We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
‘STRANDED IN EARTH orbit’, ‘lost on arrival’, ‘flew past planet’, ‘lost near Phobos’… If you happen to be one of the thousand-plus candidates chosen for the 2025 ‘Mars One’ mission, perhaps you’d be best advised not to opt for ‘humankind’s 54-year history of attempted Mars missions’ as your choice of subject for bedtime reading.
Failures far outweigh the successes over the course our stormy half century affair with the Red Planet. However, that didn’t deter almost a quarter of a million people (including around 850 in Ireland) from applying for the chance to be one of just 20 chosen for the planned 55 million kilometre voyage.
1,058 hopefuls made it past the opening round, including three based in Ireland — of whom, the most high-profile has been Dublin-based scientist Dr Joseph Roche. The mild-mannered astrophysicist has been in high demand by media outlets since his name emerged on the ‘long-list’ at the start of the month, and he’s been dutifully doing the rounds ever since answering questions on the ambitious plan (as it’s a one-way mission, the most frequent question so far has been ‘why?’).
Mars bound? Dr Joseph Roche [Image: Science Gallery]
The initiative of entrepreneur Bas Lansdorp and scientist Arno Wielders, both from The Netherlands, the privately funded project aims to establish a permanent human settlement on Mars by 2025. The initial crew of four will be followed by four more the year after that, with more missions flying out at two-year intervals until 2032.
Of course, it’s not quite that simple — organisers estimate they need to raise around $6 billion in funding. It’s planned the project will raise most of the cash needed by selling TV rights for a reality show tracking the progress of the candidates.
Ahead of blast-off for the manned mission, there’s be a series of other launches — of satellites, supplies and finally ‘rovers’ designed to set up the outpost living quarters and other equipment.
A ‘Mars One’ rover at work (Image: MarsOne.com)
To the casual observer, the plan may appear more than a little unlikely. Many space experts have also scorned the proposals — in particular the projected cost, which is just a fraction of NASA’s estimates for a Mars mission. Ethical issues have also been raised, as it’s been suggested the life-span of the successful applicants could be limited to less than a year — even if they manage to complete the perilous journey.
TheJournal.ie put some of the problems raised to Dr Roche (he is an astrophysicist, after all) beginning with the concerns of retired German astronaut Ulrich Walter, who warned that the probability of even reaching the planet’s surface could be as low as 30 per cent — the chances of surviving more than three months, worse still.
“Well, it’s such a new area no-one’s really certain yet whose estimates are trustworthy.“The reason Mars One deserves to be taken seriously is that — it’s not just a disparate group of people who don’t know what they’re doing. The founder Bas Lansdorp is an engineer with a background in wind energy — he might not have a background in space exploration, but all the experts he’s brought in are the best in their areas.
“One of the issues they keep bringing up is that when people comment outside their field, they generally express concern. So if it’s an astronaut he might say the equipment isn’t there or the spacecraft isn’t there; if you talk to the engineers they’ll say ‘the equipment is there, but we’re not sure about the reality TV show business model’.”
How about the costs issue? Six billion dollars is obviously a lot of money — but it still seems a little on the low side considering we’re talking about a mission to another heavenly body?
“The reason for the discrepancy between NASA’s estimates and this mission is purely down to the lack of the return trip.“Within space exploration at the moment the biggest financial issue is the return — trying to carry enough fuel to mount a return journey, and to do what they call a ‘hard launch’ from the surface of the planet.
“The NASA mission is thirty years down the line and around 50 times more expensive — that’s purely down to the fact that at the moment we don’t have anything that could launch to take people home. The six billion that Mars One is proposing is based on existing technology — we just can’t bring them back.
Roche is expecting to hear more news on the interview process from ‘mission control’ in April. Before then, he has to submit a series of medical test results to prove he’s up to the task.
(Youtube: RTÉ)
The final 40 candidates will be selected in the next two years or so, coinciding with the start of the TV show. Viewers from all over the world will decide on the first four people to be sent.
It’s planned the cameras will also follow the progress of the resettlers as they conduct experiments, grow their own food, and generally strive to stay happy and healthy on a planet far, far away.
An initial sketch for the Mars colony [Image: Mars One]
The television aspect is essential to the success of the mission — and while raising billions of dollars obviously won’t be easy, a look at the amount generated by sales of TV rights for the Olympics at least puts the scale of the task in some context:
[Chart: Olympic Marketing Fact File]
At the moment, according to Mars One, the TV rights issue is still the subject of “ongoing negotiations” with media companies. The project will also use crowd-funding as a means of raising the cash needed, while it’s hoped more sponsors and partners can be added the roster of Mars One supporters as the project progresses.
The development that — to date — perhaps best demonstrates the seriousness of the founders’ intentions took place last month, as Mars One signed a $250,000 (€180,000) contract with US group Lockheed Martin Space Systems to build a concept landing module for an unmanned test mission in five years time.
(Youtube: MarsOneProject)
While there are plenty of high-profile critics (amongst them, the chief engineer of NASA) Mars One also has an impressive list of advisers and supporters on board, including Nobel Prize winning theoretical physicist Gerard ‘t Hooft and the co-creator of ‘Big Brother’ Paul Römer.
The media interest generated worldwide as countries keep track of their candidates’ progress will almost certainly keep the cash flowing in in the short term — but once TV strand of the project is up and running, what are the chance of this ever [I'm afraid there really is no better way to phrase this] getting off the ground?
Dr Roche, for one, is under no illusions:
Clearly, this is very far from being a nailed on thing — but you’d never go into a project like this without expecting setbacks along the way, up to the prospect of complete failure.As a scientist I’d really have to say the chances are remote, but I think the Mars One plan is wonderfully ambitious.
[Image: Mars One]
*Jeff Wayne is not a scientist, obviously. You can rest assured that the actual chances of anything coming from Mars are far higher (but it’s unlikely the real figure would scan quite as well as a song lyric).
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Jasus this lad is takin emigration to a hole new level
Send all the Irish there
What are the odds, Of an Irish person hitting a pothole on their first day?
Feckin ejits ! The radiation alone will kill a human in months. Dozens of automated missions have to carried out first.
Spend the 6 billion on trying to make earth a better place to live.
We’re wrecking this planet, what gives us the right to start wrecking another .
We wrecked it already, why do you think we’re here and wrecking this place!
Was really enjoying reading this until I saw “55 kilometre voyage”. That’s not really that far now is it.
Also, in the fifth paragraph “it’s not a simple as that” should obviously be “it’s not as simple..”
I really enjoy the Journal, but I just can’t fathom how the journalists / authors of the articles make so many errors.
May I suggest when proof reading, do it out loud so you hear how it sounds.
$6bn for the project, $12bn for the CEO and $24bn for the new board of Mars. $48bn for eighteen staff, their pay, pensions, cars and bottles of water.
Thats $234bn including consultants fees.
This is the issue I have with this project. Ok people have to get paid for providing a service or their time, but I’m sure someone in this grand scheme is looking at the profit margin.
So sending 4 people to mars is ambitious and I’d like it to happen but not at the expense of life over money, this is totally pre meditated. If these organisers are really motivated to make history they will do it for nothing. If mankind is really motivated to go to another planet then why don’t we band resources together? Why do it this way, one way trip, TV show… It’s big brother and the public get to VOTE who goes, I can’t believe it is a movie plot!!
That’s valled socialism. As far as I can see did not work too well for the USSR in the space race. You do need to invest and you fo make it back ten fold in technological advancements. This Mars mission is alot of crap it will not happen.
We will see a mission but funded by a state. The likes of nasa will. But it will not be one way. Uproar sending astronaut to death so it must be return trip. Alot of work involved and nasa won’t have the funding unless China threaten America’s space dominance
Money would be better spent, solving problems here first and then you can Star trek anywhere after that!
If you look around there’s been lots of money thrown at existing problems, some were solved other not really. It is not always solved by money. $6B will not make a dent on existing budgets to ‘solve existing problems’ and might do some good to create a future for mankind in space.
55 kilometres – I would jog that!!
Lifespan of 1year? So we’re sending 20 people on a death mission
Can we nominate people?? There’s a few people it can think of that I’d love to send ;-)
Do you think that’s how Adam n Eve really got here??
Will ya ever go way you’s can’t handle the world they love in let alone a new planet
Any chance they might persuade gilmore and kenny to go.
Maybe we can persuade you to go too?
In theory it sounds great to get away from earth and the dreggs of humanity, to go and live with other good people on another planet, and not be held back by the things that hold back humanity here. I honestly wouldn’t be making a big deal over whatever nationallity these guys are. They are soon to be Martians. I would assume these guys are leaving any sort of twisted nationalism behind them and starting over from scratch. Sounds great, but I rather not live in a box for the rest of my life. At least they will be remembered for millenia to come, which is more than what I can say for the rest of us
Maybe Michael o Leary will fly there
Hed only go as far as one of its moons.
Much as it’s nice to say he was chosen from almost a quarter of a million applicants, fewer than 3000 bothered to pay the application fee when it came down to it…
Only an Irish man?
The rovers they describe laying the groundwork there sound implausible to me. It needs to be able to clear areas of ground, pile earth (or, eh, soil) on top of habitats, cart heavy equipment around, and also assemble equipment (such as connecting hoses and deploying solar panels). So a solar powered robot JCB essentially. It’s a far cry from any of the rovers that have made it to Mars so far! And since all they appear to have is concept art, they would appear to need to design and test this thing in full before the planned launch in 2020.
It’s an interesting idea anyway. Maybe if they did succeed in getting enough people and equipment there they’d be able to develop the industry necessary to return, so the trips would no longer be so one way.
I had a rover 75 once. Couldn’t build for sh*! and the head gasket blew.
Completely agree with you on the infrastructure needed to build a viable colony. It would be much heavier then solar-powered rovers. I frankly believe Mars One will never get the funding to go further than training the crews, but that would be a plus already. We’ll probably need Musk’s Mars Colonial Transports to carry tens of colonists at a time plus their heavy machinery to succeed.
If its a one way it has to be suicide.
But What if you wanted to go out for a
kick a round!
have your say