Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday May 15 2017, @02:25AM   Printer-friendly
from the new-colonial-era dept.

John Timmer at Ars Technica reports:

So, why Titan? The two closer destinations, the Moon and Mars, have atmospheres that are effectively nonexistent. That means any habitation will have to be extremely robust to hold its contents in place. Both worlds are also bathed in radiation, meaning those habitats will need to be built underground, as will any agricultural areas to feed the colonists. Any activities on the surface will have to be limited to avoid excessive radiation exposure.

Would anyone want to go to a brand-new world just to spend their lives in a cramped tunnel? Hendrix and Wohlforth suggest the answer will be "no." Titan, in contrast, offers a dense atmosphere that shields the surface from radiation and would make any structural failures problematic, rather than catastrophic. With an oxygen mask and enough warm clothing, humans could roam Titan's surface in the dim sunlight. Or, given the low gravity and dense atmosphere, they could float above it in a balloon or on personal wings.

The vast hydrocarbon seas and dunes, Hendrix and Wohlforth suggest, would allow polymers to handle many of the roles currently played by metal and wood. Drilling into Titan's crust would access a vast supply of liquid water in the moon's subsurface ocean. It's not all the comforts of home, but it's a lot more of them than you'd get on the Moon or Mars.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @07:15AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @07:15AM (#509820)

    Better to build a space station with artificial gravity and have it "orbit" a suitable asteroid/moon that you mine. Or have some thing spinning that's attached to the asteroid (some asteroids may have low enough gravity that if you spin/swing stuff on it most people/"victims" might not get motion sickness). Note: it doesn't have to be one of those super expensive wheel things, there are much cheaper things that can be built.

    It's funny how so many people supposedly have money for going to Mars but they didn't have the budget for this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrifuge_Accommodations_Module [wikipedia.org]

    I would have thought it's a lot more scientific and logical to actually do experiments to figure out whether humans and our favourite animals/livestock and plants can do OK in Mars/Moon/etc gravity for long periods of time.

    If it turns out that humans can't tolerate Mars gravity for long periods then we shouldn't be wasting so much time and money on going to Mars. You can't easily adjust the gravity/acceleration once you're on the surface of Mars. Whereas you can adjust it on a suitable space station.