What do you think?
Rate this book
The Case For Mars
Since the beginning of human history Mars has been an alluring dream; the stuff of legends, gods, and mystery. The planet most like ours, it has still been thought impossible to reach, let alone explore and inhabit.Now with the advent of a revolutionary new plan, all this has changed. Leading space exploration authority Robert Zubrin has crafted a daring new blueprint, Mars Direct, presented here with illustrations, photographs, and engaging anecdotes.
The Case for Mars is not a vision for the far future or one that will cost us impossible billions. It explains step-by-step how we can use present-day technology to send humans to Mars within ten years; actually produce fuel and oxygen on the planet's surface with Martian natural resources; how we can build bases and settlements; and how we can one day "terraform" Mars; a process that can alter the atmosphere of planets and pave the way for sustainable life.
The Case for Mars is not a vision for the far future or one that will cost us impossible billions. It explains step-by-step how we can use present-day technology to send humans to Mars within ten years; actually produce fuel and oxygen on the planet's surface with Martian natural resources; how we can build bases and settlements; and how we can one day "terraform" Mars; a process that can alter the atmosphere of planets and pave the way for sustainable life.
418 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 8, 1996
279 people are currently reading
4861 people want to read
About the author
Robert Zubrin
41 books161 followersRobert M. Zubrin is an American aerospace engineer and author, best known for his advocacy of human exploration of Mars. He and his colleague at Martin Marietta, David Baker, were the driving force behind Mars Direct, a proposal in a 1990 research paper intended to produce significant reductions in the cost and complexity of such a mission.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 219 reviews
March 22, 2018
In using this book for research purposes, I've been delighted with the wealth of practical information it offers. The Case For Mars is a history lesson, a speculative thesis, a business proposal, and a visionary rally cry—all in one.
The author lays his foundation on some of the more relevant origins of humanity's relationship with astronomy, astrophysics, and the planet Mars—managing accuracy without any petty attempts to pit science against religion or vice versa. The background he provided on Johannes Kepler and Tycho Brahe was actually more interesting than a lot of his introductory material, in this reader's opinion.
“Geometry is one and eternal, a reflection out of the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is one of the reasons to call man an image of God.” --Johannes Kepler
He also walks us through some of the more famous expeditions—dissecting the grand successes and horrendous disasters—and then paralleling them to how we ought to approach the exploration and eventual settlement of the red planet. His underlying point in all this is that the wisest (and most cost-effective) course of action would be to 'go native', taking with us only minimal provisions and focusing on all possible means of 'living off the land'. He goes so far as to assert: "If necessity is the mother of invention, Mars will provide the cradle.”
The author seems to feel strongly that the search for life on Mars is of the utmost importance to any potential manned missions. But while I didn't feel like he made a strong enough case for that particular pet point, I did feel his arguments for regarding Mars as the next logical 'frontier' for humanity were more than enthralling. His economic, historical, and sociological points are sound—to the point where this reader, by the end of the book, has transitioned from being generally indifferent to a cautious-yet-excited proponent of Martian expeditions with the eventual goal of colonization, terraforming, etc.
Zubrin's writing style is precise and comprehensive without being dry, and compelling without coming across as intellectually superior. In all, this is a fascinating read for anyone who is interested in Mars, the potential future of extra-terrestrial settlement, or how NASA works (or in some cases, doesn't work).
Favorite quote:
“If the human mind can understand the universe, it means the human mind is fundamentally of the same order as the divine mind. If the human mind is of the same order as the divine mind, then everything that appeared rational to God as he constructed the universe, it's “geometry,” can also be made to appear rational to the human understanding, and so if we search and think hard enough, we can find a rational explanation and underpinning for everything. This is the fundamental proposition of science.” --Robert Zubrin
The author lays his foundation on some of the more relevant origins of humanity's relationship with astronomy, astrophysics, and the planet Mars—managing accuracy without any petty attempts to pit science against religion or vice versa. The background he provided on Johannes Kepler and Tycho Brahe was actually more interesting than a lot of his introductory material, in this reader's opinion.
“Geometry is one and eternal, a reflection out of the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is one of the reasons to call man an image of God.” --Johannes Kepler
He also walks us through some of the more famous expeditions—dissecting the grand successes and horrendous disasters—and then paralleling them to how we ought to approach the exploration and eventual settlement of the red planet. His underlying point in all this is that the wisest (and most cost-effective) course of action would be to 'go native', taking with us only minimal provisions and focusing on all possible means of 'living off the land'. He goes so far as to assert: "If necessity is the mother of invention, Mars will provide the cradle.”
The author seems to feel strongly that the search for life on Mars is of the utmost importance to any potential manned missions. But while I didn't feel like he made a strong enough case for that particular pet point, I did feel his arguments for regarding Mars as the next logical 'frontier' for humanity were more than enthralling. His economic, historical, and sociological points are sound—to the point where this reader, by the end of the book, has transitioned from being generally indifferent to a cautious-yet-excited proponent of Martian expeditions with the eventual goal of colonization, terraforming, etc.
Zubrin's writing style is precise and comprehensive without being dry, and compelling without coming across as intellectually superior. In all, this is a fascinating read for anyone who is interested in Mars, the potential future of extra-terrestrial settlement, or how NASA works (or in some cases, doesn't work).
Favorite quote:
“If the human mind can understand the universe, it means the human mind is fundamentally of the same order as the divine mind. If the human mind is of the same order as the divine mind, then everything that appeared rational to God as he constructed the universe, it's “geometry,” can also be made to appear rational to the human understanding, and so if we search and think hard enough, we can find a rational explanation and underpinning for everything. This is the fundamental proposition of science.” --Robert Zubrin
March 20, 2024
If somebody wanted to understand the complexity of putting humans on Mars, this would be a good start. Somewhat dated, but impressively comprehensive (At a layman level), and probably historically significant.
December 11, 2011
Falling victim to many of the same biases he rails against other visionaries and scientists for having, Zubrin proceeds to display a zealot's lack of a grounding in reality. The technical bits "proving" that Mars is the place to go in the solar system are amusingly one-sided -- despite the fact that many of the ideas for building habitats within lunar orbit are much more cost-effective if those habitats are allowed to use materials from Near-Earth Orbit asteroids, which are far easier to exploit than Mars, and much less hazardous than the trip to Mars would be.
Moreover, Zubrin displays a lack of basic planetary science in a few places -- by trade he's an aerospace engineer, not a planetary scientist -- with his blithe assumption that if Mars once had liquid water which has since frozen, it'll be a snap (relatively) to unfreeze it, and then Mars will be habitable!!!11oneone. Which rather ignores the whole question of why Mars got cold.
The volume is not useless, but it should be cross-checked with other books on the subject of space exploration, exploitation, and habitation. This is not a one-stop-shop, and Zubrin himself I consider an untrustworthy source.
Moreover, Zubrin displays a lack of basic planetary science in a few places -- by trade he's an aerospace engineer, not a planetary scientist -- with his blithe assumption that if Mars once had liquid water which has since frozen, it'll be a snap (relatively) to unfreeze it, and then Mars will be habitable!!!11oneone. Which rather ignores the whole question of why Mars got cold.
The volume is not useless, but it should be cross-checked with other books on the subject of space exploration, exploitation, and habitation. This is not a one-stop-shop, and Zubrin himself I consider an untrustworthy source.
Read
May 29, 2022Written in 1996, Zubrin's book on the prospects of humans living on Mars, is necessarily somewhat behind the latest scientific understanding of the Mars environment. Partly through Zubrin's own lobbying efforts to make Mars the focus of the U.S. space program, NASA has maintained an active research initiative that has landed several rovers on the Red planet. These have taught us a lot, and also raised a lot of new questions. Therefore, it is inevitable that at least a few of the technical details of Zubrin's book must be out of date, so one might question why to read it.
Not, it should be said, for the gripping prose. Zubrin is readable enough, but he is no poet, or at least there's no poetry in this book to stir your soul. Quite rightfully, he seems to figure that if you're the kind to pick up and read a book titled "The Case For Mars", you don't need help to understand the emotional appeal of sending humans into space. However, perhaps for this group of readers more than most, some logical support for such a viscerally (to them) attractive idea, is necessary. Zubrin is here to say that it's ok to want to send people into space, and he's here to show you why that is so.
If you are emotionally opposed to the idea, as many people are, then nothing Zubrin (or anybody else) says is going to convince you. But, and here is why Zubrin's book is still worth reading despite its age, at some point the people in favor need to get on with planning it. There will never come a moment of unanimity, and therefore past a certain point, spending your breath trying to argue in favor of it is just another obstacle in the way of getting about the business of doing it. Zubrin has thinly-veiled disdain for the grandiose plans that resulted from George H.W. Bush's call for a plan to reach Mars, thinking that its size was what killed it (he's probably right). Most of the book is attempting to show how one can send the minimum amount necessary to Mars, and use that minimum amount to extract the rest of what we need from local (Martian) resources. It is this basic idea, that an expedition to Mars should be less like the Apollo program (send with the astronauts everything they will need) and more like the Mayflower (send the tools necessary to extract local resources as needed). Whether or not the specific details of Zubrin's plan will turn out to be correct, the basic philosophy surely is. Mars, is a long way away. You won't ever get there if you need to take enough fuel, food, etc. with you for the entire round trip. Different chapters explore the issues of getting there, staying there, and making it more like home ("terraforming", if the term is interpreted loosely). He makes decent use of visuals (tables, charts, artist's conceptions), although it is primarily a text-oriented book. I found it an easy read, and thought-provoking.
Zubrin is, 25 years later, still alive, and president of the Mars Society, which now aims to obtain private funding for a mission to Mars. It is looking increasingly likely that, like many early expeditions to the New World from the Old in the 16th century, the ships that take off into the barely-known will be taking such a risk based on private initiatives (although perhaps with official governmental blessing). I have some optimism that it may even happen in my lifetime (although not, I have to admit, very likely to accept an old coot like myself). When it does, Zubrin's book will probably be part of the reason why.
Not, it should be said, for the gripping prose. Zubrin is readable enough, but he is no poet, or at least there's no poetry in this book to stir your soul. Quite rightfully, he seems to figure that if you're the kind to pick up and read a book titled "The Case For Mars", you don't need help to understand the emotional appeal of sending humans into space. However, perhaps for this group of readers more than most, some logical support for such a viscerally (to them) attractive idea, is necessary. Zubrin is here to say that it's ok to want to send people into space, and he's here to show you why that is so.
If you are emotionally opposed to the idea, as many people are, then nothing Zubrin (or anybody else) says is going to convince you. But, and here is why Zubrin's book is still worth reading despite its age, at some point the people in favor need to get on with planning it. There will never come a moment of unanimity, and therefore past a certain point, spending your breath trying to argue in favor of it is just another obstacle in the way of getting about the business of doing it. Zubrin has thinly-veiled disdain for the grandiose plans that resulted from George H.W. Bush's call for a plan to reach Mars, thinking that its size was what killed it (he's probably right). Most of the book is attempting to show how one can send the minimum amount necessary to Mars, and use that minimum amount to extract the rest of what we need from local (Martian) resources. It is this basic idea, that an expedition to Mars should be less like the Apollo program (send with the astronauts everything they will need) and more like the Mayflower (send the tools necessary to extract local resources as needed). Whether or not the specific details of Zubrin's plan will turn out to be correct, the basic philosophy surely is. Mars, is a long way away. You won't ever get there if you need to take enough fuel, food, etc. with you for the entire round trip. Different chapters explore the issues of getting there, staying there, and making it more like home ("terraforming", if the term is interpreted loosely). He makes decent use of visuals (tables, charts, artist's conceptions), although it is primarily a text-oriented book. I found it an easy read, and thought-provoking.
Zubrin is, 25 years later, still alive, and president of the Mars Society, which now aims to obtain private funding for a mission to Mars. It is looking increasingly likely that, like many early expeditions to the New World from the Old in the 16th century, the ships that take off into the barely-known will be taking such a risk based on private initiatives (although perhaps with official governmental blessing). I have some optimism that it may even happen in my lifetime (although not, I have to admit, very likely to accept an old coot like myself). When it does, Zubrin's book will probably be part of the reason why.
December 11, 2021
Humans will never settle on Mars. It will always be beyond the range of human habitability. The lesser gravity, the cosmic radiation and dust storms, the thinness of the atmosphere, the absence of liquid water, the absence of an ozone layer, the distance, the human factors, etc., would require superhuman technological and human adaptations. It will never be profitable or cost effective. This book offers solutions, high-tech and very expensive. Despite its optimism that Mars can be terraformed, it will never be worth the cost to do so, even if the formidable engineering problems could be solved. This book assumes that the Earth will always be available to support Mars missions, but the support systems on Earth will be stretched thin as the terrestrial climate collapses.
The terraforming of Mars would be accomplished by artificially-induced global warming. Even if that could be done successfully within a reasonable time, what would prevent it from eventually getting out of control? It is grandiose to think that humans could significantly alter the climate of a body as big as Mars and as distant as Mars. It's not going to happen! It is surely possible that humans will walk on Mars some day but they will not colonize it, for the same reasons that we have not colonized the moon. According to researchers at Edinburgh University, “The surface of Mars is lethal to vegetative cells,” and much of the surface is “uninhabitable” due to “a toxic cocktail of oxidants, iron oxides, perchlorates, and UV irradiation.” [The INDEPENDENT, 7 July 2017].
The title of this book betrays the author’s bias. He wants to do this. His book is an advertisement for Mars colonization, an appeal for the funding it would require. Thus he has a vested interest in minimizing the difficulties. His talk of “living off the land like Lewis and Clark” is unrealistic. His attitude is expansionist and strongly pro-technology. He thinks stagnation is the only alternative to perpetual expansion into new frontiers. He thinks technology is progress, but expansionism and technology can and do create serious problems. It is not our manifest destiny to populate other planets. They are alien worlds. A society that lives within realistic limits is not to be disparaged as a “closed society.”
This book is about the Red Planet; it is more about engineering and technology. If you decide to read it, get the latest edition because this is a moving topic.
The terraforming of Mars would be accomplished by artificially-induced global warming. Even if that could be done successfully within a reasonable time, what would prevent it from eventually getting out of control? It is grandiose to think that humans could significantly alter the climate of a body as big as Mars and as distant as Mars. It's not going to happen! It is surely possible that humans will walk on Mars some day but they will not colonize it, for the same reasons that we have not colonized the moon. According to researchers at Edinburgh University, “The surface of Mars is lethal to vegetative cells,” and much of the surface is “uninhabitable” due to “a toxic cocktail of oxidants, iron oxides, perchlorates, and UV irradiation.” [The INDEPENDENT, 7 July 2017].
The title of this book betrays the author’s bias. He wants to do this. His book is an advertisement for Mars colonization, an appeal for the funding it would require. Thus he has a vested interest in minimizing the difficulties. His talk of “living off the land like Lewis and Clark” is unrealistic. His attitude is expansionist and strongly pro-technology. He thinks stagnation is the only alternative to perpetual expansion into new frontiers. He thinks technology is progress, but expansionism and technology can and do create serious problems. It is not our manifest destiny to populate other planets. They are alien worlds. A society that lives within realistic limits is not to be disparaged as a “closed society.”
This book is about the Red Planet; it is more about engineering and technology. If you decide to read it, get the latest edition because this is a moving topic.
July 24, 2023
Very interesting plan and ideas, not sure it's held up over time and I know Zubrin has received a lot of criticism. I still enjoyed most of the book.
September 6, 2023
The author of this book, Robert Zubrin, is a fucking crybaby. He cries about the useless ISS. He cries about the overgrown NASA plans for a manned mission to Mars. He cries about lack of consistent congressional funding and periodical presidential goal changes. It's all too much for me. And it's so unnecessary! An understated matter-of-fact approach works so much better than polemics.
There's a lot of cool discussion about technology in situ resource utilization like turning CO2 from the atmosphere and H2O from the regolith into O2 for breathing, rocket fuel for getting around, etc. I love the parts about smelting metals, too.
But there's a big problem with this book: I just can't trust the author.
He exaggerates all kinds of things and substitutes his opinion for fact all over the place. He claims colonization of Mars is the "only way" to "preserve democracy", to "push technology forward", and to "stop the return of oligarchy".
He goes on a pseudoscientific rant against "Malthusian Theory" calling it "scientifically bankrupt" and saying that "all predictions made upon it have been wrong" which is obviously untrue. He says debates about it "are not to be settled in academic journals" which comes across as blatant anti-intellectualism. I suspect I know the kind of small-minded, anti-technology Malthusianism he's talking about. The sort of people who are against crop biotechnology, etc. But he doesn't explain himself. Just incomprehensibly goes on a rant without sufficient context.
The stated purpose for writing the book is to win over public opinion about HIS plan of getting to Mars. He paints a utopian picture of Mars as the next frontier. He delivers an argument for Mars colonization by historical analogy with the United States. This is best characterized as historical revisionism because he ignores the whole part about NATIVE AMERICANS. And it's also a bit of fallacious nationalism because he exaggerates the role of the USA in moving the world forward in terms of political philosophy, technology, and culture. Not to mention he provides opinion instead of evidence that the frontier was responsible for these American achievements. I shit you not, this is a direct quote from the book: "Only in a universe of unlimited resources can all men be brothers." Who says shit like that?!
The book has an appendix about the ALH84001 meteorite that was blown of Mars and landed on Earth. He describes a paper by Imre Friedmann as "proving" that magnetite found in the meteorite was of bacterial origin. This is not a correct assessment of the scientific literature. There are other explanations including natural geological processes that could have produced the magnetite. Yet another demonstration of the authors zeal, gullibility, and lack of skepticism, knowledge of the relevant science, and critical thinking.
He also offers a piss-poor argument for panspermia full of fallacious reasoning much of which you can find here.
He's got some cockamamie idea for dealing with timekeeping challenges for people in a Mars colony. He proposes we have a new unit the "Mars second" which is slightly longer than the SI second. That way there's 60 Mars seconds in a Mars minute, 60 Mars minutes in a Mars hour, and 24 Mars hours in a Mars day. This is advantageous for people using a sextant to navigate on the surface... but super confusing for EVERY OTHER CONCEIVABLE PURPOSE. Total half-baked idea. Cool to think about, though. More useful would be to use the Zodiac signs for Mars months, because a Mars year is 687 Mars days. It would be weird to have 57 days in Mars-October, right? Better to have 57 days in "Capricorn". Yeah, that makes more sense...
There's a lot of cool discussion about technology in situ resource utilization like turning CO2 from the atmosphere and H2O from the regolith into O2 for breathing, rocket fuel for getting around, etc. I love the parts about smelting metals, too.
But there's a big problem with this book: I just can't trust the author.
He exaggerates all kinds of things and substitutes his opinion for fact all over the place. He claims colonization of Mars is the "only way" to "preserve democracy", to "push technology forward", and to "stop the return of oligarchy".
He goes on a pseudoscientific rant against "Malthusian Theory" calling it "scientifically bankrupt" and saying that "all predictions made upon it have been wrong" which is obviously untrue. He says debates about it "are not to be settled in academic journals" which comes across as blatant anti-intellectualism. I suspect I know the kind of small-minded, anti-technology Malthusianism he's talking about. The sort of people who are against crop biotechnology, etc. But he doesn't explain himself. Just incomprehensibly goes on a rant without sufficient context.
The stated purpose for writing the book is to win over public opinion about HIS plan of getting to Mars. He paints a utopian picture of Mars as the next frontier. He delivers an argument for Mars colonization by historical analogy with the United States. This is best characterized as historical revisionism because he ignores the whole part about NATIVE AMERICANS. And it's also a bit of fallacious nationalism because he exaggerates the role of the USA in moving the world forward in terms of political philosophy, technology, and culture. Not to mention he provides opinion instead of evidence that the frontier was responsible for these American achievements. I shit you not, this is a direct quote from the book: "Only in a universe of unlimited resources can all men be brothers." Who says shit like that?!
The book has an appendix about the ALH84001 meteorite that was blown of Mars and landed on Earth. He describes a paper by Imre Friedmann as "proving" that magnetite found in the meteorite was of bacterial origin. This is not a correct assessment of the scientific literature. There are other explanations including natural geological processes that could have produced the magnetite. Yet another demonstration of the authors zeal, gullibility, and lack of skepticism, knowledge of the relevant science, and critical thinking.
He also offers a piss-poor argument for panspermia full of fallacious reasoning much of which you can find here.
He's got some cockamamie idea for dealing with timekeeping challenges for people in a Mars colony. He proposes we have a new unit the "Mars second" which is slightly longer than the SI second. That way there's 60 Mars seconds in a Mars minute, 60 Mars minutes in a Mars hour, and 24 Mars hours in a Mars day. This is advantageous for people using a sextant to navigate on the surface... but super confusing for EVERY OTHER CONCEIVABLE PURPOSE. Total half-baked idea. Cool to think about, though. More useful would be to use the Zodiac signs for Mars months, because a Mars year is 687 Mars days. It would be weird to have 57 days in Mars-October, right? Better to have 57 days in "Capricorn". Yeah, that makes more sense...
September 10, 2015
Robert Zubrin makes a strong case for human colonization of Mars and, surprising to me at least, that we already should've been there by now. JFK would be disappointed that we didn't take his model for going to the moon many, many moons ago and apply it to Mars. At least we've got rovers there, but politics, complacency and a stagnant sense of adventure and frontier spirit have set us back from experiencing Mars the way it should be experienced -- with our own hands in the red dirt, our own fingers taking selfies and our own eyes viewing Earth from millions of miles away. The technology is there or damn close enough, but our heart and courage seem to be in too short supply, especially over the last 20 years or so. As Zubrin points out, there's a very good chance that life on Earth began with a seed planted by Mars via a wayward rock a long, long time ago. But we'll never know for certain the true origin of life here on Earth and elsewhere in the universe until we go to Mars, drill into the dirt and find out.
October 29, 2008
Terrific, original engineering writing. Mr. Zubrin is a visionary thinker. I agree with the comments that a program such as this should have been executed long ago, and it remains an important goal.
We are now nearing the end of the 10-year window Zubrin laid out for establishing continuous human colonization of Mars. I remember several sources indicating that NASA took the research seriously, but apparently not enough to pursue it, which is a shame.
After all the ingenious engineering recommendations, I found the height of the book and its greatest contribution to be the final chapter on why it is imperative that we take on the challenge of settling Mars, not later but now.
This work had a significant inspirational impact on my life and probably encouraged greater accomplishments than I might otherwise have made. In fact, I now find myself an engineer even though I was a dreamy (flaky) student of planetary science 9 years ago when I read The Case for Mars.
We are now nearing the end of the 10-year window Zubrin laid out for establishing continuous human colonization of Mars. I remember several sources indicating that NASA took the research seriously, but apparently not enough to pursue it, which is a shame.
After all the ingenious engineering recommendations, I found the height of the book and its greatest contribution to be the final chapter on why it is imperative that we take on the challenge of settling Mars, not later but now.
This work had a significant inspirational impact on my life and probably encouraged greater accomplishments than I might otherwise have made. In fact, I now find myself an engineer even though I was a dreamy (flaky) student of planetary science 9 years ago when I read The Case for Mars.
February 8, 2017
Very detailed. Includes everything from NASA's policy for Mars colonization and rocket programs and recent developments (keep in mind that the book is pretty dated), to terraforming of Mars. A very good book if you're interested in the subject matter. It could have been even better if it wasn't dry so often. Still a pretty informative read.
November 22, 2017
How to get to Mars, and why we should in a detailed plan and a great idea. I found this an extremely interesting read of the possibility of settling onto another world.
June 2, 2021
This is the manifesto which propelled engineer Robert Zubrin into the forefront of advocating human exploration of Mars.
This is at least partly based on prior work by scientists at the Case for Mars conferences in the 1980s, of which Zubrin was a participating member. The Case for Mars conferences were a series of meetings by NASA scientists and other interested scientists, conducted outside of NASA's aegis. The ideas and demeanor of those conferences have been influential to NASA's Mars exploration policy ever since.
At the core of this book, Zubrin proposes using martian resources to help generate air and water for human consumption and rocket fuel for returning the crew from the martian surface. Generating these consumables at Mars ('in situ') rather than carrying them all the way from earth would save billions in program costs and make exploring Mars more affordable. It is reasonable and viable, and the idea continues to play a part in discussions of human Mars exploration.
That's where Zubrin's plan is most effective. As for his broader plans of Mars exploration, there's much more room for debate.
Zubrin wants us to believe it's actually easier to go to Mars than to go back to the moon (it's not -- not by a longshot), therefore he believes we should avoid returning to the moon and go directly to Mars. That's the first part of the plan he calls Mars Direct.
And when we finally send the first human crew to Mars, Zubrin proposes landing the entire spacecraft on the surface, without staging part of the mission in martian orbit. That's the second part of the Mars Direct plan. That simplifies the mission plan by keeping all the mission's hardware in one place.
For subsequent missions, he wants to create settlements based on the consumables manufacturing sites he proposes, with emphasis on long-range mobility, so exploration is not tied just to the landing sites.
He believes it should be a priority for humans to travel to Mars and begin living there permanently, and he believes Mars Direct is the best way to begin going about it.
That's the basic summary of Zubrin's position. So, why do I give this three stars instead of five, when so many of my fellow laymen are gushing about his plan? Why am I not drinking the Kool Aid?
It's because I don't see the core proposal as something that makes all of his other ideas right. While I like the idea of generating consumables and rocket propellant in situ, everything Zubrin proposes beyond that is debatable.
A supporting reason has to do with Zubrin's manner of advocacy, which is disappointingly closed-minded.
A lot of that has to do with the '90 Day Report,' which Zubrin refers to many times in the book.
Early on, Zubrin discusses President George H.W. Bush's 1989 challenge to send US astronauts to Mars by 2019. The Bush administration then directed NASA to produce a report in 90 days outlining the agency's proposals for future space exploration.
NASA's study, termed 'The 90 Day Report,' offered a wish list of possible plans for space exploration. Although budgets were not discussed in this report, one critic estimated it would probably cost $400 billion to construct everything outlined in the study. The estimate caught fire in Washington and effectively killed any debate about the study. The '90 Day Report' then died a quick, administrative death.
With the '90 Day Report' condemned as a boondoggle, Zubrin uses it as his touchstone throughout the book, offering it as proof of why NASA is a bloated bureaucracy, interested more in sustaining itself rather than exploring space in meaningful ways.
He assails the Apollo program as a "flags and footprints" exercise where NASA's interest was only in getting to the moon, not exploring. He repeatedly accuses NASA of 'not wanting to achieve anything'--whatever that means. Using the '90 Day Report' as his example, he ridicules NASA's goals with pejoratives such as 'Battlestar Galactica'--a term the book uses many times to flog the agency--arguing NASA only wants big-ticket projects as a kind of space-industrial welfare program.
The '90 Day Report' is so central to Zubrin's ire that he's consumed by it--the '90 Day Report' is why NASA is wrong, argues Zubrin, and therefore it's why his plan, Mars Direct, must be our plan to go to Mars.
But the facts are clear. The '90 Day Report' went to the president in 1989 and sank like a stone. Congress had no taste for new space projects during their budget battles in mid 1990. The planned space station--then known as Freedom--was already withering at that point, and the Bush administration's goal of sending astronauts to Mars was already a fading memory. By 1992, with budget cutbacks looming, NASA was a rudderless ship and no one wanted to lead it. Enter Dan Goldin, who brought with him a 'faster, cheaper, better' philosophy that was to change the seas at NASA for the next decade.
By the middle of 1992, NASA had nothing to do with 'Battlestar Galactica'--NASA at this point was schlepping together pennies to run meager programs, and was told to show what it could do with shoestring budgets. The '90 Day Report' was a dead issue, and austerity was NASA's new reality.
This book went to the presses in 1996--more than six years after the '90 Day Report' died its quick death. And that was already four years after Dan Goldin began instituting his cost-cutting, value-oriented changes across the agency. Nevertheless, the '90 Day Report' continued to be Zubrin's red herring. Maybe it still is. While I think Zubrin certainly would have had a point in the very early 90s about NASA's bureaucratic faults, that issue is long closed.
Zubrin is misleading readers about NASA. They are his imagined adversary. To him, they are an evil, bureaucratic empire, trying to build a Death Star or something. Instead of engendering support, Zubrin's negativity toward NASA undermines the reasoning for his proposals.
He is a forceful and even persuasive debater, although he has a strong 'us against them' mentality, having no tolerance for alternative ideas. But not everything he proposes is the only possibility. There are many viable ideas for crewed Mars plans to which Zubrin pays little to no attention, except to shout them down. His argumentation is needlessly antagonistic. It's that closed-mindedness which makes this book's ideas hard to accept.
This is at least partly based on prior work by scientists at the Case for Mars conferences in the 1980s, of which Zubrin was a participating member. The Case for Mars conferences were a series of meetings by NASA scientists and other interested scientists, conducted outside of NASA's aegis. The ideas and demeanor of those conferences have been influential to NASA's Mars exploration policy ever since.
At the core of this book, Zubrin proposes using martian resources to help generate air and water for human consumption and rocket fuel for returning the crew from the martian surface. Generating these consumables at Mars ('in situ') rather than carrying them all the way from earth would save billions in program costs and make exploring Mars more affordable. It is reasonable and viable, and the idea continues to play a part in discussions of human Mars exploration.
That's where Zubrin's plan is most effective. As for his broader plans of Mars exploration, there's much more room for debate.
Zubrin wants us to believe it's actually easier to go to Mars than to go back to the moon (it's not -- not by a longshot), therefore he believes we should avoid returning to the moon and go directly to Mars. That's the first part of the plan he calls Mars Direct.
And when we finally send the first human crew to Mars, Zubrin proposes landing the entire spacecraft on the surface, without staging part of the mission in martian orbit. That's the second part of the Mars Direct plan. That simplifies the mission plan by keeping all the mission's hardware in one place.
For subsequent missions, he wants to create settlements based on the consumables manufacturing sites he proposes, with emphasis on long-range mobility, so exploration is not tied just to the landing sites.
He believes it should be a priority for humans to travel to Mars and begin living there permanently, and he believes Mars Direct is the best way to begin going about it.
That's the basic summary of Zubrin's position. So, why do I give this three stars instead of five, when so many of my fellow laymen are gushing about his plan? Why am I not drinking the Kool Aid?
It's because I don't see the core proposal as something that makes all of his other ideas right. While I like the idea of generating consumables and rocket propellant in situ, everything Zubrin proposes beyond that is debatable.
A supporting reason has to do with Zubrin's manner of advocacy, which is disappointingly closed-minded.
A lot of that has to do with the '90 Day Report,' which Zubrin refers to many times in the book.
Early on, Zubrin discusses President George H.W. Bush's 1989 challenge to send US astronauts to Mars by 2019. The Bush administration then directed NASA to produce a report in 90 days outlining the agency's proposals for future space exploration.
NASA's study, termed 'The 90 Day Report,' offered a wish list of possible plans for space exploration. Although budgets were not discussed in this report, one critic estimated it would probably cost $400 billion to construct everything outlined in the study. The estimate caught fire in Washington and effectively killed any debate about the study. The '90 Day Report' then died a quick, administrative death.
With the '90 Day Report' condemned as a boondoggle, Zubrin uses it as his touchstone throughout the book, offering it as proof of why NASA is a bloated bureaucracy, interested more in sustaining itself rather than exploring space in meaningful ways.
He assails the Apollo program as a "flags and footprints" exercise where NASA's interest was only in getting to the moon, not exploring. He repeatedly accuses NASA of 'not wanting to achieve anything'--whatever that means. Using the '90 Day Report' as his example, he ridicules NASA's goals with pejoratives such as 'Battlestar Galactica'--a term the book uses many times to flog the agency--arguing NASA only wants big-ticket projects as a kind of space-industrial welfare program.
The '90 Day Report' is so central to Zubrin's ire that he's consumed by it--the '90 Day Report' is why NASA is wrong, argues Zubrin, and therefore it's why his plan, Mars Direct, must be our plan to go to Mars.
But the facts are clear. The '90 Day Report' went to the president in 1989 and sank like a stone. Congress had no taste for new space projects during their budget battles in mid 1990. The planned space station--then known as Freedom--was already withering at that point, and the Bush administration's goal of sending astronauts to Mars was already a fading memory. By 1992, with budget cutbacks looming, NASA was a rudderless ship and no one wanted to lead it. Enter Dan Goldin, who brought with him a 'faster, cheaper, better' philosophy that was to change the seas at NASA for the next decade.
By the middle of 1992, NASA had nothing to do with 'Battlestar Galactica'--NASA at this point was schlepping together pennies to run meager programs, and was told to show what it could do with shoestring budgets. The '90 Day Report' was a dead issue, and austerity was NASA's new reality.
This book went to the presses in 1996--more than six years after the '90 Day Report' died its quick death. And that was already four years after Dan Goldin began instituting his cost-cutting, value-oriented changes across the agency. Nevertheless, the '90 Day Report' continued to be Zubrin's red herring. Maybe it still is. While I think Zubrin certainly would have had a point in the very early 90s about NASA's bureaucratic faults, that issue is long closed.
Zubrin is misleading readers about NASA. They are his imagined adversary. To him, they are an evil, bureaucratic empire, trying to build a Death Star or something. Instead of engendering support, Zubrin's negativity toward NASA undermines the reasoning for his proposals.
He is a forceful and even persuasive debater, although he has a strong 'us against them' mentality, having no tolerance for alternative ideas. But not everything he proposes is the only possibility. There are many viable ideas for crewed Mars plans to which Zubrin pays little to no attention, except to shout them down. His argumentation is needlessly antagonistic. It's that closed-mindedness which makes this book's ideas hard to accept.
August 4, 2011
I like that someone eager to use government money is also eager to find a way to make that money go a long way and become feasible. One of my biggest problems with government spending is that once people get the money in hand they have no connection to it. It becomes this free flowing pipe from the government and everyone just tries to bank on getting as much of it as possible for their own research. I think the author makes a good point towards then end, and I have always felt that things would be done more economically and more practically without this free flowing money machine. As is readily apparent by Americas current debt issues that stream of money does not go on forever. In fact it is very finite and we have to think on par and as a team with our government in coming of with feasibility and practicality in all areas not just science.
Unfortunately I think the government spending has hit such a terrible point that I cannot raise my hand in support of what the author is proposing here in way of a planned mission to mars. Even at his very "low" figure of 30 billion (as compared with the initial 450 billion projection= yes i see the improvement here) still America cannot undertake this sort of a project in the financial condition it is currently in. What I was surprised by is that the author did not mention or bring up involving other countries. Though I did like his capital venture plan. This is to me just because so much of this idea of traveling to mars has become about sticking your flag on the rock. Lets be realistic here with science for a moment. The LHC in CERN is one of the most successful establishments currently in science and shows a great network of team ability and international thinking. I like this approach. As a human race if reaching the Red planet is to be undertaken I agree it should be in the name of research but why does America have to feel like it has to foot the bill. So it can get bragging rights? Are bragging rights really worth the 30 billion dollar price tag on this one? I hardly think so. What about a more cooperative spirit? I like the authors aim at using Mars's own resources instead of piping in our own but why does it all have be on Americas back? America is not equipped to deal with this right now. I think this is the right approach garnered at too small of an audience.
Unfortunately I think the government spending has hit such a terrible point that I cannot raise my hand in support of what the author is proposing here in way of a planned mission to mars. Even at his very "low" figure of 30 billion (as compared with the initial 450 billion projection= yes i see the improvement here) still America cannot undertake this sort of a project in the financial condition it is currently in. What I was surprised by is that the author did not mention or bring up involving other countries. Though I did like his capital venture plan. This is to me just because so much of this idea of traveling to mars has become about sticking your flag on the rock. Lets be realistic here with science for a moment. The LHC in CERN is one of the most successful establishments currently in science and shows a great network of team ability and international thinking. I like this approach. As a human race if reaching the Red planet is to be undertaken I agree it should be in the name of research but why does America have to feel like it has to foot the bill. So it can get bragging rights? Are bragging rights really worth the 30 billion dollar price tag on this one? I hardly think so. What about a more cooperative spirit? I like the authors aim at using Mars's own resources instead of piping in our own but why does it all have be on Americas back? America is not equipped to deal with this right now. I think this is the right approach garnered at too small of an audience.
June 11, 2020
There's a lot of interesting science here, but the work as a whole is marred by Zubrin's obvious and off-putting ego, along with flashes of sexism (an apparently unironic use of the word "strumpet" stands out as especially cringeworthy) and a tendency to implicitly glorify white male machismo as a model for political leadership and European imperialism as a model for space exploration.
July 12, 2022
I learned a lot about the landscape of humans-to-Mars missions. This book opened my eyes not just to the scientific side of space exploration but also to its political one. It bothers me how modern science is largely driven by profit and business, swaying our attention from meeting clear scientific objectives to merely making businessmen and politicians happy.
The insider knowledge of the book is top-notch, but the delivery of some content could be better. I found some passages out of place. The Case for Mars is sprinkled with cringe-worthy metaphors and tons of motherhood statements. No, I don't need to hear how Mars is a dragon or the moon is a Greek siren. And I don't need to know why Mars is the final frontier for the 99th time. While these parts had some bit of sense in them, they're bordering on absurdity and redundancy.
Still, I'd be lying if I said that this book did not light up a child within me. I was fascinated by how well-thought-out Dr. Zubrin's Mars mission is. It made me more hopeful that we CAN reach Mars within the century. To quote, a new world is "no longer a notion but a possible destination." Now is an exciting time to be alive.
The insider knowledge of the book is top-notch, but the delivery of some content could be better. I found some passages out of place. The Case for Mars is sprinkled with cringe-worthy metaphors and tons of motherhood statements. No, I don't need to hear how Mars is a dragon or the moon is a Greek siren. And I don't need to know why Mars is the final frontier for the 99th time. While these parts had some bit of sense in them, they're bordering on absurdity and redundancy.
Still, I'd be lying if I said that this book did not light up a child within me. I was fascinated by how well-thought-out Dr. Zubrin's Mars mission is. It made me more hopeful that we CAN reach Mars within the century. To quote, a new world is "no longer a notion but a possible destination." Now is an exciting time to be alive.
March 30, 2022
This book is a good description of how one would get to Mars within 10 years using current technology. The book is balanced between being descriptive enough so that most lay people can understand it, and with justification supplied so that engineers can verify what he is saying. I thought the author did well in that respect.
The book is a little dated here and there. He mentions getting to Mars on such-and-such a date, but I know NASA hasn't even started yet (despite what is being said otherwise). So apparently we just are not going yet. Nevertheless, there are a lot of really good ideas in this book and I enjoyed reading it.
I will probably read this book again.
The book is a little dated here and there. He mentions getting to Mars on such-and-such a date, but I know NASA hasn't even started yet (despite what is being said otherwise). So apparently we just are not going yet. Nevertheless, there are a lot of really good ideas in this book and I enjoyed reading it.
I will probably read this book again.
November 22, 2017
LOVED THIS BOOK.
personally a dream of mine is to be a part of the Mars missions, and our settlement of the planet. Reading this book has allowed me to see the little and big things we need to accomplish as a species in order to expand our world.
personally a dream of mine is to be a part of the Mars missions, and our settlement of the planet. Reading this book has allowed me to see the little and big things we need to accomplish as a species in order to expand our world.
September 29, 2019
My main takeaway from this book is a pressing desire to sit Zubrin down and ask him if he's read Bradbury's Martian Chronicles.
No doubt Zubrin's a smart guy, and this book was invaluable to my research. I'll probably consult it over and over again until it's even more dogeared and marked up than it is already. I especially love the addendum about panspermia and wish it was longer.
And I can definitely see how it inspired Kim Stanley Robinson and Andy Weir, mainly because its strengths are their strengths and its weaknesses, their weaknesses. The explorations of scientific questions are brilliant, but Zubrin (and KSR, and Weir) is embarrassingly naive in his uncritical enthusiasm for a Mars where Manifest Destiny, patriarchy, and capitalism reign supreme. So much so that he breezes past questions like
1) how exactly will the Martian money system work? Who will set the value of currency? Will it be based on some kind of mineral standard? Will it be based on an existing Earth money system, especially if trade with Earth is steady? Should that be an American money system? Will Martians have to pay for food, childcare, healthcare, etc within their communities? Will there be social stratification based on income? How will that be dealt with?
2) Martians can make indigenous aluminum, which is great, but how will they make new clothing, including the invaluable spacesuits they need to explore the surface? What will textile manufacturing look like in a place without large animals or space for inedible plants?
3) if life already exists on Mars, should we be concerned about conserving it?
4) how will crime and punishment be dealt with, what with the lack of space and resources for an unproductive prisoner class? Or will criminals be punished with forced labor? Who will enforce that, especially given the ease of sabotage?
5) do you really think you can convince a bunch of 21st century lady astrophysicists to be breeding stock? Women in industrialized countries don't have even close to 3.5 kids, and higher education correlates to lower birthrates. Even if you can, have you considered how radiation exposure in space will effect conception? How lower gravity will effect gestation, childbirth, and child development?
Who's going to keep the kids entertained and safe on a planet where everything's trying to kill them? Zubrin thinks goats are too dangerous to have on Mars and not kids?
Also, here's a fun face about the American frontier: huge numbers of women cross-dressed and passed as men in order to do stuff like fight in the Civil War, marry other women, prospect for gold, and get jobs. Because women on the frontier want to do frontier stuff and not just babysit.
Yeah, Zubrin, KSR and AW don't really have any interest in many of the social aspects of Martian life. And it's a pretty big oversight, really. The science is fascinating, but it raises more questions than it answers. And to me, those are the more interesting questions. At least I've got Bradbury.
No doubt Zubrin's a smart guy, and this book was invaluable to my research. I'll probably consult it over and over again until it's even more dogeared and marked up than it is already. I especially love the addendum about panspermia and wish it was longer.
And I can definitely see how it inspired Kim Stanley Robinson and Andy Weir, mainly because its strengths are their strengths and its weaknesses, their weaknesses. The explorations of scientific questions are brilliant, but Zubrin (and KSR, and Weir) is embarrassingly naive in his uncritical enthusiasm for a Mars where Manifest Destiny, patriarchy, and capitalism reign supreme. So much so that he breezes past questions like
1) how exactly will the Martian money system work? Who will set the value of currency? Will it be based on some kind of mineral standard? Will it be based on an existing Earth money system, especially if trade with Earth is steady? Should that be an American money system? Will Martians have to pay for food, childcare, healthcare, etc within their communities? Will there be social stratification based on income? How will that be dealt with?
2) Martians can make indigenous aluminum, which is great, but how will they make new clothing, including the invaluable spacesuits they need to explore the surface? What will textile manufacturing look like in a place without large animals or space for inedible plants?
3) if life already exists on Mars, should we be concerned about conserving it?
4) how will crime and punishment be dealt with, what with the lack of space and resources for an unproductive prisoner class? Or will criminals be punished with forced labor? Who will enforce that, especially given the ease of sabotage?
5) do you really think you can convince a bunch of 21st century lady astrophysicists to be breeding stock? Women in industrialized countries don't have even close to 3.5 kids, and higher education correlates to lower birthrates. Even if you can, have you considered how radiation exposure in space will effect conception? How lower gravity will effect gestation, childbirth, and child development?
Who's going to keep the kids entertained and safe on a planet where everything's trying to kill them? Zubrin thinks goats are too dangerous to have on Mars and not kids?
Also, here's a fun face about the American frontier: huge numbers of women cross-dressed and passed as men in order to do stuff like fight in the Civil War, marry other women, prospect for gold, and get jobs. Because women on the frontier want to do frontier stuff and not just babysit.
Yeah, Zubrin, KSR and AW don't really have any interest in many of the social aspects of Martian life. And it's a pretty big oversight, really. The science is fascinating, but it raises more questions than it answers. And to me, those are the more interesting questions. At least I've got Bradbury.
September 17, 2012
If nothing else read the epilogue.
This book is a quick read for laypersons to get an understanding of how it would be possible to explore and then settle another planet. From how to get there to what we would do there to how we would make it possible to populate. While I still wouldn't sign up to go, at least certainly not in the first waves anyway, I find myself advocating the opportunity for those who would.
Reading this book has changed my way of thinking. Not only about space exploration and why it is critical for humans to move into space, but also challenged me about my thoughts on growth and development, fear, the unknown and such topics. Much to mull over. If nothing else read the epilogue.
This book is a quick read for laypersons to get an understanding of how it would be possible to explore and then settle another planet. From how to get there to what we would do there to how we would make it possible to populate. While I still wouldn't sign up to go, at least certainly not in the first waves anyway, I find myself advocating the opportunity for those who would.
Reading this book has changed my way of thinking. Not only about space exploration and why it is critical for humans to move into space, but also challenged me about my thoughts on growth and development, fear, the unknown and such topics. Much to mull over. If nothing else read the epilogue.
July 6, 2007
A nonfiction, science-based approach to what it would take to colonize Mars, and why we should. This book covers everything from proper dome construction to kevlar space elevators to hydroponic farming to the advent of space hotels, and makes a compelling case for exactly how we can settle Mars -- and why we really SHOULD.
And yet, somehow, Kim Robinson's "Green Mars," a fiction genre novel, taught me more about terraforming the red planet than Zubrin did.
And yet, somehow, Kim Robinson's "Green Mars," a fiction genre novel, taught me more about terraforming the red planet than Zubrin did.
February 22, 2017
I don't normally read non-fiction so I can't say this was an easy read and the at time very scientific & technical parts of this book were a real struggle. But perhaps that is more my fault than the book's. The book is possibly very outdated at this stage but nevertheless Zubrin makes an interesting Case for Mars. He seems very credible and knowledgeable and the writing is good.
April 16, 2019
Didn't quite finish it
It's really interesting, as long as you are really interested in getting to Mars and making your own fuel there. If not, maybe just watch a video about Zubrin first. He seems to be a bit of an asshole.
I'm glad he's a Mars asshole though, because he's made a big impact on the whole process.
It's really interesting, as long as you are really interested in getting to Mars and making your own fuel there. If not, maybe just watch a video about Zubrin first. He seems to be a bit of an asshole.
I'm glad he's a Mars asshole though, because he's made a big impact on the whole process.
August 29, 2020
This book presents a powerful narrative regarding the need for Mars exploration, the means of doing so, and the possible timetable for this task. The book does not spare criticism of the NASA's approach on this issue, or on the topic of space exploration more generally. The approach advanced by the book, and developed by its author is called Mars Direct, and calls for use of present day technologies for a stream of human missions to Mars, each lasting over 2 years (including the transit). The means to do so is to use the low energy Hohmann transfer to fly from low Earth orbit directly to the Mars surface in a cheapest and fastest way possible, to wait on the surface of Mars until the next Hohmann transfer window opens (using this time to explore the red planet), then return using the propellant produced locally, from CO2 found on the surface and H2 brought from Earth, using nuclear energy. This is clearly a very influential book, since even before the author mentions it, it is clear that Elon Musk's plans for Mars exploration are based upon the Mars Direct approach, while scaling it up significantly. The book then goes into great detail regarding how the initial exploration expeditions can be turned into a beginning of claiming Mars for humanity, by building local marsian industry and bringing in more and more people, eventually to found a new branch of humanity. The book, however, is somewhat outdated. It was originally written in 1996, and a revised edition was published in 2011, but even that is out of date in 2020, with SpaceX's Starship in active development, Falcon Heavy having flown several times by now, and Dragon having taken humans to the ISS. Furthermore, even though at the first glance the study of Mars colonization appears to be comprehensive, it is clear that author sometimes glosses over certain topics. For example, the author dispels the myths about the importance of reduced gravity on human health, claiming that it does not prevent humans from performing 2-year missions to Mars and back, but never mentions the topic again when the issue of colonization is discussed (the influence of reduced Martian gravitation on embryonic development and that of children is unknown). Then, even more importantly, the author goes into great details describing the chemical reactions needed to produce just about any material used by human industry on Mars, but fails to mention how, logistically, can the full chain of supply involving millions of people on Earth be recreated on Mars with just handful of people and a very limited amount of heavy machinery and materials. So yes, it's pretty clear how can one fly there and back again, producing the propellant for the journey back using a small chemical reactor churning out CH4, but how does one go from that to building a foundry or an electronics factory is not clear. Also, with the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that the approach towards space exploration involving NASA's cooperation with Russia was doomed to failure (the mentions of Energia booster, a late born child of agonizing Soviet industry, is probably the most favorable mention of that engineering failure it has ever earned - I hear there are attempts to revive that technology. This ain't gonna happen). And the weakest part of the book for me was the last chapter, venturing to claim that the life on Earth was probably brought in by an asteroid bringing in a piece of martian soil with some bacteria in it, mostly based on the fact that we weren't able to find the missing link between inorganic chemistry and bacteria here on Earth - this argument is even worse than the "missing link" argument of evolution deniers, since while evolution has happened everywhere on Earth, the creation of sufficiently evolved life that would earn the name bacteria might have happened once - in a remote, or inaccessible location - or might have left no fossils at all. Still, those are relatively minor points - this is not an origins of life book anyway - the book is clearly inspirational and is a product of deep thinking by a lot of smart people, and I recommend it to anyone who is passionate about space.
July 10, 2020
Just under a year ago from when I'm writing these words was a half-century since Apollo 11 landed on the Moon. We're just under two and a half years away from when Apollo 17 left the Moon and ended humanity's forays into deep space, to date anyway. Since then, the question has remained the same, "what next?" If you're Robert Zubrin, then that answer can be summed up in one word: Mars. And in 1996, and with updating in 2011, he made a compelling case for the Red Planet.
Fundamentally, The Case for Mars is precisely that. Zubrin, the founder of the Mars Society and co-creator of the Mars Direct plan, put forward just how we might get to the Red Planet in the short term. Across nearly 190 pages, Zubrin offers a crash course on Mars and his proposal. Readers get the history of the human fascination with Mars, our robotic efforts to explore the planet, and just why we haven't put human boots on its surface yet. Doing that, Zubrin gets into the bit he is most earnest about: talking about how to get a crew to Mars. Those familiar with the Mars Direct proposal via numerous documentaries and articles will find a full laying out of what such a voyage will take, from hardware and crew selection to the risks involved. If you need convincing that Mars is a place to go to, and that Mars Direct is the way to do it, then the first half of the book is what you need. Even better, it's written in a style and language where almost anyone can understand it.
It's in the back half, give or take, where the book runs into some trouble. Getting into colonization and the question of terraforming, the book becomes far more technical than it had been in previous chapters. To the point that, as a space enthusiast rather than being an engineer or chemist, I found myself a little out of my depth, I'm not afraid to say. The concluding chapter, The View from Earth, and the epilogue too, for that matter, likely won't sit well with some readers, especially with the nostalgic angle for both the golden days of Apollo and the American frontier. For a book that is so much about looking forward, it suddenly feels very backward-looking. Not to mention Zubrin's support for a potential Anasazi X Prize model to get to Mars in the final chapter. After all, the events of the last decade suggest that, despite the hype around it, it isn't likely to produce the Mars mission that Zubrin hopes it will.
For all of its flaws, Zubrin makes a compelling Case for Mars. Indeed, you can see his influence on Mars missions both in fiction (the film Mission to Mars or Andy Weir's novel The Martian) and in reality with NASA's planning. A human voyage to the Red Planet is still a ways off, but one can't help but feel that Zubrin's book and advocacy have gotten us closer. And that, when we do go, it'll likely be something akin to what he described here.
Fundamentally, The Case for Mars is precisely that. Zubrin, the founder of the Mars Society and co-creator of the Mars Direct plan, put forward just how we might get to the Red Planet in the short term. Across nearly 190 pages, Zubrin offers a crash course on Mars and his proposal. Readers get the history of the human fascination with Mars, our robotic efforts to explore the planet, and just why we haven't put human boots on its surface yet. Doing that, Zubrin gets into the bit he is most earnest about: talking about how to get a crew to Mars. Those familiar with the Mars Direct proposal via numerous documentaries and articles will find a full laying out of what such a voyage will take, from hardware and crew selection to the risks involved. If you need convincing that Mars is a place to go to, and that Mars Direct is the way to do it, then the first half of the book is what you need. Even better, it's written in a style and language where almost anyone can understand it.
It's in the back half, give or take, where the book runs into some trouble. Getting into colonization and the question of terraforming, the book becomes far more technical than it had been in previous chapters. To the point that, as a space enthusiast rather than being an engineer or chemist, I found myself a little out of my depth, I'm not afraid to say. The concluding chapter, The View from Earth, and the epilogue too, for that matter, likely won't sit well with some readers, especially with the nostalgic angle for both the golden days of Apollo and the American frontier. For a book that is so much about looking forward, it suddenly feels very backward-looking. Not to mention Zubrin's support for a potential Anasazi X Prize model to get to Mars in the final chapter. After all, the events of the last decade suggest that, despite the hype around it, it isn't likely to produce the Mars mission that Zubrin hopes it will.
For all of its flaws, Zubrin makes a compelling Case for Mars. Indeed, you can see his influence on Mars missions both in fiction (the film Mission to Mars or Andy Weir's novel The Martian) and in reality with NASA's planning. A human voyage to the Red Planet is still a ways off, but one can't help but feel that Zubrin's book and advocacy have gotten us closer. And that, when we do go, it'll likely be something akin to what he described here.
May 30, 2020
4.5 stars! I read the 2011 revised edition. Informative, inspiring, awesome. As much a history lesson as a treatise on the practical feasibility of not just sending a manned mission to Mars, but of establishing a Mars colony and eventually “terraforming” the Red Planet. Robert Zubrin wonderfully explains the science (physics, astrophysics, chemistry, and biology) and engineering behind the “Mars Direct” concept for such a mission. A mission that in fact could have been successfully executed 30 years ago with proven technology from 50 years ago! The essential elements, the atmosphere, the gravity, the relative short distance of Mars from Earth, its rotational axis, its solar orbit, and high potential of subsurface water...all make a mission and life on Mars eminently possible. Advances in technology and commercial space industry make a Mars mission within the grasp of private investment and ultimately a very promising commercial venture (e.g. Earth applications of Mars exploration and research, high returns from mining of the asteroid belt between Earth and Mars, etc.). So, now when will we have an Administration willing to set the goal, inspire the nation, and incentivize the modern “Space Barons” to get after this lofty, but very attainable goal??
Read
August 13, 2022daytime temperatures on Mars sometimes get up to 17° centigrade (about 63° Fahrenheit), at night the thermometer drops to -90°C (-130°F)
sucking in the Martian air with a set of pumps and reacting it with the hydrogen hauled from Earth aboard the ERV Martian air is 95 percent carbon dioxide gas (CO2). The chemical plant combines the carbon dioxide with the hydrogen (H2), producing methane (CH4), which the ship will store for later use as rocket fuel, and water (H2O)
At the end of six months of operation, the chemical plant has turned the initial supply of 6 tonnes of liquid hydrogen brought from Earth into 108 tonnes of methane and oxygen
they are a crew of two field scientists and two mechanics. A biogeochemist and a geologist will complement a pilot who is also a competent flight engineer. The last crew member, a jack-of-all-trades, is primarily a flight engineer, but can also provide common forms of medical treatment
sucking in the Martian air with a set of pumps and reacting it with the hydrogen hauled from Earth aboard the ERV Martian air is 95 percent carbon dioxide gas (CO2). The chemical plant combines the carbon dioxide with the hydrogen (H2), producing methane (CH4), which the ship will store for later use as rocket fuel, and water (H2O)
At the end of six months of operation, the chemical plant has turned the initial supply of 6 tonnes of liquid hydrogen brought from Earth into 108 tonnes of methane and oxygen
they are a crew of two field scientists and two mechanics. A biogeochemist and a geologist will complement a pilot who is also a competent flight engineer. The last crew member, a jack-of-all-trades, is primarily a flight engineer, but can also provide common forms of medical treatment
May 21, 2025
Zubrin's blueprint for humanity reaching Mars is a must-read, especially since we are about to embark on a mission to send unmanned SpaceX's Starship to Mars in 2026. The 25th edition of *The Case For Mars* covers all the bases included in a mission to Mars. It goes further and talks about the challenges in terraforming the planet to sustain human life. Today's advancements in AI, propulsion, and modern reusable rockets put travel to the planet closer than ever.
I am looking forward to this book's predecessor after man has set foot on the Red Planet.
I am looking forward to this book's predecessor after man has set foot on the Red Planet.
January 16, 2025
Pipe dream. Unless private companies take us there we are never going to mars. The issue with this book is the author who wrote it really believes
August 12, 2024
Really interesting read. While it is heavy on the technical side at times, I really liked how this book makes the strong case that we need to go to Mars. I am convinced, we need to go to Mars.
September 30, 2021
Because of the pace of change in technology and business, and the constant accumulation of increasing accurate scientific knowledge this book has gone from being a case for exploration and exploitation of Mars to a historical document, a record of the thinking and institutions of the time it was written in. Now over 25 years old, the book doesn't represent Robert Zubrin's position today entirely. He's written a number of other books and is active today. It's interesting to see where he, and the state of the art in space exploration, are today after reading about where it was as he wrote this book.
So as I say, this book is a good historical document. It is a landmark, I would say, as much as Arthur C. Clarke's book "The Promise of Space," written before the Apollo moon landings. Physics, however, hasn't changed-at least so far as propulsion in space is concerned, so you can refer to Clarke's book and then this book, and you'll see what I mean. Where Clarke is more focused on things like the physics of propulsion and the abundant energy out there-in short about "The Promise," Zubrin tells us about the barriers here on the ground and the reasons they are bullshit-they're about procedures, politics and the patterns ingrained in old aerospace business. He gives you an insider's perspective on the aerospace industry and NASA and you get a sense of why things haven't been happening until very recently.
Read Clarke's "The Promise of Space" if you're going to read "The Case for Mars," or skip ahead to what's completely current if you aren't interested in science history. It's worth being interested tho, because an awareness of the progression of the space scene makes what's happening today more interesting.
Reading this, you will see where some key aspects of Elon Musk's plan for colonizing Mars originate. This is an important book to read. And it is a very interesting and informative one. Now, it's just a very little bit dated, but being aware of the when it was written and placing it in its historical context will give you say, half its information value at least. The technical information is also quite valuable, tho' some of it is a little dated and some of it suffers the sort of distortion that always happens to data in the hands of a presenter who advocates for something and for doing it a particular way. If you've taken in lectures and read other advocacy books to do with space travel, exploration, and exploitation you'll recognize the pattern - if it's not about how something is impossible and pessimistic, it's generally a little overly optimistic. Everything can be done!
Following the historical and technical information are insights Zubrin offers into the process of mission planning and the planners, and some interesting thoughts about history, innovation, and colonization.
Where I highly credit Zubrin is for how very little he distorts anything - I mean he's generally within an order of magnitude either way when he says something is or isn't possible. And some of that is because what we know has changed. What he does a great job of doing is pointing out the ridiculous reasoning and where some of it comes from and why. The money is no object contractors, f'rxample, the people with an interest in a particular technology or a mission which would be supported by going to Mars one way and not another. Shoot. I'm being quite vague....
OK, if you've followed the development of SpaceX, how they go about developing things, how they relate to NASA and to the competition, and then you read The Case for Mars you'll see where lots of what's going on comes from. From the methane/liquid oxygen motors to the spirit of how SpaceX actually develops the technology. It's a story of pragmatism vs old school big budget Big Science.
Zubrin's insights into the value of a colony to the parent economy are good, and he places the argument for settling Mars in the context of what colonies meant in the past for European powers. It's a worthwhile argument. What he didn't foresee was SpaceX and current state of the industry.
If you don't know much about Mars, it may interest you to know that Mars has enough water to fill a modest ocean, frozen and extremely easily accessible. His arguments aren't pie in the sky at all. And as a dilettante planetologist who stays on top of the latest research, I can tell you the picture is actually a little rosier than Zubrin paints in in The Case.
I'm planning to read Zubrin further look forward to reviewing those books, maybe a bit more carefully than this one.
Finally, I must mention that reading books by Kim Stanley Robinson, "Red Mars," "Green Mars," and "Blue Mars" will make somewhat better sense to you after reading this. Additionally, there is another color Mars book, written by Brian Aldiss: "White Mars," which even calls the device which creates fuel for the rockets from Mars' atmosphere a "Zubrin."
So as I say, this book is a good historical document. It is a landmark, I would say, as much as Arthur C. Clarke's book "The Promise of Space," written before the Apollo moon landings. Physics, however, hasn't changed-at least so far as propulsion in space is concerned, so you can refer to Clarke's book and then this book, and you'll see what I mean. Where Clarke is more focused on things like the physics of propulsion and the abundant energy out there-in short about "The Promise," Zubrin tells us about the barriers here on the ground and the reasons they are bullshit-they're about procedures, politics and the patterns ingrained in old aerospace business. He gives you an insider's perspective on the aerospace industry and NASA and you get a sense of why things haven't been happening until very recently.
Read Clarke's "The Promise of Space" if you're going to read "The Case for Mars," or skip ahead to what's completely current if you aren't interested in science history. It's worth being interested tho, because an awareness of the progression of the space scene makes what's happening today more interesting.
Reading this, you will see where some key aspects of Elon Musk's plan for colonizing Mars originate. This is an important book to read. And it is a very interesting and informative one. Now, it's just a very little bit dated, but being aware of the when it was written and placing it in its historical context will give you say, half its information value at least. The technical information is also quite valuable, tho' some of it is a little dated and some of it suffers the sort of distortion that always happens to data in the hands of a presenter who advocates for something and for doing it a particular way. If you've taken in lectures and read other advocacy books to do with space travel, exploration, and exploitation you'll recognize the pattern - if it's not about how something is impossible and pessimistic, it's generally a little overly optimistic. Everything can be done!
Following the historical and technical information are insights Zubrin offers into the process of mission planning and the planners, and some interesting thoughts about history, innovation, and colonization.
Where I highly credit Zubrin is for how very little he distorts anything - I mean he's generally within an order of magnitude either way when he says something is or isn't possible. And some of that is because what we know has changed. What he does a great job of doing is pointing out the ridiculous reasoning and where some of it comes from and why. The money is no object contractors, f'rxample, the people with an interest in a particular technology or a mission which would be supported by going to Mars one way and not another. Shoot. I'm being quite vague....
OK, if you've followed the development of SpaceX, how they go about developing things, how they relate to NASA and to the competition, and then you read The Case for Mars you'll see where lots of what's going on comes from. From the methane/liquid oxygen motors to the spirit of how SpaceX actually develops the technology. It's a story of pragmatism vs old school big budget Big Science.
Zubrin's insights into the value of a colony to the parent economy are good, and he places the argument for settling Mars in the context of what colonies meant in the past for European powers. It's a worthwhile argument. What he didn't foresee was SpaceX and current state of the industry.
If you don't know much about Mars, it may interest you to know that Mars has enough water to fill a modest ocean, frozen and extremely easily accessible. His arguments aren't pie in the sky at all. And as a dilettante planetologist who stays on top of the latest research, I can tell you the picture is actually a little rosier than Zubrin paints in in The Case.
I'm planning to read Zubrin further look forward to reviewing those books, maybe a bit more carefully than this one.
Finally, I must mention that reading books by Kim Stanley Robinson, "Red Mars," "Green Mars," and "Blue Mars" will make somewhat better sense to you after reading this. Additionally, there is another color Mars book, written by Brian Aldiss: "White Mars," which even calls the device which creates fuel for the rockets from Mars' atmosphere a "Zubrin."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 219 reviews