Hi everybody and welcome back to another episode of Space News
Pod. Today will journey through the
captivating saga of Mars 1, the ambitious venture that aimed to
make humans and interplanetary species by establishing a
permanent settlement on Mars. In the glow of this plan, the
Dutch Notforprofit foundation launched by Boz Landsdorp and
Arna Wielders shone brightly. When it first took to the world
stage in 2011, their vision was nothing short of bold.
A Oneway mission to Mars, sidestepping the complexities of
a return voyage focusing on establishing A sustainable human
colony on our neighboring planet.
However, the path to Mars was strewn with obstacles.
From an overwhelming financial goal of $6 billion to
technological challenges and ethically charged decisions.
Mars One face significant headwinds and despite their
groundbreaking approach to space exploration, their mission, much
like a Martian dust storm, eventually settled.
In 2019, Mars One declared bankruptcy, leaving the dream of
a permanent human settlement on Mars unfulfilled.
But every story, every venture, every dream, regardless of its
outcome, leaves behind a legacy. So today we dive into the rise
and fall of Mars One, exploring the lessons learned and
discussing how these experiences might influence the future.
Of our multiplanetary aspirations, we'll hear from our
sponsors. Then we'll get right into the
story. It's a pretty juicy one, so I
think you're going to enjoy it. Mars One was cofounded by two
Dutch entrepreneurs, Boss Land Store and Arna Wielders, both
bringing unique experiences and skills to this venture.
Boss is an entrepreneur with a background in mechanical
engineering. And before Mars One, he
cofounded Ampics Power, a company specializing in the
development of wind energy technology.
Landsdorp left Ampics Power to start Mars One when he realized
the potential and feasibility of a one way mission to Mars.
As a CEO and cofounder of Mars One, Landsdorp became the face
of the project, frequently speaking at conferences and in
media interviews about the mission.
Our nose wielder is a physicist and engineer with experience in
space systems. And before cofounding Mars One,
Wielders worked for various space organizations.
He worked at the European Space Research and Technology Center,
part of the European Space Agency, or ESA, or ESA, and was
involved in several ESA projects.
He also cofounded Space Horizon, a company dedicated to space
tourism. As the chief technical officer
of Mars One, Wielders was responsible for the overall
technical design and implementation of the Mars 1
mission. And despite their passion and
commitment to Mars One project, they have some hurdles to
overcome. The venture was criticized and
overly optimistic timelines, technology assumptions, and lack
of adequate funding. Mars One was an ambitious
project that sought to establish a permanent human settlement on
Mars, a bold and audacious goal that pushed the boundaries of
human possibility. And at the heart of the
initiative was a vision to go where no human has gone before.
To tread new ground in space exploration and to define what
humanity could achieve in terms of interplanetary colonization.
We'll explore the origins, the successes and challenges, and
the legacy of Mars One will provide insights into the
intricate nature of the space exploration venture.
Mars One was a Dutch notforprofit foundation
established in 2011 by Boslandsdorp and Arno Wielders.
The company sought to revolutionize space exploration
by pursuing A1 Way mission to Mars.
They plan to select, train and send 4 astronauts on their
pioneering journey every two years starting in the twenty 20s
and the missions cost was estimated to be $6 billion.
The founders aimed to source this funding from sponsors and
media rights sales. Now, the underlying belief of
the Mars 1 mission was that humanity needed to become a
multiplanetary species like Elon, Musk says, both for our
survival and to satisfy our innate curiosity and desire to
explore. Mars, due to its proximity and
its similarity to Earth in terms of day length and surface area,
was chosen as the ideal destination for this ambitious
undertaking. Mars One had a unique approach
to this endeavor, though. They sought to simplify the
mission by making it a one way trip, eliminating the need for
complex return journey technology.
By using existing technology and adopting an incremental
approach, Mars 1 aimed to gradually build up the necessary
infrastructure of Mars for long term human habitation.
The project strategy consisted of sending initial unmanned
missions, deploying living units, life support units and
supply units to Mars. These units would then be set up
by robots to create a habitable settlement before the arrival of
the first crew. The crew would be
self-sufficient, relying on in situ resource utilization or I
SRU, particularly extracting water from Martian soil and
producing oxygen for breathing. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?
That's exactly what Elon Musk wants to do with SpaceX and
Starship. Now Mars One adopted an open
call for volunteers. Willing to embark on a one way
mission to Mars? You would leave Earth.
You would fly to Mars. You would spend the rest of your
days on Mars. You would never see anybody from
Earth again. This unprecedented selection
process attracted applicants from diverse backgrounds from
around the world. After rigorous selection
process, Mars One aim to train these individuals extensively in
the simulated Martian environment right here on Earth.
They prepare them for the harsh conditions and isolation.
They would experience on Mars now.
Despite its innovative approach and vision, Mars want to face
significant challenges and criticisms.
The foremost concern was the mission's feasibility given the
technological, financial and logistical hurdles.
Critics questioned whether the mission could be accomplished
with the proposed budget and the reliance on unproven
technologies like insitu resource utilization, making
water out of Martian soil. Moreover, the ethical
implications of sending humans on a one way mission raised
concerns considering the psychological impact of
permanent isolation at the potential of death on the Red
Planet. The open call selection process
and the proposal to televise the mission also face criticism for
potentially exploiting the participants of reducing a
complex science venture to just a reality show now despite these
challenges and criticisms though.
Mars One sparked a global conversation about space
exploration and interplanetary colonization.
It inspired individuals worldwide to dream about the
possibilities of space travel and prompted serious discussions
about the feasibility and ethics of colonizing other planets.
When Mars One opened the application process for
astronaut selection in April of 2013, they received a
significant number of applications from aspiring Mars
settlers around the globe by the end of the application process
in August of 2013. Mars One reported having
received over 200,000 applications, although this
number was highly disputed and some sources suggest the actual
number was quite lower. The application process was part
of Mars One's fundraising strategy.
Applicants were charged an application fee which varied by
country, and the fee was intended to be inversely
proportional to the gross domestic product of the
applicants country, ranging from $5 to $75.
The total amount of money raised from the application process
isn't quite clear. Even if one took the lowest
application fee of $5, if 200,000 applicants were indeed
received, this would amount to at least $1,000,000 USD.
However, due to the uncertainty about the actual number of
applications and the variable application fee, it's difficult
to provide a precise figure for the total funds raised through
this process. These applications came from a
wide variety of backgrounds and places, showcasing the global
interest in space exploration in the appeal of the Mars 1 mission
Now Sue and PN. An American applicant, Sue was
one of the 100 finalists. She works as a software engineer
and had a keen interest in space exploration.
PN's motivation to apply for Mars One came from her dream to
explore the unknown and to contribute to humanity's
understanding of the universe. Ryan McDonald, The British
physicist. McDonald was also among the 100
finalists. He was studying physics at the
University of Oxford at the time of his application and was
fascinated by the prospect of contributing to human knowledge
about Mars. He saw Mars One as an
opportunity to be a part of the groundbreaking mission that can
change how we understand our place in the universe.
Diana Masani Patel, British pharmacist and scuba diving
instructor, was another of the 100 finalists.
She was motivated by a sense of adventure.
And the desire to inspire the next generation of explorers.
Now it's important to know that while these applicants were
willing to leave their lives on Earth for a one way ticket to
Mars, the Mars 1 mission faced significant criticism and
skepticism over its feasibility, the ethics and lack of a clear
plan for the safety and wellbeing of the crew.
A glaring obstacle to Mars One's plans was the substantial
financial requirements. The missions cost was estimated
at a whopping $6 billion. And Mars won in to raise these
funds through a mix of sponsorship, media rights,
crowdfunding and private investments.
However, is the mission progressed, it became evident
that the organization was struggling to generate the
necessary capital. The idea to fund a significant
part of the mission through the sale of media rights, turning
the astronaut selection process and subsequent life on Mars into
a reality show, received a mixed reactions.
But critics argued it trivialized the serious nature
of space exploration and carried ethical implications.
Meanwhile, potential sponsors and investors were hesitant.
Aware of the high risks associated with the mission.
The Mars 1 mission proposed to use rockets and spacecraft
available commercially from established aerospace companies.
This meant they didn't have to develop and build their own.
Which would have been an immensely complex and expensive
undertaking. In their initial plan, they
proposed using the Falcon Heavy rocket manufactured by SpaceX to
launch their payloads to Mars. Falcon Heavy is one of the most
powerful operation rockets are in the world, capable of lifting
significant payloads to Mars. For the actual spacecraft, they
proposed using a modified version of Spacex's Dragon
capsule. The Dragon capsule had already
been used successfully to ferry cargo at this point.
To and from the International Space Station, but there's been
no cruise to the International Space Station when Mars One was
in play. Now, it's important to note that
while Mars One stated their intention to use these vehicles
at the time of the missions cancellations, no contracts had
been signed with NASA or SpaceX or any other aerospace
companies. And for the missions, Lander and
Rover Mars One partnered with Lockheed Martin, which had
extensive experience in building and operating spacecraft.
Or NASA's Mars missions. What are the more ambitious
elements of the Mars One plant was a use of life support system
to manufacture fuel on Mars for the use of vehicles and
machinery which would have required an advanced level of in
situ resource utilization technology.
At the time of the missions proposal, such a system was
still in the development phases and not yet proven.
Now Mars 1 proposed to use existing technology in vehicles
wherever possible. It also relied on several
unproven technologies. Systems at the time, and its
inability to fully address these technological challenges was a
significant factor in the missions ultimate failure.
Mars One hinged on the belief that it could only use existing
technology to create a livable outpost on Mars.
However, this overlooked the significant technological
advances still required for such a mission, the dependency on as
yet unproven technologies for longterm life support and
radiation protection. Was a major concern.
The timeline proposed by Mars One was also criticized as
overly optimistic. The plan involves sending
multiple uncrewed missions to set up a habitable environment
and life support systems, all before humans sent foot on Mars.
Now, this timeline, given the complexity of the tasks, seemed
very farfetched, and sending humans on a oneway journey to
Mars raised significant psychological and ethical
issues. Mars One applicants were
volunteering not just for an exploration mission, but for a
lifetime on an alien planet. The potential psychological
stress and the ethical implications of sending
individuals on a journey with such high risks and no return
raise serious concerns about the mission's moral standing.
Human spaceflight to Mars presents unique psychological
challenges. An interplanetary journey to
Mars, as proposed by Mars One, would entail an isolation and
confinement period of up to nine months during the voyage,
followed by a potentially permanent state on an alien
planet millions of miles away from Earth.
These conditions can give rise to a host of psychological
issues, including but not limit to loneliness, depression,
anxiety, and interpersonal conflicts.
The isolation from friends, family, and familiar
surroundings can intensify feelings of loneliness.
And can lead to depression, the confinement of the spacecraft
with limited room to move and lack of privacy and create
tension and conflict among the crew.
Prolonged periods of monotony, broken only by high stress
situations, can cause cognitive and behavioral issues.
Furthermore, communication delays with Earth ranging up to
24 minutes round trip, can create feelings of isolation and
frustration and can challenge the crew's problem solving
abilities. Because immediate support or
advice won't be available to them in a pod arrival on Mars,
the astronauts will be faced with a bearing and harsh
environment drastically different from Earth.
This alien landscape, combined with the realization of a
permanent stay, may further exacerbate feelings of
isolation, homesickness and stress.
Astronauts on a mission to Mars will require a unique blend of
skills to cope with these challenges though, including
technical and scientific expertise, excellent problem
solving skills. And robust psychological
resilience, the selection, the training and support of these
pioneers would be paramount to the success of the mission and
the wellbeing of the crew. This all culminates in the
bankruptcy in the end of Mars 1. Mars One went bankrupt in 2019
and it was because Boss Lansrup did a debate against MIT
researchers. So.
US, The cofounder of Mars One and MIT Massachusetts Institute
of Technology researchers had an event.
There was a debate. It revolved around a critical
study by MIT graduate students which analyzed the feasibility
of the Mars 1 mission plan. They use publicly available
information about Mars One and the life support requirements of
a crude mission to Mars. They found out that with the
current technology, sustaining life on Mars would be
challenging due to issues. Like the overproduction of
oxygen from plants in the habitat and the need for a
significant number of spare parts for the life support
system in every spots to the study, Boz Landsdorp claimed
that Mars One had solutions to these issues and the criticism
was based on assumptions that did not apply to the missions
plans. Landsdorp did not, however,
provide detailed explanations of counter arguments to all the
points raised by the MIT team. And Landsdorp invited the
researchers for a public debate to discuss these findings.
The debate took place at the 2015 Mars Society Convention,
where the MIT team and Landsdorp presented their points of view.
The debate further highlighted the questions and challenges
around the Mars 1 mission, and the criticism from the MIT team
was a part of broader skepticism that the Mars 1 mission faced
with various scientists, engineers, and space
enthusiasts. The mission was seen as
underestimating the complexity. And cost of a human Mars
mission. These criticisms and challenges,
along with financial difficulties, eventually led to
the demise of the Mars One endeavor.