On the colonization of space

Hey! I been gone for a long time, but I had good reasons (like an
"educational" program called college). Anyway, I have throught over
space colonization in my head, and here are my conclutions:

1. There no actors on the world stage with a compelling reason to
estalish any settlements in space. Popluation pressure and search of
new energy sources have been citied as reasons for space settlement,
and for the world at wit it is not a bad idea (esp. new energy
sources). However, there is no actor for the entire world with the
power or the monitary resources to undertake the constuction of space
settlement, or even a mission to the moon. The US would definatly
withhold money from the UN, and there almost no one with the UN even
considing space settlement.

So that leaves states. On popluation matters, however, the states that
have exessive popluation growth are so poor that space settlements is
out of the question, ditto for energy. The states that have the
economic power to begin a program of space settlement do not have
these popluation growth pressures; instead, there is consern over a
popluation delince (Of course, there is a real need of energy and
material; I will deal with it later).

Corperations have been also been cited as a potiental patrons for
space humanization. Now, no one expects a corperation to tomorrow to
hold a press conference to annonce an plan for an O'Neillian space
settlement with 25 years or so. The benfits are too long term to
outweight the short term costs. So any private space settlement
"program" would have to be through many corperations completing with
each other building on the small victories. However, why they should
is not clear. There are doing fine, raking in billions of dollars per
year, and there is a lot of growth in those sectors without resorting
to any space devlopment. Any activities in space done for profit would
use less human labour, as the cost of keeping them alive would
outweight the devlopment costs of robotic crews.

That leaves wealthly inividuals. In some sf, a wealthly patron gives
billions of dollars to space exlopation and colonization. It may
happen, but don't count on it. Most of it will go to charities.

2. So the only current reason for organizations for space exporation
is wealthly states in search of new energy sources and materials. This
is not a mute point; sometime in the next thousand years, with fossil
fuels of the Earth will have been consumed. But, even with this fact,
space settlement is not a logical endpoint. The seach for a good
energy policy may lie in a mix of wind, solar, nuclear and
hydroelectic engery, combinied with a conservation program may do the
trick.

But, even with energy is "imported" from space viva the SPS concept;
it does not mean space colonies will result. Why should any
state/company invest in space colonies? Remember, a movement into
space would be like not of in human history, with humanity needing to
providing itself with a biosphere, which does not come cheaply.
O'Neill believed that his colonies would be like northern mining
towns, designed to house massive amounts of workers for the massive
SPS's. This ignores the two great drives of the industral and
eletronic revolution: mechization and miniturization. The SPS of
O'Neil is comparable to the GEO orbit communication stations of
Clarke, with larged manned stuctures 'replaced' with small unmanned
stucture.

The more likely prototype for SPS workforces would the offshore
dilling stations, with it rotationg crews are spartan quarters. The
SPS companies would young men (and few women as well), ship them on
the station, where they do there shift for 6 months, return to collect
their pay. The SPS corperation would not have to pay much attention to
living conditions if they paycheck is high enugh. Techinical expert
need only vist once or twice to check equipment, otherwise, they stay
home on Earth. Food, water and other supplies would be shipped from
Earth, as its "close" (the moon can be reached in 2-3 days) distance
sllows for such dependance; only we one is on Mars, or in Mars orbit
or the asteroid belt would the shipping time would force people to
depend on local grown foodstuffes of a long duration.

3. The space tourism concept seems overhyped in "alt.space" circles.
There is no industry yet, and whole thing may collape. The efforts of
Scaled, the Da Vinci, Armadillo, et al. get press coverage becouse of
its unordinariness, its novelity. Novelity will also help the industry
sell tickets. But the novelity will wear off, and people may not be
willing to shell out money, esp. if there is a new resseasion and/or a
horrible space tourism acciendent.

Space colonization advocates need to figure out the solutions for
their cause to advance. Personally, advocates still have beilf in the
"master plan," where this and that will happen, and humanity will
become spacefaring. History does not work that way; plans never goes
exactly to the plan. The settlement of space will be like every other
human endeivior, full of logic and illogic, reason and irrationality,
false assumptions and overlooked detials. It will be produce it share
of leaders and followers, wisemen and madmen, heros and villians. One
can't plan for those.