Perseverance Mars rover becomes 1st spacecraft to spot auroras from the surface of another world
NASA's Perseverance rover just made skywatching history.
The car-sized Perseverance spied auroras in Mars' skies in mid-March, becoming the first-ever spacecraft to witness such a light show from the surface of another planet.
"This exciting discovery opens up new possibilities for auroral research and confirms that auroras could be visible to future astronauts on Mars' surface," Elise Knutsen, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Oslo in Norway and lead author of a study about the news, said in a statement.
Auroras occur when charged particles from the sun collide with molecules in planetary atmospheres. Earth's magnetic field channels most of those solar particles toward its poles, which is why auroral displays on our planet are generally limited to high latitudes — that is, except on certain occasions when particularly big clouds of solar plasma known as coronal mass ejections (CMEs) hit us.
Mars, however, doesn't have a global magnetic field anymore, it disappeared long ago and caused the once-wet world to dry out. Because of this, the Red Planet's auroral shows are different than those we get on Earth. The arrival of a big CME, for example, tends to set the whole Martian sky aglow.
These alien auroras have been observed from Mars orbit before, but no surface craft had managed to capture the phenomenon. Knutsen and her team set out to make history.
They calculated the best angle at which to point two key Perseverance instruments — its MastCam-Z camera system and SuperCam spectrometer — at the Martian sky. They also worked with researchers at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland to identify Mars-bound CMEs that could spark detectable auroral displays.
The Goddard scientists flagged one such outburst on March 15. That alert was noticed by space physicist Christina Lee of the University of California, Berkeley, the space weather lead for NASA's MAVEN Mars orbiter. Lee, in turn, issued a notice to other Mars mission teams, including Knutsen and her colleagues.
"When we saw the strength of this one, we estimated it could trigger aurora bright enough for our instruments to detect," Knutsen said.
That was indeed the case. The CME slammed into Mars' thin atmosphere a few days later, generating a green aurora that was pretty much uniform across the Red Planet's skies. (As on Earth, the green auroral glow was caused by light-emitting oxygen atoms.)
MAVEN and another Mars orbiter, Europe's Mars Express, detected solar energetic particles in the atmosphere at the time, confirming that Perseverance did indeed record a Martian aurora from the planet's surface.
"This was a fantastic example of cross-mission coordination," MAVEN Principal Investigator Shannon Curry, a research scientist at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado Boulder, said in the same statement.
"We all worked together quickly to facilitate this observation and are thrilled to have finally gotten a sneak peek of what astronauts will be able to see there some day,' added Curry, a co-author of the new paper.
Related stories:
— Massive sunspot that brought widespread auroras to Earth now targets Mars
— Mars orbiter notches 1st sighting of simultaneous auroras with different causes
— Perseverance rover: Everything you need to know
Perseverance's aurora observations, which were described in a study published Wednesday (May 14) in the journal Science Advances, have more than just gee-whiz appeal. After all, auroras result from space weather, which can have profound effects on spacecraft and people that venture beyond our planet's protective magnetic bubble.
"Perseverance's observations of the visible-light aurora confirm a new way to study these phenomena that's complementary to what we can observe with our Mars orbiters," Katie Stack Morgan, acting project scientist for Perseverance at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California who was not part of the study team, said in the statement.
"A better understanding of auroras and the conditions around Mars that lead to their formation are especially important as we prepare to send human explorers there safely," added Stack Morgan.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
The 2026 Senate Race Already Attracting Big Attention… and Big Money
In what promises to be a decisive clash for control of the Senate, North Carolina's high-stakes Senate race is shaping up to be one of the most costly of 2026. This next cycle, Republicans will be fighting to preserve their 53- 47 Senate majority. Republican National Committee Chair Michael Whatley is running for that North Carolina Senate seat; he joins the Rundown to share his outlook on GOP prospects in the midterms, the weight of President Trump's endorsement, and the sharp divide he sees between Republican and Democratic platforms. As acting NASA administrator, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced plans to build a nuclear reactor on the moon, a strategic initiative he says will be crucial to compete with the growing lunar ambitions from China and Russia. Former NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine joins the podcast to explore Secretary Duffy's call for American nuclear reactors in space, the evolving legal debate over ownership in space, and why he predicts mining rare metals on the moon will become very lucrative. Plus, commentary from FOX News Digital columnist David Marcus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit
Scientific American
an hour ago
- Scientific American
NASA Budget Cuts Could End U.S. Exploration of the Outer Solar System
In the spring of 2022 the U.S. space community selected its top priority for the nation's next decade of science and exploration: a mission to Uranus, the gassy, bluish planet only seen up close during a brief spacecraft flyby in 1986. More than 2.6 billion kilometers from Earth at its nearest approach, Uranus still beckons with what it could reveal about the solar system's early history—and the overwhelming numbers of Uranus-sized worlds that astronomers have spied around other stars. Now President Donald Trump's proposed cuts to NASA could push those discoveries further away than ever—not by directly canceling the mission but by abandoning the fuel needed to pull it off. The technology in question, known as radioisotope power systems (RPS), is an often overlooked element of NASA's budget that involves turning nuclear fuel into usable electricity. More like a battery than a full-scale reactor, RPS devices attach directly to spacecraft to power them into the deepest, darkest reaches of the solar system, where sunlight is too sparse to use. It's a critical technology that has enabled two dozen NASA missions, from the iconic Voyagers 1 and 2 now traversing interstellar space to the Perseverance and Curiosity rovers presently operating on Mars. But RPS is expensive, costing NASA about $175 million in 2024 alone. That's largely because of the costs of sourcing and refining plutonium 238, the chemically toxic, vanishingly scarce and difficult to work with radioactive material at the heart of all U.S. RPS. The Fiscal Year 2026 President's Budget Request (PBR) released this spring suggests shutting down the program by 2029. That's just long enough to use RPS tech on NASA's upcoming Dragonfly mission, a nuclear-powered dual-quadcopter drone to explore Saturn's frigid moon Titan. After that, without RPS, no further U.S. missions to the outer solar system would be possible for the foreseeable future. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. 'It was an oversight,' says Amanda Hendrix, director of the Planetary Science Institute, who has led science efforts on RPS-enabled NASA missions such as Cassini at Saturn and Galileo at Jupiter. 'It's really like the left hand wasn't talking to the right hand when the PBR was put together.' Throughout its 400-odd pages, the PBR repeatedly acknowledges the importance of planning for the nation's next generation of planetary science missions and even proposes funding NASA's planetary science division better than any other part of the space agency's science operations, which it seeks to cut by half. But 'to achieve cost savings,' it states, 2028 should be the last year of funding for RPS, and 'given budget constraints and the reduced pipeline of new planetary science missions,' the proposed budget provides no funding after 2026 for work by the Department of Energy (DOE) that supports RPS. Indeed, NASA's missions to the outer solar system are infrequent because of their long durations and the laborious engineering required for a spacecraft to withstand cold, inhospitable conditions so far from home. But what these missions lack in frequency, they make up for in discovery: some of the most tantalizing and potentially habitable environments beyond Earth are thought to exist there, in vast oceans of icy moons once thought to be wastelands. One such environment lurks on Saturn's Enceladus, which was ranked as the nation's second-highest priority after Uranus in the U.S.'s 2022 Planetary Science and Astrobiology Decadal Survey. 'The outer solar system is kind of the last frontier,' says Alex Hayes, a planetary scientist at Cornell University, who chaired the Decadal Survey panel that selected Enceladus. 'You think you know how something works until you send a spacecraft there to explore it, and then you realize that you had no idea how it worked.' Unlike solar power systems—relatively 'off-the-shelf' tech that can be used on a per-mission basis—RPS requires a continuous production pipeline that's vulnerable to disruption. NASA's program operates through the DOE, with the space agency purchasing DOE services to source, purify and encapsulate the plutonium 238 fuel, as well as to assemble and test the resulting RPS devices. The most common kind of RPS, a radioisotope thermoelectric generator, converts the thermal energy released from plutonium 238's natural decay to as much as 110 watts of electrical power. Any excess heat helps keep the spacecraft and its instruments warm enough to function. Establishing the RPS pipeline took around three decades, and the program's roots lie in the bygone cold war era of heavy U.S. investment in nuclear technology and infrastructure. Preparing the radioactive fuel alone takes the work of multiple DOE facilities scattered across the country: Oak Ridge National Laboratory produces the plutonium oxide, then Los Alamos National Laboratory forms it into usable pellets, which are finally stockpiled at Idaho National Laboratory. Funding cuts would throw this pipeline into disarray and cause an exodus of experienced workers, Hendrix says. Restoring that expertise and capability, she adds, would require billions of dollars and a few decades more. 'These decisions are made by people that don't fully understand the implications,' says Ryan P. Russell, an aerospace engineer at the University of Texas at Austin. 'Technologically, [RPS] is on the critical path to superiority in space, whether that's military, civilian or industrial applications.' Russell emphasizes that RPS isn't just critical for exploring Uranus, Enceladus and other destinations in the outer solar system—it's also a likely fundamental pillar of the administration's space priorities, such as developing a sustained human presence on the moon and sending astronauts to Mars. While both destinations are relatively close to the sun, the Red Planet's global dust storms can bury solar panels, and the moon's two-week-long lunar nights are cold enough to test the mettle of even the best batteries. The latter situation informed the reasoning that drove NASA's acting administrator Sean Duffy's directive last week to fast-track a lunar nuclear reactor. Abandoning smaller-scale nuclear options such as RPS while aiming for a full-scale reactor is 'like trying to build a house without a two-by-four,' Russell says. 'If you don't have the basic building blocks, you're not gonna get very far.' Another initiative reliant on RPS, NASA confirmed in a statement e-mailed to Scientific American, is the beleaguered Mars Sample Return (MSR) program that the U.S. agency has been jointly pursuing with the European Space Agency. While the White House has proposed nixing MSR, scientists and politicians view bringing Martian samples back to Earth as a key milestone in the modern-day space race against China. Meanwhile other nations are pursuing or preserving their own RPS capabilities, with Europe's sights set on americium 241, a radioisotope with a five-times-longer half-life but a five-times-weaker energy output than plutonium 238. Russia has used RPS for decades, and China and India are also developing homegrown versions of the technology. Notably, despite the administration's push for commercial partners to take up costly space functions such as rocket launches, RPS is unlikely to find much support in the private sector. 'Dealing with [this sort of] nuclear material—that's not something a company is going to do,' Russell says. Going forward, the planetary science community hopes to convince Congress that RPS is 'critical and foundational,' Hendrix says. The Outer Planets Assessment Group (OPAG), which was chartered by and provides independent input to NASA, expressed its concerns to the space agency in findings from a June meeting, writing that the decision would have 'dire implications' for future solar system exploration. White papers prepared by representatives of the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Goddard Space Flight Center and Glenn Research Center conveyed similar sentiments, noting that nine of the 15 existing and future missions recommended in the latest Decadal Survey use RPS. In short, 'you're just hamstringing your ability to do certain mission configurations and also to get out to and past Saturn if you shut down RPS,' Hayes says. 'You can't argue that scientific prioritization was part of [the White House's] decision process.' Although both the House and Senate have released drafts of the 2026 appropriations bill that preserve top-line funding for NASA, neither explicitly mentions RPS. That means the program would fall under NASA's 'discretionary spending,' a category that scientists and legal experts alike say would be more easily manipulated by a presidential administration looking to enforce its political agenda. In other words, without a clear, direct callout for RPS from congressional appropriators, the Trump administration's plan to shut down the program could more easily come to pass. Hendrix consequently hopes that Congress will add language explicitly funding RPS in its final budget. 'There is a strong interest from Congress in the need for a powerful, deep-space energy source,' says a congressional staffer who is familiar with the NASA budget and was granted anonymity to discuss these issues freely. But 'I don't know that members have quite honed in on [RPS] yet because the worry is so much about [Trump's] intent to cancel a lot of future planetary missions.' Fundamentally, political support for outer solar system missions is a moot point without corresponding support for the ability to get there, explains University of Oregon planetary physicist and OPAG co-chair Carol Paty. The decision to shut down RPS 'seems like a simple line item,' she says. But the implications are 'deeply troubling and concerning. If there are not big missions to drive the community, to drive exploration, to drive training the next generation, where does that leave us?'
Scientific American
an hour ago
- Scientific American
Deep-Sea Desalination Pulls Fresh Water from the Depths
From Cape Town to Tehran to Lima to Phoenix, dozens of cities across the globe have experienced water shortages recently. And in the next five years the world's demand for fresh water could significantly outpace supply, according to a United Nations forecast. Now several companies are turning to an unexpected source for a solution: the bottom of the ocean. Called subsea desalination, the idea is to remove the salt from water in the deep sea. If it worked at scale, the technology could greatly alleviate the world's water access problems. Costs and energy requirements have kept desalination from going mainstream in most of the world. Early desalination involved boiling seawater and condensing the steam, a purely thermal method that used loads of energy. This approach was later replaced by multistage flash distillation, in which temperature and pressure 'flash' salt water to steam. In the past 25 years reverse osmosis has become more common—it uses high pressure to push seawater through a membrane with holes so small that only water molecules squeeze through, leaving salt behind. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Reverse osmosis is more efficient than distillation, but it takes a lot of energy to pressurize millions of gallons of seawater and move it through filters. What if we could let that movement happen naturally by harnessing the pressure hundreds of meters underwater? That's the idea behind subsea desalination. Reverse osmosis pods are submerged to depths of around 500 meters (1,600 feet), where immense hydrostatic pressure does the heavy lifting of separating water from salt. Purified water is then pumped back to shore. Far-fetched as it may sound, there are multiple prototypes already at work; the companies behind them aim to take cheap, large-scale desalination from pipe dream to reality. One of these companies is Oslo-based Flocean. Its founder and CEO, Alexander Fuglesang, says there's no revolutionary new technology behind his business; it's 'essentially a subsea pump cleverly coupled to existing membrane and filter technology,' he says. What's new is the energy savings—Flocean uses 40 to 50 percent less energy than conventional plants—and modular systems that can be deployed to many deep-sea location without bespoke engineering. The seafloor has other benefits, too. This region harbors fewer bacteria and other microorganisms than at shallower depths, and there is little local variation in temperature or pressure. 'The deep sea is really predictable,' Fuglesang says. 'It's the same 365 days a year.' This isn't the case at land-based plants, which have to deal with algae blooms, river runoff, storms and seasonal temperature changes. Plus, less chemical pretreatment of the water is needed at depth, and because the equipment is all underwater, there's no 'not in my backyard' controversy over putting big, unsightly infrastructure near the seashore. Despite its advantages over land-based plants, subsea desalination has several hurdles to clear before scaling to commercial levels. For starters, it's still too expensive. Land-based desalination is several times more costly than pulling water from aquifers or lakes, even at giga-plants in the Middle East that benefit from abundant solar power and large economies of scale. Even if subsea technology cuts the cost of land-based desalination down by 40 percent, it will still be a pricey way to obtain potable water. 'We need to remember that once the water is desalinated, it still needs to be pumped up from depths of up to 600 meters,' says Nidal Hilal, founding director of New York University's Water Research Center in Abu Dhabi, who has studied water-treatment engineering for more than 30 years. 'Early pilot tests show promise, but the technology has yet to be proven at large scale.' Affordable renewable energy will make subsea desalination more viable. Improvements in technology will also help. Hilal's research group, for example, is developing electrically conductive reverse osmosis membranes that keep themselves clean by repelling salt ions and impurities. They would extend maintenance intervals, which Fuglesang says might be two to three years with existing membranes. Although proponents of the technology say it would have little effect on undersea life, others urge further research to gauge its impact on marine ecosystems. 'Many organisms thrive at a 500-meter depth,' says Adina Paytan, a professor affiliated with the Institute of Marine Sciences at the University of California, Santa Cruz. The twilight zone—which extends from 200 to 1,000 meters below the surface—is not only home to organisms such as whales, squid and jellyfish. 'It's extremely important for many ocean processes such as the carbon cycle and nutrient cycling,' Paytan says. Companies will need to ensure that their water intake and salty brine by-product don't harm marine life or significantly alter these processes. Given the depths required, subsea desalination won't work in just any seaside location. 'Many coastal cities lie on wide continental shelves, meaning deep water is far offshore,' Hilal says. Coastlines with steep drop-offs are ideal because shallow shelves would require long pipelines, adding to capital and operational costs. Fuglesang isn't worried about technical or engineering hurdles; he says the industry's biggest challenge will be aligning customers, governments and financial partners. Flocean is working on what will be the world's first large-scale subsea desalination plant, off the coast of Norway, and is finalizing a contract to start supplying water to an industrial facility in 2026.* Netherlands-based Waterise has also secured its first industrial customer, with plans to start building a plant in the Red Sea's Gulf of Aqaba later this year, and Bay Area–based OceanWell is testing its prototype near Los Angeles. Long-term government contracts will most likely be needed for subsea desalination to really take off, and they may prove elusive. 'The water-infrastructure industry is quite conservative,' Fuglesang says, noting that because new projects are so expensive, 'nobody wants to be first' to go all-in on a new technology. Hilal says he believes subsea desalination could go mainstream and supply water to entire cities. But, he adds, 'reaching true city-scale will take time, conceivably a decade or more.'
