Mars Sweet Mars
Almost six decades ago, something incredible happened that sparked the imagination of people all over the planet: A modified R-7 Semyorka—the world’s first intercontinental ballistic missile — rose from the steppes of Central Asia on a pillar of fire, carrying a special payload. Forged in the embers of the worst war in history and fuelled by a suicidal arms race, what rose that day, however, far from being a harbinger of an apocalypse, was a symbol of mankind’s loftiest dreams: It was Sputnik 1, and it was humanity’s first baby step outside our cradle.
In the six decades since, we have come a long way. We have established a permanent human habitat in Earth orbit, we have walked on the Moon, and we have sent our scouts to every planet and dwarf planet in the Solar System up to the orbit of Pluto. Some of our first interplanetary probes are now beginning to explore interstellar space. Our robotic explorers routinely study Mars. We have intercepted comets and asteroids. We have landed on an asteroid, an alien satellite, and a comet. We have brought back to Earth space dust and particles from the Solar wind. Tourists have started visiting our orbital outpost. Private companies are starting to prospect asteroids for minerals and water. The dawn of the space age has been slow to blossom into a brilliant sunshine, but it increasingly seems imminent.
It is perhaps unsurprising then that people have started seriously considering colonizing Mars. Although there have been various people and organizations advocating human colonization of Mars for decades, it was not until recently that two major voices began to be heard. The first is Elon Musk, the founder and CEO of SpaceX, who has famously said that his goal is to die on Mars. That might sound like something a nerdy teenager would say, but Musk is no greenhorn. He has demonstrated his calibre building SpaceX up from scratch. Unlike its established competitors who have had no incentive to make access to space cheaper, SpaceX is innovating reusable launch systems that will make space accessible to a larger market. Musk’s personal ambition is evident in the informal moniker by which one of SpaceX’s planned spacecraft is known — the Mars Colonial Transporter, which is supposed to be able to transport 100 people at a time to the red planet.
The second, more recent voice is that of Mars One. Founded just four years ago, Mars One exploited social media to rally space enthusiasts into applying to become the first colonists on Mars. They were in the news recently for shortlisting 100 people from whom they would choose four to be the first colonists, based on the outcome of a reality TV competition. But unlike Musk and SpaceX, the only thing Mars One has is a plan — it has demonstrated no technology whatsoever, nor a viable business plan. According to their roadmap, the first group of colonists will leave Earth in 2024, a mere nine years from now. Even Musk, whose estimates of SpaceX sending its first astronauts (as opposed to colonists) to Mars has been slipping by years, now thinks the optimistic scenario is around 2026. When SpaceX —probably the best-positioned to send the first humans to Mars — estimates a launch more than a decade away, it is ludicrous that an organization that has no capital and no technology plans to send colonists by 2024. Even assuming that funding is a non-issue and that all technologies involved would be outsourced to companies like SpaceX, living on Mars for decades — what the colonists would do, by definition— would involve solving challenges far greater than sending and bringing back astronauts. The more colonists they send, the more resources they would need. The only way to make sure the colony survives would be to make it mostly self-sustaining. Colonists would have to find water and grow food on Mars, prospects for neither of which have been demonstrated with any confidence. But in spite of all the technological hurdles — all of which humans will eventually overcome — what is bound to kill Mars One is its business plan.
Mars One aims to fund the mission with revenue from the reality TV show for shortlisting candidates, crowdfunding, and private donations. Consider the first of these. American Idol, one of the most profitable TV shows in recent times, was estimated to have made $6.64 million in advertising revenue for every half an hour. This adds up to less than a billion dollars in revenue per year. Assuming that Mars One’s extremely optimistic estimate of $6 billion to launch and operate a four-person mission is true, it would still take more than 6 years of reality TV to break even. That is assuming there are no significant recurring expenses once the colonists have settled on Mars. Each subsequent four-person mission would cost $6 billion as well, yielding a net total of $150 billion for a 100-person colony. Things look bleak for Mars One even adding crowdfunding and private donations. The most successful crowdfunded project of all time — Pebble Time — has, with 16 days left for funding at the time of writing this, raised about $18 million. In the case of crowdfunding, people are either customers or investors, and in either case, expect something in return. Any money spent on Mars One would count only as donation, leaving no incentive for potential funders. Private donations are possible, but unlikely to be of the order of billions of dollars. In other words, Mars One is not financially viable.
So how would we possibly colonize Mars? What would be the incentive that would convince ordinary people — as opposed to space enthusiasts — to give up their home planet? One possibility has to do with the increase in automation. When automation renders many jobs irrelevant later this century (drivers, pilots, doctors, soldiers, cooks, etc.), a Martian base — presumably highly underdeveloped compared to Earth — would be a source of new employment. This assumes two things — one, that the Martian base is a self-sustaining colony, and two, that the hardware aspects of automation is too expensive to ship to Mars. The latter is likely to be overcome by continued improvements in additive manufacturing, so that 3D-printed robots may be used to service our Martian bases instead of humans.
There is no doubt that Mars One is doomed, but our dreams of colonizing Mars may not be. SpaceX is sure to push the envelope of what is possible for at least a few more decades. Other companies are bound to join the fray. Scientific research will overcome the technological challenges involved. But whether we will ever have a true colony on Mars, ultimately, will be a question of economics more than anything else.
Aside: Andy Weir’s extremely interesting and well-researched novel The Martian — the story of an astronaut marooned on Mars who has to survive years living off limited resources — gives an unconventional overview of the challenges facing any potential colonist.
