The human interest to dominate and colonize should end at Earth, and not expand to the cosmos

 

In recent years space exploration and space colonization have been used interchangeably and treated as synonymous. Space exploration is a simple endeavor with a complicated mission to understand the universe we occupy. Space colonization is the project to expand humanity beyond the planet we now call home. That humans should and could expand beyond the earth and settle all possible planets throughout the cosmos has been a desire for decades. This desire does not seem to discriminate and can be found nestled in the hearts of many, from the average worker to the richest people on the planet. The first ambition for space colonization can be attributed to the Moon. The space race between the USA and USSR basically boiled down to who could reach the Moon first to assert a colonial claim. The current fever around space tourism has similar patterns, although its modern permutation has greater ambition than the Moon. The new goal, Mars, is a mostly American obsession and project. Mars was selected because there are markers for life being able to survive on the planet with little effort.  

To date billions have been invested in this project, with stated plans to fully colonize Mars in the upcoming decades despite the potential cost, logistical concerns and harm it can cause to both planets and humanity (Wattles, 2020). Those who are funding such an endeavor claim that space colonization is a means to ensure humanity’s survival, the ultimate next leap for the species, a worthy scientific endeavor and overall, an exciting prospect. However, this project as touted has many underlying concerns both scientifically and ethically, and while purported as a solution to Earth’s problems, instead exasperates them and acts as a means of distracting from said problems by providing an optimistic if unrealistic future.

How would space colonization work?

The primary argument for space colonization is that it will serve as a backup for humanity in the event of a cataclysmic disaster on Earth, i.e., nuclear war, pandemics, or an asteroid impact. Such possibilities is why Mars is considered by its proponents to be ‘Planet B’ and a potential salvation for humanity. The logistics required to enable humans to live long term on Mars is dubious at best. Mars’ freezing temperatures, lack of breathable air, extreme solar radiation, Fig.1, and to our knowledge lack of plant and animal life are among the obvious obstacles. We know very little about Mara but one of the primary hazards we know it presents is radiation. Radiation exposure is a concern for humans whenever going beyond the Earth’s atmosphere (Chancellor et al., 2018). One proposed solution in an effort to colonize Mars is full automation (Campa et al., 2019). The thought process is that AI and can do many the tasks necessary for Mars colonization. This might account for the recent boom in AI and robotics in the last decade. Realistically, even if we can develop the technology to neutralize these factors getting to mars in one piece is a challenge in and of itself since there are physical tolls that occur with long space flights that would be immensely exacerbated in a mission to Mars (Mader et al., 2011). If all these factors, and more, can be mitigated and accounted for, there is still the issue of construction. Plans for automated construction, 3D printing and designs have been theorized but real-world issues such as resource availability and repairs cannot be dealt with until humans have managed to reach the planet (Soureshjani et al., 2023). As far as we know, there is no indication that humans could make a sustainable thriving society on Mars, which makes this endeavor nothing more than an ego driven a pipe dream. 

(From Impey, 2015) comparing the exposure to highenergy cosmic rays in different situations

Space colonization is being marketed by companies valued in the billions who have an incentive to sell such a story. The goal is to make us unconcerned with the issues assailing our home planet and focus on the shiny next one. At a time when billions of people on Earth suffer from poverty and the ills that accompany it, hunger, lack of access to clean water, healthcare and safe and adequate housing to name a few, the vast sums of money and therefore resources being spent on space colonization efforts is something no rational person can justify. When wealth inequality is becoming more exacerbated (Zucman, 2019) what governments do with resource allocation is vital to the survival of much of humanity. The billions of dollars being sunk into this illusion could instead be invested in projects and technologies that would improve life on Earth. Realistic and achievable endeavors like sustainable energy sources and climate resistant habitats can aid humanity more than an imaginary future on Mars. The minimum cost of $150 billion, mostly public dollars projected for such an endeavor could easily feed the entire planet. Another way to utilize this money to benefit the people funding this project is universal free college tuition estimated to cost only $79 billion in contrast (Deming, 2019). These resources can be spent in a more sustainable way, while also continuing to fund scientific achievements. NASA’s Artemis program, SpaceX’s Starship missions, and other ventures consume enormous financial resources that could instead be directed toward solving pressing global crises and more effective research goals such as improving and investing in renewable energy(Panwar et al., 2011). 

Why does this matter?

The prioritization of space colonization over improving the general lot of humanity reflects a troubling mindset. Those with privilege and power would rather abandon the planet they had a heavy hand in breaking, than do the challenging work of fixing it. The fact that they are betraying humanity in favor of the possibility of a highly improbably fantastical escape seems too beyond them. This is not progress; it is escapism on a planetary scale. There’s a romanization of space colonization as a means to elevate humanity which ignores the reality that colonization in any form is indistinguishable from the colonization done by European powers (Slobodian, 2015), something most same people view as unethical and criminal today.

Space colonization is often framed as a way to alleviate Earth’s resource shortages. This argument is intellectually dishonest as it ignores the immense environmental cost of space exploitation which pales in comparison to the astronomical cost of space colonization. Mining asteroids or other planets for minerals would require staggering amounts of energy. Rather than focusing on alternative power sources for use on earth, where all the people are currently, there has been a shift where nuclear power is now being reserved  for a hypothetical colonization mission. All the while, carbon emissions from the fossil fuels utilized to power this endeavor are exacerbating the ‘catastrophe’ that creates the ‘need’ for a new home planet. Essentially, the drive to create a backup planet is destroying the original therefore ensuring we need a backup planet. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the extraction of extraterrestrial resources won’t lead to new forms of environmental destruction, since at this point, we know so little. Stripping asteroids and other planets for resources only means we will be replicating the same exploitative practices that have harmed Earth. While its supporters say that asteroid mining is a good environmental solution since it won’t have to be done on Earth anymore the harm to Earth cannot be the only harm considered (Hein et al., 2020). This plan for the next 500 years of humanity assumes that humans cannot and will not evolve past consuming and abandoned like lotus, that there can be no different future than the one we exist in today.

 Beyond the financial and environmental drawbacks there are social implications of space colonization that are concerning. The most glaring one is “who gets to go”? The wealthy and powerful are the ones driving and funding this endeavor and are most likely would be the ones to populate colonies, after the first few ‘test’ cases were ironed out, Fig.2. What does this era of elitism look like? What do the proponents envision for this new colony? This question has not been given clear answers, but it  seems to be one where the rich and powerful continue to control all the resources for the “furtherment” of this new colony. 

(From Impey, 2015) a concept of a lunar colony 

What are the consequences?

The social, financial, and environmental impacts of pursuing this endeavor were stated above but the consequences need to be further discussed. The consequences of the environmental impacts of massive fossil fuel usage in a doomed attempt to reach Mars are accelerating climate change which ensures the destruction of human and animal habitations. Floods, droughts, wildfires, and all kinds of natural disasters that lead to food shortages and starvation will follow. As humans and animals flee traditional and settled habitats and co-mingle, health crisis will develop. Current health and social systems are already strained globally by underfunding, greed, and corruption. Mass migration could very well lead to societal collapse.

Conclusion 

Space colonization is not the bold, visionary endeavor marketing departments describe. It is a costly distraction from the urgent work of healing our planet and ensuring a just future for all people. The resources, intellect, and effort being poured into off-world settlements should instead be directed toward solving Earth’s crises. Until we learn to live sustainably and equitably on our home planet, spreading humanity into space will only export our problems rather than solve them. Instead of space colonization the focus should be on space exploration. Not to build settlements and strip new places of natural resources but to seek knowledge and understanding. Scientific leaps do not have to be synonymous with death and destruction. Space colonization won’t save humanity, but space exploration might.

The defining challenge of our time is not how to escape Earth but how to save ourselves.

References

 

Campa, R., Szocik, K., & Braddock, M. (2019). Why space colonization will be fully automated. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 143, 162–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.03.021

Chancellor, J. C., Blue, R. S., Cengel, K. A., Auñón-Chancellor, S. M., Rubins, K. H., Katzgraber, H. G., & Kennedy, A. R. (2018). Limitations in predicting the space radiation health risk for exploration astronauts. Npj Microgravity, 4(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41526-018-0043-2

Colonialism facts and information. (2025, July 4). Culture. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/article/colonialism

Deming, D. (2019, July 19). Tuition-Free College Could Cost Less Than You Think. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/19/business/tuition-free-college.html

Five steps to colonising Mars. (2014, October 30). https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20141030-five-steps-to-colonising-mars

Hein, A. M., Matheson, R., & Fries, D. (2020). A techno-economic analysis of asteroid mining. Acta Astronautica, 168, 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2019.05.009

Humans to Mars—NASA. (n.d.). Retrieved July 1, 2025, from https://www.nasa.gov/humans-in-space/humans-to-mars/

Impey, C. (2015). Beyond: Our Future in Space. W. W. Norton & Company.

Joseph: Marketing Mars. Financing the human mission... - Google Scholar. (n.d.). Retrieved July 2, 2025, from https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=Marketing%20Mars%3A%20financing%20the%20human%20mission%20to%20Mars%20and%20the%20colonization%20of%20the%20red%20planet&publication_year=2010&author=Rhawn%20Joseph

Mader, T. H., Gibson, C. R., Pass, A. F., Kramer, L. A., Lee, A. G., Fogarty, J., Tarver, W. J., Dervay, J. P., Hamilton, D. R., Sargsyan, A., Phillips, J. L., Tran, D., Lipsky, W., Choi, J., Stern, C., Kuyumjian, R., & Polk, J. D. (2011). Optic Disc Edema, Globe Flattening, Choroidal Folds, and Hyperopic Shifts Observed in Astronauts after Long-duration Space Flight. Ophthalmology, 118(10), 2058–2069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.06.021

Nuclear Technology Set to Propel and Power Future Space Missions, IAEA Panel Says. (2022, February 18). [Text]. IAEA. https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/nuclear-technology-set-to-propel-and-power-future-space-missions-iaea-panel-says

Panwar, N. L., Kaushik, S. C., & Kothari, S. (2011). Role of renewable energy sources in environmental protection: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(3), 1513–1524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.11.037

Selling Mars as Planet B. (2017, May 31). Aerospace America. https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/features/selling-mars-as-planet-b/

Slobodian, R. E. (2015). Selling space colonization and immortality: A psychosocial, anthropological critique of the rush to colonize Mars. Acta Astronautica, 113, 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2015.03.027

Soureshjani, O. K., Massumi, A., & Nouri, G. (2023). Sustainable colonization of Mars using shape optimized structures and in situ concrete. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 15747. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-42971-9

Wattles, J. (2020, September 8). Colonizing Mars could be dangerous and ridiculously expensive. Elon Musk wants to do it anyway | CNN Business. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/08/tech/spacex-mars-profit-scn

Zucman, G. (2019). Global Wealth Inequality. Annual Review of Economics, 11(Volume 11, 2019), 109–138. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080218-025852