Lunar Residence?

[zatar]

With all the discussion of travel to the moon and even living on Luna, what is stopping us? The fact the we aren't even attempting to set up residency there. Think of all that land. Luna is around the same size as our own earth, but think. It has no oceans to take up a large portion of it's surface...

 

[adrenalynn]

<font color="yellow">Luna is around the same size as our own earth</font><br /><br />Just a note for technical accuracy. I do believe the lunar surface is scarcely larger than the continent of Africa. The moon is around-about 1/4 the earth's diameter, give or take, with about 1/50th the volume. Not nearly so much land.<br /><br />What's stopping us? Personal opinion - cost/benefit. The cost to colonize the moon in any sort of perpetual form would be outlandishly (no pun) expensive. And we probably don't have the lift technology (and certainly not the infrastructure) to do it today. Heck, just dusting off the technology to get there again [reliably] might be beyond us today. . . <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>.</p><p><font size="3">bipartisan</font>  (<span style="color:blue" class="pointer"><span class="pron"><font face="Lucida Sans Unicode" size="2">bī-pär'tĭ-zən, -sən</font></span></span>) [Adj.]  Maintaining the ability to blame republications when your stimulus plan proves to be a devastating failure.</p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000"><font color="#ff0000">IMPE</font><font color="#c0c0c0">ACH</font> <font color="#0000ff"><font color="#c0c0c0">O</font>BAMA</font>!</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[qso1]

Three words...cost, cost, cost.<br /><br />Critics successfully made NASA look like a costly pig after Apollo. Often ignoring much larger government wastes but worse...believing that if we ended NASA today, the world would benefit because we would actually spend money on the human problems (Poverty, disease) critics justifiably want to see ended. Fact is, as demonstrated by past government spending follies (S $ L scandal, deficit spending) ...if NASA closed tommorow, the next day, that money would be wasted on new government follies. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[dragon04]

<font color="yellow">The fact the we aren't even attempting to set up residency there.</font><br /><br />Considering the costs involved, why would we do so? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[kelvinzero]

I love the idea of luna industry: the moon covered in solar panels and smelters. It has plenty of oxygen, aluminium silicon and iron in the regolith. It could deliver these to earth orbit at a much lower cost than launching from earth.<br /><br /> Unfortunately the moon has very little apparent hydrogen, nitrogen or carbon which are vital to life and also much of our industrial techniques.

 

[MannyPim]

Greetings qso1,<br /><br />I am going to disagree with yoru statement. It's not that your statement is wrong. It's that it provides a convenient starting point for discussion.<br /><br />Yes, the cost of lunar missions is very high right now. And this high cost is used as the reason why we are not doing more Lunar missions.<br />However, becoming a space faring civilization is of such importance for the future of Humanity that is justifies us spending the money we need to in order to begin that process.<br /><br />Even though the cost is high, it is not beyond America's capability. And it certainly would not be beyond the capability of an international conglomerate.<br /><br />The problem is that the governemnt, in its infinite wisdom has decided to keep NASA going as a jobs program rather than to fulfill its obligation to prepare the pathway to our future in space. with the Vision for Space Exploration we have finally begun to move in the right direction. But we should be making a much stronger effort and mounting a much more ambitions program to colonize the Moon.<br /><br />As an example, most people don;t realize that the entire NASA budget of around $16 Billion a year or so, amounts to less than 1% of the Federal budget.<br />Sepnding 1% on somehting that is so critical to our future is patently ridiculous. I am an unabashed space enthusiast and I believe tht many of the long term solutions to the most serious probelms we face on Earth are easily solvable from the perspective of a Space Faring Civilization. So the amount of resources we should be spending on this effort should be at least ten times as much (at least 8% of the Federal Budget).<br /><br />Now, if we had $160 Billion / year to spend on space exploration and settlement AND if we spent that money very wisely (like partnering with private enterprise) the cost of building Lunar settlements would not be an issue. We would have already built multiple settlements by now. <br /><br />And, because we would have a much mo <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>The only way to know what is possible is to attempt the impossible.</em></font> </div>

 

[zatar]

In response to Adrenalynn's post...<br /><br />First off, sorry about the size thing, I had to post quickly and didn't have nearly enough time to truly think that through. :<br />Second, I didn't mean to literally hike up there and start putting buildings. I meant conducting the research so that it could be possible in say 50 or 60 years. With the technology, things could be grown up there in a way such as a closed ecological system, a "bio-dome" if you will. Of course this will take a lot of research, but I think with the rate of technological advancement it could be pulled off and be witnessed by our very eyes. <br /><br /><br />This discussion has sparked an idea for me. I might make a Phpbb forum dedicated to just a lunar city. I mean, if it were to happen, wouldn't you want to be one of the people to go there?

 

[MannyPim]

It will be possible a lot sooner than 50 or 60 years.<br />We actually have all the technology needed right now to build large scale lunar facilities. <br /><br />We also don't need to have a 100% self sufficient colony right from the start.<br />The best strategy is to build an Earth dependent colony with whatever level of self sufficiency is reasonable at the outset. Then we gradully work to make our dependency on Earth less and less until it becomes totally self sufficient. <br />A colony capable of indefinitely supporting itself with no help or supplies at all form Earth may take 50 to 100 years to achieve.<br /><br />I would say as far as your idea for a lunar city forum: go for it.<br /><br />I have been working on a design for a large scale lunar colony over the last few years. I will be going to Hawaii in a couple of months to present the concept at a Lunar conference there. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>The only way to know what is possible is to attempt the impossible.</em></font> </div>

 

[nexium]

Hi Zatar: The surface of the moon is not nice. Nights are two weeks long.<br />With very good luck, we will find natural tunnels which extend many kilometers below the Moon's surface. Unlike Earth, these deep tunnels will be cool, so disposal of waste heat will be a minor problem instead of a major problem. We may find ice or liquid water. We can grow food far below the surface using grow lights. The technology we develop for living below the surface of the moon will likely be transferable to other moons, Sedna type bodies and large asteroids and large comets. Neil

 

[zatar]

I already made the site, I'm putting a link in the signature so you can join if interested.

 

[j05h]

I'd recommend starting a thread here in Biz & Tech for your lunar city. You'll get more traffic on Uplink than any site you build yourself, unless you're advertising. This is a great site for generating ideas.<br /><br />Josh<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[zatar]

I will eventually, I'll leave this thread up for a little bit first, see if anyone's interested then maybe make a thread.

 

[billslugg]

Neil<br />Why do you think disposal of waste heat would be a problem aboveground? If you put a radiator in the shade, it can be aimed at deep space - 3 deg K. No? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[j05h]

<i>> Why do you think disposal of waste heat would be a problem aboveground? If you put a radiator in the shade, it can be aimed at deep space - 3 deg K. No?</i><br /><br />That's a waste. It should be channeled to a Sterling or Brayton heat engine. <br /><br />For both large and small underground habitats, care needs to be taken not to heat the surrounding medium to much. This can release volatiles from the soil/tunnel in catastrophic ways.<br /><br />Josh<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[MannyPim]

<font color="yellow"> Too bad the 600 billion we've pissed away on the war in Iraq could not have been spent on NASA instead. </font><br /><br />Come on Eddie.... let's leave this kind of stuff for Free Space.<br /><br />Can you share your opinions / toughts about colonizing the Moon? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>The only way to know what is possible is to attempt the impossible.</em></font> </div>

 

[kelvinzero]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p><br />I will eventually, I'll leave this thread up for a little bit first, see if anyone's interested then maybe make a thread. <br /><p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I'd like to agree with JO5H. This is a good forum, there are several sites of moon colony enthusiasts. (permanent, moonsociety etc)<br /><br />..also forums tend to consist of a lot of shouting and not much progress <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /><br /><br />Perhaps instead you should maintain a concise website that represents your personal vision and summary of the state of current research, links to articles, etc etc.. and connect to whatever webrings are relevant.<br /><br />Im actually dabbling with the same approach, but for a hard SF project of how a colonised solarsystem could look.

 

[qso1]

I actually agree with much of what you stated. I have often mentioned we could raise the space budget to just 1.5 % GDP from the current .9% GDP and accomplish much more.<br /><br />I don't see current programs as corporate welfare but if they are, its only due to the fact that underbudgeting has brought it on. Underbudgeting that resulted from the 3Ps (Press, public, politicians) deciding that human space exploration isn't worth doing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[MannyPim]

Greetings QSO1,<br /><br />Unfortunately the public perception is that we are wasting tons of money on space instead of using that money to address the immediate problems here on Earth.<br /><br />People have no concept of how little we actually spend on the Space program. And they don't actually understand the benefit we get from space technology and space derived technology.<br />It's partly that NASA does a poor job of explaining those things and partly that people are not interested enough to inform themselves better. Space has become boring and routine.<br /><br />That is why I advocate for a bold and ambitious new goal; one that also provides oportunities for anyone interested to participate and be involved: <br />Let's set out to build the first permanent large scale settlement on the Moon and to finish it by 2025. <br />It's ambitious, but it is achievable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>The only way to know what is possible is to attempt the impossible.</em></font> </div>

 

[nexium]

The shade moves during the two weeks of daylight and most of the shade is gone when the Sun is straight up. We have little success running Stirling engines on waste heat on Earth, partly because the engine requires a heat sink to condence the working fluid. We would still need to radiate into space, or store the waste heat for two weeks until it is night.<br />Josh is correct, volitiles will contaminate the tunnel air if we warm the tunnel more than a few degrees. When we know the composition of the contaminates we can remove them from the air to a nontoxic level unless they are extremely toxic, such as radon. Neil

 

[qso1]

Couldn't agree more. I think the time has probably come for the private sector to take the reigns from NASA as far as low orbit access. Once that nut is cracked, if it can be...we will see a dramatic change in human spaceflight. NASA would still be needed for lunar and mars bases and it should be less expensive to do those once getting to low orbit becomes economical.<br /><br />I like the idea of proposing a goal to have a manned base on the moon by 2025. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[zatar]

I agree with MannyPim entirely, but we need something to fall back on rather then ideals and hopes. Ideals and hopes are probably the best thing someone can have, but realists tend to be favored in our society of today. Of course, with current goverment we more then likely wouldn't be able to do it now (if we happened to have a LOT of money and required technology among other things.). But who knows? In 2025 we could have a president who is willing to attempt it.

 

[MannyPim]

Greetings Zatar,<br /><br />Qso1 has the right idea.<br />I don't believe we should (or have to) depend on the government to make it happen.<br />We have a much better chance with private industry.<br />ideally, it shoudl be a partnership between the government and the private sector: each one taking on the roles for which they are best suited and working together for the common goal of opening up space for all of humanity as soon as possible.<br /><br />In the end, it's up to each and everyone of us to demand this of our governemnt. The current perception in Washington DC is STILL that people don;t really care that much about space. If we could change that perception, much more could be accomplished.<br />The successes of the commerical space ventures: Rutan, virgin Galactic, Bigelow, Falcon, etc... will help to get people interested / informed about space and will help to change that perception in DC.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>The only way to know what is possible is to attempt the impossible.</em></font> </div>