You are not logged in.
http://www.paulbirch.net/TerraformingMarsQuickly.zip
Look at this. There is even financial analisis and estimation, confirming the strong logico-economical notion over necessity to terraform Mars in decades...Interesting and comprehencive stuff about -- soletas, annular mirrors, light filtering and refocusing the beam towards the planet`s rim, photosynthetical optimisation... the necesity for regolith evaporation for engassing the early athmosphere... (BTW, applicable on earth`s Moon, too, I think).
Here you can find an article also "Terraforming Venus Quickly"; "How to spin a planet?"; "How to move a planet?", and my favourite and most informing, widening the realm of terraformable worlds almost to infinity:
"SUPRAMUNDANE PLANETS" !!!
Please -- look at it, and also my post "Supramundane habitats+", and comment my generalisation scheme.
Offline
I know the paper well. I'm not entirely sure how realistic the proposal is, but on the surface it seems reasonable in a practical sense. It would be interesting to see some more work on that and similar proposals.
Though it would totally change the face of Mars, it's brute-force terraforming to the extreme.
What's most interesting is that if you convert the total cost estimate to dollars, adjust for inflation, then break down the annual US Federal budget and cut out funding for failed programs(dyas of debate, I'm sure), senseless agencies (there are a few) and general waste... the US government wastes enough money every year to make a planet!
If it is a workable plan however, I have doubts about its applicability to the Moon.
Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Offline
These papers attracted me really as very sober and reasonably sounding. I also wait to see further work on the subject.
===========================================
(..........Especially the feasibility of the DCM`s capable entirelly within the parameters of the existing materials and tech to hold terraformed shells over a planets with bigger than earth`s gravity. The possibility around (say) planetless star mined for materials to be biult a more than million layered suprastar "planet" with pleasantly optimal terraformed surface HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS times bigger than overal earth`s one, within the 12-hour access via ground car occasionaly point-to-point!!!................
This thing really dwarfs the Galaxy in terms of natural planets` living area supply compared with the sole star system!..................)
===========================================
Paul Birch I think only proves mathematicaly that the concept of really fast terraforming (decades) is plausible, achievable and even necesarry in economical terms. The terraforming at all entirelly depends on bussiness and culture. The bruteness of the soleta-burn volatilisation of Mars and digging the channels such way is matter of aesthetics. Such instant terraforming could be considered beautifull in it`s "simplicity". I personaly like it. But for other worlds. If mankind really decides that Mars is unique and very valuable natural park -- than NO terraforming, only tourists will roam the planet -- no one intends to landfill the Great canion, isn`t he? Slow + en situ resourses utilisation for teraforming also would spoil the park if considered as such.
About the state expendirures, it`s pity but the world economy works this way -- the government collects more than 50 % of the income, and feeds certain amount of sharks in the private sector...
Why the regolith evaporation technique is non-applicable on Moon?
I thought this way could be released O2 (+argon?) innitial atmosphere -- which after that to be used for aerobraking without loss of amonia/water/carbon/etc. meteors, + the craters/lowlands to be linked with channels in Burch`s martian manner, in order after importing water linked world ocean system to be formed -- the hydrological cycle if possible would augment the athmosphere ability to moderate the temperature differences between the nigh and day side...
It`s estimated that the amount of oxigen contained in a cube of lunar regolith with side of 20 to 50 km, or the regolith in depth of 8 metters (I`m not sure to member exactly the numbers) is enough?
Can`t the simple regolith evaporation under several thousand degrees release the oxigen? The metals should sink deeper and would not recombine?
Offline