Domestic vs Industrial

Martian Republic · 2004-07-15 20:44:43

Agriculture society would be best on mars, it is also the best way to advoid all the problems of big citys.

You also have to have an industrial base or otherwise you won't have an economic system or much of a biological system either. To have either or both economic and biological system, your going to have to have city to get the population density with labor force to run those system.

So the question not, are we going to have city, but what kind of cities are we going to have.

So we want to build city that are uplifting the human spirit and are a pleasure to live in. City designed around geometric shape and designs and are by themselves, mentally stimulation to be in. Design them with parks, museum, classical music and those kinds of things. In other words, design city to live in instead of just being some place to stay, because you have nowhere else to go.

Larry,

EarthWolf · 2004-07-22 09:27:10

Hello,

Well, if anyone doesn't mind, I'd like to put my two cents into the pot. I've studied the history of the European colonial/imperial period. I've seen in these years that the driving force behind European colonialism was primarily economic. I feel that the only way a Mars colony would be started, remember that funding/backing is the key, is if there is a substantial economic benefit to the colonial venture.

That's one reason why we don't have orbital factories and Moon bases right now. Too much cost and not enough profit to justify the investment. As for the economic basis for a Mars colony, I'd say that the colony would need to establish an industrial infrastructure to maintain it's own needs and possibly compete with Earth in the interplanetary market. Especially if the colonists intend to gain their political/economic, as well as, practical independence from Earth governments.

I'm not a pro-industrial person. I'm probably what you might call an environmentalist and humanist. So I don't advocate a wholesale industrialization at the cost of humanity and the environment. I just try to think and weigh the options with a balanced, common sense approach.

Cordially,

EarthWolf

Morris · 2004-07-23 22:29:33

How does a wily monkey get another wily monkey to trade his banana for a useless rock?
He polishes it and calls it a "diamond".

Mars is red with auburn dew,
Another planet for the few
who dare, who dream, who do declare
that this world is ever fair,
and lovely to behold;
give us the vacuum, the frozen cold,
for dull as this land may seem,
for us, this jewel does ever gleem.

Diamond <chuckle>

Nice poem. Yours?

Morris · 2004-07-23 23:07:08

Well, if anyone doesn't mind, I'd like to put my two cents into the pot. I've studied the history of the European colonial/imperial period. I've seen in these years that the driving force behind European colonialism was primarily economic. I feel that the only way a Mars colony would be started, remember that funding/backing is the key, is if there is a substantial economic benefit to the colonial venture.
That's one reason why we don't have orbital factories and Moon bases right now. Too much cost and not enough profit to justify the investment. As for the economic basis for a Mars colony, I'd say that the colony would need to establish an industrial infrastructure to maintain it's own needs and possibly compete with Earth in the interplanetary market. Especially if the colonists intend to gain their political/economic, as well as, practical independence from Earth governments.

Yes. The profit needs to be there one way or another. Is there any science to be done on Mars which would justify, not just a mission, but a settlement? And the only other alternative would appear to be a military need. And why would there be a military need to have a settlement on Mars?

Perhaps the primary value for a Martian settlement would be validation of concept. The large number of technical problems to be solved would likely lead to useful spinoffs and the mere continued existence and growth, though slow, of the colony would be a shining beacon for the future. Once there and functioning for its own sake, research could then be done which would be seen as too expensive to set up entirely for the results to be obtained.

I'm not a pro-industrial person. I'm probably what you might call an environmentalist and humanist. So I don't advocate a wholesale industrialization at the cost of humanity and the environment. I just try to think and weigh the options with a balanced, common sense approach.

That's one of the nice things about an opportunity to start over. In some cases environmental damage occurs as an unforeseen side effect of the scale that production eventually attains. Not only will Martian settlers start ahead of the game both in terms of vision and technology, but the lack of high profit back on Earth will reduce the temptation to let the environment go for the sake of profit. And the settlers would have no such interest! What an opportunity to achieve the balance you refer to!

Besides, though it's difficult to predict the twists and turns of technology development, it seems likely that the primary products of Martian settlement for many years will be information. Just as a way-out guess, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the initial valuable advances would be in biotechnology.

This indicates why it will be so important to have various legal and economic matters, especially property rights, worked out before settlement begins. We need to make sure that most of the profits go back to the settlers.

Blessings!

clark · 2004-07-24 23:17:40

Nice poem. Yours?

Thank you. Yes.

I have others.

RobertDyck · 2004-07-25 00:37:40

Frankly, I think you could find at least one million people on Earth right now who'd go live on Mars as it is.

That sounds good. Now how do I get initial funding to establish the Martian colonization spaceline? Let's see, 100 person initial ship, followed by 1000 passengers per ship after demand is established and initial profits can pay for the bigger ship. I was thinking of asteroid mining to build initial funding to construct the smaller colonization ship, and to establish a propellant supply.

John Lewis speculated that some C-type asteroids in near Earth orbit are actually dead comets; ice cores with surface ice long since boiled off leaving a few feet of loose dry material. If there is a dead commet relatively close to Earth it could be mined for ice. Ice can be made into rocket fuel. Just stick a pipe into the ice and heat the bottom, it'll melt the ice so the water can be sucked up like oil from an oil well. In vacuum, water will boil into steam. If sufficient pressure builds it'll let water remain liquid. Either way, you get pressurized steam up the pipe so you don't need a pump.

Mining and homesteading are complementary, not competing. Ok, part of me is a businessman and I like the sound of untapped customers waiting to pay for a service.

Morris · 2004-07-25 10:53:45

Nice poem. Yours?
Thank you. Yes.
I have others.

Hmmm. Is anybody working on collections of Mars-related art, poetry, etc.? If so, where are they located?

clark · 2004-07-25 11:48:58

poetry is usually found in this thread:

http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic … ...13;t=66

there are some various threads that link to pictures of Mars

Morris · 2004-07-25 11:58:22

poetry is usually found in this thread:
http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic … ...13;t=66
there are some various threads that link to pictures of Mars

Thanks.

prometheusunbound · 2004-08-14 20:20:07

Well, if anyone doesn't mind, I'd like to put my two cents into the pot. I've studied the history of the European colonial/imperial period. I've seen in these years that the driving force behind European colonialism was primarily economic. I feel that the only way a Mars colony would be started, remember that funding/backing is the key, is if there is a substantial economic benefit to the colonial venture.

It aint sexy, but I think machine tooling might be something the colonials could make. Small, exteremly valuable bits that last for months instead of shifts would catch an incredible premuim on earth. And the miners would need gravity eventually. And Mars is much easier to escape from than earth.

Morris · 2004-08-14 22:27:11

It aint sexy, but I think machine tooling might be something the colonials could make. Small, exteremly valuable bits that last for months instead of shifts would catch an incredible premuim on earth.

And what about Mars would allow you to make them last longer or produce them less expensively than if they were made on Earth?

prometheusunbound · 2004-08-16 17:55:43

And what about Mars would allow you to make them last longer or produce them less expensively than if they were made on Earth?

The lack of gravity means more exotic alloys can be created, more perfect crystals can be grown. This means harder, longer lasting tools can be made. Not to mention mining would be a whole lot easier with that much less gravity.

If it was done in orbit, the near total lack of gravity would be even better when considering the relative hardness of the tools. Getting the materials off mars would be a whole lot cheaper than getting them off earth. Asteroids would be cheapest in material transportation, but the total lack of enviromental support would probably counterbalance that.

srmeaney · 2005-03-24 23:50:36

Considering a mine and underground city will be critical to the terraforming of Mars, there isn't much choice.

spaceman9000 · 2005-10-15 06:48:43

I personally think that the first few cities would be built in a Mars-Direct fashion with rocket sections, however I do have sketches for rockets of my own design, perhaps the first city would be similar to the early plantation cities of the Americas. I see that industry and commerce(profit-seeking capitalism) will be the 2 biggest factors in the settlement of the Red Planet. I see the order as follows
I) Mars-Direct style science bases
II) setup of automated construction robots, and materials lab to manufacture brick, glass, grind rocks for mortar, and get water from the polar ice caps or underwater source
III) robotic construction of semi-underground houses and buildings with Martian brick, mortar, and glass
IV) robotic mining bases set up to refine silicon, aluminium, iron, copper, and other resources necessary for colonization
V) once the city is completely built and the mining base ready, the permanent human population will come on privately-funded rockets
VI) various city-states (maybe with different governments and religion) will develop according to desire and reason
These city-states may indeed be the scientific, spiritual, economic, or industrial capitals of human civilization, but time will tell.

SpaceBull · 2005-10-15 10:21:44

It would be great if something valuable enough for exportation was discovered on Mars, because this would mean that the private sector would gladly put huge amounts of money on the table to develop the technologies necessary for colonization.

However, one aspect about mining and exploitation worries me, and that is how robots could easily make humans in space superfluous. Robots on our own moon can for instance be run directly by remote control from earth, and I don't really see any reason to have people there at all if you want is to extract minerals. Robots are getting better every year, and they will soon be capable of performing all the same tasks as humans.

I would therefore like to have a combination of both mining/exploitation and people wanting to go there for other reasons. The profit motive was an important incentive in the colonization of the Americas, and similar incentives would also work on Mars.

spaceman9000 · 2005-10-15 15:15:31

SpaceBull, I understand your concern of remote control and the robotic setup on Mars. But I say we should develop an AI for these robots. And as for the cash crop, how does rocket fuel sound? The ISPP plants discussed in The Case for Mars could be a common 'plantation' concept for the Red Planet. We take the CO2 out of the atmosphere (and together with imported H), transform it into CH4(methane) and O(Oxygen). The methane is your fuel and you can burn the oxygen, or for life support.
Another idea for a cash crop, once camp is set up, is the mass immigration of peoples into the New World, or tourism, or industrial goods once a factory exists. The list goes on and on, I cant even list all the options. But, I think Mars's real cash crop down the road will be its vicinity near the asteroids, which I think will really start up our new, premanent space age. But, as I try to stress, it all starts with the courage of some crazy pioneer and his/her investor.

Grypd · 2005-10-15 15:51:21

Im what could be best called an advocate for the use of robotics on these forums. But the one thing a robot will not do is replace Humanity. Robots have one purpose to either go where it is unsafe to risk people. Help mankind to work in harsh enviroments and to build things so that we can move in and thrive.

There has always been more than profit motive that drives people to migrate. An example is that increased population in one land has lead to movement of those who would not inherit land to other lands. The Vikings,Scots,Irish are examples. population pressure is not there to result in this but there is one other pressure. An unwillingness to conform. South Africa was colonised by Hugenots(french protestants) the USA by various ethnic groups, Europe by jews dispossesed by the diaspora.

Martian colonisation will get people never doubt it some looking to make a new world some just for the peace from a war ridden world and some for the money they think they can make. In the end they will come.

spaceman9000 · 2005-10-20 15:38:43

There has always been more than profit motive that drives people to migrate.

I dont think that the profit-making motive is the ONLY reason for colonization. I absloutely agree with you that population is the THE biggest factor for any real frontier. I mean, why else would China have a one-child policy and the American abortion rights/Planned Parenthood movements have started except for the fear of population growth and massive starvation of land and resources. It all starts with exporting our extra people and industries to Mars.

one thing a robot will not do is replace Humanity. Robots have one purpose to either go where it is unsafe to risk people. Help mankind to work in harsh enviroments and to build things so that we can move in and thrive

I agree, but I wasnt proposing that AI replace humanity, but help us. Let me explain, like you said, the AI should take care of the 'hard' labor: manufacturing, construction, etc. I say that the humans would be in those plants/constuction sites as management and programming staff. They would also theoretically have more free time to spend on the sciences and the liberal arts. It would be sort of like the Greek paradise of Eudimonia, except their would be a lot more computers and man/machine interaction.

Gregori · 2008-03-12 07:21:50

I don't think we can avoid how industrialised any future settlement of Mars will be. Only high technology could make living on such a barren hostile world possible. The lives we live today would not be possible without a highly indusrialised society.

So, It will be a huge part of it. Colonizing space will be like the next industrial revolution. It will require massive new machines and technology to take advantage of resources in space.

I don't know if its being planned, but someone has to figure out how you make a huge factory/refinery in space. It will be too expensive to import alot of the materials in space. Advance inrobotic will probably help.

I'm hoping that the advances in technology will also make Mars a nice planet to live on with greenery, fresh air etc etc

Martian Republic · 2008-03-12 23:56:20

I don't think we can avoid how industrialised any future settlement of Mars will be. Only high technology could make living on such a barren hostile world possible. The lives we live today would not be possible without a highly indusrialised society.
So, It will be a huge part of it. Colonizing space will be like the next industrial revolution. It will require massive new machines and technology to take advantage of resources in space.
I don't know if its being planned, but someone has to figure out how you make a huge factory/refinery in space. It will be too expensive to import alot of the materials in space. Advance inrobotic will probably help.
I'm hoping that the advances in technology will also make Mars a nice planet to live on with greenery, fresh air etc etc

The best place to start the industrializing of space would be to start on the Moon setting up mining and manufacturing facilities there. We would also want to build a lunar base too. As the first initial break out into an industrialized space factories and colonization program. We may have small space station, but we would have to send up too much of the supplies from the Earth to set them up and resupply them if we where to go for space station only. Later on, we could add mining near asteroid mining to our list of resources for our factories. We the current technology at our disposal that is about all that we could do right now. For the next ten to twenty years, this should be our primary target for getting into space.

We then should have a second twenty to thirty years after the first ten to twenty where we intend to colonize Mars and develop the technologies to run the new manufacturing technics that we need to run those factories. New technologies, like laser welders to replace those old electric or gas welders and new technologies like that. We will also need to develop new shuttle for the Earth, Moon and Mars and new deep space space ship that can travel to Mars from Earth in a few days or so and back to Earth in a few days. We need large ore caring mining ship with space foundries etc. Since most of this technologies don't currently exist, that means we will have to spend the next ten to twenty years developing those technologies to accomplish this mission if we wanted to actually do it. To run a manufacturing economy that could build the required equipment to replicate itself so that we wouldn't have to bring stuff from Earth anymore or at least a decreasing amount of stuff coming from Earth, would require to keep it running or to build it bigger in size. You would have to have hundreds of nuclear powered ship, deep space space ship for both passengers and cargo ships, you would have to have mining colonies on asteroids, the moon, Mars.

To put something this big together, it would take forty to sixty years to do it. It would not be cost effective for the private sector to do it, so it would have to be a government project with private business participation in it. It would have to be setup around a government national mission of setting tax plan, creating cheap long term loans to private business with government build infrastructure projects. We would probably also have to have agreements with other nations too to proceed with such a project.

Larry,

Antius · 2017-10-10 06:22:28

Wow! This thread is screwed up!

SpaceNut · 2017-10-10 22:14:09

Sorry about that Antius but that poster is now gone and the topic artifacts and shifting has been repaired.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-04-23 06:36:25

Can Bitcoin "Fix" El Salvador's Economy? By Frank Muci
https://frankmuci.substack.com/p/can-bi … rs-economy

Market Societies vs. Societies with Markets
https://joewrote.substack.com/p/market- … eties-with

Mars shows man the final frontier of circular economy
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-spac … SKBN1WW2IF

SpaceNut · 2022-04-23 07:52:55

yes currency that is accepted for use but do you go with a shovel or a backhoe is the difference in moving materials....

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2004-07-15 20:44:43

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#27 2004-07-22 09:27:10

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#28 2004-07-23 22:29:33

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#29 2004-07-23 23:07:08

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#30 2004-07-24 23:17:40

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#31 2004-07-25 00:37:40

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#32 2004-07-25 10:53:45

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#33 2004-07-25 11:48:58

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#34 2004-07-25 11:58:22

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#35 2004-08-14 20:20:07

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#36 2004-08-14 22:27:11

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#37 2004-08-16 17:55:43

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#38 2005-03-24 23:50:36

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#39 2005-10-15 06:48:43

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#40 2005-10-15 10:21:44

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#41 2005-10-15 15:15:31

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#42 2005-10-15 15:51:21

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#43 2005-10-20 15:38:43

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#44 2008-03-12 07:21:50

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#45 2008-03-12 23:56:20

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#46 2017-10-10 06:22:28

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#47 2017-10-10 22:14:09

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#48 2022-04-23 06:36:25

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

#49 2022-04-23 07:52:55

Re: Domestic vs Industrial

Board footer