recommended reading

Why Humans Still Can't Go to Mars

NASA

Long-distance human spaceflight is, famously, a bust. So far, anyway -- no doubt we'll figure it out someday. But the reason we haven't sent humans on five-year missions seeking out new life and new civilizations isn't because of cost, politics, or lack of warp drive. The real reason is that astronauts would probably be killed by radiation before they met their first gas giant.

They wouldn't be dead dead, of course. They might even make it back in time to die on Earth. Yet the outbound trip alone would be enough to send their risk for cancer shooting way beyond what NASA considers acceptable levels.  

How do we know? Well, before they sent the Mars Curiosity rover to the red planet, scientists strapped on a sensor to measure the amount of radiation bombarding its ship. According to newly released data, for every day the vessel spent traveling to Mars, it recorded 1.8 milliSieverts of space radiation.

One thousand milliSieverts -- or more simply, 1 Sievert -- is enough to raise your risk for cancer by 5 percent.

With that, let's do some math. Given that Curiosity's interplanetary trip lasted 253 days, the rover accumulated 456 milliSieverts of radiation for the duration of the journey (which doesn't include time spent on the Mars surface). That's .46 Sieverts, or 46 percent of the 1 Sievert dosage linked to a 5-percent jump in cancer risk. By comparison, the average American absorbs an estimated 0.0036 Sieverts of radiation a year.

"The findings indicate radiation exposure for human explorers could exceed NASA's career limit for astronauts," NASA spokesperson Trent Perrotto wrote in an e-mail.

Even in Earth orbit, astronauts absorb radiation. Although we're pretty good at blocking dangerous particles emitted by the sun, our shielding technology isn't as good at blocking other types of space rays. NASA has, therefore, set a lifetime limit on the amount of time any person can spend up there. And that threshold is at the 3-percent-increased-risk-for-cancer mark.

The journey to Mars would therefore get you pretty close to your lifetime exposure cap, to say nothing of the radiation you'd suffer on the planet's surface or on the voyage home. It'd be 23 times the amount employees working for the Energy Department are allowed in a year, and 127 times what the ordinary person is exposed to annually.

We don't conclusively know what that level of exposure would mean for people on a mission to Mars—only that it would be very dangerous. Unless we develop better shielding (or faster-than-light travel), our first interplanetary travelers might never make a second trip.

Threatwatch Alert

Thousands of cyber attacks occur each day

See the latest threats

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

Close [ x ] More from Nextgov
 
 

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from Nextgov.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Modernizing IT for Mission Success

    Surveying Federal and Defense Leaders on Priorities and Challenges at the Tactical Edge

    Download
  • Communicating Innovation in Federal Government

    Federal Government spending on ‘obsolete technology’ continues to increase. Supporting the twin pillars of improved digital service delivery for citizens on the one hand, and the increasingly optimized and flexible working practices for federal employees on the other, are neither easy nor inexpensive tasks. This whitepaper explores how federal agencies can leverage the value of existing agency technology assets while offering IT leaders the ability to implement the kind of employee productivity, citizen service improvements and security demanded by federal oversight.

    Download
  • Effective Ransomware Response

    This whitepaper provides an overview and understanding of ransomware and how to successfully combat it.

    Download
  • Forecasting Cloud's Future

    Conversations with Federal, State, and Local Technology Leaders on Cloud-Driven Digital Transformation

    Download
  • IT Transformation Trends: Flash Storage as a Strategic IT Asset

    MIT Technology Review: Flash Storage As a Strategic IT Asset For the first time in decades, IT leaders now consider all-flash storage as a strategic IT asset. IT has become a new operating model that enables self-service with high performance, density and resiliency. It also offers the self-service agility of the public cloud combined with the security, performance, and cost-effectiveness of a private cloud. Download this MIT Technology Review paper to learn more about how all-flash storage is transforming the data center.

    Download

When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.