>nuke the north and south pole on mars >buttloads of co2

co2 isn't a greenhouse gas, it won't increase the temperature on mars
and you'd need a lot of nukes to do this

>>8459537
Go away Elon

>>8459543
>co2 isn't a greenhouse gas, it won't increase the temperature on mars
wrong
>and you'd need a lot of nukes to do this
we've got plenty of nukes

>>8459544
pls no bully

>>8459537
That mofo got no substantial magnetic field. It'll just loose its atmosphere again. Also there will still be a buttload of radiation getting through.

File: 1476610916057.png (216KB, 804x732px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 804x732px

>>8459543
>co2 isn't a greenhouse gas

>>8459543
>co2 isn't a greenhouse gas
It has the essential properties of a greenhouse gas. You not wanting to believe in global warming won't change that.

>>8459637
>loose

>>8459637
>That mofo got no substantial magnetic field. It'll just loose its atmosphere again.
The process you're describing would take one to two million years, though. Plenty of time to devise a more permanent solution or go extinct.

>>8459849
>take one to two million years
That's a big amount of time

File: frodo.png (325KB, 560x559px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 560x559px

>>8459537
why don't we just nuke mars with an oxygen bomb?

>>8459990
why dont we nuke your mom with my dick?

When people talk about nuking the ice caps on Mars for CO2 I don't think they realize how much CO2 there actually is there.

If you managed to melt all the dry ice, the atmosphere would double in pressure, which is not much at all.

>>8459537
You forgot the part where a solar storm wipes the atmosphere clean off

>>8459623
yes bully

>>8459537
can you prove that there's enough co2 there for this?

>>8459537
>not steadily pushing it into a closer orbit with the Sun
>not re-establishing a hot enough core to sustain a magnetic field while pushing into closer orbit

>>8459543
>co2 isn't a greenhouse gas
oh dear fucking hell, who invited the Breitbart writer?

>>8461567
>pushing a planet
>heating the core
>>>/x/

>>8460142
solar wind doesnt strip atmosphere that quickily

>>8459869
UUUU

File: 1460246275878.jpg (55KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1024x768px

What about methane gas pockets and gases that are chemically locked inside regolith? Surely that would help.

>>8461732
yeah nuke them as well
nuke it all
fuck mars up

File: image_46.jpg (44KB, 750x660px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 750x660px

>>8459543
>co2 isn't a greenhouse gas

>>8459537
Yeah lets turn Mars into Venus.

File: This is actually earth, not mars.jpg (221KB, 1024x640px) Image search: [Google]

221KB, 1024x640px

>>8461736
I wasn't specifically saying we should NUKE the gas pockets and regolith...
Just that we could maybe release the methane in controlled bursts and release gases like oxygen, carbon monoxide and CO2 through chemical processes.
...While we nuke the shit out of the polar ice caps of mars.

File: Captain_Picard_is_Pleased_by_cptmeatman.jpg (39KB, 600x750px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 600x750px

>>8459537
>spending gazillions of dollars on flying nukes to a dead planet
>minute increase in atmosperic composition and pressure, if any
>significant radiation hazard
>zero change in temperature

>mfw sending anything up there is just as pointless and expensive as ever

>>8459537
> .3G
FUCKING KEK

enjoy getting deformed babies on your mars colony.

>>8461761
thats why we have to go to venus
its already warm, solar power is like twice as good there, infinite wind power, nice thick atmosphere perfect for growing crops

Think you can just compress all the water you could ever need straight out of the atmosphere.

Dnno why Musk wants to do mars, when Venus is closer and better.

>>8461790
You can't reach Venus' surface

>build a Mars base with enough manufacturing infrastructure to build another Mars base on-site using in situ materials
>get colonists to just keep building new bases
Is there a flaw in this plan?

>>8461797
?
says who?
It's 450 degrees, not hot enough to melt anything, only difficulty is the electronies.
But active cooling with the unlimited wind power on the surface is doable.

Dredging from floating platforms is doable, if there is subsurface hydrocarbons then that's like 99% of the difficulty solved.

File: C_Venera13_Camera2.jpg (81KB, 1000x210px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1000x210px

>>8461851
>> UNLIMITED WIND POWAH
Nigga windspeed on the surface is like really low like 0.5 m/s, sure it's like really dense, but you can't get much power.

NASA figures that a 1 meter wind turbine generates something like 15 watts mechanical. This is not enough to cool electronics. Silicon carbide semiconductors work at venusian temps and aren't too far off. Only thing we're having trouble with is the packaging. IE the traces have to be made with gold, the solder is silver, and chips themselves have to be made from special ceramic.

>>8461797
Oh look a picture of Venus' surface

File: SiliconCarbide.jpg (18KB, 395x261px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 395x261px

>>8461862
And here's some high temp SiC semiconductor electronics with GOLD traces. Unfortunately what kills these things is the gold traces degrading, this is a fixable problem

File: 1111111111111111111.jpg (795KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

795KB, 1600x1200px

>>8461851
Colonizing Venus is a stupid idea.
The surface temperature is over 860F and jet fuel burns at 800F. You would not be able to build anything because it would melt.

Also...
THE ATMOSPHERE IS ACID (and also toxic and opaque)
So anything on the surface would be molten, in darkness and be crushed by 90 atmospheres of pressure. Anything floating would have to be low enough in the atmosphere to have enough air pressure to float and we still run into the same problems as before except now you can also fall to your death.

Also Venus is a girl planet, no thanks

>>8461872
>The surface temperature is over 860F and jet fuel burns at 800F. You would not be able to build anything because it would melt.
wow and you thought you had it bad
venus is stuck in a perpetual 9/11
justice for venus when?

>>8459545
That would actually be a noble and agreeable method of reducing our (and Russia's) nuclear stockpile.

File: 600CLED.gif (41KB, 360x180px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 360x180px

>>8461869
And look at this a silicon carbide LED operating at 600C.

>>8461872
>>So anything on the surface would be molten
Venus is like 500 C tops m8, jet fuel burns hotter than this.(And as we all know jet fuel can't melt steel beams)

>>Anything floating would have to be low enough in the atmosphere to have enough air pressure to float
The venusian atmosphere is really dense, it's CO2 after all. CO2 is heavier than air, so air is a lifting gas on venus. At 50 km, you reach 1 atm pressure, and air is still a lifting gas.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20030022668.pdf

File: lunar_base_2_by_simonfetscher-d7f9k1z.jpg (194KB, 1280x521px) Image search: [Google]

194KB, 1280x521px

>>8459537
doing anything on Mars is pointless now. One should first try to build a Lunar base.

>landing of lunar in-situ construction modules
>development of mining facilities for Helium-3
>tokamak research facility for fusion advancement
>deadulus drive development
>then everything else

thinking about Mars now, is like thinking about the Moon before even sending a dog into space.

>>8461900
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Helium-3 mining is a fucking joke. It's present in VERY LOW concentrations on the moon and fusion isn't energy positive on Earth. Simply building tokamaks on the moon won't fix that.

Lunar ISRU does make sense, just not for helium-3. If we're ever going to build space based solar power plants, we would build them using lunar resources.

File: Lunar_base_concept_drawing_s78_23252.jpg (507KB, 1023x675px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 1023x675px

>>8461900
one wouldn't even need the development of the daedalus drive, a rail-launch ramp from the moon would work great given that deuterium would fuel the tokamak to achieve enough power to propell the vehicle at a high velocity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_driver

File: cyborg.jpg (759KB, 2560x1920px) Image search: [Google]

759KB, 2560x1920px

>unbreathable atmosphere
>too cold
>radiation
>very low gravity
>very low atmospheric pressure
all of these are problems solved by replacing our squishy vulnerable bodies with superior mechanical ones

>>8461912
yes, but not with tokamaks. at least not at the current state of research

>>8461920
would it be biologically possible to replace major bone structure with tougher materials like metal. basically creating wolverines without the healing.

>>8461927
here, I think you dropped this
>?

>>8461862
>Nigga windspeed on the surface is like really low like 0.5 m/s, sure it's like really dense, but you can't get much power.
It would be the same situation as on Earth, certain areas have more wind power than others. Put your wind turbines on a nearby hill/mountain.

It's a whole planet, after all.

>>8461862
>Oh look a picture of Venus' surface taken by a probe that was destroyed by Venus' nightmarish atmosphere just minutes after photographing it

File: Fig7_3copy.jpg (26KB, 332x374px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 332x374px

>>8461996
That is incorrect. The venera probes lasted about an hour with max survival time of 127 minutes on venera 13. The issue was the electronics failed

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera

>>8461966
Surface windspeed is still fuck all. Venera 9 landed at a relatively high altitude compared to other probes and still measured a wind speed of 0.5-0.7 m/s

>>8462030
>60 to 127 minutes is too long to casually describe as "just minutes"

>>8462030
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera_10
>Venera 10 measured a surface windspeed of 3.5 m/s.

What about this
Not sure what the optimum altitude for wind turbines would be.

>>8462202
That's about 850 watts per m^2 at the betz limit, which is pretty decent. This of course before conversion to electricity, which is going to be pretty bad because magnets don't work well at venusian temps. Landis estimates you need 594 watts to run a cooler for electronics for a rover. So one could maybe run a cooler with windpower

Main problem is that we have no data about windspeed variability on venus. It's probably not 3.5 m/s all the time

Of course with SiC electronics there is no need for cooling and one could use all that power for something else

>>8462270
Ok so you build a wall then you nuke it, then you fill it with oxygen, the oxygen then floats away leaving a cold radioactive airless wasteland,

>>8462241
Still might want SOME sort of cooling if building electronics capable of 500c doesn't work out.

>>8459990
the radiation from space would deactivate the oxygen atoms

>>8459663
dumb crooked nasty hillary supporter