3 ms·

Every time I read about colonizing another planet, I think about how we correctly don't want to colonize the bottom of the ocean or the Sahara desert because it

Every time I read about colonizing another planet, I think about how we correctly don't want to colonize the bottom of the ocean or the Sahara desert because it would be completely uneconomical, and yet either would be much easier than this.

missingdays 5mo ago
What it would be much cooler
- freedomben 5mo ago
  I know you're probably joking, but there is definitely a romanticism around "other planets." The "cool" factor is definitely a power variable.
dullcrisp 5mo ago
We’d have a settlement in the Sahara desert if it took six months to get there and there were something interesting there. We have one in Antarctica.
atrus 5mo ago
Yeah, and the fact that no one is doing "practice runs" on them is telling how serious any colonization effort really is. Zero chance of a successful mars city if we can't even colonize the trivial in comparison ocean.
sl-1 5mo ago
I agree. And how all of our meager steps towards trying to learn the pre-requisites of sustainable colonies (eg. closed cycle ecology) have failed miserably. For example Biosphere program (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 ). And the only working ecological system we can study is being destroyed by humanity and capital on record pace.
- PaulHoule 5mo ago
  Biosphere 2 had the problem, not least, that it didn't have enough of an atmosphere to buffer swings of CO2 concentration between day and night. It's like "what did they think would happen?"
  - amanaplanacanal 5mo ago
    I assume the reason nobody has tried to fund a biosphere 3 is because we don't yet have enough knowledge to make it possible.
    - PaulHoule 5mo ago
      I think it is more that you need a specific endpoint and a real business plan. Like how could Biosphere 2 have really made money? A closed loop ecology for, say, survival on Mars, is an interesting question that somebody might need an answer to but there is no reason why it needs to look like the Earth with oceans and all and it might lean heavily on bacteria that live in vats or 24 hour illuminated agriculture or something. Meanwhile it is not so clear that from a scientific point of view that some experiment in a greenhouse can give conclusive answers about the ecology of the Earth where so much is going on.
      - cindyllm 5mo ago
        [dead]
RankingMember 5mo ago
That and we'd soon do the same things to a new planet that we're doing to this planet. The more time humanity has to mature from a cooperation-over-conflict perspective (both with each other and other beings/the environment) before it starts spreading to other planets, the better.
RetroTechie 5mo ago
It would be akin to a city floating on Earth's open ocean. With all food, household items etc, and even construction materials produced via extraction from the surrounding ocean. For Earthlings, the open ocean is harder to survive on long-term than deserts like the Sahara. Maybe on par with living off the land on Antarctic. Never mind all that corrosive stuff in Venus' atmosphere. Doable in theory, yes. But HARD (and then some). That's ignoring the economics of such an enterprise. On the upside: still easier than interstellar travel.
- glenstein 5mo ago
  I think atmospheric extraction is very important and valuable but we'd be missing heavy metals and some critical elements. You do have carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, a little bit of hydrogen, a little bit of chlorine and flourine, and you can do a lot with those. Not as much hydrogen as you would want or need. But potassium, sodium, calcium, magnesium, silica, iron oxides, nickel, titanium etc. are available on the surface.
- mmooss 5mo ago
  I get your point, but ... > It would be akin to a city floating on Earth's open ocean. With all food, household items etc, and even construction materials produced via extraction from the surrounding ocean. Akin in some senses, but let's not omit that another planet would be far, far more difficult. Humans do live on boats and islands in oceans; we can breathe the air, drink the water (if desalinated), eat the fish, swim, build boats from resources, etc.
WalterBright 5mo ago
There's no reason to colonize the ocean bottom. For one thing, it's completely dark and cold. For another, I don't see any way you could build a spacious structure that could resist the pressure.

missingdays 5mo ago

What it would be much cooler

freedomben 5mo ago
I know you're probably joking, but there is definitely a romanticism around "other planets." The "cool" factor is definitely a power variable.

dullcrisp 5mo ago

We’d have a settlement in the Sahara desert if it took six months to get there and there were something interesting there. We have one in Antarctica.

atrus 5mo ago

Yeah, and the fact that no one is doing "practice runs" on them is telling how serious any colonization effort really is. Zero chance of a successful mars city if we can't even colonize the trivial in comparison ocean.

sl-1 5mo ago

I agree. And how all of our meager steps towards trying to learn the pre-requisites of sustainable colonies (eg. closed cycle ecology) have failed miserably. For example Biosphere program (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2 ). And the only working ecological system we can study is being destroyed by humanity and capital on record pace.

PaulHoule 5mo ago
Biosphere 2 had the problem, not least, that it didn't have enough of an atmosphere to buffer swings of CO2 concentration between day and night. It's like "what did they think would happen?"
- amanaplanacanal 5mo ago
  I assume the reason nobody has tried to fund a biosphere 3 is because we don't yet have enough knowledge to make it possible.
  - PaulHoule 5mo ago
    I think it is more that you need a specific endpoint and a real business plan. Like how could Biosphere 2 have really made money? A closed loop ecology for, say, survival on Mars, is an interesting question that somebody might need an answer to but there is no reason why it needs to look like the Earth with oceans and all and it might lean heavily on bacteria that live in vats or 24 hour illuminated agriculture or something. Meanwhile it is not so clear that from a scientific point of view that some experiment in a greenhouse can give conclusive answers about the ecology of the Earth where so much is going on.
    - cindyllm 5mo ago
      [dead]

RankingMember 5mo ago

That and we'd soon do the same things to a new planet that we're doing to this planet. The more time humanity has to mature from a cooperation-over-conflict perspective (both with each other and other beings/the environment) before it starts spreading to other planets, the better.

RetroTechie 5mo ago

It would be akin to a city floating on Earth's open ocean. With all food, household items etc, and even construction materials produced via extraction from the surrounding ocean. For Earthlings, the open ocean is harder to survive on long-term than deserts like the Sahara. Maybe on par with living off the land on Antarctic. Never mind all that corrosive stuff in Venus' atmosphere. Doable in theory, yes. But HARD (and then some). That's ignoring the economics of such an enterprise. On the upside: still easier than interstellar travel.

glenstein 5mo ago
I think atmospheric extraction is very important and valuable but we'd be missing heavy metals and some critical elements. You do have carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, a little bit of hydrogen, a little bit of chlorine and flourine, and you can do a lot with those. Not as much hydrogen as you would want or need. But potassium, sodium, calcium, magnesium, silica, iron oxides, nickel, titanium etc. are available on the surface.
mmooss 5mo ago
I get your point, but ... > It would be akin to a city floating on Earth's open ocean. With all food, household items etc, and even construction materials produced via extraction from the surrounding ocean. Akin in some senses, but let's not omit that another planet would be far, far more difficult. Humans do live on boats and islands in oceans; we can breathe the air, drink the water (if desalinated), eat the fish, swim, build boats from resources, etc.

WalterBright 5mo ago

There's no reason to colonize the ocean bottom. For one thing, it's completely dark and cold. For another, I don't see any way you could build a spacious structure that could resist the pressure.