Where in the World is Mars' Water? (axios.com)

An anonymous reader shares an Axios report: In the beginning, Mars was a water world. But at some point in Mars' distant past, much of that water disappeared, leaving behind polar ice caps and a complex geology. Figuring out just where it went has been a major priority for scientists -- life as we know it can't exist without water, and any future settlers would need a steady supply. A new study, published Wednesday in Nature, suggests that much of what remains might in inaccessible. Some went into space, but even more of it may have sunk into the ground like a sponge, only to become bound up in minerals deep within the planet. "Mars, by virtue of its chemistry, was doomed from the start," study author Jon Wade, of Oxford University, tells Axios.

Comments

Re:No hope of terraforming

[Oswald McWeany]

So, this would imply that we could never terraform Mars because it cannot maintain surface water.

We couldn't with today's technology, nor tomorrow's. Long term? Who knows. There is lots of water out in space. Many comets and asteroids contain bunches of it. If you could harvest them and send them to Mars- you could probably create temporary surface water... over the millennia it will sink into the planet again- you'd need to keep "topping it off". Losing water to space is a big problem too... you'd need to try and keep an atmosphere- again, you could probably create one, but need to keep "topping it off" over the millennia by pumping more gas out.

You can terraform Mars but it will revert back to it's current dead-state if you don't keep maintaining it. A bit like a field. You can plough a field and harvest wheat one year... the next it might self seed and have some coming back that you can harvest, the next a little less, the next a little less... eventually you're going to need to replough the field, rotate the crops, replant, etc, if you want that field to feed you.

Thought this was settled?

[bradley13]

I thought it was pretty much settled? Thin atmosphere, solar radiation disassociated water into hydrogen and oxygen, the hydrogen left, the oxygen combined with various minerals. At least, that's what I had learned...

Re:Anti-Mars propaganda

[jfdavis668]

That 3% fresh water is constantly cycled back to and from the ocean. If you only had the fresh water amount from Earth, and let it loose into the Mars environment, it would quickly disappear into the rocks. No plants would be able to grow, so no terraforming. Fresh water exists on Earth because the oceans exist.

Re:Geology?

[morethanapapercert]

Technically, no, the proper term for the study of Mars planetary formation, mineral chemistry etc is areology. However, according to wikipedia, geology in the broader sense is still used for the study of solid planets in general. Using the more general term avoids having to coin a new neologism every time a particular planetary body becomes a significant field of study.

Plus, geology is a much wider used and understood term. If I say I am working in the field of geology specializing in the mineral chemistry of Mercury, your average layman will understand me, but the term Hermeology might cause confusion.

Sorry, I drank it

[rsilvergun]

but in my defense I was really, really thirsty. But at least I didn't blame it on Albino Nameks (too obscure?).

"Water-sculpted" landscape?

[ve3oat]

I have long thought that much of the "evidence" for water on Mars, that is, the sculpted features of the Martian landscape, were due simply to the action of the thin wind there over thousands and millions of years. Living in Canada and having over the decades often observed the sculpting of snow by the wind here, it seems to me the parallels are obvious. The wind does surprising things to snow, both light and heavy snow, and I see many similarities in the thought-to-be-water-sculpted features on Mars.

It ain't the long-gone water, it's the thin but ever-present wind.

Re:"Water-sculpted" landscape?

[gnasherspants]

author here. Some cross bedding features could be wind generated (ha! geography!). But theres also a lot of evidence of hydrous minerals - clays, etc - and evidence of frozen ice, especially in the Northern basin of Mars.

Planetary Geology [Re:Geology?]

[Geoffrey.landis]

Do planetologists use the term "geology" when they're talking about another planet?

Technically, no, the proper term for the study of Mars planetary formation, mineral chemistry etc is areology.

It etymologically ought to be areology, but it turns out that having a different word for the geology of each planet was too cumbersome, so they are all lumped together as "Planetary geology."

  https://scienceandtechnology.jpl.nasa.gov/research/research-topics-list/planetary-sciences/planetary-geology-and-geophysics

  http://planetary-science.org/planetary-science-3/planetary-geology/

and geologists routinely use the term "Martian geology" and "geology of Mars"

  https://mars.nasa.gov/programmissions/science/goal3/

  http://planetary-science.org/mars-research/surface-geology-of-mars/

  https://www.exploratorium.edu/video/martian-geology-101

  https://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/geol212/lectures/01.html