Should we be going to the moon, Mars and other places beyond Earth when we are not able to properly explore and take care of our home planet? Is the huge amount of money being spent on extraterrestrial exploration the best investment we can make when we still haven’t seen, let alone mapped, most of our own ocean floor?
These fundamental questions were at the heart of an hour-long discussion, Red Planet vs. Blue Planet, at today’s National Geographic Explorers Festival in Washington, D.C. (#NatGeoFest) The answers may surprise you.
The lively discussion at National Geographic headquarters was moderated by Joel Achenbach, author and staff writer at The Washington Post, and contributor to various National Geographic publications (including Mars: Inside the High-Risk, High-Stakes Race to the Red Planet, National Geographic Magazine, November 2016).
The panel of prominent experts in the topic of exploration of Earth and beyond were:
Bob Ballard, ocean explorer and National Geographic Explorer-in-Residence
Bethany Ehlmann, planetary geologist and National Geographic 2013 Emerging Explorer
Chris Hadfield, astronaut and first Canadian to walk in Space
Stephen Petranek, writer and technologist, and co-executive producer of the National Geographic mini-series “MARS“, which is based on, and inspired by, his book, “How We’ll Live on Mars.”
We have better maps of Mars than of our planet, Ballard, a proponent of focusing more on the exploration of our own planet, said at the start of the discussion. It’s easier to see Mars because 70 percent of Earth is covered by water, he explained. “It’s a much greater challenge to map our planet, although the cost of mapping Mars, I think, was $3 billion…you could map our planet for the same amount of money. We haven’t done it yet.”
What is more, Ballard added, we don’t have maps of half of the United States, because 50 percent of America is underwater [the sea floor within the U.S. coastal territory]. The U.S. has largest underwater holdings of any nation.
Our blue planet. Credit: NASA
Hadfield, who has been into Space three times, going around Earth 2,600 times, including a space walk during an aurora, advocates for further exploration both on Earth and beyond our planet.
It’s important to encourage exploration, Hadfield noted, because it’s on the frontiers of things that we discover the most. By challenging ourselves to go to an environment we’ve never been before…whether under the ocean or on Mars…the understanding of our own planet and our role on it only comes from exploration and our ability to see it any way that we can challenge ourselves.
“I think we need to continuously push ourselves to do those things. Often the returns are just scientific–you get data…ideas…but what National Geographic has done so well for so long is take those bits of data, those ideas, and turn them into something human, something that inspires us to be even more curious,” Hadfield said.
Chris Hadfield on the first Canadian spacewalk on April 22, 2001. (Credit: NASA)
Bethany Ehlmann actually explores Mars, albeit it remotely, via robots. “My job is not only the Rover driver, but the Rover backseat driver,” Ehlmann quipped. “As one of 400-and-something members of the science team for the Curiosity Rover, we take take turns. There are a few of us who have the privilege each day of getting to be in charge of the decisions of where does the Rover go, where does it drive to, what does it drill, what rock do we shoot with our laser in order to make a measure of its chemistry.”
It’s a whole different style of exploration when you can’t pick up the rock and touch it, Ehlmann noted. “I am a geologist by training. Sometimes this is intensely frustrating…you just want to look at what is on the other side.”
What the Rover does, however, is extend the human presence to another planet, through the eyes of a robot that drives around with a field of view that is about the same height as our eyes. This is incredibly exciting, as each day a data download comes from Mars and you never quite know what you are going to find, Ehlmann said.
Every once in a while, Mars produces a large surprise, Ehlmann added — a “Wow” moment from a planet hundreds of million miles away.
“It goes back to the theme of this discussion ‘Red Planet vs. Blue Planet’, the reason I explore Mars is the question ‘Why did Mars, once a water-rich world — it had lakes…rivers…hydrothermal systems…it may even have had an ocean in the north — why did it go from being a Blue Planet to a Red Planet? “It’s a hugely profound question, and I want to understand that. This is why I explore with Rovers.”
The red planet. Credit: NASA
Citing Elon Musk’s SpaceX’s mission, which is to enable humans to become a spacefaring civilization and a multi-planet species by building a self-sustaining city on Mars, Stephen Petranek said he believed there could be 50,000 people on Mars by 2050, “a conservative estimate”.
People can’t get their heads around that we’re going to have humans on Mars, Petranek said. “In ten years, I think humans will have landed on Mars, if Musk can build this colonizer rocket that can carry 80-100 people at a time.”
But is this a good idea, something we would want to do?
Exploration is good, but it does boil down to cost, Ballard said. “NASA’s budget is a thousand times larger than NOAA’s exploration budget, so it’s really [about] money. Yes, we should do every kind of exploration we can, but I’m really focused on my own planet. Knowing how little of it has been explored, that 95 percent of the human race lives on less than 5 percent of Planet Earth, I would rather colonize Earth first.”
Chris Hadfield: “Historically, we have explored for three different reasons. One is ideological…a strong core belief, religion or anything else, that leads to exploration…Or it is purely scientific, and that drives some of the current exploration going on. Or the main reason we have ever explored has been financial — it’s why the Portuguese invented all the things they did to get us around Africa, and then with the Spaniards, across the Atlantic, and then across the North Atlantic and the Northwest Passage — and it’s still driving us today. If we look at 10,000 years, or 300,000 years of exploration for our species, of those three historic drivers, and the balance between the three, financial almost always end up being the main discriminator. Where does Mars fit into that?”
While being a big fan of Musk, Hadfield added, “I think it’s his form of ideology that is pushing” the exploration of Mars. “I don’t think that it is going to be financially viable, and what he’s doing is not scientific. The scientific exploration of Mars does not involve settlement and colonization. So I think that as an ideology and a way to motivate people it’s a wonderful idea, and it’s a long-term motivator because we need our young folks to do something that hasn’t been done before. But I don’t think the timeline is realistic.”
What SpaceX is doing is tremendously important, Ehlmann added, but it was difficult. Only the United States had so far managed to land robots to explore Mars successfully, and no one had developed spacecraft capable of returning to Earth. “All of our Rovers that we send, they’ve gone on a one-way trip. They explore, and then they remain. I think that if we are going to send out a colony, we might want some two-way traffic and at least some supplies and materiel, especially if there is a financial side to this.”