If possible, would terraforming Mars be ethical?

[The Mad Monk]

We have loads to spare. If all the carbon dioxide locked in limestone and other carbonate beds as carbonate was released into the atmosphere at once, we'd have an atmosphere even thicker, denser, and hotter than Venus.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Sure, go ahead. But pray tell me this: How in god's name are you going to "create" carbon dioxide? There may be oxides in the soil, but I think that there is a deficit of carbon on Mars. This means that you're going to have to import carbon to Mars. Do we have that much to spare?

Theoretically, we can suck up parts of Venus's atmosphere and transport it to Mars. This way, we can terraform two planets.

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Has anyone given much thought as to whether mars is really able to hold a sufficient atmosphere? It is after all smaller than earth and has less gravity.

I am pretty sure it Mars can hold at atmosphere of heavier gases.

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
How much carbon dioxide will it take to raise the atmospheric temperature to a habitable level?

If CO₂ is not sufficient, we can dump methane and other sorts of greenhouse gases on Mars.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
What would that accomplish? Are asteroids chock-a-block rich in carbon dioxide, or are we just venting our frustration that the only other planet in our solar system that we ever had a hope of settling turns out to be unfixable?

Asteroids are useless, but comets are mostly frozen gases.

[Dis]

sure it's ethical. It's not like we are killing anything that is already there.

[monolith94]

not this ****ing thread again...

[Az]

If CO2 is not sufficient, we can dump methane and other sorts of greenhouse gases on Mars.

Actually, we'll start the Greenhouse effect with PFCs, and CFCs. they're much better at that than CO2.

About Venus: why not just drop Europa, a giant icecube, on it?

[Urban Ranger]

For one thing, because you are going to screw up the orbits of the rest of the satellites. Besides, you can't cool off Venus like that because of an external energy source coupled with a massive greenhouse effect. You'll need to reduce that first.

[DAVOUT]

It is ethical under the conditions given. Life, at this point, cannot be a scourge to the Universe, it is rather consistently threatten of extinction, and in the end, the sun will destroy the whole solar system. Meantime, lets play with our toys.

[The Mad Monk]

Mars dosen't have sufficient gravity to hold a breathable atmosphere, at least for more than a few hundred thousand years.

[Skanky Burns]

In the same way as concrete doesn't sufficiently block sunlight to prevent grass from growing, at least for more than a few hundred thousand years.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
Mars dosen't have sufficient gravity to hold a breathable atmosphere, at least for more than a few hundred thousand years.

It depends. Mars has roughly a mass of 1/10 of Earth, but since the surface temperature of Mars will remain fairly low, pretty hard to say if it has enough gravity to hold in oxygen, nitrogen, CO₂, etc.

[Dauphin]

Its not that hard to work out.

Work out the Mars escape velocity and the surface temperature. Then work out the energy distribution for the gases based on surface temperature, hence their velocity distribution and then bingo. You have a rough guide.

[The Mad Monk]

It's been done (don't ask me where -- I don't remember), as Big Crunch laid out, and the results are as I laid out. Earth can't actually hold it's atmosphere either, but more is being generated all the time through a combination of volcanism, micrometeor bombardment and biological activity.

Of course, a couple hundred thousand years is still a good long time in human term.

[Skanky Burns]

Yeah, its all too easy SD.

[Dauphin]

All I said was that it wasn't hard and it isn't. It was, incidentally, an exam question in my first year of university.