[uuvs8]

> What do you think the effect of putting an output on Mars will be on Climate Change? I'm thinking negligible in comparison.

If you are seriously saying that getting 20k people to Mars is impacting Earths climate less than getting them to Mars then you need a reality check.

Hint: You can't not just not walk there, but anything apart from sunlight to support life isn't there which even Antarctica has in abundance (oxygen and water).

[somenameforme]

----

CO2 emissions per a Falcon 9 : 425.

Emissions per human on a Falcon 9 (assuming 4) : 106

Emissions for a Starship launch: 2700

Emissions per human on a Starship launch (assuming 100) : 27

Emissions per year for America: 5,000,000,000

Emissions per year for a single American: 15

Emissions per for for a single American over an 80 year lifespan: 1200

----

I don't know if people don't really appreciate how many people there are, overestimates rocket pollution, or just like some person reads something on the internet, somebody else repeats it, and nobody at any point bothers to see if what anybody is saying makes any sense. Rocket launches are such a nothing-burger in terms of emissions that yes sending people to Mars (assuming they stay for a while) would definitely be a net reduction in emissions.

For some fun tangential data, to match the current emissions of the US, alone, you'd need to launch about 12 million Falcon 9s. Last year was the biggest year, for space, by far with a whopping global total of 178 orbital launches. So the entire global pollution impact, for that record breaking year, was equivalent to ~5,000 Americans.

https://everydayastronaut.com/rocket-pollution/

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?location...

[bryanrasmussen]

thank you for the going and doing the work that I just couldn't get the energy up for.

[JumpCrisscross]

> seriously saying that getting 20k people to Mars is impacting Earths climate less than getting them to Mars

It impacts the pristine nature of Antarctica less. You’re also ignoring motivation. There are smart people motivated to see Mars. (Maybe not to settle. But to visit. The same way one may be curious to visit Antarctica without wanting to live there.)

[bryanrasmussen]

>If you are seriously saying that getting 20k people to Mars is impacting Earths climate less than getting them to Mars then you need a reality check.

no I'm saying their excess heat generated in a polar region will be more detrimental than the excess heat generated on Mars will be. Among other things.

Basically that the day to day living in the area being damaged is going to be more damaging than the one off transportation. That said I haven't done the calculation, but since I was the first one to even bring it up I doubt anyone has done it either.

[littlestymaar]

> no I'm saying their excess heat generated in a polar region will be more detrimental than the excess heat generated on Mars will be

This is not how climate works, not at all. The issue isn't “the amount of excess heat”, it's about how many shit-tons of greenhouse gases we would put in our atmosphere by sending those people to those two places.

And given you need to send more stuff on Mars to make it livable than on Antarctica + the fact that you'd send them with freaking rockets instead of boats, it's going to be several orders of magnitude more damaging.