MARS AND SPACEX
Nasa and SpaceX are looking towards a future where humans have a civilization on Mars. The Economic Times claims that “Musk wants to take humans to Mars in less than ten years and build a metropolis there in twenty.” If Elon Musk builds a city on Mars it will only be filled with oil and chemicals not fit for its natural environment. The same exact thing that’s happening to Earth like global warming, pollution and sea level rise is going to happen to Mars if we continue to allow billionaires and government officials to pursue this destructive ambition. Why are they worrying about interplanetary travel when the Earth is on fire and is crumbling beneath our feet? It seems as though all the people in power – Elon Musk, NASA, and SpaceX – want to do, is push these problems onto Mars and pollute space. Why can’t we fix our own planet before trying to destroy others? A quote from SpaceX- Mission Mars states that Mars is a little bit colder than Earth “but we can warm it up.” Why would they want to warm up Mars? Why not just leave it like it is and observe it from afar? There is absolutely no need to travel there; it is just unrealistic and unhealthy. If humans were supposed to be on Mars, they would be on there already. Earth has been fitted for humans and we have adapted to it accordingly. Going to Mars would be a six-month trip in zero gravity and once arriving, the humans would have to battle the toxic dust, unbreathable air, and radiation that covers the planet’s surface. Those in power seem all too content with facing these challenges, so much so that they seem to be forgetting about the ones currently plaguing our planet. They do not care that the Earth is dying because of their selfish disregard and unheralded dreams. The governments of the world do not seem to care either. It’ll be Mars then Jupiter and Saturn until humanity has single-handedly destroyed our entire solar system.
EARTH POLLUTION
Every single time a rocket launches, it releases about 200 to300 tons of CO2. Annually, 1,000 tons. The effects of these rocket launches are not limited to chemicals and unhealthy substances. They release aluminum oxide, hydrogen chloride, nitrogen oxide, and a plethora of other substances that are harmful to the environment. But clearly, Earth pollution isn’t enough to stop space travel.
SPACESHIP DISASTERS
There have been around 30 astronaut deaths in space and/or while preparing for dangerous space missions. The Challenger Shuttle disaster is one of the most famous and devastating events in the history of space travel. Not very long after the shuttle took off, a fire started that spread up the rocket. Since the rocket was moving so fast, it started to break apart and explode. All seven crew members died in the explosion. NASA didn’t want to delay the launch any longer than it already had been, but if they had been patient and thought about the safety of everyone on the shuttle, things might’ve turned out differently. This event caused the American space program to come to a standstill for three years. Astronauts face a multitude of challenges like space radiation, isolation, higher risk of disease and more. Although astronauts are very brave and courageous, we have to remember that they are still human. We shouldn’t be sending people to space knowing the dangers that it could cause.
THE FUNDS
NASA and SpaceX have spent over $27.8 billion on space exploration and rocket launches. That money could be put towards more beneficial and charitable outlets like building homeless shelters, donating to global warming activists and so much more. Instead, all these organizations want to do is continue to destroy our planet and spend billions of dollars just to put more people at risk, pollute the planet, and let the people who would really benefit from that money –even just a portion of it – suffer, simply due to NASA and SpaceX’s ego. It doesn’t seem right that while some people are in desperate need of money and have whole families to support, they’re just supposed to accept the fact that there are people with billions and billions of dollars who don’t care about humanity at all – not truly – and waste it on trying to get humans to Mars and beyond.
SPACE GARBAGE
There are around 100 bags of human waste on the moon right now, equalling about 200 tons. Since no one in power cares enough about it and doesn’t have the common sense needed to think about trash on the moon, no one’s been cleaning it up. There are probably going to be up to several hundred thousand satellites floating around in space by 2027. There are also about 100 million tons of debris (tiny pieces of trash) floating around up there, which has been dramatically multiplied since the 1960’s. This exponentially growing space junk only increases the risk of satellites crashing into one another and other space machines. Think about how much trash and debris there already is on Earth. With all these continued rocket launches and space explorations, space will end up being just as dirty. Humans are obligated to keep Earth and space clean because we are the only ones (that we know of so far) out there to help keep our planet and atmosphere clean. If space is dirty it will affect our environment negatively and cause air pollution. Air is one of the most important things in our world and without it being clean, it increases the risk of heart disease and lung cancer. If we don’t keep our bodies and planet healthy it will cause serious problems for the human race.
In conclusion,
It is imperative that humans stop exploring space to maintain the part of the universe that is so far untouched. Let us take our eyes off of planets miles upon miles away and focus our attention on the planet right beneath our feet– a planet that is in dire need of saving.
Eli Corr • Feb 18, 2025 at 1:19 pm
I would like to start by stating that I am no fan of Elon Musk and his Mars colonization ambitions. I think Mars is a poor candidate to direct crewed spaceflight at for the next few decades. However, this does not mean that I condemn all attempts at crewed space exploration. I think a much more realistic goal for near term space exploration is establishing a permanent human settlement on the Moon. The Moon is a great location for a base precisely because it is so uninhabitable, its low gravity and lack of a significant atmosphere make it a wonderful place to build and launch immense payloads from. Additionally, as a result of Earth’s high gravity and thick atmosphere, it is actually cheaper from an energy standpoint to launch a satellite into a low Earth orbit starting from the Moon than if you launched from Earth. These factors as well as many others make the Moon not only a great exploration candidate but also an essential place to industrialize if we ever want to expand into the rest of the solar system in a substantial way.
With that out of the way, I will now explain the issues that I take with this article. The first claim made by the article is that space exploration is both ignorant of and detrimental to the state of our climate. First of all, humanity does not have to be concentrated on solving one problem at a time. We can and should devote resources to many sectors of technological development, with climate efforts being an extremely important one of these sectors. Secondly, the development of space has and will continue to provide immense benefits in humanity’s fight against climate change. Weather satellites operated by organizations such as NOAA have provided crucial information both to climate research as well as the general public. Many technologies developed specifically for space exploration have been adapted for everyday use, such as solar panels. Services that we use every day are only possible because of previous development of space. GPS satellites aid with navigation everyday, and satellite internet provides coverage of remote areas. Continuing to develop space based weather satellites will only improve our knowledge of climate change and global trends in temperature. There is of course, the climate impact of rocket launches. While it is true that certain rockets emit harmful chemicals when they launch, rockets launch so infrequently compared to other forms of transportation that the high emissions cost of each launch is essentially meaningless. There are, in fact, rockets that do not emit very harmful chemicals. Liquid hydrogen rockets, such as the United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket, only produce water vapor from their rocket exhaust.
But all of these benefits do not explicitly require humans to be involved, so why have manned space programs at all? Admittedly, the benefits of human exploration are more far off and less concrete. There are some tangible benefits of humans in space, however. Medical research on the ISS, for example, has provided us with vital information about long term radiation exposure on humans, as well as how living beings adapt to zero gravity environments. While most solar system exploration is and will continue to be performed by robots, any long term efforts should require humans to be present. There may be situations that arise on a space station or outpost that require human ingenuity and creative thinking. There can be significant signal delays for deep space exploration missions, so having humans be present on the mission would help potential issues be addressed as they happen, instead of when the information reaches the control center on earth. Humans have continuously inhabited space since the construction of the ISS, and ending this presence would be foolish and lock us out of valuable insights into long term human habitation of space.
The cost of space is another easy to criticize aspect of space exploration. Yes, sending stuff into space is very expensive, an inevitable result of us living on a planet with high gravity and a thick atmosphere. The benefits of space infrastructure as I’ve previously outlined, far outweigh the initial launch costs. Space programs also provide vital jobs for space centers and facilities across the country. For example, the Apollo program, despite its immense costs, returned around 7 dollars for every dollar spent on the program. There are much more wasteful sectors of government spending that should be criticized, mainly the military, but NASA is not one of them. NASA’s budget accounts for less than half of a percent of the federal budget. The unfortunate truth is that cancelled NASA funds would likely be funneled back to the military, not to social programs.
A very real problem brought up by the article is that of space debris, but not for the reasons described. The article claims that trash left over by human exploration is a problem for the moon. I take issue with this claim. The problem with trash on earth is that it can harm life and disrupt ecosystems. The moon, nor any other object in the known universe, does not have any native life to worry about disrupting with trash. We should consider the left over items from lunar landings as historical artifacts, not as mere trash. Equating these items to discarded Doritos bags is not only ridiculous, it is distracting from the very real problem of space debris in Earth orbit. Yes, there is a large amount of debris in space from decades of exploration. The danger that this debris poses however, is not for people on the ground, but rather for functional satellites and space stations already in space. That is why we have debris tracking networks that keep track of debris large enough to potentially harm valuable satellites. There are also efforts being taken, both by research institutions and the space industry, to address and mitigate the space debris problem. Space debris will have to be consciously addressed as we proceed in space exploration, but it is not an impassable barrier for further space development, not unless we ignore it.
There are also the less obvious benefits of space exploration. These programs accelerate interest in STEM topics among people of all ages. Space programs are also key drivers of international collaboration, and shining examples of what can be accomplished if countries decide to work together instead of fighting. The obvious example is the ISS, but there were countless other programs such as the Apollo-Soyuz Test Project, the earlier Mir space station, and the Cassini-Huygens Saturn spacecraft. The current Artemis lunar program includes several international partners, and one of the astronauts scheduled to be launched on the next lunar mission is a Canadian.
Speaking of astronauts, another point brought up by the article is that space is very dangerous for humans, so we therefore shouldn’t send humans at all. First of all, no one is more aware of the risks involved with space than astronauts themselves. Astronauts are professionals who train for years before even being considered for a space mission, no one is forcing them to step into a capsule. Criticism of the Space Shuttle program is certainly valid, it had real issues with safety standards. The Shuttle was an incredibly ambitious vehicle, it had capabilities for crew count and cargo that we cannot meet today with our current vehicles. There are reasons that it no longer flies, it was complex and risky, with some portions of the flight having no option for an abort if it would have been necessary. The spacecraft flown today are very different from the Shuttle. The Russian Soyuz spacecraft has been flying with no serious issues for over 60 years, and was used by NASA astronauts to reach the ISS after the Shuttle was retired. The current main US crewed spacecraft is the SpaceX Crew Dragon, which has had a flawless mission record since its introduction in 2019. These capsules, as well as others being developed by other nations, all include abort systems that could prevent catastrophes such as Challenger. Space is and always will be a dangerous place, but astronaut safety can only be improved if we continue to support advancement in space. The danger of space is itself a reason to go to space. If we wish to have real development in space, we must first tackle the risks associated with space travel.
Space is a topic that has inspired humans for as long as we have existed, and space exploration is a natural extension of this fascination combined with the human desire to explore. To ignore space exploration would be to ignore human nature and shut all of us off from some of the most important technologies ever developed and stifle our knowledge of the universe that we live in.