   Russia Plans Martian Nuclear Station
http://science.slashdot.org/science/03/08/19/0053250.shtml?tid=126&tid=134&tid=160
  What a bunch of bullroar. ;  Would anyone want to live on Mars?If there was a huge frontier to explore, sure.  Perhaps if they find life (or even remnants of it) there, it would be more justified.In the end, what would we have learned?  I think that ultimately, no matter how much we accomplish, it comes down to what we do with the knowledge and the realization of our capabilities to make things better where we are NOW. ;  We could learn to relieve the population problem eventually by sending people to mars I suppose.  Then again, Russia mostly doesn't have this problem.-=Lohrno   [edited by - Lohrno on August 19, 2003 10:59:42 AM];  The population problem is a result of the Earth''s easily-depleted natural resources.  I don''t think the Earth is anywhere near capacity, but that''s another point.  How will spreading to Mars help the population problem?  Mars has zero life-sustaining resources, and no way to grow significant amounts of food.Oh yeah, plus the deadly radiation thing :-)~BenDilts( void ); ;  someone has to do it. we''ve only been talking about it in Science Fiction for like, forever. (And I do mean forever, or atleast since the Roman times. Mars was the god of war, and he lived there.)   Do you use your powers for good or for awesome?My newly updated site | The Cutter Project | Association of Computing Machinery;  First of all, as linked in the /. article, Mars does not have terribly fatal radiation. There are estimates that you are 100 times more likely to die from smoking than from visiting Mars.Secondly, it sure seems like most people have too little imagination to realize the full potential of another planet. Just because we couldn''t drop down onto the surface, break out our camping gear, and live for the rest of our lives doesn''t mean the planet can''t sustain life. Terraforming technology hasn''t even begun to be developed, but I have no doubts that we could find a way to put a few billion people on Mars without much work. That same technology could fit a solid billion people into wastelands like the Sahara as well. As with the trip to the moon, such space adventures could very well lead to much improved life down here on good ol'' Earth.;  This is great news!  We''ve (USA) had similar proposals like Robert Zubrin''s Mars Direct plan.In the Mars Direct plan, a small nuclear plant similar to what we put on outer planetary probes could power a small chemical processor machine that produces oxygen and water for use on Mars, and fuel for the return trip back to Earth.  Doing it this way gives us a way to "live off the land" instead of shipping all of the supplies there.Putting a colony on Mars actually requires LESS fuel than putting a colony on the moon.  This may sound strange, but the aerobraking used to decelerate at arrival saves you so much delta-v that you actually require less fuel.  Also the fact that mars has an atmosphere allows you to save a lot on weight by not having to bring as much liquid gas supplies.A little friendly competition with Russia will be good for NASA, IMHO.   -solo   (my site) ;  And then, a huge space fortess will come crashing into the planet and land on a huge island and they will build Macross City there... 