Author Topic: We could colonize the moon for just $10 billion - and make it happen by 2022  (Read 703 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Buster's Uncle

  • Geo's kind, I unwind, HE'S the
  • Planetary Overmind
  • *
  • Posts: 51256
  • €937
  • View Inventory
  • Send /Gift
  • Because there are times when people just need a cute puppy  Soft kitty, warm kitty, little ball of fur  A WONDERFUL concept, Unity - & a 1-way trip that cost 400 trillion & 40 yrs.  
  • AC2 is my instrument, my heart, as I play my song.
  • Planet tales writer Smilie Artist Custom Faction Modder AC2 Wiki contributor Downloads Contributor
    • View Profile
    • My Custom Factions
    • Awards
Opinion: We could colonize the moon for just $10 billion — and make it happen by 2022
Lunar lessons could be applied to, say, a Mars project
MarketWatch
By Jurica Dujmovic  Published: Mar 19, 2016 2:51 p.m. ET



Soon this type of scene may no longer be science-fiction.  National Aeronautics and Space Administration



What if I told you there’s no reason we couldn’t set up a small base on the moon by 2022 without breaking the bank?

The endeavor would cost about $10 billion, which is cheaper than one U.S. aircraft carrier.

Some of the greatest scientists and professionals in the space business already have a plan. NASA’s Chris McKay, an astrobiologist, wrote about it in a special issue of the New Space journal, published just a few weeks ago.

Before we get into the details, let’s ask ourselves: Why the moon? Although scientists (and NASA) don’t find it all that exciting, the moon is a great starting point for further exploration. Furthermore, building a lunar base would provide us with the real-world experience that may prove invaluable for future projects on other planets like Mars, which NASA plans to reach by 2030. The main reason the moon is not a part of NASA’s plan is simply because of the agency’s crimped budget.

NASA’s leaders say they can afford only one or the other: the moon or Mars. If McKay and his colleagues are correct, though, the U.S. government might be able to pull off both trips. All it takes is a change of perspective and ingenuity.

“The big takeaway,” McKay says in a Popular Science issue written by Sarah Fecht, “is that new technologies, some of which have nothing to do with space — such as self-driving cars and waste-recycling toilets — are going to be incredibly useful in space, and are driving down the cost of a moon base to the point where it might be easy to do.”

The document outlines a series of innovations — already existing and in development — that work together toward the common goal of building the first permanent lunar base.

One such innovation is the proposed use of virtual reality during the preparation and planning phase. A lunar VR environment enriched with real-world scientific data would be used as a simulation in which the 3D-printed structures could be modeled and tested against the thermic and environmental factors present on the moon’s surface. This would provide scientists and engineers with vital information necessary to solve structural problems before they happen for real. 3D printing would also considerably reduce the repair and replacement costs on the lunar base, because small components could be easily replaced on-site.

To bring robots, supplies, astronauts and habitats, SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rockets and the upcoming model Falcon Heavy would be used. Speaking of habitats, a modified, radiation-resistant version of Bigelow Aerospace’s inflatable habitat seems the most probable candidate for the role. Those habitats could be packed into rockets’ cargo bay and expanded after reaching their destination.



Bigelow Aerospace’s inflatable habitat.  bigelowaerospace.com


The first station would probably be built on the outer rim of one of the moon’s North Pole craters. The poles receive much more sunlight than the rest of the moon (nights there can last up to 15 days), so solar-powered equipment will get enough light to function properly. Furthermore, all that energy could provide power for robots that would excavate large amounts of ice detected within the craters. Water gathered that way could then be used for life support, as well as for providing oxygen, or it could be processed into rocket fuel, which would be sold or stored for refueling space crafts.



This is what mining on the moon might look like.  National Aeronautics and Space Administration


After rockets bring in supplies and gear, and robots unpack the habitats and establish the perimeter for mining operations, astronauts would start arriving. Here’s how the process is envisioned in the document: “Just imagine a small lunar base at one of the lunar poles operated by NASA or an international consortium and modeled according to the U.S. Antarctic Station at the South Pole. The crew of about 10 people would consist of a mixture of staff and field scientists. Personnel rotations might be three times a year. The main activity would be supporting field research selected by peer-reviewed proposals. Graduate students doing fieldwork for their thesis research would dominate the activity. No one lives at the base permanently but there is always a crew present. The base is heavily supported by autonomous and remotely operated robotic devices.”

It continues: “The activities at this moon base would be focusing on science, as is the case in the Antarctic. It could provide an official U.S. government presence on the moon, and its motivation would be rooted in U.S. national policy — again as are the U.S. Antarctic bases. A lunar base would provide a range of technologies and programmatic precedents supporting a long-term NASA research base on Mars.”

If NASA takes these arguments to heart, affordable lunar bases may be a step toward the first permanent lunar settlements. From then on, anything could happen. In time, the moon could be terraformed, and hundreds of years from now, an entirely new human society may evolve, unfettered by issues we face on Earth.

If this sounds like sci-fi, remember that not a long time ago, 90% of modern technology belonged to that category. What do you think about colonizing the moon?


http://www.marketwatch.com/story/it-would-cost-only-10-billion-to-live-on-the-moon-2016-03-17?siteid=yhoof2

 

* User

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?


Login with username, password and session length

Select language:

* Community poll

SMAC v.4 SMAX v.2 (or previous versions)
-=-
24 (7%)
XP Compatibility patch
-=-
9 (2%)
Gog version for Windows
-=-
106 (33%)
Scient (unofficial) patch
-=-
40 (12%)
Kyrub's latest patch
-=-
14 (4%)
Yitzi's latest patch
-=-
89 (28%)
AC for Mac
-=-
3 (0%)
AC for Linux
-=-
5 (1%)
Gog version for Mac
-=-
10 (3%)
No patch
-=-
16 (5%)
Total Members Voted: 316
AC2 Wiki Logo
-click pic for wik-

* Random quote

Already we have turned all of our critical industries, all of our material resources, over to these...things...these lumps of silver and paste we call nanorobots. And now we propose to teach them intelligence? What, pray tell, will we do when these little homunculi awaken one day announce that they have no further need for us?
~Sister Miriam Godwinson 'We must Dissent'

* Select your theme

*
Templates: 5: index (default), PortaMx/Mainindex (default), PortaMx/Frames (default), Display (default), GenericControls (default).
Sub templates: 8: init, html_above, body_above, portamx_above, main, portamx_below, body_below, html_below.
Language files: 4: index+Modifications.english (default), TopicRating/.english (default), PortaMx/PortaMx.english (default), OharaYTEmbed.english (default).
Style sheets: 0: .
Files included: 45 - 1228KB. (show)
Queries used: 35.

[Show Queries]