Why would anyone want to live on the Moon in the future when Mars is more hospitable than the Moon is?

Question

Basically i'm asking in your opinion Moon colony Vs Mars colony, where would live out of the two?

Answer 1

Day length of Mars = 24 hours 38 minutes
Day length of Moon = 28 Earth days

Moon atmosphere pressure = zero
Mars atmosphere pressure = about 1/100th of that of Earth, a lot more than zero.

Martian temperatures range from about +17C to -170C. Moon surface temperatures have a range like +115C to -200C

Want to grow some beans and tomatoes? You can't do it on the Moon and get a worthwhile return. Plants cannot stand days so long. You cannot grow them under lights economically on the Moon because the low efficiency of photosynthesis means the energy balances are negative. If you tried to grow them "under glass" on the surface the greenhouse effect of the dome would cook them in minutes. They would also be irradiated by solar and cosmic radiation. All food would have to be sent from Earth.

Plants would probably tolerate the extra half hour of the Martian day length. Sunlight would be weaker but plants do grow in low light conditions on Earth and a bit of breeding and genetic engineering could fix this. Martian summer temperatures near the Equator reach about 17C, it is probably less than that outside my house right now here. A greenhouse could bring that temperature up to a pleasant 25C or so inside without much trouble at all.

The CO2 atmosphere of Mars can be added directly to the greenhouse for plant respiration. Martian atmospheric nitrogen would also be used. There is every indication of water on Mars in far greater quantities than the small amount which is speculated to be on the Moon.

The Martian atmosphere is mainly CO2 with some nitrogen. Using 19th century chemistry with simple, cheap catalysts it is possible to make quantities of methane, oxygen, carbon monoxide and even ethylene. Ethylene, methane and carbon monoxide could be used as propellants for Mars ground vehicles and to refuel rockets for launching stuff and people back to Earth. Oxygen would be used in these propellants mixed with atmospheric gas as a buffer, or straight as a rocket oxidant. A bit more chemistry might give gasoline or kerosene and even plastics. There are no easily exploitable resources for this on the Moon.

Hydrogen sent from Earth would be needed at the start to get things going but if water is found in good quantity then there is a source of hydrogen and oxygen. There is every reason to expect that other basic chemical resources such as nitrates, sulphates and chlorides will be available.

The Martian atmosphere has an ozone layer and would shield colonists from some UV, it also blocks some solar and some cosmic radiation. More protection would come from a metal roofed building with a layer of sandbags on top, or perhaps better, a building made from local materials -mud bricks, with an arched roof. The Romans knew how to build these. The complete lack of a Moon atmosphere means no shielding at all.

Thus it is possible for a Martian colony to grow at least some of their own food and produce their own fuels and oxygen while having some natural shielding from space radiation.

As for communication, people can live without telephones and the internet, strange to say. Want to contact relatives on Earth? Send them an e-mail. It might take several minutes to arrive, but they are probably asleep, down the pub, playing tennis or at work anyway.

Answer 2

Currently the moon has more to offer than Mars. Materials such as silica, aluminum, titanium and the very rare Hydrogen-3 (useful in fusion) is abundant on the moon. Communication is also much easier between Earth and moon. There is only a 1.5 second delay in transmission. Communication with mars can take upwards of 30 minutes to get an answer to a transmission. Also, one face of the moon is always facing Earth, so communication would never be hampered by passing behind the Sun like it would be with Mars. Plus it will be easier to supply a moon base mainly due to its proximity to Earth. It takes only about 4 days to get to the moon, but it can take 6 months to get to Mars. If there was some form of emergency that you HAD to get back to Earth, the moon would be a lot easier to return from. The moon also lacks a substantial atmosphere, this would make astronomical observations (from the far side of the moon) quite incredible. No flickering stars, no wind buffeting the telescopes, nearly instant temperature equalization of the instruments with the outside. Yes, the moon would be a scientist's and capitalist's paradise!
I hope this helps. Good luck.

Answer 3

Well, personally I'd pick Mars. But here's some reasons why any people might pick the Moon:

1) economics (work): the Moon is going to be a major source of resources for orbiting industries. Because of the Moon's low gravity it is (in principle) potentially much cheaper to extract raw materials from the Moon and send them to Earth orbit than to lift them agaist Earth's gravity.
2)Proximity to Earth--most people are going to want to be able to visit home, or have conversations with friends and relatives back on earth, not to mention access to Earth culture, products, etc. All of these things will be much easier if you are on the Moon
3) Health. For many people, the Moon's low gravity may help extend life--by reducing strain on weakened hearts, etc. Also, many people who use wheelchairs could get around easliy with the Moon's low gravity.

Mars is more hospitable--and I 'd bet ultimately it will attract more people. But bear in mind, on either world, you won't beable to go outside witout an environmental suit/spacesuit--and you will have to live in work inside pressurized buildings or underground structures.

Answer 4

I pick neither. Both would be interesting to visit, or even work on for a period, but finally I will want to come home to Earth. Or, if it is possible, go to a planet, yet to be discovered, in another star system, that has close to Earth gravity, nice air, oceans, native plant life, and is more like Earth than Mars in general.

Answer 5

haha its an old man's dream that has come to be socially accepted. moon is smaller too aint it? lol i feel dumb for asking that, but...... blonde. does it real matter anyway? anywhere humans go, the place is gonna get screwed by the greed that bred global warming in the first place!

mars would be colder wouldnt it....bein further away....seems kinda like a duh moment there! if we lived on mars we'd have to get rid of all the aliems tho.....(i know that is spelt incorrectly)

Answer 6

At least on the moon, if you want to visit the Good Old Earth, it doesn't take forever to get there.

Answer 7

I think they're just thinking of using it as a base to launch rockets from in the far future, a jumping-off point to other planets. If they can mine the components to make fuel, it will be alot cheaper because alot less fuel will be used due to the gravity.

Answer 8

The wireless rates on Mars are too high. And the internet connections are all dial-up.

Answer 9

Mars has more to offer as a place where colonization would be possible.

Answer 10

The universe has chosen earth for us. Period.