Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (887962)	9/15/2015 1:41:59 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1574854

True, but nuking CO2 deposits just to take a step closer to that outcome is far from a sure thing. And what might be the blockers? Any idea at all? We have wandered from the original topic. Eric claimed that Mars terraforming advocates haven't taken into account the erosion of the Martian atmosphere by solar winds and implied that was somehow insurmountable. Neither of those is true. Elon's suggestion is a novel one. And it probably would work if a bunch of small ones are used instead of a few big ones. You know, the whole surface to volume ratio thing. It almost certainly can't do the job alone, but it would be a huge amplifier for other methods. A great adjunct would be NH3 rich comets. UV from the Sun would breakdown the ammonia into nitrogen and hydrogen and the nitrogen would be a great buffer gas, just like on Earth. But, there are a lot of reasons why nukes wouldn't be a great idea. Radioactive fallout would be a big one. But the biggest one is the same one that argues against terraforming it at all. Which is the likelihood of there being native life on Mars.