{"id":165,"date":"2012-08-08T14:05:59","date_gmt":"2012-08-08T19:05:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ecooptimism.com\/?p=165"},"modified":"2013-07-07T14:01:43","modified_gmt":"2013-07-07T19:01:43","slug":"if-we-can-put-a-man-on-the-moon-version-2-0","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ecooptimism.com\/?p=165","title":{"rendered":"\u201cIf we can put a man on the moon\u2026\u201d version 2.0?"},"content":{"rendered":"

On the occasion of Curiosity\u2019s spectacular landing on Mars, a couple of articles discussed the positive ramifications for Earthly problems. On NPR, a headline reads \u201c‘Curiosity’ Signals From Mars That We Can Solve Our Problems On Earth.<\/a>\u201d The gist of the article is that, amidst our seemingly intractable political and cultural divides in which nothing gets resolved, the level of technical achievement necessary to overcome the \u201cseven minutes of terror<\/a>\u201d illustrates:<\/p>\n

We can <\/em>solve problems. We can solve really big, really scary and really impossible problems. We can do amazing things. But we can only do these things when, collectively, we step up and take on the mantle of adulthood. We can only do these amazing things when we set aside the childish pleasures of fits and tantrums and rise to the level of responsibility that maturity demands.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

There aren\u2019t many problems bigger and scarier than global climate disruption (let\u2019s face it; \u201cclimate change\u201d is way too timid sounding). The author, Adam Frank, goes on to write \u201cYou don’t alter your planet’s atmospheric chemistry unless you have reached a certain level of, let’s say, “ability”.\u201d One would hope that level of ability corresponds at least somewhat to the aforementioned mature level of responsibility.
\n\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
Cost isn\u2019t the point we\u2019re making in this post, and it\u2019s kind of irrelevant to compare Curiosity\u2019s cost to the Olympics\u2019, but this graph does add a bit of perspective.
\nAnyone want to make a similar graph comparing Curiosity\u2019s budget to, say, fossil fuel subsidies or the defense budget?<\/h6>\n<\/blockquote>\n
<\/h6>\n

 <\/p>\n

As if to prove Frank\u2019s point on the ecological and Earth-bound relevancy of planting some cameras and drills on a planet that\u2019s somewhere around 200 million kilometers away and has an ecosystem nothing like ours (if indeed it has an ecosystem at all), a post in The Atlantic Cities discusses \u201cWhat Mars Can Teach Us About Climate Change<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

We only have one climate to test our hypotheses in. We can’t irreversibly hack Earth’s climate (by pumping it full of toxic gases, for example) to test whether our assumptions are right or wrong\u2014that, obviously, would be disastrous for Earth’s inhabitants. That means climate models are loaded with historical and empirical data to make them function.<\/p>\n

If only we could take the model to another planet to really test the underpinning physics.<\/p>\n

Bingo. Curiosity, the car-sized mobile chemistry lab that dropped spectacularly onto the surface of Mars yesterday, will give scientists a rare chance to test their assumptions about how climate change works on Earth. It will hunt the surface of Mars for sediment to pick up and drop into its sophisticated onboard machinery, then send back critical insights into how the climate of Mars\u2014once warmer, with rain, rivers, and deltas\u2014has changed over billions of years, lashed by solar winds.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This optimism, inescapable to the EcoOptimist, is heartwarming in its relevance to global warming. But one has to recall that it wasn\u2019t long after the Apollo moon landings that a disparaging metaphorical question arose. As the EcoOptimist, I suppose I shouldn\u2019t make this kind of conjecture, but will we soon be saying \u201cIf we can put an SUV on Mars, why can\u2019t we\u2026?\u201d Let\u2019s hope not.<\/p>\n

Share this:<\/h3>