Colonization; - Who will be first?

BWhite · 2005-02-23 08:51:36

http://space.com/businesstechnology/tec … .html]This article summarizes what my intuition has been telling me for years.

Technologies are converging and the cost and risk associated with actual settlement, out there, will continue to fall, perhaps rapidly with breakthroughs in materials science. Abdundant Mars water means imports to Mars for life support can be kept at a minimum.

If there is super abundant Mars water, it can be exported to L1 to support the mining of lunar platinum and lunar tourism in the event wringing water from the lunar regolith proves too difficult.

How to ship Mars water to L1? My thought is to simply re-use RL-10 engines or RL-60 engines scavenged from supply missions sending materials to Mars. Mars volatiles are worth no less than $3000 per pound FOB at L1.

If you re-use the engines and tanks that deliver supplies to Mars (refurbished with settlement labor and fueled with Marsian LOX & methane/LH2) then the net "cost" to the Terran management is zero. Every penny of the $3000 per pound paid for Mars volatiles shipped to L1 remains out in space rather than returned to Earth.

Bottom line - - I predict we will see a "Dutch auction" situation develop.

Whichever subset of humanity grabs for the brass ring first (and best) and sets up a permanent settlement, well tat subset of humnaity will exert a disproportionate influence over the coming centuries of human development.

As that Confederate general said, "Get there firstest with the mostest" - - that will win the settlememt races of the 21st centiury.

= = =

If GCNRevenger gets his honest to God RLV and Earth to LEO falls well below $500 per pound, humanity explodes out into space either way.

But - if someone had the foresight to build a Mars city one decade before honest-to-God RLVs come on line - - - are those HtG RLVs? - - those investors will make out like bandits. It would be like buying land BEFORE the interstate highway came through.

Dutch auction and bullish on space development. Rah! Team!

Edited By BWhite on 1109170444

BWhite · 2005-02-23 09:02:37

This, I disagree with as a necessary precondition:

First, McCullough explained, is that advanced lunar infrastructure will provide semi-finished modules and other lunar materials for integrating and expanding space systems. Secondly, large vehicles can be fabricated in space using mostly automated methods. These great vessels could shuttle between planetary LaGrange points far from Earth. Lastly, large passenger-carrying vehicles will need to haul a massive "water radiation shelter" to protect occupants on outward bound flights.

Like with honest-to-God RLVs =IF= some fringe group sees the handwriting on the wall and realizes that RLVs are coming soon and lunar infrastructure will be built, then to dash for Mars and build your city first has very real competitive advantages.

Even if you have to rough it to get there.

That Boeing guy may be a terrific engineer but he hasn't read enough history. :;):

= = =

Let the other guy pay to build out the cislunar infrastruture while YOU focus on grabbing the prime Mars settlement land.

Edited By BWhite on 1109171093

GCNRevenger · 2005-02-23 09:28:54

Chicken and egg Bill, chicken and egg...

No RLV, no city

Cobra Commander · 2005-02-23 09:40:01

I too have thought along essentially these lines, we can almost do it right now if the colonists were hardy folk willing to deal with the difficulties. The bulk of the crew doesn't even have to be as "technical" as is often envisioned, just capable of operating, maintaining and fixing the equipment they bring. You don't need a PhD in nuclear engineering to operate a reactor. Further, rapidly advancing technologies hold the potential to vastly simplify the manufacturing process. When you can "print" tools and parts it gets much easier.

Rather than training geologists to be construction workers, train construction workers to work in pressure suits. That's what colonization will entail, for every specialized scientist or engineer you'll need to have numerous mechanics, plumbers, construction workers and so on. Even on Mars, someone has to fix the toilet.

Unfortunately the funding obstacle stands. No bucks, no Buck Rogers as they say. It will take many billions for even a beachhead mission with colonists prepared for the austere lifestyle.

Bill has some interesting ideas on the financing aspect, worthy of further examination if a totally privatized mission is the objective. My own take would require a government with greater vision and a penchant for nefarious scheming at the expense of other interests. Most likely a bit of both will be needed.

But it would sure be something to be standing on Mars when that first big-budget colony ship arrives, waving smugly.

Edited By Cobra Commander on 1109173276

BWhite · 2005-02-23 09:41:33

Chicken and egg Bill, chicken and egg...
No RLV, no city

Ah, but if you had inside information that the RLV was almost done, take the leap.

BWhite · 2005-02-23 09:47:21

Bill has some interesting ideas on the financing aspect, worthy of further examination if a totally privatized mission is the objective. My own take would require a government with greater vision and a penchant for nefarious scheming at the expense of other interests. Most likely a bit of both will be needed.
But it would sure be something to be standing on Mars when that first big-budget colony ship arrives, waving smugly.

The ironic bit about this issue is that this lily livered liberal, Bill White, zooms to a point far more libertarian than many of those who believe they are further "right" than he.

= = =

You don't need a PhD in nuclear engineering to operate a reactor.

A retired Navy officer, who has spent his whole life running one of Admiral Rickover's tea kettles would seem perfect for this job.

Edited By BWhite on 1109174366

Cobra Commander · 2005-02-23 10:00:32

Realizing that Leftism actually stifles progress, are we?

It's a quagmire! :laugh:

Libertarians to Mars, otherwise... why go?

BWhite · 2005-02-23 10:15:43

I have always been a Third Way guy. Hernando de Soto and Amartya Sen and so on. Watching the establishment of a global oligarchy of mega-corporations hardly strike me as a libertarian utopia. :;): President Kerry would merely have been a finger in the dike against the onslaught of corporate oligarchy.

Anyway - - the nation-state is NOT well suited to accomplish space settlement. The first thing any self respecting space colony will do is revolt.

Edited By BWhite on 1109175384

Cobra Commander · 2005-02-23 10:22:28

Anyway - - the nation-state is NOT well suited to accomplish space settlement. The first thing any self respecting space colony will do is revolt.

Unless given sufficient slack on the leash. If handled right, a nationally sponsored but nominally independent colony could bring great benefits. Essentially treat them as independent and trade with them for goods and services, work out arrangements. No need to be too overt about matters of who is really in charge. The wiggle-room it allows for with regards to treaties could be quite valuable on its own.

BWhite · 2005-02-23 10:38:53

Anyway - - the nation-state is NOT well suited to accomplish space settlement. The first thing any self respecting space colony will do is revolt.
Unless given sufficient slack on the leash. If handled right, a nationally sponsored but nominally independent colony could bring great benefits. Essentially treat them as independent and trade with them for goods and services, work out arrangements. No need to be too overt about matters of who is really in charge. The wiggle-room it allows for with regards to treaties could be quite valuable on its own.

A private group that treated the various world governments as factors to be manipulated rather than the protagonist or entity that leads the way could do well.

Because I agree, access to heavy lift (or RLVs) and nuclear power is essential and both technologies are coveted by plenty of rogue nations.

Today, ANY settlement effort will need at least the tacit consent of Uncle Sam. Imagine Tom Ridge's reaction to a group of libertarian nut-jobs asking for 144 pounds of plutonium to fuel a pair of Mars reactors?

(I recall a Calvin & Hobbes cartoon - - "Mom, can I buy a flamethrower?" )

= = =

Slack on the leash? That requires a philosopher king, a leader who has the ability to engage in genuine introspection. :;):

Edited By BWhite on 1109176887

Commodore · 2005-02-23 11:06:19

What proper colonization requires is a goverment representing mankind, or at least one representing the home countries of those going beyond.

A United States of Earth if you will, modeled on the US and EU consitutions, that recognises the colonies as a "nation" that has all rights of all the other nations, in it.

clark · 2005-02-23 11:12:30

Old Martian saying, "Politicans worry about the words on paper, Martians worry about the dust in the hab."

Cobra Commander · 2005-02-23 11:18:26

A private group that treated the various world governments as factors to be manipulated rather than the protagonist or entity that leads the way could do well.

I would think any private entity with a serious chance of getting a Mars mission off the ground would take that perspective out of necessity.

Which in turn can allow a state to manipulate them if done skillfully. Let 'em think they're really pulling one over you while they do exactly what you want with minimal expense to you.
:;):

Slack on the leash? That requires a philosopher king, a leader who has the ability to engage in genuine introspection.

Unfortunately such people don't win elections. Alas, we're screwed.

Back to tricking the powers that be and perhaps playing kingmaker from time to time. Now where to get that seed money and dirt on government officials? :hm:

Through Deceit to Mars!

Commodore · 2005-02-23 11:18:56

Old Martian saying, "Politicans worry about the words on paper, Martians worry about the dust in the hab."

Well, I don't think its that old. :;):

clark · 2005-02-23 11:24:02

Would you prefer one older?

"Terrans see a world they want, Martians make the world they have." :;):

SpaceNut · 2005-02-23 11:29:27

To have a mars revolotion only takes the first one to go to say no. What is anyone going to do about it. ???

On the notion of using the cargo landers bringing supplies to any mars or for that fact moon base IMO its a great idea to reuse, I like it.
It sure does save on cost of sending other vehicles if one can make one out of the spare parts from them. In fact with a new launch pad assembly crane one could then make multi stage rockets from them for other uses.

RobS · 2005-02-23 11:43:42

I doubt Martian water will be used extensively as fuel beyond Mars orbit because of the cost of launching it. It will be much easier to build a reusable shuttle for Martian surface to orbit flights, compared to Earth to LEO flights; the delta v is forty percent as much and the reentry temperatures are much lower. But for a long time Martian surface to orbit will be more expensive than Earth's surface to orbit, because Mars will be too small to maintain and repair the vehicles; they will be flown back to Earth, Earth orbit, or the moon for repair every few years. Furthermore, the volume of mass lifted to orbit from the Earth will be more for a long time, driving down costs.

Furthermore, Phobos and Deimos are almost certainly made of carbonaceous chondrite, which is 5-10% water. Both moons are a delta-v of about 1 kilometer per second from the Earth, which is a quarter the delta-v from the Martian surface and less than half the delta-v from the moon. Both moons have negligible gravity, also, meaning that ion engines or solar sailing vessels could perform 99% of the delta-v. Water ice could be trundled from either moon to L1 or low Earth orbit slowly, over two years or more. If the infrastructure on the moons got big enough because of the demand (and Martian demand would be built in), the water could become dirt cheap (less than $100 per kilo, maybe). It could even be cheaper than water from asteroids, because even though the delta-v is higher, the Mars orbital market and the presence of a Mars colony would lower many costs (staffing on the moons could be kept to a minimum, people could telecommute from the Martian surface, emergency equipment and supplies could be sent up quickly, etc).

Once Phobos and/or Deimos get set up to produce water, other products could follow in the subsequent decades. Greenhouses there could grow food for earth orbit and the lunar surface, and if it were set back to Earth frozen over two years, it'd be cheap as well. Plastics manufacturing could get set up there to use the carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen (and nitrogen hauled up from Mars) if the micro gravity (5/10,000 of Earth, I think) isn't a problem. Products requiring zero-g might be manufacturable there as well, or could be made in orbit around the moons, a half hour trip from the bases on the moons.

So I doubt Martian water will go much farther than low Mars orbit. Phobos and Deimos may be an early priority for a human visit and within a decade of human arrival on Mars, automated production of dmall amounts of methane, oxygen, and maybe hydrogen could be attempted on them.

-- RobS

John Creighton · 2005-02-23 11:48:39

Often in mars discussion forms there is talk about revolution like it is a forgone conclusion. Granted there are limits historically to the length of time a given government can control a territory of a given size and population. However, just because a group of people arrives there first and declares independence does not mean that they will form the next government. The native Americans arrived in North America first but they were not equipped in technology or numbers to deal with the flood of settlers coming from France, Spain and England. The US revolted but other nations in the empire didn’t such as Canada and Australia. I find the preoccupation with revolution a somewhat American centric view of history. A Mars colony founded by the states may or may not revolt but then again so may California.

GCNRevenger · 2005-02-23 12:14:28

Chicken and egg Bill, chicken and egg...
No RLV, no city
Ah, but if you had inside information that the RLV was almost done, take the leap.

A true RLV will take many years to build

A Mars mission perminant enough to make a valid land grab will take years to prepare

So, there ain't gonna be a "surprise Mars colony mission" just in time to beat the RLVs.
---
Sounds about right Rob, but I think that growing plants on Mars or in near-zero gravity will be so hard that Martians will be doing well just to feed themselves. The biggest problems are lack of nutrients and much, much less sunlight.

BWhite · 2005-02-23 12:14:44

I doubt Martian water will be used extensively as fuel beyond Mars orbit because of the cost of launching it.

The "cost" of launching gets added to the Marsian GDP if Mars workers are making Mars rocket fuel and refurbish scavenged RL-10 engines and fuel tanks used to send supplies to Mars.

If a Mars settlement needs cash in their Swiss bank account and Dennis Wingo's SkyCorp needs 30,000 pounds of methane at L1 to help fuel his lunar platinum mines and will pay $100 million for the methane and if the Mars settlement has some refurbished RL-10s sitting in a dome somewhere maybe a deal can be brokered.

Phobos or Deimos is "better" - - I agree - - but that does not mean a first Mars settlement cannot raise some ancillary cash by sending volatiles to L1.

Edited By BWhite on 1109182552

BWhite · 2005-02-23 12:19:06

Chicken and egg Bill, chicken and egg...
No RLV, no city
Ah, but if you had inside information that the RLV was almost done, take the leap.
A true RLV will take many years to build
A Mars mission perminant enough to make a valid land grab will take years to prepare
So, there ain't gonna be a "surprise Mars colony mission" just in time to beat the RLVs

If an H-t-G RLV can be done, then a first colony might be the impetus to finish it. Otherwise, who will pay to build this RLV? And why?

IIRC -- As of today, there is NO money on the table anywhere for building an RLV.

= = =

Sounds about right Rob, but I think that growing plants on Mars or in near-zero gravity will be so hard that Martians will be doing well just to feed themselves. The biggest problems are lack of nutrients and much, much less sunlight.

Ammonia. Mars needs ammonia and lots of nukes for grow light.

Edited By BWhite on 1109182973

BWhite · 2005-02-23 12:20:58

I find the preoccupation with revolution a somewhat American centric view of history. A Mars colony founded by the states may or may not revolt but then again so may California.

True, but isn't the American government the most likely current source of funding for a 1st settlement? Ameri-centric thinking may well be appropriate. :;):

Commodore · 2005-02-23 12:22:47

Why are we getting water from Mars when there is plenty of water rich astroids around that we only have to deliver once?

BWhite · 2005-02-23 12:24:55

Why are we getting water from Mars when there is plenty of water rich astroids around that we only have to deliver once?

That boils down to where do we go first.

Is it easier to send 30,000 pounds of methane with re-used RL-10s
refurbished by scientists in their "spare time" or move an asteroid?

Edited By BWhite on 1109183107

BWhite · 2005-02-23 12:33:20

What proper colonization requires is a goverment representing mankind, or at least one representing the home countries of those going beyond.
A United States of Earth if you will, modeled on the US and EU consitutions, that recognises the colonies as a "nation" that has all rights of all the other nations, in it.

http://en.rian.ru/rian/index.cfm?prd_id … ert=0]This article addresses this point.

"Today we have some new ideas concerning the prospects of Russian-U.S. cooperation in the research of the Moon and Mars, for instance, the development of energy resources of the Moon," Mr. Prikhodko said.
According to him, Vladimir Putin and George Bush are to discuss the issues of space cooperation, in particular, from the point of view of the expansion of the legal basis for the implementation of joint projects.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2005-02-23 08:51:36

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#2 2005-02-23 09:02:37

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#3 2005-02-23 09:28:54

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#4 2005-02-23 09:40:01

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#5 2005-02-23 09:41:33

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#6 2005-02-23 09:47:21

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#7 2005-02-23 10:00:32

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#8 2005-02-23 10:15:43

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#9 2005-02-23 10:22:28

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#10 2005-02-23 10:38:53

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#11 2005-02-23 11:06:19

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#12 2005-02-23 11:12:30

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#13 2005-02-23 11:18:26

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#14 2005-02-23 11:18:56

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#15 2005-02-23 11:24:02

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#16 2005-02-23 11:29:27

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#17 2005-02-23 11:43:42

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#18 2005-02-23 11:48:39

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#19 2005-02-23 12:14:28

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#20 2005-02-23 12:14:44

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#21 2005-02-23 12:19:06

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#22 2005-02-23 12:20:58

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#23 2005-02-23 12:22:47

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#24 2005-02-23 12:24:55

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

#25 2005-02-23 12:33:20

Re: Colonization; - Who will be first?

Board footer