The biggest threat that human beings pose to other worlds is what we don't know - or think we know but don't really know.
Every summer for the past 20 years, Pascal Lee has been visiting a remote Arctic region in Canada to imagine what is on Mars. This cold, dry, unsightly and, in fact, lifeless place on Earth is closest to the conditions that exist on the red planet - and this makes it an excellent training ground for mastering the technique of controlling rovers.
Lee, a planetary explorer at the SETI Institute in California, is the director of NASA's Haughton Mars Project, and it is there, at Houghton Crater, that he uses a similar Martian environment to study scientific questions related to outgoing from humans by threats to life on those planets that we are going to colonize.
So, for example, if people fly to Mars, will the microbes carried in our bodies actively multiply on the Martian soil, threatening local Martian microbes and destroying the local ecosystem? Lee's recent research suggests that the answer to this question will be negative - at least on the surface of Martian soil: the harsh Martian climate, as well as intense ultraviolet radiation, will destroy many of our microbes that we accidentally bring with us from Earth. …
However, the Houghton Crater Martian Project - along with other similar sites in Antarctica and Chile's Atacama Desert - inadvertently raises numerous ethical questions about how we should behave as interplanetary colonists. As humans improve their space vehicles and intend to colonize Mars over the next few decades, these questions become less far-fetched and more pressing.
And here's another scenario: if people land on Mars and are exposed to some mortal danger from the Martians, then should they attack the inhabitants of the red planet? If we talk about Lee's personal opinion, then he answers in the affirmative to this question. “If at some point it’s about the survival of me or the microbes on Mars, then I probably won’t hesitate,” he says.
These are complex questions, however, and go beyond the Houghton-Mars Project.
The 142-nation International Council for Science established the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR) to help answer these questions, and the United Nations Outer Space Treaty, in force since 1967, helps streamline some of the ethical and legal aspects that arise in connection with these issues.
Promotional video:
However, this treaty is aimed at ensuring the safety of people and scientific data about life on other planets, and not to protect the environment or the ecosystem on these planets. Moreover, the contents of this treaty are only guidelines - they are not laws, and the legal consequences of failure to comply with them remain unclear, says Catharine Conley, head of NASA's Planetary Protection Office.
“The peer pressure approach is still working in other countries,” she says. In her opinion, it is in the interests of the space agencies themselves to work together, as they often rely on each other for cooperation and progress in research. However, today, as more and more private companies like Space X are getting involved in missions to Mars, the playing field is changing.
“If other organizations get involved that don't have long-term scientific goals, the situation becomes more complicated,” says Conley.
In accordance with the main lines of this treaty, federal governments are responsible for the behavior of both their space agencies and non-governmental space organizations in their countries. Therefore, a company like SpaceX must obtain permission from the government department before launching its rocket - however, in the event that it, at some point in the flight, accidentally or intentionally violates the main directions of this agreement, other countries could theoretically sue the United States government or take other legal action, Conley says.
Despite the general good intentions and hard work to cleanse spacecraft of pollutants, the greatest danger that humanity poses to other planets is not known to us - or we think we do, but, in fact, this is not true. While research from the Houghton-Mars Project suggests little microbial transmission from rovers on the surface of Mars, other dynamics may exist on the red planet or on other planets that scientists are not even aware of.
“For certain types of terrestrial organisms, Mars is a giant dining dish,” says Conley. “We do not know, but it may happen that these organisms will reproduce much faster than on Earth, because they will be in this untouched external environment and will be able to take advantage of it.”
So far, most of the attention on these kinds of ethical issues has focused on Mars, which is the most realistic target for colonization in the near future. However, other types of planets could raise other concerns. “You can imagine all sorts of different scenarios, but the problem at the moment is that everything is open because no one has studied such things before,” Conley says, referring to the legal implications of pollution on Mars or other planets. - Therefore, until a specific case appears, it is impossible to decide what to do. But, of course, from the point of view of planetary protection, having a specific case already means that something went wrong."
There is also a danger that such questions may fall outside the scope of planetary research. Take, for example, the issue of generating electricity - in order for people to be able to live on another planet, they need to develop a way to generate electricity there. A substance called perchlorate is found in relatively large quantities on Mars (and also on Earth in the form of bleach or other substances), and it accounts for 1% of all dust on the red planet. This highly energetic salt is a good source of energy for humans on Mars, but that could change dramatically if Earthlings accidentally bring in germs that will eat it all up before we can use it, Conley says.
Unfortunately, the main directions determined by the Outer Space Treaty do not guarantee against making such mistakes. The mainstream is strict when it comes to keeping a spacecraft clean while searching for life on other planets, but less strict when it comes to flying spacecraft to explore other issues. This is because the main lines of planetary defense exist to safeguard scientific evidence of extraterrestrial life - not the environment on other planets, says Gerhard Kminek of the European Space Agency's Planetary Defense Division.
The working groups of the Committee on Space Research, including the Group on Potentially Harmful Activities in Space, are actually investigating how human activities in space can damage the environment on other planets. These working groups report the results of their work to the relevant UN bodies. But they only offer guidelines, not laws, says Kminek. As such, the International Space Agencies must recognize the importance of developing best practices in spacecraft sanitation, as well as adhering to the sometimes rather onerous standards of the Outer Space Treaty.
“If you do it bad one day, it may be enough to jeopardize any future research related to life,” says Kminek. "And that is why there is a strong international consensus about making sure there are no bad players."
Expedition standards also differ depending on which celestial body. For example, the atmosphere on Mars is dense enough that many microbes will immediately burn up when they get to Mars - this keeps sanitary standards rather lax compared to spaceships heading to planets with a less dense atmosphere like Jupiter's moon Europa, says Kminek.
Such conclusions are at least based on our understanding of these celestial bodies at the moment. During the Apollo missions to the moon in the 1960s and 1970s, we realized how unpredictable critical problems during space travel can be. On the Moon, the threat of moon dust to astronauts was underestimated until it began to infiltrate the pores on their faces as well as their zippers, jeopardizing the integrity of their spacesuits, says Margaret Race, a colleague of Conley's at the Search Institute. extraterrestrial intelligence SETI.
“If they had stayed there longer, their suits would have stopped functioning normally,” she says.
The late astronaut and engineer Eugene Cernan, the last man to walk on the lunar surface, reported major problems during the Apollo 17 flight during a technology meeting in 1973: “In my opinion, dust is probably is the most significant obstacle to regular operations on the Moon,”he said. “We are able to solve all other psychological, physical and mechanical problems - everything except dust.” People did not act very far-sighted when they did not restrict the transportation of materials from Earth to the Moon or vice versa, Reis said. There is no life on the moon, and therefore it had minor consequences on these celestial bodies. But if life existed on the Moon and the transfer of species really took place, the consequences could be more significant. “If there were life on the moon,then today we would have her here,”she says. "We did our best at the time, but we didn't understand then."
Space engineering has come a long way since the end of the Apollo program, but there is still a lot of work to be done to determine the best options for protecting life on other planets from human beings, Conley says. And if we eventually land on Mars, progress in this area will still need to continue - even if it seems that scientists have sufficient knowledge about the danger that humans pose to other planets.
“My answer to that question is, do you stop brushing your teeth after you first ate a candy bar?” Conley asks. “We have to keep doing this,” she says. Because, ultimately, it is the unknown that will be the greatest threat that human beings pose to other worlds.
Laura Poppick