Author Topic: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, why, and how?  (Read 47193 times)

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Colonization:  Where, when, who, what, why, and how?

[How, being a pesky detail pointed out by Jim Davis below...]

A search on this forum, using the words "colony colonies colonization", and the terms "match any word", and "search in topic subject only" and "show earliest threads first", results in a good number of hits.  For me this is not surprising, since colonization is the appropriate end game of the law calling for a permanent human presence in space.

YMMV, as always.

As we know, NASA isn't currently in the business of enabling colonization; some hold fervently that it shouldn't be in that business, rather that an NGO should make the attempt.  There are well known private efforts to both colonize Mars, as well as to bring back minerals from asteroids, possibly as an industrial approach, paving the way for a colonization effort.

Some recent observations:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26163.msg951411#msg951411

Quote from: Jim
Off world colonies are not the same as off continent colonies.  The scifi depiction of lunar and mars from the 50's-70's is not going to happen.

I never said that "off Earth settlements" wouldn't benefit humanity.  They won't benefit nations and their gov't because
1.  They won't return resources back to the homeland unlike terrestrial colonies did
2.  The off earth colonies will have their own gov't
3.  The USA is not going to establish colonies.

So, yes, I can say that they would be "no benefit to the USA as a nation".

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26163.msg951424#msg951424

Quote from: Martijn
How confident are you that off-world settlements will happen at all? Will there ever be true colonies, where people will spend their whole lives? And what about lunar resorts, or ISRU facilities where people might work for several years of their lives? How far in the future is all this? Decades, centuries, a thousand years or more?

Some older observations:

"Non-Plausible, too many assumptions"  I ... was hoping to make only three assumptions [about lunar colonization], but I kept on going to see just what it would take.  So I hear the plausibility argument.  But the technical argument is still mine.  We coulda done it if we wanted to.

The technical argument is not valid. ... 

My earliest public outline of an approach:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=17652.msg428814#msg428814

Quote from: JF
One of the big objections to colonies, as opposed to outposts, is about what people do on them.

The idea of "what people do on the outpost" is intended to stimulate discussion about the economics of an effort such as this, on both sides of the balance sheet.

To me, you start with:

1. Flags and footprints.

2. Land a habitat module for 3 or 4 people to stay and study the area.

...

9. The population is doubled to 48...

A partial list of the first page of that search I mentioned above, for convenience:

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29245.msg921624#msg921624

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29217.msg920258#msg920258

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29070.msg910808#msg910808

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29074.msg910971#msg910971

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26834.msg809021#msg809021

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=27819.msg852683#msg852683

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=18503.msg465985#msg465985

Part of my earlier narrative:

My feeling is that if we plan for this eventuality, then nobody will lose money, and nobody will throw rocks.  In other words, there won't be a violent revolution when the time for independence has come.

In general, my position is that we should accelerate our use of chemical rocketry to get to the Moon and Mars, and to stay there. ...

The time frame for this to happen would be between forty and a hundred years.  The technical and cost and even chemical rocketry objections to this idea are surmountable, as a brief discussion in the "Lunar colony in 1969" thread suggests.

As always, it is political will which seems to be the insurmountable problem, but the strenuous objections raised surprise me in their ferocity.  My suggestion that political will can be influenced by a better public education system here in the US is seen as being fruitless.

So the topic is: Colonization:  Where, when, who, what, and why?  Admitting that some will hold the opinion "No-way, No-how".
« Last Edit: 09/10/2012 08:45 pm by JohnFornaro »
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #1 on: 09/09/2012 05:54 pm »
When?
As much as I like Elon Musk, colonization will not happen before we come up with something cheaper and more reliable than chemical propulsion.

Where?
Moon L1

Why?
Stagnant economy due to over competitiveness. We are already feeling it. May peak before 2050.

Who?
Private companies will dominate, not governments. Similar to oil drilling platforms, highly payed workers that can sustain long term confinement.

What?
Mining, zero G factories, tourism, old people retirement (good for the heart and limbs)

Offline Quindar Beep

  • Member
  • Posts: 46
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #2 on: 09/09/2012 07:53 pm »
I maintain that we won't see permanent colonies in our solar system before we see the colonization of Antarctica. The most-southerly continent has a number of advantages over Mars or the Moon:

- There's breathable air.
- There's drinkable water right outside the door, just bring a bucket and apply some heat.
- The cost of getting there is much lower.

The current treaty putting claims in abeyance elapses in 2048. If we get a gold rush of settlers into Antarctica after that, then I think we'll see off-world colonies some time later. But if the world situation at the time is sufficiently prosperous to allow us to leave its resources frozen in the ice, then there'll be no economic pressure to move off-world either.
« Last Edit: 09/09/2012 07:54 pm by Quindar Beep »

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #3 on: 09/09/2012 08:27 pm »
I don't see why people are so against chemical propulsion… It clearly isn't about the cost of fuel. And we certainly use similar fuels every day and to fly aroUnd the world. What's wrong with chemical?

And if you are talking about beyond Leo. We already have such technologies in very widespread commercial use.

There are also ways of combining chemical propulsion to suborbital then capturing with a non-chemical propelled rotating tether. (with existing, non-exotic materials)

So why the hate of chemical? The problem is the throwing away of the vehicle, not what propellant it uses (directly).
« Last Edit: 09/09/2012 08:28 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #4 on: 09/09/2012 08:39 pm »
As much as I like Elon Musk, colonization will not happen before we come up with something cheaper and more reliable than chemical propulsion.

For launch or for in-space transport? I don't think your assertion is true for the former, and only partially true for the latter. We don't really need, but probably do want something with higher Isp than chemical propulsion, but not as a replacement, but in addition to chemical propulsion. And we already have it too: solar electric propulsion. Right now only for small or easily divisble payloads such as propellant, but that conveniently makes up the bulk of IMLEO.
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline douglas100

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2177
  • Liked: 227
  • Likes Given: 105
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #5 on: 09/10/2012 11:31 am »
Where: the usual places, Moon, Mars, asteroids.

When: unless there is a remarkable unforeseen change, not before the end of this century. (I'm not ruling out an unforeseen change by definition of course: for example, the fall of the Soviet Union was not expected even 10 years before it happened.) This doesn't rule out the establishment of bases on other Solar System bodies much earlier.

Who: private groups and individuals with very large financial backing.

What: I'll pass on that, too many possibilities.

Why: The long term survival of intelligent life in the Solar System and beyond would be my reason. The settlers would probably have many different reasons.
Douglas Clark

Offline spectre9

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2403
  • Australia
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #6 on: 09/10/2012 02:31 pm »
Where, when?

Moon, Mars, NEAs. Chemical fuel can get people to these places in the next 50-100 years.

Who?

Anybody that has enough funding to make it work. This might mean collaborations of billionaires or it could mean changing the laws of a country to pour public money into the pursuit.

What?

A space colony is somewhere people can live, have families, build stuff and create economic opportunities beyond the earth. The less dependency on Earth the better, getting mass to LEO will always be expensive.

Why?

This planet is getting smaller every day. It's been explored all the way around. Every piece of land has been claimed by one country or another either for it's resources or to protect it's natural wilderness.

If people want to form new nations it must be done off world. I think we'll be waiting a long time for any government to embrace space colonisation but they will play an important role in developing the hardware that will get people out there onto the frontier.

Economic output is always the defining benchmark over the long term. They will all eventually fail if they can't produce enough to survive. Begging isn't gonna cut it, people will be left to die if they don't abandon doomed colonies.

Where will that "place to be" colony form at?

Wherever the resources are more easily accessed. On Mars there is water on the surface but you have a big gravity well and thin atmosphere in your way. Need to look around a bit more I think.

Offline thydusk666

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 136
  • I see dead pixels in the sky!
  • Europe
  • Liked: 8
  • Likes Given: 10
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #7 on: 09/10/2012 03:23 pm »
It seems to me that governments will never push for colonization. It will always be too expensive and too many will argue against it. So I'm moving my hopes to the private industry. Las Vegas-kind of tourism in the Inner Solar System is going to be possible.

Where: first LEO, Moon then NEA, Mars

When: 2030-2050's. When there will be a huge revenue potential. Space will become much more financially viable when re-usability will be as common as here on Earth; when we will stop discarding expensive equipment as space junk.
Possibly when nuclear fusion technology matures (ITER, 2030's+) and the need of He3 will drive the need of Moon mining.

Who: Private companies, for sure. Earnings will be the biggest (and possibly the only) drive. We are not in shortage of "greedy" companies, so I'm confident that as soon as it's worth it, the Space rush will start.

What: Mining, construction, tourism, fuel production, food production, transport systems, maintenance... A whole set of industries, like here on Earth.

Why: $$$$! As much as we like to think, nobody will invest a dime (except for a handful of governments doing space exploration and research) as long as there's no investment return. The Cold War is over, there's no Space Race anymore. Governments are whining about financial crisis and are visibly delaying any projects.

So, to conclude, here's my optimistic scenario: by 2030's we'll have a much cheaper, faster and reliable launch system (maybe SpaceX, Armadillo or others). That will allow for Moon ISRU, a permanent Lunar outpost and fuel depots/gateways to be much cheaper. Tourism and many other industries will follow shortly. There's plenty of $$$ here on Earth just waiting to be spent by potential tourists.
By that time the Earth population will get to ~10Billion. Enough customers, if you ask me :)

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #8 on: 09/10/2012 06:05 pm »
So the topic is: Colonization:  Where, when, who, what, and why?  Admitting that some will hold the opinion "No-way, No-how".
I'm of the opinion that colonization as an explicit goal is actually pretty silly, as rarely in human history have things happened like that. People have set out in search for new lands mostly for other reasons, and settlement, often planned to be temporary, has always been sort of a side effect.

Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #9 on: 09/10/2012 07:51 pm »
So the topic is: Colonization:  Where, when, who, what, and why?  Admitting that some will hold the opinion "No-way, No-how".
I'm of the opinion that colonization as an explicit goal is actually pretty silly, as rarely in human history have things happened like that. People have set out in search for new lands mostly for other reasons, and settlement, often planned to be temporary, has always been sort of a side effect.

I understand "No-way, No-how", as a choice. 

I'm struggling with "silly", when considering that humans have done a lot of colonization over the millenia on Earth.  And considering the New World effort, colonization wasn't considered to be "temporary" in the least.

Maybe you could clarify?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #10 on: 09/10/2012 08:20 pm »
There is quite a continuum between bases and full-on, independent colonies. A base could be only part-time, could be full-time with 3-4 year rotations, could be decade-long rotations, then some of the researchers/technicians could just decide not to leave. All these options could be done with the same base structure, and the difference between them is merely how long people decide to stay and how often supplies are sent. And very likely, the very first base will use ISRU of some sort. Power will be produced in-situ, which is more than you can say for Antarctica research bases (which are usually powered by diesel... though of course oxygen is simply ISRU produced in antarctica...). Water, air, power, and probably rocket propellant, fuel for rovers (could be just electricity), and maybe even some food would likely be ISRU produced at the very first Mars base. And perhaps even the first Mars surface mission...


And remember, the lowest delta-v budget mission is also a long-stay mission, which means you need to stay on the surface for about a couple years... at which point you practically have some sort of base already, though not all the infrastructure needed necessarily.

And, such a base would already need some tools for fixing stuff, perhaps even a small machine shop (large ocean-going ships, especially battleships and large nuclear subs, etc, often are equipped with machine shop), perhaps even a small 3d printer. You already have many of the tools needed for making stuff last a long time. And, with the capability to melt and cast iron (using the quite plentiful meteoric iron which is already refined for you), you can produce new tools and equipment and even structures (and you can make cast iron parts for a forge using the meteoric iron, etc, with which you can produce pressure vessels and thus the capability to expand, etc... though there are a LOT of details missing, there). You'd still receive shipments from Earth, of course... it takes a lot of infrastructure (or tech development...) to produce high quality materials, though if you can produce sugar, you can ferment it into lactic acid and catalyze that into useful plastic. But even so, there are all sorts of stuff you'd want to get from Earth.

But at what point does it become a colony? Only once it becomes 100% self-sufficient? In that definition, almost nowhere on Earth nowadays would fit that description... We wouldn't claim America isn't colonized just because it trades a lot with Europe and Asia.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Online Jim Davis

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 560
  • Liked: 124
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #11 on: 09/10/2012 08:21 pm »
Colonization:  Where, when, who, what, and why?

John, I don't want to make too much of what was clearly intended to be an attention getting title but surely the question of "how" is more important than where, when, who, what, and why?

Are you implicitly assuming "how" is a solved problem or one that is well on the way to solution?

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, why, and how?
« Reply #12 on: 09/10/2012 08:45 pm »
Pesky detail.  Edited OP.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline scienceguy

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 836
  • Lethbridge, Alberta
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 279
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, why, and how?
« Reply #13 on: 09/10/2012 09:03 pm »
Where? Mars.

How? With a space elevator, as soon as someone comes up with carbon nanotubes.

By the way, I have been researching nanotubes myself...
e^(pi*i) = -1

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #14 on: 09/10/2012 09:11 pm »
I understand "No-way, No-how", as a choice. 

I'm struggling with "silly", when considering that humans have done a lot of colonization over the millenia on Earth.  And considering the New World effort, colonization wasn't considered to be "temporary" in the least.

Maybe you could clarify?
I'm not sure i can clarify much better, but to restate that humans have colonized a lot, but rarely, if ever, with explicit stated intent of doing so.

Again, the fact that people stay and settle is often a side effect of some other goal that brought them there.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #15 on: 09/10/2012 09:21 pm »
I don't see why people are so against chemical propulsion… It clearly isn't about the cost of fuel. And we certainly use similar fuels every day and to fly aroUnd the world. What's wrong with chemical?

...

So why the hate of chemical? The problem is the throwing away of the vehicle, not what propellant it uses (directly).
I see SpaceX attempts to recover stages. They are doing exciting stuff, it might just cut price per Kg, but as a rule of engineering, KISS!

Portuguese Kings would send 2-3 ships to explore new lands in the 15th and 16th century. One year after, the expedition would have 17-30 ships! 30 years after, a steady stream of colonist would follow. This was only possible after a technological breakthrough: upwind sailing. Sure, sailing had been around for millennial, but it took a propulsion change to make it happen.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #16 on: 09/10/2012 09:50 pm »
This was only possible after a technological breakthrough: upwind sailing. Sure, sailing had been around for millennial, but it took a propulsion change to make it happen.
Huh ? Viking ships were able to sail upwind. Nevertheless, Leif Ericson's name is not widely recognized.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 754
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 17
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, why, and how?
« Reply #17 on: 09/10/2012 10:53 pm »
Where:
Initially in LEO, then Lunar poles, with support facilities between, those support facilities will outgrow LEO and Lunar destinations to become the true colonies.
 
when:
Hundreds of tourists/yr to LEO (2030)-> Hotels in orbit (2040)-> increased numbers push costs/hd down -> the rich adventure tourist get board with LEO and see the Moon (2045) as the REAL adventure, substantial infrastructure is built in space to support tourism, colonization is just the people living there, cooking the meals and keeping the power and water running.

who:
Private capital, airlines, hotel chains, aerospace. Eventually all the organizations, firms and occupations in your typical 2050 town.

why:
Tourism is big business, but there will be stuff mined or made in space that'll sell on Earth. Our biggest resource is people, and a lot of our brightest and most resourceful people will end up living in space, they'll create high value products - electronics, chemicals, medical systems and treatments.

How:
Stratolaunch with a fully reusable passenger carrying upper stage (may as well call it a spaceplane), then Stratolaunch with a fully reusable upper stage to tether, then far larger air launch systems to tether.
« Last Edit: 09/10/2012 11:07 pm by Andrew_W »
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #18 on: 09/10/2012 11:00 pm »
 
I understand "No-way, No-how", as a choice. 

I'm struggling with "silly", when considering that humans have done a lot of colonization over the millenia on Earth.  And considering the New World effort, colonization wasn't considered to be "temporary" in the least.

Maybe you could clarify?
I'm not sure i can clarify much better, but to restate that humans have colonized a lot, but rarely, if ever, with explicit stated intent of doing so.

Again, the fact that people stay and settle is often a side effect of some other goal that brought them there.

Well, I see what you're saying in part.  "We came for the gold and spices, but we stayed because of the natives and the beautiful beaches!"

There is a clear conceptual difference with colonization off planet.  Mankind (and daughterkind) will have to make an admission that we have choice and free will.  Even tho I'm not a millionaire, I continue to voice the certainty that we have these things, and that the money we might have is not some sort of indictment that our goals and wills may be misplaced.   That is, if you don't mind me getting a mite philosophical.

Don't get the silly part, still.  Without further clarification, MSL must be considered "silly", given the hunger, ignorance and poverty back home.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1002
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Colonization: Where, when, who, what, and why?
« Reply #19 on: 09/10/2012 11:08 pm »
Well, I see what you're saying in part.  "We came for the gold and spices, but we stayed because of the natives and the beautiful beaches!"
...
Don't get the silly part, still.  Without further clarification, MSL must be considered "silly", given the hunger, ignorance and poverty back home.
Then let me offer you this "We shall go to the moon/mars/uranus for the natives and beautiful beaches!". Good luck getting widespread support.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0