People have been bogged down over the idea that they had to bring existing resources with them to solve new problems.
For years scientists have believed that Mars is the planet that most closely resembles the Earth. Many scientists who look to the future feel that it is only a matter of time before humans voyage to Mars and establish colonies there to live. The planet may offer clues on how to improve the quality of human life. It may contain resources that can be used to improve technology, cure disease and test experiments and ideas. The possibilities are endless.
Why is a mission to Mars taking so long to come to fruition? There are many problems facing our ability to take advantage of Mars, including the fact that many people do not agree about the future and the benefits that the planet can provide us with. In addition, even those who see these advantages are blinded by certain ways of thinking about how to obtain them. One of the biggest logistical challenges in getting to Mars and back is the cost of transporting enough fuel and supplies for the round trip. NASA has estimated that the cost of making the kind of mission they had in mind would be over $450 billion.
Robert Zubrin, an engineer at a private company, has changed the fundamental way that people think about the mission. Zubrin came up with the idea of building a machine that makes fuel out of Mars' own atmosphere. At first, many people thought this was impractical, too risky and too expensive. Since then, Zubrin has built a prototype of this idea and demonstrated that it will work, and for only a small fraction of NASA's estimated cost.
In addition, this has led others to think of additional ways for the mission to take advantage of Mars' own natural resources. The new way of thinking about the mission is "travel light, and live off the land," explains David L. Chandler in his August 5, 1996 article in the "Boston Globe". NASA scientist Michael Sims agrees that "the issue is not about technology, it's about how we set it up so it will happen."
This change in the way of thinking about the mission has prompted NASA to recalculate its financial costs, which it has now reduced to only $30 billion as opposed to $450 billion. But Zubrin feels that the cost can be reduced to $6 billion for a three year mission and take only about 20 years before it can happen if private companies, as opposed to NASA alone, take charge.
Zubrin also feels that one way to accomplish this might be for the government to offer generous cash prizes to companies that can set up the expedition and establish competition among companies. This idea is similar to the conditions around Lindbergh's flight and the expedition to the poles. Some feel that the television rights alone might be enough to fund the mission. This would again be a major change in the way that space exploration is thought of: private companies as vehicles for progress as opposed to the narrow focus of government.
We welcome your comments and questions.
© 1996 Mitchell and Company | E-mail | Legal
© 1996 Developed by Interactive Media Advertising Group, Inc.
