Mars Sample Receiving Facility and sample containment: Difference between revisions

The NRC and ESF findings on risks of [[Environmental degradation|environmental disruption]] are accepted by most participants in this debate (with the notable exception of Robert Zubrin<ref name=zubrin>Robert Zubrin "Contamination From Mars: No Threat", [http://www.planetary.org/explore/the-planetary-report/ The Planetary Report] July/Aug. 2000, P.4–5</ref><ref name=zubrin-interview>[http://astronomy.nmsu.edu/cwc/Teaching/SpaceCol/sts497i/Zubrin/transcript.txt transcription of a tele-conference interview with ROBERT ZUBRIN] conducted on March 30, 2001 by the class members of STS497 I, "Space Colonization"; Instructor: Dr. Chris Churchill</ref>). As a result, it is agreed by most researchers that a full and open public debate of the back contamination issues is needed at an international level.<!--(NASA and ESF surveys both say this as well as other sources e.g.) --><ref name=esf2012_PP-debate>{{cite report |title=Mars Sample Return backward contamination - strategic advice |publisher= European Science Foundation |year=2012 |chapter=5: "The Potential for Large-Scale Effects"|url=http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/2013/01/17/ESF_Mars_Sample_Return_backward_contamination_study.pdf|quote=''RECOMMENDATION 10: Considering the global nature of the issue, consequences resulting from an unintended release could be borne by a larger set of countries than those involved in the programme. It is recommended that mechanisms dedicated to ethical and social issues of the risks and benefits raised by an MSR are set up at the international level and are open to representatives of all countries.''}}</ref> This is also a legal requirement.<ref name=esf2010_RALOS>[http://science.nasa.gov/media/medialibrary/2013/01/17/ESF_Mars_Sample_Return_backward_contamination_study.pdf Mars Sample Return backward contamination – Strategic advice and requirements] see 7.2: Responsibility and liability of States</ref><ref name=race>M. S. Race [http://salegos-scar.montana.edu/docs/Planetary%20Protection/AdvSpaceResVol18(1-2).pdf Planetary Protection, Legal Ambiguity, and the Decision Making Process for Mars Sample Return] Adv. Space Res. vol 18 no 1/2 pp (1/2)345-(1/2)350 1996</ref>

Note that [[Discussion of science value of a Mars sample return | SomeThere exobiologistsare believeseveral papers by astrobiologists that argue that more in situ observation is needed first for practical reasons and reasons of cost benefit]]. There are also [[Dissenting views on Mars sample return back contamination risks | minority view dissenters]] who disagree with the proposed plans. Zubrin considers them to be too cautious and the ICAMSR consider that stronger precautions are required.