Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2017/01/25 10:23:29
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Slowly but surely, ESA's plan for an international, collaborative lunar settlement is beginning to take shape. It's a more realistic goal than plans to colonize Mars, and if successful, the "Moon Village" would act as a kind of "backup" plan for the human species.
THE RACE TO SPACE
Last year, the European Space Agency (ESA) announced plans for building a permanent lunar base—called Moon Village—which would be a step forward as the International Space Station (ISS) is slated to be decommissioned in 2024. The Moon Village is a part of ESA Director General Johann-Dietrich Wörner’s Space 4.0 concept, a new epoch in the space sector where space exploration is no longer exclusive to the public sector but open to private organizations as well.
Wörner says that the pieces of the plan are smoothly falling into place, describing ESA’s Ministerial Council 2016 at Lucerne, Switzerland earlier this month as a “success, tinged with a bit of disappointment.”
IN BRIEF
Slowly but surely, ESA's plan for an international, collaborative lunar settlement is beginning to take shape. It's a more realistic goal than plans to colonize Mars, and if successful, the "Moon Village" would act as a kind of "backup" plan for the human species. THE RACE TO SPACE
Last year, the European Space Agency (ESA) announced plans for building a permanent lunar base—called Moon Village—which would be a step forward as the International Space Station (ISS) is slated to be decommissioned in 2024. The Moon Village is a part of ESA Director General Johann-Dietrich Wörner’s Space 4.0 concept, a new epoch in the space sector where space exploration is no longer exclusive to the public sector but open to private organizations as well.
Wörner says that the pieces of the plan are smoothly falling into place, describing ESA’s Ministerial Council 2016 at Lucerne, Switzerland earlier this month as a “success, tinged with a bit of disappointment.”
Space 4.0 garnered worldwide cooperation, with all 22 ESA member states along with cooperating states outside the EU expressing support. After multiple rounds of lively discussion (as well as exhausting negotiations on funding), his proposal “Space 4.0 for a United Space in Europe” amassed €10.3 billion ($10.77 billion) in pledges.
The “tinge of disappointment” comes from the Asteroid Impact Mission (AIM) failing to get financial support. AIM was supposed to be a defensive “learning exercise” that would use NASA’s Dart impactor spacecraft to deflect asteroids. “It was an example of ESA at its absolute best: daring, innovative and ambitious all at once,” he wrote.
Artist’s concept of a Moon settlement. Image: ESA, Foster + Partners ESA isn’t the only one with eyes set on the Moon. British architecture firm Foster + Partners designed their own version of an inflatable lunar habitat with a catenary dome capable of shielding inhabitants from space radiation and small debris. The Google Lunar XPRIZE also challenged a battalion of claimants to aim for the Moon. India, Russia, Japan, and China’s space agencies are also in the race.
As for extraterrestrial settlements, Mars is a competitor for NASA’s attention. But although Elon Musk plans to send humans to Mars soon, building a colony there would probably take longer than building a Moon Village. For one thing, a one-way trip to Mars alone takes three years—preparations not included, which is why the estimated timeframe for a Mars colony is reasonably set between the next 40-100 years. A trip to the Moon, on the other hand, takes only about three days. And because ESA plans to 3D-print structures out of materials from the Lunar regolith, the cargo necessary for each trip would be substantially lessened. A “BACKUP” FOR THE SPECIES
Some people contend that funds and efforts spent on space exploration are a waste of resources, especially considering the fact that we have people starving and dying here on Earth to whom aid could be redirected. While that’s true, scientists argue that if we do not build alternative settlements away from Earth, it’s highly probable that the entire species (and the entire planet) would be snuffed out at some point—whether it be due to an outside force such as a comet, or an internal conflict such as warfare. A colony outside the Earth would play an important role in the survival of the human race—a “backup” for the species, if you will.
World renowned theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking tells Big Think: “It will be difficult enough to avoid disaster on planet Earth in the next hundred years, let alone the next thousand, or million. The human race shouldn’t have all its eggs in one basket, or on one planet. Let’s hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have spread the load.”
Looking ahead into the long-term future—a hundred, a thousand, a million years forward—is a grueling job that has to be done. Scientists and futurists take it upon themselves to look at the larger picture, beyond religion, politics, and other social issues, to see the human race in the context of a colossal universe in which we are nothing but an infinitesimal speck, struggling to beat the cosmic odds.
So maybe it’s time to heed their advice.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/26 16:12:08
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
2017/01/25 10:29:00
Subject: Re:ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
I really wish people would stop talking about the ridiculous "backup plan for the species" idea.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2017/01/25 10:37:15
Subject: Re:ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Work on a 'village' in an environment like the Moon can be adapted for use elsewhere, so is hardly wasted resources.
The ISS is prone to so many problems, having a dispersed base is much better.
Having some gravity must make a lot of things about the ISS much easier, and there is less need for as exercise and muscle training.
If Humanity needs a backup, how do you ensure the viability of that backup?
Consider the following:
Massive asteroid: Debris from the Earth might be flung into space, hitting the moon.
Zombie outbreak/widespread infection: Escapees hoping to get to the moon get infected, and quarantine procedures take time to set up.
World War: Some weapons may be capable of affecting the moon, or the launch facilities get taken over and bombs get sent up.
Skinnereal wrote: Work on a 'village' in an environment like the Moon can be adapted for use elsewhere, so is hardly wasted resources.
The ISS is prone to so many problems, having a dispersed base is much better.
Having some gravity must make a lot of things about the ISS much easier, and there is less need for as exercise and muscle training.
If Humanity needs a backup, how do you ensure the viability of that backup?
Consider the following:
Massive asteroid: Debris from the Earth might be flung into space, hitting the moon.
Zombie outbreak/widespread infection: Escapees hoping to get to the moon get infected, and quarantine procedures take time to set up.
World War: Some weapons may be capable of affecting the moon, or the launch facilities get taken over and bombs get sent up.
Re: Viability:
1) an asteroid of that mass would be pretty unlikely. So unlikely that its pretty much irrelevant (plus, because the moon is tidally locked, you could just build the base on the side of the moon that doesnt face earth.)
2) even if a pandemic of that scale was to happen, it seems extremely unlikely that anyone would be able to just hop onto a rocket and fly to the moon. Youd need the necessary training, equipment, resources... plus, youd probably be absolutely fine on a remote island or something. Way too many things that can go wrong with a rocket.
3) the most likely scenario out of the three, though it still seems pretty out there. A moon settlement with no strategic value would be one of the last areas to attack. Especially if its made up of multiple nations. Still, most likely option.
As to actual, real issues it might face:
1) low gravity and radiation might lead to unknown health problems in the long term. Especially if these people wanted to go back to earth, or settle on a different planet.
2) getting enough volunteers
3) getting enough genetic diversity for the settlement to stay viable in the long term.
4) cost
5) political issues ("why waste money up there if we can use it down here")
etc.
2017/01/25 19:40:54
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Honestly, the largest problem with using the moon for a backup is that it can't possibly be self-sufficient. About the only use for it is a staging point for future space exploration and colonization, as well as a giant lump of fusion fuel thanks to its large He3 deposits (which is about the only resource the moon has).
If you want to use colonization as a backup for humanity, you need to look at Mars and Venus, and that requires a fair amount of terraforming (less, ironically, for Venus). Still worth it, but a bit further out.
2017/01/25 22:46:19
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Laughing Man wrote: Honestly, the largest problem with using the moon for a backup is that it can't possibly be self-sufficient. About the only use for it is a staging point for future space exploration and colonization, as well as a giant lump of fusion fuel thanks to its large He3 deposits (which is about the only resource the moon has).
If you want to use colonization as a backup for humanity, you need to look at Mars and Venus, and that requires a fair amount of terraforming (less, ironically, for Venus). Still worth it, but a bit further out.
Venus is never going to be habitable. There is no technology that will survive the combination of extremely high pressure (92 atmospheres aka 900m underwater), extremely high temperatures (~460-500 degrees celsius which is hotter than Mercury's sun facing hemisphere) and clouds of acid.
The last thing to land on Venus was the Venera 14 probe in 1981. It survived for 57 minutes.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/01/25 22:55:35
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2017/01/25 23:54:43
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Laughing Man wrote: Honestly, the largest problem with using the moon for a backup is that it can't possibly be self-sufficient. About the only use for it is a staging point for future space exploration and colonization, as well as a giant lump of fusion fuel thanks to its large He3 deposits (which is about the only resource the moon has).
If you want to use colonization as a backup for humanity, you need to look at Mars and Venus, and that requires a fair amount of terraforming (less, ironically, for Venus). Still worth it, but a bit further out.
Venus is never going to be habitable. There is no technology that will survive the combination of extremely high pressure (92 atmospheres aka 900m underwater), extremely high temperatures (~460-500 degrees celsius which is hotter than Mercury's sun facing hemisphere) and clouds of acid.
The last thing to land on Venus was the Venera 14 probe in 1981. It survived for 57 minutes.
Need to create bacteria that thrive in that environment that bind the bind the gasses that create the greenhouse effects on Venus. I would be more logical to build an underground base on the moon IMHO.
A Town Called Malus wrote: Venus is never going to be habitable. There is no technology that will survive the combination of extremely high pressure (92 atmospheres aka 900m underwater), extremely high temperatures (~460-500 degrees celsius which is hotter than Mercury's sun facing hemisphere) and clouds of acid.
The last thing to land on Venus was the Venera 14 probe in 1981. It survived for 57 minutes.
No technology now. I'm sure people 400 years ago would have said "there's no technology to go to the moon".
2024 painted/bought: 109/109
2017/01/26 12:35:11
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Laughing Man wrote: Honestly, the largest problem with using the moon for a backup is that it can't possibly be self-sufficient. About the only use for it is a staging point for future space exploration and colonization, as well as a giant lump of fusion fuel thanks to its large He3 deposits (which is about the only resource the moon has).
If you want to use colonization as a backup for humanity, you need to look at Mars and Venus, and that requires a fair amount of terraforming (less, ironically, for Venus). Still worth it, but a bit further out.
Venus is never going to be habitable. There is no technology that will survive the combination of extremely high pressure (92 atmospheres aka 900m underwater), extremely high temperatures (~460-500 degrees celsius which is hotter than Mercury's sun facing hemisphere) and clouds of acid.
The last thing to land on Venus was the Venera 14 probe in 1981. It survived for 57 minutes.
Actually some people have come up with the idea of building large floating buildings in the atmosphere of Venus. You'd be at a relatively normal pressure and you'd be above the poisonous clouds. Theoretically, you'd only need oxygen to survive the outside.
DS:90-S+G+++M++B-IPw40k03+D+A++/fWD-R++T(T)DM+ Warmachine MKIII record 39W/0D/6L
2017/01/26 13:00:08
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Laughing Man wrote: Honestly, the largest problem with using the moon for a backup is that it can't possibly be self-sufficient. About the only use for it is a staging point for future space exploration and colonization, as well as a giant lump of fusion fuel thanks to its large He3 deposits (which is about the only resource the moon has).
If you want to use colonization as a backup for humanity, you need to look at Mars and Venus, and that requires a fair amount of terraforming (less, ironically, for Venus). Still worth it, but a bit further out.
Venus is never going to be habitable. There is no technology that will survive the combination of extremely high pressure (92 atmospheres aka 900m underwater), extremely high temperatures (~460-500 degrees celsius which is hotter than Mercury's sun facing hemisphere) and clouds of acid.
The last thing to land on Venus was the Venera 14 probe in 1981. It survived for 57 minutes.
Actually some people have come up with the idea of building large floating buildings in the atmosphere of Venus. You'd be at a relatively normal pressure and you'd be above the poisonous clouds. Theoretically, you'd only need oxygen to survive the outside.
Which involves getting these things to Venus. Also, all the clouds on Venus are poisonous, its atmosphere is 96.5% CO2 and the rest is pretty much all Nitrogen. How do we make them float? What happens when something goes wrong with the floatation devices? How do you grow food whilst floating with no access to water production (no atmospheric Hydrogen to use as Venus has no magnetic field and therefore the Hydrogen was stripped away by the solar wind)?
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2017/01/26 15:12:54
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2017/01/26 17:08:32
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Need to create bacteria that thrive in that environment that bind the bind the gasses that create the greenhouse effects on Venus.
Literally nothing will survive at that temperature, biology as we know it will simply not function.
Indeed, and Venus' lack of a magnetic field means that it has no defence against stripping of its atmosphere by the solar wind. So trying to free up the oxygen from the CO2 (and then somehow keep it from recombining with the carbon) will not do any good either, as the Oxygen will naturally rise above the remaining CO2 and be stripped away by the solar wind.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/26 17:27:49
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2017/01/27 19:07:10
Subject: ESA’s Plan for a “Moon Village” is Slowly Starting to Come Together
Laughing Man wrote: Honestly, the largest problem with using the moon for a backup is that it can't possibly be self-sufficient. About the only use for it is a staging point for future space exploration and colonization, as well as a giant lump of fusion fuel thanks to its large He3 deposits (which is about the only resource the moon has).
If you want to use colonization as a backup for humanity, you need to look at Mars and Venus, and that requires a fair amount of terraforming (less, ironically, for Venus). Still worth it, but a bit further out.
Venus is never going to be habitable. There is no technology that will survive the combination of extremely high pressure (92 atmospheres aka 900m underwater), extremely high temperatures (~460-500 degrees celsius which is hotter than Mercury's sun facing hemisphere) and clouds of acid.
The last thing to land on Venus was the Venera 14 probe in 1981. It survived for 57 minutes.
Actually some people have come up with the idea of building large floating buildings in the atmosphere of Venus. You'd be at a relatively normal pressure and you'd be above the poisonous clouds. Theoretically, you'd only need oxygen to survive the outside.
Which involves getting these things to Venus. Also, all the clouds on Venus are poisonous, its atmosphere is 96.5% CO2 and the rest is pretty much all Nitrogen. How do we make them float? What happens when something goes wrong with the floatation devices? How do you grow food whilst floating with no access to water production (no atmospheric Hydrogen to use as Venus has no magnetic field and therefore the Hydrogen was stripped away by the solar wind)?
If the flotation device is punctured, you've got bigger problems as you've just lost your atmosphere: Breathable air is a lifting gas on Venus.
As for water, it's possible to extract it from the sulfuric acid that makes up Venus' clouds. At the level an aerostat habitat would float at, the pressure is managable and temperatures don't get above 50 degrees. and cosmic radiation isn't an issue thanks to the atmosphere above you. Mars, on the other hand, has the problem of a low pressure atmosphere and not much protection from cosmic radiation. On Venus, all you need to worry about is carrying air with you and wearing your acid-proof raincoat.
6000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 
4000 pts - 
1000 pts - 
1000 pts 
