Mars Express gets festive: A winter wonderland on Mars
esa.int
esa.int
However, landing on the polar ice cap has some downsides, not least of which is it would be the most boring place on the whole planet to land.
Korolev crater might make a good alternative site since you could conceivably land near a substantial amount of easily accessible water ice while still retaining easy access to terrain that is not ice-covered.
Since then, we've found a lot more. For example, this recent paper about the million cubic km of ice in Valles Marineris[1] (which are near the equator), or this presentation about kilometer-thick glaciers on Mars at mid-latitudes[2] from the recent Mars society convention.
We don't have to go to really cold and annoying for return flights locations near the poles to find water -- there's plenty of it on Mars in better places.
[1] http://www.dmzone.org/papers/Gourroncetal2014_VM.pdf [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2ERsEXAq_s
I always read this but do we really have the tech to this without needing big and heavy equipment and a lot of energy? Why don't we "just" do this on the South Pole?
Sure, the chemistry is simple and well understood and the equipment needed isn't that heavy.
> and (without) a lot of energy
Nope. Splitting water is heavily endothermic. The SpaceX BFR Mars mission plan would require ~3MW continous for two years for the energy required for CO2 capture and chemistry to make enough CH4+O2 to return to earth. This is a massive amount of energy, basically requiring either a quite respectable fission reactor or ~10ish MW of solar panels, which take about a single BFS cargo hold by themselves.
The reason these kinds of plans are floated regardless of the energy costs are simply that carrying that much power production down there is still much easier than taking enough fuel with you to return home.
Rationally, yes. This sentence makes sense. But, I find it amazing and difficult to visualize just how EXPENSIVE FUEL is.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2112298-food-made-from-...
Thus no need to grow potatoes :)
Would it? Wouldn't the ice preserve certain things (e.g. any microorganisms which might have lived there) better than if they were left out in the open?
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA00161
See that circular crater filled with ice in the top part of the picture. That's the same crater. So it is not exactly unknown feature on Mars.
Also this is more close to the "true" picture, without the fake 3d perspective applied:
http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2018/12/Plan_view_of...
Final detail that Mars Express is still satellite, buzzing around at 300+ km altitude. The pretty pictures we see are composites of pictures like these:
https://i.imgur.com/leNaYkM.jpg
(which is also not completely raw)
It is in fact a synthetic image constructed from a couple data sources. Not a real image taken from a camera. It may as well be one of those "artists conception of...." images used whenever a new planet is discovered.
The straight-overhead view is less CGI-y (still composed, but of multiple overhead strips):
https://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2018/12/Plan_view_o...
I'd like to know more about the input images...
Mars Phoenix (which landed in the upper northern hemisphere and dug for soil samples) was intended to figure out whether the ground environment near the ice cap was conducive to life. It found that the soil does contain water ice distributed throughout it, but also contains hostile perchlorates.
More recently, satellite imagery has found evidence of liquid water, both in seasonal flows on mid-latitude slopes (as a briny mixture with low freezing temp), and in underground lakes beneath the south polar ice cap.
tl;dr: This Korolev crater pic is a fun pretty-picture post offering an opportunity to educate readers with a seasonal twist. No new science here.
We've known for very long that the Mars polar caps contained water ice (since Mariner 9 and the Viking orbiters in the 1970s). We've known that the ice sublimates and deposits on the surface during local winter at high latitudes (Viking landers, 1970s). We've known that Mars had substantial amounts of liquid water on its surface at least for transitory periods (Mariner 9 & Viking orbiters, 1970s).
Since the early 2000s we've known that Mars contains substantial amounts of water ice in the form of sub-surface permafrost. Specifically that much of the surface of the planet, if not all of it, is underlain with permafrost that is as much as half water ice in some areas, at a minimum depth below the surface of only around a meter. This permafrost layer exists even in middle latitudes and might exist even at equatorial latitudes at a greater depth.
During the same time frame the Spirit and Opportunity rovers provided evidence that Mars experienced extended periods (of at least many millions of years) where substantial quantities of liquid water existed on the planet, leading to the formation of various geological features and minerals which could only be produced under those conditions.
More recently (within the last 10 years) the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter has provided evidence of the presence of sub-surface glaciers on Mars. These glaciers are vast volumes of water ice under thin layers of loose surface soil (a few meters to just one meter), and they exist all over Mars at latitudes as low as 30 deg. To put that in perspective, that's about the same latitude as New Orleans and San Diego.
Even more recently (this year) data from the Mars Express orbiter pointed to the existence of a lake of liquid water 1.5 km beneath the Southern polar cap, likely made up of very briny water.
All of this points to several interesting conclusions.
Firstly, in regards to future colonization of the planet by humans there appears to be abundant and easily accessible reserves of water ice throughout much of the planet. This means that there are a great many (instead of very few) prime locations on Mars for placing settlements. With water ice and the CO2 atmosphere you can make: water (of course), oxygen, hydrogen, and methane which makes it possible to manufacture key resources for interplanetary transit (LOX/methane as a rocket propellant), human habitation (water and oxygen), farming (water, CO2, oxygen, sunlight), energy storage and fuel for vehicles (oxygen and hydrogen or methane), and even the beginnings of industry (plastics from methane, iron and steel from carbon monoxide et al, glass, aluminum, etc.) Being able to site settlements at mid latitudes means being able to choose areas that have decent sunlight most of the year, making it possible to grow crops using natural sunlight and to use solar power as at least one component of power generation.
Secondly, in regards to the history of Mars the evidence of the presence of liquid water over geologically significant time periods combined with the evidence of pockets of sub-surface liquid water existing even into the present day means that Mars may have harbored environments suitable for the formation and existence of life, and some of that life may actually still exist through to the present day.
Yes, that's what they mean by a composite.
Here's the top down view (still quite spectacular!):
http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Images/2018/12/Plan_view_of...
EDIT: According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars , typical atmospheric pressure on the surface is about 0.6 kPa, compared to about 100 kPa on Earth. That's a bigger difference than would be explained by gravitational differences alone, so probably the fact that there is just much less atmosphere is more important. Either way, it's substantially less dense than any air you're likely to encounter on Earth.
Pictures like this make me want it. To stand somewhere on the ice, maybe brush a little snow around and see the rim all around... it's like a little island, delicate.
We are living in fantastic times!