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This discussion has been archived.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, @01:03PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @01:03PM (#509989)

    Yeah it's some asshole who read a sci-fi book writing the article. All your points are valid. Mars is by far the best option. Venus atmosphere has problems because there are not raw materials available. Unless we could somehow blast the atmosphere off and the surface turned out not to be as volcanic any longer as the conditions that created the hell we see now.

  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday May 15 2017, @03:57PM

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 15 2017, @03:57PM (#510076) Journal

    Personally, I think the asteroids are the best goal, but Mars is an acceptable intermediate step. We don't really have the technology to do either of them properly yet, but Mars might be marginally doable.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:13PM

    by kaszz (4211) on Tuesday May 16 2017, @08:13PM (#510721) Journal

    No need to blast the atmosphere away. If you can find a gigantic calcium oxide asteroid this can be solved by crashing into the planet surface. It will react with the carbon dioxide and form limestone effectively cleaning the atmosphere.

    The problem is mainly finding such asteroid nearby..