I'm not going to preach upon the morals of what we've been doing wrong for all these decades (those involved with their cloaking on behalf of NSA/DoD agendas don't seem to actually have any morals), just upon what some of us are doing right now, and of what those and others are planning upon accomplishing in the near future.
True; this page is much about fresh water, somewhat like all of the pure H2O that's so easily obtainable (extracted via vacuum distillation) from those nifty cool nighttime clouds of Venus. Thus having pure water is an obvious key element or component as to unlocking further energy resources and of naturally for sustaining life as or NOT as we know it or, perhaps at least life NOT as we are willing to accept (sort of exactly like how many have treated those people of Afghanistan along with a raft of other Islamic/Muslim sorts, where there's dirt in my back yard that gets greater respect). Fortunately, once H2O is obtained on Venus, it stays sterile and ready for action.
This page is also about Earth's alternatives (meaning conscious decisions) of securing clean water or not for others or, at least that potential of providing sufficiently sterile water as simply not being rocket science. Even if the water is badly contaminated with particulate and of bugs you can see without a microscope, becoming sterile is simply not an option worth overlooking, nor is this something we can't easily accomplish with relatively old technology and from sharing a few minimal resources that can't possibly be used against us unless we get ourselves into a water balloon fight (at least nothing like our outfitting those nice Taliban and bin Laden with some of our best "stingers").
UV (a/b) sterilization is the low tech method of choice and, by a damn wide margin of error at that.
A mere 100 watts of energy can power said UV lamps as to effectively treat 1000 gallons per hour. That's merely 24,000 gallons per day and, in most poor or developing countries that's more then enough for 1000 soles (in desperate times you can 10 fold that into 10,000 soles, as 2.4 gallons per daily allotment would be 2+ gallons more then they're getting right now and, at least it would be safe to drink). Once the water storage is sufficiently pure, then the quantity or volume of safer water can be further ten fold improved as being sustained upon the same 100 watts of UV energy consumption.
A portable appliance, outfitted with a sufficient solar array and the inverter/power supply as to illuminate a pair of 40 watt UV lamps which can be suspended into a sistern or that of a community water tower or preferably a stainless tank will do all of this with little other technology. Those UV lamps will operate for a year and the wholesale cost of lamps and pyrex shell/tube maintenance will become roughly $100 per year (keeping in mind that in many such worldly places that's nearly the annual income of a family member). This is certainly not all that much for annually treating 8.6 million gallons of water per installation.
The investment of robust solar panels (10' x 10' or 100 sq.ft.) would become the most costly aspect but, capable of sustaining more then enough surplus energy as well as compensating for panel degrade or of module damage over a 20 year period. The battery/inverter power supply would be next in line and finally the pyrex lamp cylinder and UV lamps would be of the least costly portion.
As compared to going after those potentially lethal Mars microbes, 10,000 of these water sterilizing appliances would not represent 1%. In fact, of further sanitation products, assorted enzyme and expertise to install and maintain would merely push the budget towards 1% of the projected 250 billion dollar investment (not to mention the risk factors should anything go terribly wrong) of acquiring and returning Mars microbes to Earth no sooner then another decade from now (then what?), as there would still have been at least 10 million soles for each of those ten years and counting, as their having to drink contaminated water and/or infected from other food products and life styles contaminated by the same and, certainly of medical cost as well as that of saving whatever on body disposal has got to be worth something.
Now then, I'm not exactly sure how much good outfitting 10,000 water sterilising appliances is going to help Earth's humanity because, that's merely supplying a minimum of 10 million folks with something many have never had before, so perhaps safe drinking water will not be appreciated nor worth squat and, that of spending 100 times more as for obtaining lethal Mars microbes is worth every penny. Not that Mars is even the only humanly unobtainable goal in sight, as Pluto, those moons of Jupiter and even far beyond or solar system is where those really big bucks are being slated (obviously the further "dog wagging" away from our moon the better, as far as NASA/NSA/DoD are concerned).
As I badly write this page and, you're going about wondering where your next meal is coming from or perhaps just that of having a safe drink of water, NASA and their associates or partners in crime are plotting away at agendas not even officially on the books, while at the same time covering their tracks on failed and/or of incomplete promises and of some rather serious mistakes that may never become properly realized, thus we'll have to make those same unfortunate mistakes over again, subsequently keep paying through our nose until there's no further blood to be had, perhaps learning to tolerate a few more airplanes crashing into tall buildings, or of being eliminated by our own friendly fire or of much worse biological tit for tat's.
Be certain that you fully realize, I'm not the one suggesting that we curtail our space research and exploration in favor of saving (annually) 10 million soles from easily avoidable sickness and premature deaths, as that would be (by even NASA/NSA/DoD standards) silly, even though you and I would certainly know of many others that would entirely eliminate all aspects in favor of fixing our own world without the help of such others introducing additional microbes from other worlds (especially of those worlds we as humanity can't possibly occupy unless hundreds of megawatts of energy producing nuclear reactors can be established for decades prior). Since we can't seem to get a sufficient number of those reactors online for you and others right here on Earth, what the hell makes you think it's at all reasonable to expect anything Mars can ever materialize.
What I have been saying for nearly two years is, we should be more attentive to what's most obtainable and of the least risk to Earth's humanity, as well as the least impact financially and then of lesser drain upon the talents and resources at hand. If we can further study those objects most likely affecting Earth's climate and of Earth's long-term survival (sun, moon, Venus, Earth killer space rocks), offering Earth's sciences the opportunity to learn and intellectually grow without our breaking the bank nor infecting humanity with further microbes (many of such microbes already existing on Earth we can't control as is), then perhaps that's exactly what we should be doing.
I've long conceded that we should be applying whatever it takes as to our utilizing the moon (based or not upon those phony Apollo missions), as for being the absolutely best satellite platform hosting science projects and of truly deep space astronomy or, perhaps just that of obtaining really great resolution of what's situated right next door (like Venus or even Mars).
BTW; SAR Images (actually millions of them) were acquired of Earth by Spaceborne Imaging Radar-C/X-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SIR-C/X-SAR) onboard the space shuttle Endeavour on or about April 15, 1994. At least according to the more capable German team, that effort produced 1.5 raw meter resolution of Earth (oddly 20 times better then our NASA team reported) and, that imaging was based upon an extremely large version of the Magellan mission along with having a 200' receiving mast. If one was to perhaps utilize the moon (I believe it's somewhat further away then 200') as that of being the SAR imaging receiving mast, where at that sort of distance we're talking about some sort of increditable stellar performance, like how about 6.3 million times better resolution as based upon just extrapolating upon the shuttle SAR array, but then obviously the Earth based transmitter array(s) would become another thousand fold better yet, thus we're at 6.3 billion times better then the reported 1.5 meter resolution of Earth acquired at the 250 km altitude (accomplishing all of this without any limitations of atmospherics, nor of ground mirrors nor other distorting optics and best of all folks, SAR sees just as well in total darkness as looking directly at the sun, how's that for contrast depth and furthermore, SAR imaging can distinguish target composition [8-bit, 12-bit even 16-bit] right through thick clouds if need be). Wouldn't you like to see the surface of Jupiter at better then good resolution?The moon is obviously sufficiently stable, we even seem to know where the darn thing is nearly all the time and, if such a stable lunar SAR receiving target were to be utilized as for SAR imaging, becoming the least expensive deep space radar telescope receiving mast ever, we may not even have to go to Pluto, let alone Mars nor of those moons of Jupiter. Do the math, knock your socks off.
The obvious establishments of LL1 and LL2 as for similar deep space or merely that of truly exceptional looks at Venus and Mars, as SAR imaging goes, those lunar extensions would certainly have provided any number of advantages, could have been established over a decade ago, not to mention their offering at least a thousand fold better resolution then of anything optical (including that pathetic Hubble that still can't even image Venus nor Mercury, I mean, is that thing another multi trillion dollar joke or what?)
I've been on this war path of trying to get others to refocus upon Venus. In part because of it's atmosphere being so capable of sustaining life NOT as we know it. It certainly offers whatever life the least good if being on a cooler planet if there's little or no natural energy resources (far worse yet on frozen Mars) and, especially lethal if there's insufficient or no radiation shielding (Mars again is radiated dead regardless of other factors, unless that other life NOT as we know it is somehow plutonium based), as nice climate or not, if you're radiated you're seriously dead. Well folks, Venus offers whatever life NOT as we know it, more then a sufficient radiation shield (more than of Earth) and, it also has the distinct advantages of having a rather substantial nighttime season (affording the option of seasonal migrations) by way of air travel through their crystal clear ocean of that mostly CO2 atmosphere which affords 64+kg/m3 of airship buoyancy (that's Earthly 79+kg/m3 as compared the Hindenburg @1.21 kg/m3), it also affords enormous vertical energy generating potential from the 4+bar/km pressure and thermal differentials, then of more energy from the very hot nature of their environment offers direct thermopile conversion energy and even much more so from a good number of geological or geothermal attributes. The mega tonnes of water (H2O) as conveniently being stored in those high (solar radiation blocking) clouds, made easily accessible by rigid airship technology, which by the way needs no further technology such as radio as to accomplish the safe and reliable feat of extracting amounts of pure H2O from those acidic clouds and, as for thermal insulation from conduction is certainly not a factor unless you're an absolute idiot (then you don't deserve to live anyway).
On top of all that positive stuff; there's a darn good number of most likely artificial structural attributes, those clearly viewed as situated at elevated sites, imaged not by any distorting camera nor of that limited by any illumination nor of any clear weather, as the SAR imaging was entirely 8-bit digital and multi-look per pixel and acquired at 43 degrees perspective, thus what you see is what you get and, that format of imaging is highly regarded as "truth" as well as being the most reliable of further enlarging capable. Plus, unlike those pathetic Apollo mission photos, at least we all have the raw originals to work with, so there's no way nor even an obscure motive for altering the facts or even distorting what's clearly being depicted. I often refer to this as the "DUH" factor because, if you can see something that's most likely artificial, then there's obviously not all that much left for the imagination.
Of course, NASA and their loyal worshipers are deep into their cloak and dagger alternative life styles, those benefiting the likes of NSA/DoD agendas and subsequently having to be backed and/or entrusted by their own system wide insatiable diet of "nondisclosure" policy, that which has been protecting those responsible for some of the worst errors as well as atrocities known to humanity, including their intentional skewing of space related science and physics plus the fact that I've recently caught a number of those responsible for much of what's been overlooked and otherwise washed under the carpet with regard to Venus, as being somewhat unfortunate, not so much for them as for the millions of others ill affected and/or killed off because of their cult arrogance, greed and utter stupidity, of otherwise so much being involved with our past and ongoing "cold-wars", which have lately been heating up to a nifty boil (making Venus look like a downright cool place), this time taking out a few too many of our own kind and now costing us further trillions as a result. Other then all that, everything has just been super fine, at least by NASA/NSA/DoD standards, somewhat like those ENRON/Andersen, WorldCom and of even the Pope's immoral standards, as neither of these jokers excel at their seeing anything whatsoever all that wrong with their past nor of the "status quo". The recent facts that seem more then sufficiently confirming that Shakespeare was yet another total fake, this should not be anymore of a surprise then of the intentional downing of the Russian SST, the USS LIBERTY fiasco, flight-800 nor of 9/11 (sort of makes myself wonder what else is to come).
Somehow to American standards, it's been perfectly OK for others being oppressed and, if that werent bad enough, sickened from poor water and lacking sanitation, obviously prematurely dying and otherwise forced into badly over consuming and/or selling off Earth's resources, just as long as that benefits our needs and for seeing that we keep getting our way. The fact that over the past few decades we've spent trillions upon highly questionable space research (including whatever it's taking for keeping the lids on that Apollo stuff) and of ever deeper (humanly unobtainable) explorations which have not placed a single grain of rice on the table of humanity, have not cured a single ailment that wasn't intended for an astronaut and, I'm not talking about the legitimate spin-off's which have been beneficial, as even Hitler generated spin-off's that benefitted others seemingly unrelated to his war efforts. What others and myself have been stipulating is, the means do not justify the end, especially when those means have been and they continue contributing mostly to global inflation, global warming, introducing a number of other biological and chemical pollutions and of a unsustainable drain upon our limited petrol chemical as well as all sorts of other natural (fast becoming non-renewable) resources.
It's true, that if a whole lot of push comes down to shove, at least we have a sufficient stockpile of nuclear fuel to power this nation for the next 1000 years (then what?). Though 10% of this world's population is capable of being sustained via nuclear, wind and solar, the other 90% of this world's population has little if any such energy technology alternatives as for their backup, thus they'll likely further starve to death or worse, then of whatever's their's become ours by default (sort of like the US Mexican wars contributed California).
Now folks and perhaps warlord Bush satan worshipers; if such a nearby planet that was humanly obtainable (at least via inter-planetary laser communications, improved upon by a VL2 platform), offered us some alternative intelligence and good amounts of energy resources (including nuclear elements) in exchange for whatever. If we were not at war with them (economic, political, ethnic or of whatever cold/hot tit for tat diplomacy), then there's a slim chance that our sorry butts could be mutually salvaged. The question is; should we be placing this opportunity or utter disaster in the hands of those foxes guarding those "nondisclosure" NSA/DoD chickens or, should others of lesser cloak and dagger motives take the lead and run with it?