Colonizing Venus - looking for sources

MeteorWayne · Mar 7, 2007

well, if it's 4 AM, time to hit the sack buddy!! We'll talk tomorrow. MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

chesh · Mar 7, 2007

I agree. Esp. with your last fine paragraph which sums it up so well. "These are just a few problems. Venus is a very poor prospect for a future home for mankind. And no person in their right mind would want to live on a floating blimp in a caustic, poisonous atmosphere, when so many more roomy, pleasant, and comfortable destinations exist elsewhere in the solar system." There is a huge amount of denial regarding these problems, too.

dragon04 · Mar 7, 2007

In regards to one of your points I should note that the atmosphere itself provides protection against radiation in being so thick: But a "cooled down" Venus with an atmospheric pressure in the range of Earth and without a significant magnetic field wouldn't enjoy those benefits. How many atmospheres of pressure do you reckon in would take to explode your lungs the first time you took a breath? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!". </div>

dragon04 · Mar 7, 2007

Planetary colonization is a massive endeavor in both terms of economy and resources. If and when the first generation of H. Sapiens calls another world "home", it will have to be one where a minimum of materials and supplies will have to be brought along, and it will be utterly important to be able to "live off the land". Subsurface habitats on Mercury would pose less problems in that regard than Venus would. Economy is a good thing. Ganymede would be a better and more practical colonization target than Venus, IMO. It's not impossible to build floating blimp cities in the Venusian atmosphere. But it's far more impractical than many other places I can think of. Economy. I love economy. Why spend extremem amounts of money and resources to float 100 people in a Venusian habitat and incur the risks and costs of keeping that habitat in place when the same money could support a Martian colony perhaps ten times larger? Because it would be really cool? Economy doesn't care about coolness. Nor does practicality. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!". </div>

colbourne · Mar 7, 2007

Terraforming Venus using microbes does not need to be a very expensive project. I would expect that we already have microbes that could live in the Venus atmosphere. Combining these microbes with the properties required to terraform the planet, would not be beyond our ability within the next few years I would guess. Only a small probe would be required to carry the microbes to Venus. Using a sun shield would be a much bigger and more expensive job but I would not think beyond our abilities. Can anyone come up with a figure for how many years it would take to cool Venus asumming a 100% sun shield. I would think this would be fairly quick for the atmosphere and surface but the core would take much longer. I am guessing we could get the surface to Earth like temperatures at the surface within 50 years. The slow rotation of Venus might make a more challenging problem. We might have to have mobile cities keeping to the areas with the ideal climate. I think I will wait for my trip to Venus till when we can land on the surface as it is here that the fun will really start. I will visit the "cloud city" but I do agree that after a few days it might become rather boring. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

colbourne · Mar 7, 2007

As an alternative to building the space shield , it might be possible to design a microbe that will convert the atmosphere of Venus in to a reflective shield. At the same time this would slowly sink to the surface , reducing the atmosphere pressure at the same time. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

mithridates · Mar 7, 2007

Well, I think we've discussed this subject as much as we possibly can (we meaning all the most prominent posters on this thread); we're pretty clear on each other's positions. Let's change the subject a little to the proposed Venus solar flyers. What's your opinion of them? This is what we'll need to investigate the atmosphere at that level before we can even think of sending people there, so perhaps it's best to concentrate on something like this that I assume we all agree on. http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg18624985.700-to-conquer-venus-try-a-plane-with-a-brain.html Image here: http://space.newscientist.com/data/images/archive/2498/24985701.jpg I almost forgot that Venus Express is still around the planet given the lack of anything interesting coming out of the official site there. I see the mission was extended last week until May 2009. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ----- http://mithridates.blogspot.com </div>

mithridates · Apr 8, 2007

Nice to see an article in a standard newspaper about the subject, giving it some well-deserved attention: http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070405/COLUMNISTS14/704050329/1084/LIFE05 <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Could Venus one day support human life? Venus will be the brightest object in the sky tonight. You can find it by looking slightly north of west and 26 degrees above the horizon at 8:25. The White Planet is still approaching Earth. As late as the mid-20th century, some scientists speculated that Venus, beneath its opaque cover of cloud, might have a climate not unlike tropical Earth. And some were even willing to speculate that it might be home to exotic forms of life. But such speculation ended quickly when NASA Mariner flybys and Russian Venera landings revealed that the Venusian surface was arid, desolate, and hot enough to melt lead, more suggestive of Gehenna than of Eden. The question is no longer whether life exists on Venus; it has become whether life can exist on Venus. Hope springs eternal — even among scientists — and, more especially, among engineers. Enough hope to turn their answer into a resounding maybe. The key to initial settlement of Venus is the thickness of its atmosphere. Thirty-five miles above the planet's surface, that atmosphere is only slightly less dense than Earth's at sea-level, and its temperature just happens to a comfortable 75 degrees Fahrenheit. And, because it consists of heavy carbon dioxide, a mixture of lighter nitrogen and oxygen would be buoyant in it. From these modest facts, it is only a small engineering leap to cities of Earthlings, floating above the Venusian clouds in giant air-filled balloons, growing their food and powering their technology with bri</blockquote> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ----- http://mithridates.blogspot.com </div>

nrrusher · Jul 14, 2007

Mars Sucks, Venus Rules Lets do a tally Atmposphere Mars = None/Very Little Venus = Too Much Ability to Change Atmosphere To make Livable Mars = Very Difficult/Impossible Venus = Possible - Atmosphere a Good Thing Score = 1 Venus & 0 Mars Good Gravity Venus Wins Closeness Venus Wins Size Venus Wins Resources Venus Wins

nrrusher · Jul 14, 2007

The idea here is, as far as building a colony as hospitable to earth life as possible, Venus is a better choice, especially in the long run. Heat and Presure...?? Yes those are a problem, but they both have the same solution. A solar shade. Difficult but do-able. In the meantime there is nothing wrong with a little science base on Mars, but why not floating cities on Venus? I guess my main issue is that mars is not much more on Mars than on the Moon. The only real motivator is the search for life there....and I would say that is not so real of a possibility. As a scientific outpost, Mars is OK, but as a real human reach beyond the earth, Venus is a far greater prize.

MeteorWayne · Jul 14, 2007

Atmosphere Venus, too much, lotsa bad stuff. I'm sure mith will like your analysis though <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

nrrusher · Jul 14, 2007

I question the time table give for cooling Venus with a Solar Shield. If you blocked out a significant portion of the light reaching earth, the effects would be immediate. Granted, Venus is a different animal, but not that different. Once the sun's input is removed we are talking deep freeze before too long. There should also be a snowball effect. As the temp drops, the pressure drops, which in turn makes the temp drop faster since the planet surface can radiate more heat to space....etc. I am also a big fan of space elevators, and I think setting up one on Mars and one on Venus (using the Solar L1 point) would both propel human development of the entire solar system immensely. I rather wish I was born 25 years later than I was. I might actually get to see some of this come to be, if not take an active part in it.

nrrusher · Jul 14, 2007

I do not care to retype it, so see "Two New Earths" and "Venus Space Elevator" on www.halfbakery.com for a more complete idea of what I am thinking. http://www.halfbakery.com/view/recent

mithridates · Jul 16, 2007

"No one would want to live on a blimp" - just one blimp and we're done? Don't be ridiculous. Nobody plans to colonize a location without the intent of expansion. Just as how those colonizing Mars will put up with a small location at first with the promise of expansion later on, so would anyone wanting to colonize the cloudtops of Venus - the goal is one blimp, then another, then another, and eventually this: http://www.flhosa.org/Lloyd's%20Life_files/entry%20pics/Cloud%20City.jpg I can appreciate that you prefer Mars (I do myself at times), but let's not pretend that anybody that volunteers to colonize a location does so without the intention to expand. Oh, and there's water vapor in the atmosphere (20 ppm), plus more trapped in the extensive H2SO4. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ----- http://mithridates.blogspot.com </div>

mithridates · Jul 16, 2007

You have an odd fixation with terra firma. Other people may say the same thing about 1g. People need terra firma, people need 1g, people need 24 hour days, whatever. Nobody that attached to terra firma or ideal conditions should even be considered for voyages to space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ----- http://mithridates.blogspot.com </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 16, 2007

LOL, mithridates, others might say you have an odd fixation with trying to live on or above Venus <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Wayne <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

mithridates · Jul 16, 2007

I guess so. I just want to go somewhere actually. Ceres, Mars, Venus, the Moon, doesn't really matter. If there's more political will to go to Mars then let's go there first. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> ----- http://mithridates.blogspot.com </div>

nrrusher · Jul 16, 2007

I agree. I just want to see us going SOMEWHERE. Simply put, in the short term I see Mars and Venus as a toss up, its in the longer term, primarily due to the gravity issue (I'm a little worried about he .33 g's on Mars) that I think Venus pulls ahead. I see "dirigible" cities EASILY within our CURRENT technology, it is just a question of application. Pressure similarities, not having to worry so much about Radiation, the start of a serious endeavor to nudge another world closer and closer to virtually non-assisted (i.e. no space suit) occupation of the surface.....gives Venus an edge I feel. Keep in mind, once the temperature can be brought down, even just 25%, exploration of the surface becomes much less difficult. Pressue is not such a big issue, we have those capabilities already, but that would drop as well as the temp drops. Even if we can only build a 1/4 size solar shield with present tech, that would be something..... On another note, our country, if not the world, is in desparate need of some ambitious, but possible unifying, dreams. The fact that we are expanding human knowledge, our long term security, etc. is all really a side note, Mars, Venus, Mecury, whatever.... I really enjoy this banter by the way....no one else seems to care...all they look forward to is their FAC club and fantasy football league... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> PS - I am a 10 year IT professional (database management & design is my forte, but I have a pretty broad spectrum) looking for other opportunities...anyone have/know of an opening? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

nrrusher · Jul 16, 2007

Here is a copy of something I posted elsewhere in response to a couple other opinions..... I think the floating Cities on Venus is by far the best idea in 50 years for getting our space faring feet wet. Here is my copy/paste from another linked site. I think Hollywood is destroying our ability to act on our dreams. Why think big when someone else can for you and put it on your TV screen? Anyway, I would like to hear comments on the below. I think the whole "need to make a profit" thing is getting blown way out of proportion and being given way to much importance. Getting something established, IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME that can be reasonably self sustaining should be the real goal. Learning how to make something really pay a huge return is often impossible until you have hung out for a while and understand the environment first hand. I think the bar is being set way to high. Making money on Venus should not be the end all to whether or not a floating city would be worth it. The experience, the economic benefits of creating an industry here on earth to support it......forget tax breaks, take the tax breaks and build up a space faring market that has a deep enough root to start growing on its own along with supporting a devloping support industry. You will encourage students to learn more math, science, engineering, etc., which will pump much more into our economy IN THE LONG TERM than tax breaks every could. If we mobilized for space development like we did for WWII the economic, scientific, social, and general health benefits to our society would be beyond anything we could imagine. I have an MBA and am all for the business end of thing, heck, I have staked many years and a lot of money on it, but I do not go to work for the primary sake of making a profit. I go to work so I can take what I make and do something REALLY meaningful with it...a family, investing in my child's future, perhaps a little landscaping to ma

MeteorWayne · Jul 16, 2007

nrrusher. Terrafoming ain't as easy as you think! "The pressure of Venus' atmosphere at the surface is 90 atmospheres (about the same as the pressure at a depth of 1 km in Earth's oceans). That isn't going to go away. We can't ever live unprotected at that pressure. It is composed mostly of carbon dioxide. There are several layers of clouds many kilometers thick composed of sulfuric acid. How are you going to get rid of all that CO2?? These clouds completely obscure our view of the surface. This dense atmosphere produces a run-away greenhouse effect that raises Venus' surface temperature by about 400 degrees to over 740 K (hot enough to melt lead). Venus' surface is actually hotter than Mercury's despite being nearly twice as far from the Sun. Even a 25% reduction in absolute temperature is still 555K or about 281 C That's hotter than the sun side of the moon. It's easier to collect and save heat (i.e. Mars) than to dissapate in in such an environment. Where do you dump the heat from your bodies and machines? Food for thought. Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

nrrusher · Jul 16, 2007

Really, by now I understand what the obstacles are....I've had plenty of reminders <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> There is nothing wrong with hanging out in the clouds for 10 years while we decide exactly how to go about making it a nicer neighborhood to live in. We presently venture 1km down in the ocean...so that isn't an issue anyway, if we want to go and have the equipment shipped or made there. The problem is the temperature. Once you remove/reduce the sun's thermal maintenance of the Veneran oven, the temp will drop.....if you can prove to me it will not, then you win, I give up....but that doesn't even make sense. As the temp drops, so does the pressure... BUT even then that is not the most important thing here. We CAN, RIGHT NOW live in the tree tops. Pressure and Temp are both nice. I would go so far to say, from what I know (and I do read, I read A LOT) that on a per person basis, maintaining and growing an outpost would be cheaper right now, considering all factors and technologies, for us on Venus than on Mars....not that I do not like Mars....Olympus Mons kicks butt. Want to mine Venus?? Stick a hose out your window, pull in the gases, and use the abundant solar power to process them into necessary supplies of oxygen, water (yes, there is water available if you process the acidic gases) etc. You do not need a super heavy duty containment structure to hold in the atmospheric pressues because tha is very similar. The temp is similar at that height. Inflateable platforms...you want another bedroom..just blow. Sending a habitat ahead of us would be easier on Venus as well. Not having to land on terra firma eases the rocket and landing requirements. It could easily be auto-established using simple robotics and remote control. We could monitor is insides for a month so we can be fairly certain that it would hold up for human occupation...... Anyway, I am rambling about this too much. Taken on

MeteorWayne · Jul 16, 2007

"As the temp drops, so does the pressure... " Not sure I understand the mechanism for this. As it got cooler, seems to me the pressure would increase, "On Venus you MIGHT actually be able to reach safety or repair/replace your damaged unit before your injuries become fatal. " Well that's certainly not true in a dirigible in the H2SO4 clouds <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> But I'm not sure if you are suggesting that, or a surface environment. Have to reread the last few extensive posts. Yes the banter is fun. Until recently, mith was in a dirigible by himself, at least now he has someone else on his side <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> I'm still not convinced it's safer than the moon, but there's time to discuss it <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

nrrusher · Jul 16, 2007

This is getting addictive, so just one more post, and that is it, until maybe later.....

As the temp drops, gases, such as CO2, will start to fall and freeze. Remember, at higher pressures, stuff freezes sooner, including CO2. And considering the pressures that we are considering, that would happen a lot sooner than here. As more turns to ice and drops, the atmosphere thins, thereby decreasing the pressure, which in turn reduces the capacity of the atmosphere to retain heat..and on and on and on... Just make sure you don't take any deep breaths if your faceplace get a crack in it. Remember, at 1 atmosphere, the external gases will not be trying to get into your spacesuit, because a path of lessor resistance does not exist...literally unless you de-robe or get a REALLY big tear in your outfit, you could just squeeze/cover the damaged spot and make it back to the airlock without to much worry. A Venus suit woud be MUCH easier to fabricate, wear, and work in than anything we could do with a Martian or Lunar outfit. There is also MUCH less of a concern with solar radiation on Venus due to its atmosphere. That is the one downside to reduces the atmosphere...you would also reduce the protection from radiation. However, that would be partially handled by a solar shield.... Thanks in large part to this banter, I have convinced myself of it.....show me someone who wants to do this and I am on board...just pay me enough to live on and I would be in seventh heaven...... (my wife might think otherwise) <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

MeteorWayne · Jul 16, 2007

"This is getting addictive, so just one more post, and that is it, until maybe later.....

" Yeah, sure <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> "As the temp drops, gases, such as CO2, will start to fall and freeze. Remember, at higher pressures, stuff freezes sooner, including CO2. And considering the pressures that we are considering, that would happen a lot sooner than here. " I'll have to check and see what the condensation point of CO2 is at 90 atmospheres. I have no idea. In any case, if you do manage to lower the pressure to a few atmospheres, then the sublimation point gets back to what it is here at 1 atm, which is about 195K, much less than the 555K you talked about earlier <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />. In fact it's mighty freakin' cold, unrealistic (and even undesireable) for a terraformed Venus. But hey, like I say, we have time. I hope a UFO comes by and asks me if I want a ride to "Way Out There" Not sure I'd sign up for a trip to Venus, but that's me <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

nrrusher · Jul 16, 2007

Boy, you want the details, don't you.... I do not know exactly myself ( I read it once, but didn't retain it) but that isn't exactly important at this point, so long as it does. The exact chemical composition of the atmosphere and other factors would all play into it....and we just won't know all that until we hang out there for a bit, now will we... . <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> I believe it happens in stages, but the extent of the solar shield, whether it gets built little by little or is put up in one big swoop, would all have an effect on the matter. If I was getting paid I could probably spend more time on the matter. In any case the CO2 WILL condense, whether it happens in stages, all at once, at 500 K or 300 K, is irrelevant. The point is to get the pressure and temperature down low enough that we can work on the surface sufficently to continue the process, get at needed resources, etc. Once we get the temperature and pressure down low enough that we can work on the surface, its a whole new ballgame. Once we have the CO2 converted (to carbon nanotubes and oxygen, for instance) and/or contained in some manner using the plethora of energy provided by the sun, then we can start to lower the solar shield somewhat and let things warm up a little. The lack of a dynamic ocean and water based weather system on the planet might actually make it EASIER to terraform, as the variables in the weather system are reduced....just sun and atmospheric circulation. Need it to cool off, just close some of the blinds...want it warmer...open a few up.... <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> What I am wondering, is what is the greatest amount of atmospheric pressue that a human could learn to be confortable living in? I could see some advantages to not decreasing the atmospheric pressure any more than we have to..... Any thoughts on that? As the temp drops and CO2 drops

Colonizing Venus - looking for sources

MeteorWayne

Guest

chesh

Guest

dragon04

Guest

dragon04

Guest

colbourne

Guest

colbourne

Guest

mithridates

Guest

mithridates

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

mithridates

Guest

mithridates

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

mithridates

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

nrrusher

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page