In the news

Curiosity hunts for Martian methane

Too little for life? Retesting may resolve scientific debate over 2003 detection

ScienceNOWNovember 11, 2012 

On Sol 84 (Oct. 31, 2012), NASA's Curiosity rover used the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) to capture this set of 55 high-resolution images, which were stitched together to create this full-color self-portrait.The mosaic shows the rover at "Rocknest," the spot in Gale Crater where the mission's first scoop sampling took place. Four scoop scars can be seen in the regolith in front of the rover.The base of Gale Crater's 3-mile-high (5-kilometer) sedimentary mountain, Mount Sharp, rises on the right side of the frame. Mountains in the background to the left are the northern wall of Gale Crater. The Martian landscape appears inverted within the round, reflective ChemCam instrument at the top of the rover's mast.Self-portraits like this one document the state of the rover and allow mission engineers to track changes over time, such as dust accumulation and wheel wear. Due to its location on the end of the robotic arm, only MAHLI (among the rover's 17 cameras) is able to image some parts of the craft, including the port-side wheels.This high-resolution mosaic is a more detailed version of the low-resolution version created with thumbnail images, at: .Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Malin Space Science Systems


The tension as Curiosity rover scientists began their spiel during a press teleconference was palpable. For months of weekly press conferences, reporters had been asking about Curiosity’s analyses of atmospheric methane on Mars. If the rover was finding even a part per billion (ppb) or so of methane, there would be a chance that life – life on Mars, today – was producing it.

But no Martians turned up this time. Christopher Webster of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., is the instrument lead for the Tunable Laser Spectrometer, Curiosity’s atmospheric analyzer. Webster reported in recent weeks that after four analyses, he could say only that, with 95 percent confidence, there is between 0 ppb and 5 ppb of Martian methane.

That range of concentrations rules out only one possible scenario to explain a methane gush that astronomers on Earth detected in 2003, according to atmospheric modeler Malynda Chizek of New Mexico State University at Las Cruces. (One more whiff of methane in 2006 was reported and nothing since.)

Chizek has run an atmospheric model that calculates how fast processes like solar ultraviolet irradiation will destroy methane on Mars. In one run, she simulated what would happen if a gush of methane like the one observed in 2003 recurred every year – a realistic scenario if the Martian spring thaw releases methane trapped in ice or produced underground by bacteria. Under those conditions, the simulation suggested, Curiosity would detect 20 ppb to 35 ppb – far above Curiosity’s new upper limit of 5 ppb.

All the remaining scenarios are still in play, however. The 2003 gush could have been a once-in-a-century release involving life … or not. Or the 2003 observations could have been in error, and a few ppb of methane are lingering in the air from volcanic eruptions or the ultraviolet irradiation of organic-rich cosmic dust drifting into the atmosphere. Or, perhaps, methane on Mars is really down at the few-hundred-parts-per-trillion level, and neither life nor methane-belching volcanoes have anything to do with it.

Curiosity should still be able to settle everyone’s questions about methane on Mars. Webster is hoping that concentrating the methane in future Curiosity samples will allow the detection of methane at concentrations as low as 100 parts per trillion. It will just take time, he said, weeks or months of time. Patience.

News & Observer is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service