Mars soil toxins complicate colonization dreams
A Bluesky thread on perchlorate contamination reignites debate over Mars habitability and billionaire space ambitions.
What to know
- Mars soil contains perchlorates, toxic environmental contaminants discovered in 2008, that affect the planet's entire surface and pose serious risks to human contact and plant growth.
- Multiple technical barriers compound the colonization challenge: radiation levels 2.5× higher than Earth, low gravity, no atmosphere or magnetosphere, water scarcity, and 9-month supply delivery times.
- Online commenters widely dismiss near-term Mars colonization claims as unrealistic and criticize billionaire-led timelines of 2030s settlement, questioning whether resources should instead address Earth habitability.
- While theoretical solutions exist—such as engineering microbes to neutralize perchlorates—commenters argue the cumulative obstacles make Mars colonization impractical compared to other challenges humanity faces.
The dispute Whether Mars colonization should be pursued at all versus redirecting those resources to Earth preservation and habitability. · positions read across 124 posts and comments
Mars colonization is impractical and unrealistic given multiple compounding biological, physical, and logistical barriers.
-
“humans will never live on Mars. no atmosphere. no magnetosphere. lower gravity. no water.”
transitfossil.bsky.social · Bluesky ↗
Billionaires are misleading the public with false timelines and should focus on fixing Earth instead of pursuing Mars.
-
“Telling their followers that humans will be on Mars by 2030. No one will be living on Mars...ever. I can't believe people fall for this crap.”
sukitupbuttercup.bsky.social · Bluesky ↗
Mars exploration is valuable for human curiosity and scientific advancement, though technical solutions remain challenging.
-
“For me, it's two answers: one spiritual, one practical. Firstly, we're made to explore. This is an extension of that curiosity about the mysterious immensity of the universe, and it's important for our collective sanity.”
mikeachim.bsky.social · Bluesky ↗
Mike Sowden Bluesky commenter
How it unfolded 3 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump postscomments
-
3
Skeptics challenge Mars colonization timelines and billionaire leadership
Multiple commenters dismissed near-term Mars colonization claims as unrealistic, with several specifically criticizing billionaires like Elon Musk for promoting 2030s settlement timelines. Critics questioned whether resources devoted to Mars would be better spent preserving Earth habitability.
“humans will never live on Mars. no atmosphere. no magnetosphere. lower gravity. no water.”
— transitfossil.bsky.social -
C
Still, I'm willing to send a select group of tech bros there immediately.
2 more of the top 3 · 39 posts in this stretch
-
But sir, all the ketamine addicts think it’s a great idea.
-
People wasting money on planet B when they could have been using that money to save planet A. Prime position to get bio plastics industry going, something that sequesters CO2. When combined with hemp fibre, diesel fuels from the seed, hempcrete housing that locks in CO2 for hundreds of years.
-
-
2
Online commenters emphasize multiple barriers to Mars habitability
The thread spawned debate over compounding obstacles: radiation levels 2.5 times higher than Earth, low gravity effects, lack of atmosphere and magnetosphere, water scarcity, food supply challenges, and 9-month delivery times. Commenters highlighted why even Antarctica colonization has proven impractical as a more feasible comparison.
-
We have a miraculous planet, all we have to do is not kill it…
2 more of the top 3 · 82 posts in this stretch
-
Planet will survive, humans...not so much. Had the whole climate change narrative started with 'humans will die if we don't do something' instead of 'the planet is dying', we might not be where we are right now.
-
Oh fucking great. Thanks a bunch. Now the billionaires won't all pack up and go there
-
-
1
Engineered organisms could theoretically neutralize perchlorates
Sowden noted that scientific literature suggests organisms could be genetically engineered to consume perchlorates and convert them into harmless chemicals, citing examples of toxin-eating microbes discovered in nature.
“Organisms could be tweaked or engineered to convert (ie. eat) perchlorates into harmless chemicals.”
— Mike Sowden -
M
In all the grandiose discussion about colonising Mars, I don't see much about how the soil is poisonous to us. This was only discovered in 2008. It contains perchlorates, which are environmental toxins here on Earth. Any human contact with Mars dust? Super-bad news in the long run. 1/
2 more of the top 3 · 3 posts in this stretch
-
That's basically *the entire surface of the planet* being poisonous - not just to us, but plant life too. Even if the temperature, pressure, radiation and various other human biology nightmares are solved, this alone will be a super-hard thing to fix: sciencedirect.com/science/arti... 2/
-
But as that paper says - not impossible! Organisms could be tweaked or engineered to convert (ie. eat) perchlorates into harmless chemicals. Many toxin eaters exist - like the life recently discovered in fog that eats poisonous formaldehyde: everythingisamazing.substack.com/p/magnalia-0... 3/
-
-
background
Perchlorate contamination extends across entire Martian surface — Sowden elaborated that perchlorates affect the entire surface of Mars and are toxic not only to humans but to plant life as well, making remediation extremely difficult despite being theoretically possible.
-
background
Sowden highlights Mars soil toxins as colonization barrier — Mike Sowden posted to Bluesky that Mars soil contains perchlorates—environmental toxins discovered in 2008—which pose serious health risks to any human contact with Martian dust, a factor largely absent from mainstream colonization discussions.
What people are saying 17 voices from 1 site · best of 124 · verbatim
- If the technology and resources required to make Mars habitable could instead be applied to Earth, why prioritize Mars colonization?
- Given the radiation, gravity, and resource challenges, at what point does Mars colonization become technically feasible?
- Yesterday
-
What a wonderful resort for billionaires! Robots to serve them, not one dissatisfied human anywhere. They could be so happy.
-
I don't want to be cruel, but it might be good for earth if some people learn from experience that Mars is uninhabitable.
-
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 People have been so stupid following Elon musk & his charade of 👻 💩 that will kill us all,… Oh wait, that is the billionaire elites ACTUALLY PLAN!
-
I with you on this. Would love to see him and his buddies take off ASAP. October 15th would be good. We can then enjoy Halloween knowing the real monsters are gone.
-
Because if they’re honest, they can’t funnel our tax dollars to the world’s richest man in order to keep making him richer. And it would be a shame if we can’t take care of him. (Also, if we took care of planet earth, we wouldn’t need a new planet. So there’s that.)
-
Antarctica is 1000 times easier to colonize, but nobody wants to because it's still too difficult. Mars is not gonna happen.
-
Shhh, they dont pay attention to all the feeds. 🤫
-
No, that's a great question to ask! For me, it's two answers: one spiritual, one practical. Firstly, we're made to explore. This is an extension of that curiosity about the mysterious immensity of the universe, and it's important for our collective sanity. Secondly...
-
Sincere question: If all that extra labor, construction, scientific study, transportation, etc. is necessary to exist there why not do that here on Earth instead? (Assuming we ruin this place for habitation). Is it so that only a select few would get to go to Mars & start over?
-
Musk is a lying megalomaniac like Trump.
-
Mars colonisation is a load of bollocks.
-
Yes, the radiation is a nightmare. Probably the best bet is habitation underground - same with the Moon! - or in Mars's massive lava tubes. (I'm always surprised sci-fi shows ignore this and portray above-ground bases, eg. "For All Mankind", pictured. I guess it just looks cooler?)
-
It's hard to imagine any disaster that could make Earth a worse planet to live on than Mars. Earth after that dino-killing asteroid impact seems like paradise in comparison.
-
Also, radiation amounts are greater on Mars than Earth or even the ISS (2.5X greater!). Gravity on Mars is slightly more than 1/3 Earth's which has adverse effects for long term habitation. Returning home from Mars will require in space refueling and favorable planet alignment which takes time.
-
Don’t forget food supply. 2300 kcal day person is baseline. Working in a pressurized suit more likely 3000. You will not grow it there, ALL must be ‘imported’, delivery time 9 months. Water also need to be imported for the first year as the facilities to extract/purify Mars water needs to be build
-
yes. humans will never live on Mars. no atmosphere. no magnetosphere. lower gravity. no water. evolution equipped humans to live on Earth over 200,000 years. I say Elon Musk and the rest of his Signal chat buddies should leave for Mars immediately and prove me wrong. he's the genius w/ $1T.
-
They're all full of shit. Telling their followers that humans will be on Mars by 2030. No one will be living on Mars...ever. I can't believe people fall for this crap.