Why we should send women to Mars instead of men

Space travel is a male domain. The Soviets sent the first woman into space in 1963. However, Valentina Tereshkova was not a pilot like her male colleagues; it was probably chosen more for propaganda reasons. Since then, a number of women have been in space, but their share of all astronauts to date is only about twelve percent.

That could change in the future. Women are better suited for space travel than men – at least according to a study by the European Space Agency, which was published in the scientific journal “Scientific Reports”. Jonathan Scott’s research team examined the energy balance of astronauts in relation to their suitability for space travel. According to these calculations, the result is clear: women can use the scarce space and energy and other resources much better than men.

For their calculations, the research team used a method developed to estimate the effects of body size on the survival needs of male astronauts. They compared the figures of this model with existing data on the metabolism of female astronauts. For all parameters and all body measurements, the estimates resulted in lower values ​​for women than for comparable men.

Women across the board have been shown to consume fewer calories, oxygen or water than their male counterparts. They also release less carbon dioxide (CO₂) and produce less heat. Incidentally, this is not just a matter of body size, which of course plays an important role in these factors, because even with identical body masses, women performed better. The reason for this lies in their more efficient metabolism. Balance also deteriorated in both sexes with increasing body size, but to a lesser extent in females.

The unequivocal finding suggests that long space missions, in particular, are better conducted with all-female crews. For example, if the four crew members were all female instead of male, the groceries on a 1,080-day journey into space would weigh nearly 1.7 tons less.

According to NASA data, this amount would save a whopping $158 million — plus it would require 2.3 cubic feet less space, which could then be used for other things. The importance of this is illustrated by the fact that 2.3 cubic meters corresponds to almost four percent of the total available 60 cubic meters of the planned Lunar Gateway space station, which NASA is designing for lunar orbit.

During long missions in space, astronauts must undergo compensatory training to compensate for the long-term effects of the lack of gravity, such as muscle atrophy, bone loss, and reduced aerobic and sensorimotor capacity. For example, on the International Space Station, two half-hour training units are required six days a week. During these exercises, astronauts consume more oxygen, release more CO₂ and heat, and require more water than during less physically demanding activities.

Here, too, female crew members have an advantage: they lose 29 percent less water through sweating than male colleagues during such training sessions. Accordingly, they need to drink less to rehydrate. In addition, they reach their maximum oxygen uptake earlier.

When we talk about long space missions, we’re not talking about completely hypothetical trips to another galaxy. Our nearest neighbor, the system of the binary star Alpha Centauri and the red dwarf Proxima Centauri, is already more than four light-years away. A journey there would take tens of thousands of years with the technology currently available. In comparison, the only celestial body on which a human has been able to set foot is the moon. And that’s just 1.5 light seconds away.

Our neighboring planet Mars, on the other hand, is very well within reach. However, a full mission to the Red Planet – planned by NASA for 2040 at the earliest – would take another 450 days. On journeys of this duration, it is particularly important to use resources sparingly. With that in mind, an all-female crew would be best – and preferably one made up of fairly petite women. (i.e)