When astronomers decide to build a telescope they do an extensive site selection study to figure out where the best place to build the telescope is. The most i

When astronomers decide to build a telescope they do an extensive site selection study to figure out where the best place to build the telescope is. The most important factors are things you would expect: how cloudy the site is, the elevation of the site, latitude, light pollution, etc. But they also consider the political feasibility of building the telescope. [1] Although Mauna Kea is a better site on purely scientific grounds than the Chile site where GMT is going to be built, Mauna Kea has always been dinged in these site selection reviews for the political problems of getting the telescope built. TMT decided to risk the political difficulties for the better site. It seems that the political objections to the TMT were stronger than they anticipated. There are actually some excellent sites in various parts of the world that don't yet have telescopes on them because the infrastructure isn't there yet to support them. If my memory serves right, there is a site in Nairobi that is one of the best in the world scientifically, but it's unfeasible economically and politically to build a large telescope there. There was also a site in Morocco that made the short list as a site for the E-ELT. As economies improve, though, these sites will eventually be developed. In the past 15 years the infrastructure in India has gotten to the point that it was possible to build the Indian Astronomical Observatory on a very good site in the Himalayas. I think China is now building (or at least considering) another observatory somewhere in the Himalayas as well. [1]: For a list of some of the factors considered, see this paper, especially Table 1: http://authors.library.caltech.edu/19568/1/Schoeck2007p8596Workshop_On_Astronomical_Site_Evaluation.pdf http://authors.library.caltech.edu/19568/1/Schoeck2007p8596W...