Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
ZENODOarrow_drop_down
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other ORP type . 2025
License: CC BY
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Can we, and should we, go to Mars?

Authors: Verseux, Cyprien; Poulet, Lucie; Gargaud, Muriel; Mason, Nigel; Lehto, Kirsi; Viso, Michel;

Can we, and should we, go to Mars?

Abstract

Human missions to Mars are appearing feasible and choices must be made on whether to support them. However, debates on this matter are increasingly polarized. To support constructive discussions and sound decision-making, an interdisciplinary European group of over sixty world-renowned scientists, astronauts and science fiction writers conducted a thorough analysis of the most popular scenarios dealing with a human presence on Mars. The outcome evidences a wide variation in the feasibility of these scenarios. It also underscores the immense value which could be produced by sensible human missions to Mars, as well as the tremendous risks they would pose if performed without adequate consideration. For instance, small-scale exploration missions could be implemented in the coming decades, while terraforming is largely beyond any technology that we can envision. Science-driven missions are worthy but picturing Mars as a fallback plan, should the Earth be devastated, is misleading and unethical. Catastrophic breaches of ethics must be avoided without forfeiting the exploration of Mars. This requires gaining an ability to discuss the matter with nuances, relying on established scientific knowledge, considering scenarios one by one rather than as a whole, and refusing to let the exploration of Mars become a partisan issue.

Keywords

Astrobiology

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average