrin’s book, The Case for Mars.
Assuming I had the engineering skills needed to make it work, I’d go in a heartbeat.
I’m surprised that no one mentioned the idea of colonizing for the purpose of “religious freedom”.
Perhaps I’ll write a S/F story about the idea, sometime in the future.
What do you mean it won’t sustain life? All we have to do is turn on the alien artifact that drops hot rods into the icy core giving off oxygen…
Mars has no magnetic field since it’s core is most likely dead. The cost of insulating against the radiation would be the major expense.
I’ve often wondered if it is really possible to terraform Mars with a dead core?
would they get their own bishop?
Mars has a number of local magnetic fields, some of which approach the strength of Earth’s.
Location, location, location.
And Mars isn’t dead, In the past three Martian orbits, there have been new gullies carven, indications of seismic activity, craters forming and disappearing, throwing out the dating system entirely (til it is massively recalibrated), new, crater-free volcaoes in the north polar regions, etc.
And then you’ve got the anomolous methane.