Russia To Build Nuclear Power Plant On Mars

[UM-Bot]

Image credit: NASA

Russian scientists have announced plans to build a nuclear power station on Mars. They say that all the necessary technical drawings have now been completed, and - after a few minor niggles have been ironed out - all will be ready for the construction work to begin.

The power plant should be up and running by 2030. But experts are already asking questions about the feasibility of the project.

View: Full Article | Source: BBC News

[Saru]

This took me quite by surprise, I had no idea Russia were planning anything as ambitious as this, nor that they had the funds to research such an undertaking.

The estimated date of completion may not be for another 27 years, but this would be a project of monumental scale, and I'm not convinced that even by then, it will be possible to have a manned Nuclear power plant operating on Mars by 2030.

Let's face it, at the moment we consider ourselves lucky if an unmanned probe gets there in one piece.

[Starlyte]

Let's face it, at the moment we consider ourselves lucky if an unmanned probe gets there in one piece.

So true SaRuMaN!

When I read the title of this article I almost couldn't believe what I was reading. I am most surprised that this is the first we've heard about it. How can they possibly be planning to build this power station when no one has even stepped foot on the red planet? I think they are a little too optimistic on this mission. Unless..........there is more that we don't know about.

[Sukato-San]

Russian scientists have announced plans to build a nuclear power station on Mars. They say that all the necessary technical drawings have now been completed, and - after a few minor niggles have been ironed out - all will be ready for the construction work to begin.

Hoooooo boy... Too much vodka for Dimitri. Dasvadanya!

[Bizarro]

i think it could be done today if we had the motivation. its just a matter of risk. back in the old days, risk was a part of spaceflight; but now we consider risk an obstacle. if we are too afraid to try ambitious things like this, will they ever be accomplished? at least the Russians still have balls between their legs, gotta give em that much credit. i wish them luck.

[Homer]

Bizarro, it couldn't be done today if the whole world worked together doing it, and that is a fact. Although the risk factor is an obstacle, funding is by far the biggest obstacle. The station itself, the delivery system, the propulsion system of the delivery system, the costs of maintaining it and research and developement are all hampered by funding.

I agree with SaRuMaN and starlyte. This project is too ambitious and the time table too optimistic. Russia is a broke and backward nation barely capable of feeding itself. If this happens at all, it surely will not be a Russian adventure, but a joint adventure involving various other nations.

[Nancy]

back in the old days, risk was a part of spaceflight; but now we consider risk an obstacle.

Whoaaaaaaaaa there Space Cowboy... Two steps back, please?

SaRuMaN and Homer hit the nail on the HEAD.

First of all, "risk" is not an obstacle! Risk has always been in the forefront of ANY Space Program, and it continues to be so, to this day. Talk to any Astronaut in training and ask them, ok?

What IS the obstacle is...... safety.... honesty within the Space Program culture and the guts to make the necessary changes NEEDED.

On top of that, consider that currently, the Russian Space Program is the ONLY means to "shuttle" Astronauts/Cosmonauts back and forth to the ISS, and the next Expedition Crew isn't even positive they can GET back! Why? Lack of funding and expertise within the Russian Space Program. That is the major drawback, lack of $$$!! Unless Putin strikes gold and/or oil somewhere in Siberia, that just ain't gonna change in the near future.

As far as I'm concerned? Yep, too much vodka flowing in Moscow.

[Bizarro]

you are all too pessimistic. never underestimate a budding capitalist economy in search of a boost. could you imagine the goldmine that a Mars colony would provide? the Russians are looking to capitalize on our failures by becoming the space leader. a Mars colony would assure that. nothing is impossible. you could say improbable, but its definitely possible right now. with our space program on the rocks, the Russians could easily prove theirs to be worthy of investment.

sometimes i think people let money sink into their thinking. money is just some arbitrary measure of effort, not of the ACTUAL effort involved. money is not something that prevents something from happening if it is necessary to do. if we found out that the world was going to be hit by a giant asteroid next year, i guarantee you that we would make this happen and then some. we have the ability, we just don't have the desire. we're too busy triffling with life here on Earth and the petty games we play everyday.

i also believe we could launch a rocket next week to the ISS if we had to in a pinch. all the NASA people are just fishing for funds when they say they cannot. its just politics at play. they want more fat paychecks.

[Homer]

Bizarro,

Lets break down your last post a bit, shall we?

you could say improbable, but its definitely possible right now.

No it's not possible right now. As I previously mentioned, this is a fact, and is not even worth discussing. The Russian scientists themselves stated the necessary technical drawings have now been completed, and - after a few minor niggles have been ironed out - all will be ready for the construction work to begin. This means that the construction hasn't even begun, and if it hasn't begun, then it is impossible to do it now.

money is just some arbitrary measure of effort, not of the ACTUAL effort involved. money is not something that prevents something from happening if it is necessary to do.

Ok, first of all, you previously mentioned "never underestimate a budding capitalist economy in search of a boost." The absolute only thing that keeps a capitalist economy budding is money. Obviously educated, hard working workers to make it happen, but the bottom line is the almighty dollar. Period. Secondly, money(or lack thereof) does prevent things from happening. All projects require a budget. If the cost of the project exceeds what's available in the budget, the project will come to a halt unless more money can be acquired. Without a huge budget to cover the costs of this enormous undertaking, this project will either fail or take a lot longer than previous estimates.

we have the ability, we just don't have the desire. we're too busy triffling with life here on Earth and the petty games we play everyday.

I agree with this statement. Funds are not infinite, and therefore must be prioritized. Planet earth is a dangerous place, and requires a large amount of recources to keep things going. There isn't a whole lot of money that politicians are willing to allocate to the space program, especially with so many other pressing issues. However, in general terms, I wouldn't consider this 'petty games'.

[Nancy]

you are all too pessimistic.  never underestimate a budding capitalist economy in search of a boost.  could you imagine the goldmine that a Mars colony would provide?  the Russians are looking to capitalize on our failures by becoming the space leader.  a Mars colony would assure that.  nothing is impossible.  you could say improbable, but its definitely possible right now.  with our space program on the rocks, the Russians could easily prove theirs to be worthy of investment. 

i also believe we could launch a rocket next week to the ISS if we had to in a pinch.  all the NASA people are just fishing for funds when they say they cannot.  its just politics at play.  they want more fat paychecks.

Bizzaro...... I suggest you do a little more research before making statements as you have, regarding this.

Getting the US Manned Space Program up and running again is something that we cannot and SHOULD not do right now. Wait and read the "Columbia Accident Investigation Board" report, due out shortly. It will curl your hair.

"Bigger paychecks" at the current time is on the BOTTOM of the list!

Russia and 15 other Countries signed an International Agreement to participate in the ISS........ a potential "gold mine" that is being neglected BY the Russians!

As SaRuMaN indicated, safely getting unmanned probes to Mars has a horrid track record. I do believe that the Russians space programs are not half as advanced as ours, not by a long shot and ours is in deep trouble as it is.

Sorry, but we still disagree.......... a lot!

[Bizarro]

im sorry, i will only agree to disagree. i see things in a totally different light from you two. call me crazy, but i believe in human ingenuity. there is more than one way to skin a cat. with even modest funding a space program could do these things, its just a matter of putting a few good minds to work at the method.

i should add that a manned mission would not have problems with getting to Mars. the problem with the probes is that we send a machine to do a man's job. a pilot could easily realize the mistake in calculations and correct them without risking the mission. this is precisely why we should send a manned expedition.

[Kismit]

Some days it just feels more like home .......

[snuffypuffer]

I for one, think we should get our space program back up and running. As long as we learn from our mistakes, a base on Mars is worth the risk. It's all a matter of getting the right minds together with the proper funding. Getting to the moon cost lives, we still did that. Risk just goes with the territory, we explore, it's part of our collective psyche. Another space race would be a huge boost to all countries involved, let's beat the Russians to it.

BTW, getting into orbit on a shoddy Russian rocket is full of risk.

[Starlyte]

i should add that a manned mission would not have problems with getting to Mars. the problem with the probes is that we send a machine to do a man's job. a pilot could easily realize the mistake in calculations and correct them without risking the mission. this is precisely why we should send a manned expedition.

I could be wrong about this, but isn't one of the reasons they don't send a manned mission to Mars because they are afraid of the microbes and such that they might bring back? Aren't they worried about the possible contamination of Earth and Mars?

[Bizarro]

@Kismit.

Starlyte, i don't know if there are any microbes on Mars. if there were, that would be a great discovery. also, there are abundant rocks from Mars on Earth from space. wouldn't any microbes that were on Mars at that time be here already?

the main problem is radiation. there needs to be more research into building a spacecraft that can protect the crew from intense radiation. a different propulsion method would be great as well. i think a nuclear powered spacecraft would work, especially one with a powerful engine. it could be reused.

[Saru]

I was under the impression that it's currently next to impossible to get humans to Mars, because with liquid chemical fuel as the only available fuel source, the sheer weight of the fuel that would be needed to get there would make the whole trip completely inpractical.

It's not going to be possible to get people to Mars at all until we have improved upon our propulsion capabilities somewhat. An Ion-drive powered by a nuclear power source might just do the trick, but until that has been achieved, it is more or less a technological impossibility for humans to reach Mars at this point in time.

[Bizarro]

we can always do a trajectory shot to limit the amount of fuel we would need. i agree that a different form of propulsion would be helpful, but its still possible without it.

[Saru]

How would the craft slow down once it got to Mars, how do you relaunch it back into space from the surface, and how do you return to earth afterwards ?

Also, how do you feed the astronauts and how do you protect them from the sun's radiation on the journey there and back ?

There are a lot more factors to consider aswell, and these are just the most obvious ones. I think you'd be hard pushed to reach Mars with today's technology, the risks involved would make it suicidal.

Even if it were possible to get to Mars, without a more effective means of propulsion, the amount of time you'd spend in space would expose you to so much radiation that you'd never survive long enough to make it back alive.

[Starlyte]

the main problem is radiation.

I knew there was some reason....

[Bizarro]

how would it slow down? rockets for just that purpose.

how would it return? in-situ resource utilization http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/...s/marssurf.html

how do you feed the astronauts and protect them from the sun's radiation? you grow food on the spaceship and recycle water. there are theoretic 'safe rooms' being developed where astronauts could stay during powerful cosmic radiation storms. i believe with some money put into researching this issue it could be overcome.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/.../mars_crew.html

an interesting page about manned missions to Mars.

[Nancy]

.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/mars/.../mars_crew.html[/url]

an interesting page about manned missions to Mars.

I have to give you credit for sticking by your guns on this issue

Thank you for the LINKS...... I took a peek at them, and on the last one you provided, please NOTE:

Last Updated: 12 August 2002, DRW

I still contend you are missing the most vital point here Bizarro. Just as the US changed September 2001, NASA and their Contractors changed February 1, 2003.

I can hear you now, "Well? Challenger exploded and we found our way back to Manned Space Flight, we can do it now" OR.. words to that effect.

Unfortunately, we did get back to using Shuttles and once again, NASA became complacent, arrogant and ignored warnings from subordinates, for years.

As a result, Seven Humans lost their lives (which they were willing to do, for research) but.... The US Space Program let them down!

Believe me, I am one of THE most ardent supporters of The Manned Space Program! It isn't simply a matter of the almighty dollar, Bizzaro, or the technology your LINKS detail. It is a matter of the "CULTURE" within NASA, their failure to ignore or "poo poo" recommendations, warnings, update procedures, report up the chain of command severe safety issues...........ETC.

I concur, once the entire Program is upgraded, revamped, additional broadbased explorations should be considered. However, the Shuttle Fleet is grounded until possibly early 2004....... close to a year after Columbia exploded over Texas.

That alone should tell you something.

[Bizarro]

i don't believe that is true, Nancy. you can blame NASA for the deaths of those astronauts but i believe it was bound to happen eventually. its not perfectly safe and the people who fly on the shuttle know that when they sign up. we will get right back on the horse again and something else will happen in the future too. you cannot stop exploring because of accidents. that's what caused this, an accident. we will learn from it just like we learned from the O-ring failure and we will move on.

those links just answer a few of the questions about how its possible. we have the technology, we just dont have the will.

[Nancy]

i don't believe that is true, Nancy.  you can blame NASA for the deaths of those astronauts but i believe it was bound to happen eventually.  its not perfectly safe and the people who fly on the shuttle know that when they sign up.  we will get right back on the horse again and something else will happen in the future too.  you cannot stop exploring because of accidents.  that's what caused this, an accident.  we will learn from it just like we learned from the O-ring failure and we will move on. 

OK.... UNCLE!! I give up

Seems that I cannot communicate effectively with you.. I made the same points

you did in your response, yet they were overlooked, or misunderstood by you.Tis ok, it happens.

[Homer]

Bizarro, although those links you provided are interesting, as Nancy said, they aren't anything new. Also, those links only reinforce everyone elses position that we simply don't have the means to make this mission now if the whole world worked together doing it. Those links confirm that.

You have completely disregarded everything said by Nancy, SaRuMaN and myself regarding this, and seem to be blinded by your own belief in the impossible, despite all the information that we've placed before you.

Not only is your position incorrect, but your arguments only expose your inability to see the facts as they really are.

[Bizarro]

no, i see your 'facts', Homer, i just think they are based on flawed thinking. i have far more faith in humanity than you do. i believe money is not ever going to be a reason that humanity stops reaching for the stars. we have an inherent need to explore. when we decide to finally accept that fact of our nature, money will not stop us. we will do whatever is necessary. while that is not the case today, it could very well be tomorrow for all you know. when speaking of the future, no one can speak in 'facts'. is your middle name Nostradamus?

if it were suddenly necessary to go to Mars in 5 years, i believe we would be there- i have no doubt of that. right now, its not a necessity. that doesn't mean its impossible. improbable sure, but definitely not out of our technological grasp. if it were a national priority, we could even start today. ALONE.

that's like NASA saying we can't fly up and get the astronauts from the ISS. do you really believe that? of course we can go get them. we know exactly what is required and if it came down to it we could modify or even build a rocket to do it. we are just trying to get the Russians to pay for it for awhile and using the Columbia accident as an excuse. did we suddenly forget the technology necessary to fly a rocket or even one of the grounded shuttles? they can still fly, we are choosing to keep them on the ground. if we had to, i think we would risk flying one to get them. don't you? after all, they have proven reliable enough to only have 2 accidents in many flights. that is acceptable risk when lives are on the line.