Philosophy behind space settlements

On 1/31/14 12:46 AM, sraj wrote:

> One obvious problem with the first model is that, for it to be
> successful, at least in terms of trade in physical resources, there
> should be simple and cost effective methods of transport. There is no
> evidence that it will ever be possible to have this form of transport.

I'm not sure I accept either premise here:

1. Economies depend mainly on transport of physical goods -- but do
they? Huge sections of the economy today (including my own industry)
are based on software and other media.

2. Transport of physical goods between offworld colonies and Earth is
impractical -- but is it? Launch of goods from Earth is grotesquely
expensive now, but getting better. And we can envision technologies
(space elevator, launch loop, etc.) that would make it even easier. And
transport in the other direction is already reasonably cheap, and would
also get cheaper with scale.

> Taken to the extreme situation of a space ship speeding through the
> cosmos, this will be next to impossible. (I am afraid space based novels
> on this subject, have mislead space enthusiasts).

If by "through the cosmos" you mean interstellar travel, then I think
you're probably right on that point.

> Hence I see only one practical route to space settlements.
>
> 1. Prove that a settlement of say a thousand people can be set up in the
> middle of the Sahara desert, who enjoy a high quality of life making use
> of all scientific advancements, who are self-sufficient in terms of
> availability and use of water (they are very efficient in its use), and
> self sufficient in terms of ability to harness renewable energy. They do
> not import more than 10% of their daily needs from outside sources.

Yes, this would be great, though it doesn't need to be the Sahara; any
desert or tundra (including arctic) would work, as would a floating
colony in some large body of water.

> 2. Prove that it is possible to set up a sealed biosphere in the middle
> of the Sahara desert which will provide a high quality of life for a
> thousand people. No more than 20% of water can be imported every year
> from an outside source.

A sensible second step (with the above caveats).

However, while these test colonies are quite logical, I doubt they will
ever happen. The drive to expand into space is much larger than the
drive to expand into deserts. Moreover, there are economic
opportunities in space (high-end tourism, zero-G sports & theater,
zero-G manufacturing, SSP, etc.) that model colonies on Earth don't share.

> (The conditions any where in the cosmos are likely to be more life
> threatening than the conditions that exist in the middle of the Sahara
> Desert.)

Yes, that's true. But it's not just about where we can survive.

Best,
- Joe