A future history of Mars

steve smyth — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:31:41 GMT

speculative artwork, eh?
leave it to you to come up with something better than the ubiquitous 'artist's rendition'.
Good on ya...it's been drivin' me batty for ages...truth in advertising would have sped this process up since day one!

A future history of Mars

Rocket maker, Sacramento, CA — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:54:42 GMT

Sounds like a good book. But it also sounds somewhat like Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars Trilogy (Red Mars, Green Mars, Blue Mars).

A future history of Mars

CherryBomb, Dallas, Texas — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 22:10:53 GMT

"I’m trying to write a very realistic novel." Umm, one about Navajo tribal leaders investigating a vanished civilization on Mars? Face reality, Ben. This is a fantasy novel.

A future history of Mars

Jose Marti, Miami, FL — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 11:54:25 GMT

I really enjoy Bova's Grand Tour novels. They don't have the strange and brilliant ideas common in most Sci-fi novels nowadays, but that's what makes them so real. I totally understand what he means when he says he's writing future historical novels... they read exactly that way.

He's also got very good and practical ideas for living and working in space in his books. It's almost as if he's writing a "how to" manual for space programs and private space companies.

A future history of Mars

Frank Weigert — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 13:05:20 GMT

What Bova and other visionaries ignore is the INVESTMENT their schemes require. Most big physics solutions to global warming seem to require hundreds of billions of dollars in new investment to replace existing fossil fuel production as well as future expansions.

Ain't gonna happen.

The eventual solution must make better use of existing facilities. I propose making biofuels from algae.

Botryococcus braunii is pelagic algae that grows in the Indian Ocean. Its various strains make isoprene oligomers with different average molecular weights, mostly centered around n=6. What matters most is that the dry weight of the most prolific strain is OVER 70% HYDROCARBON. This is algae truly is a fuel plant.

Oil companies could feed these hydrocarbons directly into existing refineries. Electricity generators could directly replace coal with them. Because the hydrocarbons contain no sulfur, nitrogen, metals or ash, most existing pollution abatement and catalyst guard investment could be shut down as unnecessary. This is a really sweet feedstock.

For more details and some economic background see the website:

http://alum.mit.edu/news/WhatMatters/Archive/200111/

A future history of Mars

Bob Fealey, Rochester, Mn — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 14:41:56 GMT

This is a great interview of a fascinating author who weaves facts and fiction seamlessly in his novels. I will be running out to the book store this weekend to (hopefully) pick up "Mars Life"

A future history of Mars

Patrick, Portage, WI — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:27:17 GMT

Going to have to pick this one up.

A future history of Mars

Mark, Cocoa, Florida — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:47:05 GMT

Thanks for the great piece, Alan. Mr. Bova most definitely ranks right up there with the big three, Arthur C. Clarke, Robert A. Heinlein, and Isaac Asimov.

Many of our dreams were created and nutured by these folks, and Mr. Bova continues the tradition in style.

Keep the rest of us focused on what we are capable of as a species.

A future history of Mars

Larry, Pagosa Springs, Colorado — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 01:43:59 GMT

Sounds like drivel to me.

A future history of Mars

Thomas Ashby, Calgary — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:12:09 GMT

The one big mystery about Mars is ..what happened to it's magnetic field, if in fact it ever had one? If it did, why did the dynamo system burn out or fail? The only way clues to answering this can be done is getting a complete geologic picture of the Martian interior. On earth this is done by recording seismic waves produced by large earthquakes that propogate through the earth. This could be done on Mars with a system of geophones around the planet and some well placed nukes.

The only real reason life managed to survive and evolve on earth is because of the active earth and it's magnetic field that is a protective shield against life destroying radiation.

A future history of Mars

Bruce, San Diego, CA — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 19:23:18 GMT

Photovoltaic (solar electric) power has been widely used in space, and, unless I’m mistaken, was originally developed specifically for use in space – so that’s one more thing to add to the list of space technologies that benefit us in everyday life on earth today. I’m a great proponent of anything that makes space profitable, advances our knowledge, and makes space tourism affordable to the masses, as long as it offers the overall best solution to a problem.

As I see it, solar power satellites have only a few advantages over home rooftop solar panels or solar arrays on earth’s desserts. The ones in space will not be affected by night or cloudy days (although they may be occasionally eclipsed by the earth during part of their orbit), and they are more efficient in the more intense sunlight in space. I do wonder if those advantages outweigh the cost and complexity of putting the power satellites in orbit, maintaining them, dealing with micrometeorite damage, keeping their microwave antennas aimed at the receiving antennas, maintaining the receiving antennas, distributing the power, and the energy losses that result when converting from electricity to microwaves and back to electricity again. Also, if the microwave beams used to transfer energy from the satellites to earth are of a low enough power density not to endanger birds or airplanes that inadvertently fly through them, the earthbound receiving antennas will have to be huge.

Why not just cover that same (or more) receiving area on earth with photovoltaic panels, which can be easily maintained and serviced by workers in a truck and not wearing space suits, and save the launch costs and added hardware complexity? I’m betting that the excess capacity necessary to still produce adequate power on cloudy days would cost less than putting the system in space. There are low-tech ways to store energy for night use: charge up batteries, spin up a huge flywheel, or pump water up a hill to a reservoir so it can be later run downhill through turbines. Or there is the “medium-tech” method of using electricity to electrolyze water into oxygen and hydrogen that can be later recombined in a fuel cell to produce electricity, or a combustion engine to produce mechanical power, or a rocket to take tourists into space, with water being the only “emission.”

Still better, I believe, is flat panel rooftop photovoltaic power – especially in areas with abundant sunshine. This eliminates the distribution problem and vulnerability to widespread power outages from a central power supplier. Moreover, this technology is already in place and continues to improve – not a pie in the sky. Wind power is OK, too, but flat panel solar has no mechanical moving parts to maintain and no big hazardous tower sticking up and intruding on the view. Mechanical moving parts and the fact that they won’t focus on cloudy days is why I don’t like solar tracking arrays. Those competing with rooftop solar power want it to seem like something that will be possibly practical in the distant future, but too expensive and complex today, and unfortunately, that is what most people still believe.

I have been enjoying a grid-tied photovoltaic system with battery backup for several years. The solar panel array covers less than one third of the roughly 2,000 sq. ft. total roof area on my modest 1,600 sq. ft. living space suburban home. The other hardware takes up an insignificant part of a corner of my garage – about like a small closet – including the batteries. Systems without batteries are even simpler and less expensive, if you don’t mind being without power when there is a power outage on the grid. My electric meter runs backwards all day and forward only at night or on a really dark overcast day. I have a “net-metering” agreement with the electric company, which means that, at the end of each year, I only pay for any power I used in excess of what I generated that year. I made my system bigger than it needed to be so that, when improved battery technology becomes affordable, I could increase my battery capacity beyond short-term emergency back-up and go entirely off-grid if I choose.

The result is that I generate more than I use and have been “donating” a lot of free, zero-emission power to the electric company - because they only credit my generation against my use, rather than paying me for the excess. I suppose if they were required to pay for excess consumer-generated power, they’d be a lot less friendly and cooperative about setting up net-metering agreements. Still, my electric bill is only $5 per month for the privilege of being connected to the grid so I don’t need more batteries. My system should pay for itself in around 20 years. It would be a lot sooner if I had made it smaller, with less “overkill.”

Alternatively, I could come up with more ways to use my free, zero-emission power, such as central air conditioning, a Jacuzzi, an additional refrigerator, and/or charging up an electric car when they become practical and affordable – which may not be too far off. There is already on the market an electric sports car that can go over 200 miles between charges, and 0 to 60 in less than 4 seconds, but it costs over $100,000. See http://www.teslamotors.com - they are developing a 5-passenger sedan that they plan to put in the $60,000 range – still expensive, but less so when you consider the greatly reduced maintenance cost and zero fuel cost (or greatly reduced “fuel” cost, if you still have to pay for your electricity instead if getting it free from the sun).

What is really needed is some consciousness-raising in the general public about the reality and availability of rooftop solar power and electric cars NOW, so that prices can drop with economy of scale and our nation can be clean, green, and energy independent.

A future history of Mars

Sam Costanza — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:40:14 GMT

Amazing how many mundanes there are out there.

Just remember, a little over a hundred years ago, flight was fantasy. A little over 150 years ago, so was electricity. In the 1930s, many believed we'd never be able to go into space.

Now, Mr. Bova is stretching his imagination, while keeping the story rooted in reality, and all many can do is kvetch about the whole idea of life elsewhere as fantasy and drivel. To quote Jack Burton, from Big Trouble In Little China, "Well, ya see, I'm not saying that I've been everywhere and I've done everything, but I do know it's a pretty amazing planet we live on here, and a man would have to be some kind of FOOL to think we're alone in THIS universe."

A future history of Mars

Rich in G'burg — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:15:08 GMT

There was an op-ed piece by Dr. Bova in the Washington Post a week or so ago where he once again promoted the concept of solar power satellites. He mentioned that the operating cost was competitive with conventional power sources, but he didn't say anything at all about the capital cost.

On that, I'd read (several years ago) that it would cost about $1 million per installed kilowatt for this kind of technology. If true, that means that orbital solar power is absurdly expensive -- three full orders of magnitude more expensive to build than conventional powerplants. No corporation could possibly get financing for something like this.

A future history of Mars

ANDREW OLIVER SATCHELL — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:05:08 GMT

GOOD

A future history of Mars

David Holmes, Marietta, Ga. — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:55:48 GMT

I think that Nova's "New Morality" scenario wouldn't play out in the future due to the fact that we see how such people that claim to have all the answers like the so-called religious right act in our present day. In the future hopefully humanity will have grown leary of such non-sense and will learn to deal with such marginal groups as a potential "New Morality" by just ignoring them and letting them go back under the rock from where they crawled out from.

A future history of Mars

Doug Jones, Mojave CA — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:53:10 GMT

Rich in G'burg, yes space-based solar power will be expensive at first, and so it would not be used for basic grid power. However, the department of defense is VERY interested in SBSP for military bases in remote sites, since the logistic tail for diesel fuel to run generators on-site is horrendously expensive. I've seen figures upwards of $10/kWh, so even a very expensive power beam could be competitive. Eliminating tanker truck convoys in hostile areas would also be very much appreciated.

Col. Michael Coyote Smith has a useful website: http://spacesolarpower.wordpress.com/

A future history of Mars

Don Pointer, Buckhorn, New Mexico — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:41:38 GMT

You can bet that there is not now and never was life on Mars. I don't care how big a wet puddle there may have been on Mars. Life on Earth started with a chemical brew that had a couple of billion years to cook in very large oceans. Mars has never had the conditions to generate life. Sorry about that, folks.

A future history of Mars

Sam Costanza — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 03:40:49 GMT

Don Pointer--

Define "life," if you would, please. I doubt seriously we'd find a higher native civilazation on Mars, but the evidence seems to indicate conditions on Mars were once quite a bit different, so it is possible that there was at least simple animal life there, once. Even if the probes and manned missions find nothing more complex than amoebas or bacteria, that is a big sign of hope that there should be more life on other planets.

My bet is on the icy Jovian moons.

A future history of Mars

David Holmes — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 17:50:54 GMT

I would imagine a primary canadate for life "out there" would be on Saturn's Encaladus. Beneath the ever cracking freezing and re-freezing layers of ice is a thermally heated ocean. I am not sure how a chemical brew works for cooking up some basic microbes but given a few billion years or so it might have brewed up some intriguing life forms over time.

A future history of Mars

alpha omega — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 02:17:48 GMT

What happened too the the GRB's beyond redshift 6.7
Is this an indication that the universe is in the process of deflation....how fast is this deflation....how long do we have before the universe winks out of existence....

A future history of Mars

David Holmes Marietta Ga. — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 11:46:31 GMT

Don,s comment (oct. 21st) got me really thinking about potential life on Mars (his mentioning Mars lack of a "chemical brew"). Makes a whole lot of sense. Just one question on that line of thought, could it be possible that life could arrive on Mars or any likely host planet through the debris from a comet impact since a primary ingrediant of comets is ice? Or as a general question to this blog what are other ways that life could arrive on a planet other than being originated on that planet through a "chemical brew"? Again I really think Don's comment makes sense, but like many of you I really want some kind of life found on Mars--keep hope alive.

A future history of Mars

Quester — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 22:35:27 GMT

I heard that the gamma ray bursts are missing beyond that limit...no one knows why for sure,there have been several possibilites but nothing that can be proven...if it is contracting at greater than light speed we will be unable to detect it...
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/22oct_missinggrbs.htm