Colonization of Moon Titan: Pros and Cons

[Radrook]

I can't reveal the exact mechanism yet. But basically, cooling is achieved at the molecular level at extremely rapid pace. Not the same as laser or electromagnetic cooling since the energy requirement is a lot less even if compared to commercial heat-transfer cooling systems.



The very thick atmosphere offers superior protection to most threats coming from space including cosmic radiation and large meteors (smaller than 100 meters diameter)



The popular and practical methods use bioengineered airborned organisms at the upper atmosphere where it is cold enough for these organism and even humans to survive comfortably.

However, the problem I see with this method, is that oxygen is lighter than carbon dioxide. Converted Oxygen will not sink to the planet but float up. It won't just reduce the efficiency of the conversion process but some of the oxygen produced that is floating would be blown away by the Solar Wind which greatly diminish the efficiency.

A method I would use is provide the conversion process at the surface using photosynthetic biomatter. No one seemed to have thought of it before due to the cooling challenge. But if you have cooling solution, you can use fully automated/robotic processing plants that can expand processing plants themselves using materials directly available in Venus. This way, the oxygen could mix with CO2 upon release, and it would be much harder for oxygen to reach the upper atmosphere.

It would still take many years, even decades by the time the robots made Venus livable enough at the surface.



The prospect of life at Venus' surface is next to impossible. The prospect of airborne life in the upper atmosphere is more likely due to Earth-like temperature but with only trace amounts of water (even water vapor), that too is unlikely.

Thanks for the info.
Well, Titan provides a similar protection via its thick atmosphere but there we have the extreme cold to contend with. The method you describe depends on an invention as yet unrealized. But the estimates of the time-frame are definitely superior to others I have read about which speak of hundreds of years. I set up a thread about this.
Here is a question that I would appreciate a response to on that thread. How would we reduce the atmospheric pressure to a tolerant level?

 

[Radrook]

A ONE WAY trip??!!!

What if they didn't like it once they got there?

Some might simply choose to commit Harikari.

 

[Radrook]

Have you heard of the "Mars One" program which is a very long term habitation of Mars, one way (no return trip!!) to Mars some time beyond the year 2020?

The program opened the selection to the public and I think in just the first day, over a million sent their applications!!

Well, at least their habitats and other equipment will be waiting for them there once they arrive.

Mars One
A habitable settlement will await the first crew before they depart Earth. The hardware needed will be sent to Mars in the years ahead of the humans.

Here is the spacecraft they will be using:

The Mars Transit Vehicle is a compact space station that will carry the astronauts from Earth orbit to Mars. It is comprised of four parts which are docked in Earth orbit: two propellant stages, a Transit Habitat and a Lander. The propellant stages are used to propel the Transit Vehicle from Earth orbit to Mars.

The Transit Habitat is the home for the astronauts during their seven month journey. In it, they sleep, train and prepare for their arrival and landing. When they are near Mars, the astronauts enter the Lander which is then disconnected from the Transit Habitat.

The Transit habitat and the propellant stages are left behind to orbit the Sun. The Lander is the only component that sets foot on Mars, with the astronauts inside.
The Transit Habitat has a mass of about 20,000 kg. It will carry close to 800 kg of dry food, 3000 liters of water and 700 kg of oxygen on board.

No water or oxygen will be recycled, because the trip lasts only 210 days. Not recycling these components eliminates the need for recycling systems, backups, spare components and reduces power and cooling requirements. The 3000 liters of water is also used for radiation shielding.

Mars Transit Vehicle - The Technology - Mars One

 

[timewerx]

The Transit Habitat has a mass of about 20,000 kg. It will carry close to 800 kg of dry food, 3000 liters of water and 700 kg of oxygen on board.

No water or oxygen will be recycled, because the trip lasts only 210 days. Not recycling these components eliminates the need for recycling systems, backups, spare components and reduces power and cooling requirements. The 3000 liters of water is also used for radiation shielding.

That's a pity. They apparently haven't figured out how to scratch more power yet. I would advice them to wait 10 years if they don't want to waste a lot of money and risk the lives of astronauts.

 

[Radrook]

That's a pity. They apparently haven't figured out how to scratch more power yet. I would advice them to wait 10 years if they don't want to waste a lot of money and risk the lives of astronauts.

.
So you consider the present risks unacceptable.


If indeed there is death, especially of a very gruesome kind, then that would definitely set back any further attempt for a long while as the Challenger Shuttle disaster demonstrated.

The Space Shuttle Challenger disaster occurred on January 28, 1986, when the NASA Space Shuttle orbiter Challenger (OV-099) (mission STS-51-L) broke apart 73 seconds into its flight, leading to the deaths of its seven crew members, which included five NASA astronauts and two Payload Specialists. The spacecraft disintegrated over the Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of Cape Canaveral, Florida, at 11:39 EST (16:39 UTC). Disintegration of the vehicle began after an O-ring seal in its right solid rocket booster (SRB) failed at liftoff. The O-ring was not designed to fly under unusually cold conditions as in this launch. Its failure caused a breach in the SRB joint it sealed, allowing pressurized burning gas from within the solid rocket motor to reach the outside and impinge upon the adjacent SRB aft field joint attachment hardware and external fuel tank. This led to the separation of the right-hand SRB's aft field joint attachment and the structural failure of the external tank. Aerodynamic forces broke up the orbiter.

Space Shuttle Challenger disaster - Wikipedia

Also if somtheing similar to the Appolo Thirteen happened at a far greater distance that could indeed prove far more difficult to overcome or prove fatal.

Apollo 13 was the seventh manned mission in the American Apollo space program and the third intended to land on the Moon. The craft was launched on April 11, 1970, at 13:13 CST (19:13 UTC) from the Kennedy Space Center, Florida, but the lunar landing was aborted after an oxygen tank exploded two days later, crippling the Service Module (SM) upon which the Command Module (CM) had depended. Despite great hardship caused by limited power, loss of cabin heat, shortage of potable water, and the critical need to make makeshift repairs to the carbon dioxide removal system, the crew returned safely to Earth on April 17.
Apollo 13 - Wikipedia

So I agree that it's best to assure a huge margin of safety whether it be to Mars or to the atmosphere of Venus. At least the trip to Venus is considerably shorter and no need to exit the spacecraft would be necessary unless repairs are needed.

 

[timewerx]

.
So you consider the present risks unacceptable.

Apparently, they are still running very tight margins on an experimental craft. This is where you get high risk of malfunctions or complete mission failure.

I'm guessing the budget is very tight or the technology involved, very expensive.

Also if somtheing similar to the Appolo Thirteen happened at a far greater distance that could indeed prove far more difficult to overcome or prove fatal.

Yes, that is true. Their biggest limitation here is the rocket technology which forces them to have very tight constraints.

If you have very efficient propulsion technology, there is much less weight constraints. You can build very strong, heavily armored, heavily powered spacecraft with high safety margin.

It's like comparing old, wooden sailing ships of the bygone age over a nuclear submarine.

I've been working on one. The propulsion system not only is a propulsion system but would be very reliable to be turned on for the entire duration of the trip. Accelerating at a constant 1G means it will double its purpose as artificial gravity and then halfway in the trip the ship will make a 180' turn and decelerate at 1G. They'll be in Mars a lot quicker and not suffer from low gravity in a highly protected ship.

I tried to make the proper authorities (one from MIT I think many years ago, not sure) aware of it but they say it's impossible because I cannot break a fundamental law in physics. Don't quote me on that if I succeed. I don't hold grudges and I'd rather forget the whole thing.

 

[Radrook]

Apparently, they are still running very tight margins on an experimental craft. This is where you get high risk of malfunctions or complete mission failure.

I'm guessing the budget is very tight or the technology involved, very expensive.



Yes, that is true. Their biggest limitation here is the rocket technology which forces them to have very tight constraints.

If you have very efficient propulsion technology, there is much less weight constraints. You can build very strong, heavily armored, heavily powered spacecraft with high safety margin.

It's like comparing old, wooden sailing ships of the bygone age over a nuclear submarine.

I've been working on one. The propulsion system not only is a propulsion system but would be very reliable to be turned on for the entire duration of the trip. Accelerating at a constant 1G means it will double its purpose as artificial gravity and then halfway in the trip the ship will make a 180' turn and decelerate at 1G. They'll be in Mars a lot quicker and not suffer from low gravity in a highly protected ship.

I tried to make the proper authorities (one from MIT I think many years ago, not sure) aware of it but they say it's impossible because I cannot break a fundamental law in physics. Don't quote me on that if I succeed. I don't hold grudges and I'd rather forget the whole thing.

How would a constant acceleration and then deceleration at 1G violate the laws of nature? Or was it something to do with the propulsion system itself?

 

[timewerx]

How would a constant acceleration and then deceleration at 1G violate the laws of nature? Or was it something to do with the propulsion system itself?

Yes, it was something of the nature of the propulsion.

The negative energy was a very controversial topic then. They said my theory would violate two principal laws in physics, the Newton's law of motion and the law of conservation of energy.

Although in my studies, it might only violate Newton's but NOT the conservation of energy due to no-so-well understood nature of negative energy.

I've had surprisingly positive results in my experiments which I have very sporadically done since the turn of the millenium in the year 2000. Sporadically because of lack of time. Money is not a problem. I've always had the money to continue. It's just the time and business related travel or long shifts which takes me away from it. A change of career or change of job might give the opportunity to focus on it. But that opportunity keeps eluding me like there are forces "beyond" conspiring to prevent me from completing my work!

Right now most I can do is theoretical work on "paper"...In reality, I do it all in my mind. I don't trust putting confidential info on computer or on the paper. I'm working to improve its thrust dramatically so it can be used right from the ground all the way to Mars or somewhere else like another star. If the Lense-Thirring effect works, it might also be able to travel faster than speed of light.

 

[Radrook]

Yes, it was something of the nature of the propulsion.

The negative energy was a very controversial topic then. They said my theory would violate two principal laws in physics, the Newton's law of motion and the law of conservation of energy.

Although in my studies, it might only violate Newton's but NOT the conservation of energy due to no-so-well understood nature of negative energy.

I've had surprisingly positive results in my experiments which I have very sporadically done since the turn of the millenium in the year 2000. Sporadically because of lack of time. Money is not a problem. I've always had the money to continue. It's just the time and business related travel or long shifts which takes me away from it. A change of career or change of job might give the opportunity to focus on it. But that opportunity keeps eluding me like there are forces "beyond" conspiring to prevent me from completing my work!

Right now most I can do is theoretical work on "paper"...In reality, I do it all in my mind. I don't trust putting confidential info on computer or on the paper. I'm working to improve its thrust dramatically so it can be used right from the ground all the way to Mars or somewhere else like another star. If the Lense-Thirring effect works, it might also be able to travel faster than speed of light.

Sounds like fascinating work!
It would truly be a pity if for lack of time it couldn't be brought to fruition.

BTW
What would be the best approach to terraforming Titan? Or is Titan beyond Terraforming?
Too much methane, ethane? Seems like you could light a match and have the whole atmosphere go up in flames! LOL!

 

[timewerx]

Sounds like fascinating work!
It would truly be a pity if for lack of time it couldn't be brought to fruition.
What would be the best approach to terraforming Titan? Or is Titan beyond Terraforming?
Too much methane, ethane? Seems like you could light a match and have the whole atmosphere go up in flames! LOL!

I have no idea if it here's a way to convert methane to oxygen of the atmosphere with zero chances of igniting it. It means suppressing all electrical discharges would seem impossible in a planet-wide scale.

Methane + Oxygen is a highly flammable and even explosive mixture.

You can't just pump out all the atmosphere since Titan would rapidly freeze unless you can artificially heat the entire surface.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I wouldn't. The rule of law and order is part of the formula that creates wealth.

I got news for you.

A VERY large part of the wealth generated by the technological society you live in, is the direct result of space exploration and the technological advances that were made by doing that research.

Law is why America succeeds.

Tell me, what can America accomplish with 10.000 nukes that it can't accomplish with 200?

 

[Radrook]

I have no idea if it here's a way to convert methane to oxygen of the atmosphere with zero chances of igniting it. It means suppressing all electrical discharges would seem impossible in a planet-wide scale.

Methane + Oxygen is a highly flammable and even explosive mixture.

You can't just pump out all the atmosphere since Titan would rapidly freeze unless you can artificially heat the entire surface.

You mean freeze even more than it's already frozen? Its warmest
-292 degrees Fahrenheit. That's 157 degrees colder than Antarctica's low temperature of (−128.6 °F) at Vostok Station.

 

[SkyWriting]

I got news for you.

A VERY large part of the wealth generated by the technological society you live in, is the direct result of space exploration and the technological advances that were made by doing that research.

No, it is due to the rule of law which allows people
to retain their capitol and not have it confiscated
by thieves, corporations, government, or all three
as other countries deal with.

Back to your comment, most research is privately funded.

 

[Michael]

One of the neat things about living on Titan is that you can actually strap on some wings and fly exactly like a bird does.

http://io9.gizmodo.com/humans-might-be-able-to-fly-on-titan-if-they-use-large-1536169825

The atmosphere also probably lends itself to drones.

 

[Radrook]

The atmosphere also probably lends itself to drones.

Why would it be favorable for drones?

 

[Michael]

Why would it be favorable for drones?

If the thickness of the atmosphere works well for wings, I suspect it would work well for a propellered drone also. Wings would actually be more efficient.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No, it is due to the rule of law which allows people
to retain their capitol and not have it confiscated
by thieves, corporations, government, or all three
as other countries deal with.

All the "capitol" that was used to build and maintain those 9800 unneeded nukes, was taken from private people and corporations.

Back to your comment, most research is privately funded.

And the government provides the platform from where businesses can be birthed, to do such research and earn money.

No private company is going to take the plunge into the unknown, head first.
Companies do risk analysis. They want a ROI.
You can't calculate risks or ROIs when you literally take the plunge into the unknown. You need leads, at least.

Government funded space exploration, is why we have GPS, satelites, the internet, computers, smartphones.

It's not just the being in space. It's all the work that had to be done to get there and back in addition to being able to run experiments there and do measurements.

What company would spend 400 million dollars on shooting a device into space, not knowing if it would yield something usefull?

A government is a far better fit for such initial exploration.
That public know-how can then serve as seeding grounds for companies with great ideas.
SpaceX does space stuff now. But thanks to all the know-how already present, they can shoot a rocket into space for far, far less then 400 million bucks.

Government plants the seeds. Businesses give it water and make profit.
That's how it is. That's why halting publicly funded science programs is generally a really bad idea.

 

[SkyWriting]

All the "capitol" that was used to build and maintain those 9800 unneeded nukes, was taken from private people and corporations.

Government owned or private nukes?

 

[Armoured]

Titan seems inviting to colonization because of the way it mimics earthlike features such as lakes, river tributaries, sand dunes and rains. However, closer inspection is a bit sobering. Lets take a closer look. To begin with the lakes are composed of methane as is the rain.
Lakes of Titan - Wikipedia

---------------------------------------------------------------

Positives to colonization are:

1. Tolerable atmospheric pressure which makes pressurized spacesuits unnecessary. It also provides complete protection against space radiation and meteoroids and is useful for aerobraking spacecraft during entry.

2. Nitrogen in atmosphere can be used as plant fertilizer.

3. Indications of cryvolcanism which provide water with which to make breathable oxygen.

Atmosphere of Titan - Wikipedia

-------------------------------------------------


Negatives to colonization are:

1. Extreme cold : 94 K (−179 °C, or −290.2 °F), Far colder than Antarctica

2. An atmosphere making the use of solar power impossible and making insulation from the cold far more difficult than in a vacuum due to heat dissipation.

3. Low surface gravity of 0.138 g, slightly less than that of the Moon/ Which means that there are health risks involved such as skeletal calcium leakage and a gradual muscular atrophy.

4. Crustal instability: There are land features which can swivel 40 miles in a very short period of time making navigation to a specific place a bit uncertain since you never know when it will decide to get up and go while the going’s good.

Climate of Titan - Wikipedia

It's a long way to walk, too.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Government owned or private nukes?

Well, that sure was a facepalm moment.