• MycelialMass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Pressure is way harder to deal with than a vacuum, not that i think mars is happening any time soon

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Both have unique challenges, but overall brucethemoose is right about the overall cost comparison. For instance, we could easily have a “space elevator” equivalent to the bottom of the ocean, it’d be a fraction of the cost of maintaining a freight network to mars. Pressure is hard to deal with, but not as difficult as it is to get shit out of a gravity well as dense as Earth.

    • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      The main point is the usable resources. You’d have a damn near infinite source of usable resources at the bottom of the ocean meanwhile on Mars everything would need to be scavenged or shipped.