Thoughts on the station's biosystem

> From:
> I too would hesitate to remove the agriculture section from the living
> section. To do so would result in a stale atmosphere without huge
> atmosphere transfer systems.

A stale atmosphere where? You don't need crops in the main habitat to keep
the air fresh. Any greenery will do that. You also don't nee many animals in
the food ring to do that, if indeed you need animals at all.

Meat could be grown for food in the same way organs could be grown for
implantation. Such a controlled industrial process would be perfect for the
limited volume in a space colony. Since it's highly likely the technology
will be developed anyway, and since it will likely end up cheaper and safer
(plus the ethical considerations) it's the situation I'd prefer. Even if the
techno-cautious on this list would espouse it.

> The only place where that would make any sense in my book would be in
> vacation habitats.

Given the choice of living in a copy of central park or a copy of Bucktooth
Alabama, I'd choose central park. IMHO, it's more impractical to expect
people to want to live in a space farm than it is to have a separate food
ring.

You might also consider that every additional isolated airtight volume as a
potential life boat if anything happened to the main habitat.

John

How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday