Thinking Big

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

This post was inspired by a realisation for the need of long-term planning of civilisation. Tell me what you think:

If we want the highest living standards for the greatest amount of people, we should be seeking energy abundance. To truly achieve that, I believe we should be thinking big. In addition to an established and efficient nuclear energy infrastructure that incorporates extensive reprocessing and harvesting of oceanic uranium (http://www.jaea.go.jp/jaeri/english/ff/ff43/topics.html), we should also consider such projects as massive concentrating solar power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrating_solar_power) facilities in major deserts such as the Sahara, extensive energy island (http://orbitalvector.com/Power/Energy%20Islands/ENERGY%20ISLANDS.htm) chains, and damming (http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2008/06/08/287-dam-you-mediterranean-the-atlantropa-project/) the Mediterranean (http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=965) (which would produce a total energy output of 110,000 Megawatts).

http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2102 http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2103

Left: Diagram illustrating a facility for extracting uranium from seawater.
Right: A concentrating solar thermal facility

With such an abundance of energy, not only can we maintain a high standard of living for everyone concerned, but we can also take civilisation as a whole that much further. For example, we can construct solar power satellites (http://orbitalvector.com/Space%20Structures/Solar%20Power%20Satellites/SOLAR%20POWER%20SATELLITES.htm) to provide an abundance of power to locations outside Europe, Russia and North Africa (which would be amply provided for by the Mediterranean Dams), giant orbital mirrors (http://www.livingstonmt.com/access/dan/107russianspacemirror.html) to give light to places like Siberia in order to facilitate habitation and food production, and colonise Antarctica (http://colonizeantarctica.blogspot.com/) as a preliminary exercise in colonising the rest of the Solar System.

http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2105 http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2106

Left: An artist's conception of a Solar Power Satellite
Right: A diagram illustrating the Russian plan to use orbital mirrors

An important part of this plan is to establish a permanent human presence in space, materially independant of Earth. We will need a strong industrial presence in orbit if this is to happen. I have already made a thread discussing low-cost access to space (http://www.revleft.org/vb/showthread.php?t=91954&), but there is another option to consider at the scales discussed in this thread; ground construction and launch of a nuclear pulse propulsion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_pulse_propulsion) spacecraft. The original designers of Project Orion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_%28nuclear_propulsion%29) envisioned an 8,000,000-ton craft taking off from Jackass Flats, Nevada (http://www.bisbos.com/rocketscience/spacecraft/orion/superorion_liftoff1.html), using conventional explosives for take-off. Modern and soon-to-be-developed materials could increase the weight (and therefore cargo) of such a craft even further. Such a craft could take off in almost any remote area, or from a mobile seaborne launchpad.

http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2107

An artist's conception of a space elevator with combined diagram

http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2108

An 8,000,000-ton nuclear pulse-propelled spacecraft under construction

We need only send up one such craft - the first one would contain the personnel and tools necessary to make use of nearby asteroids to construct the orbital facilities mentioned above, dedicated manufacturing facilities or even sister ships of it's type. Additional vessels so constructed would be used to establish independant colonies on the Moon and Mars, explore the outer Solar System or even take a round trip to Pluto and back inside of a year.

While all that is going on, space-based observatories would be scanning nearby stars for potentially habitable planets. Once a promising star system is found, construction of an unmanned scouting vessel should commence. Designs such as the Starwisp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starwisp) would be ideal, since it could theoretically be "stamped" or "printed" in relatively large numbers, allowing multiple star systems to be scouted at a lower cost, since the vast bulk of the propulsion system remains at home. interstellar laser sails (http://orbitalvector.com/Deep%20Space%20Propulsion/Solar%20Sails/Solar%20Sails.htm) are another option, attractive due to their potential to carry a significant (up to 1000 tons) payload.

http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2109

A diagram showing different laser sail craft to scale

Because there is no guarantee that terrestrial planets around nearby stars will be Earthlike, there will most likely be a need to terraform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming) any planets found in order to facilitate long-term sustainable colonisation. Thankfully, our own Solar System provides plenty of opportunities for us to get some practice in. Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Mars) is perhaps the most ideal candidate for terraforming, and initial efforts would likely be concentrated there. Terraformation of Venus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Venus) would be complicated by its extremely long day (longer than a Venusian year!), but in a way this is a good thing - it gives us an opportunity to learn to deal with slow planetary rotation speeds.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6e/TerraformedMarsGlobeRealistic.jpg/275px-TerraformedMarsGlobeRealistic.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/TerraformedVenus.jpg/250px-TerraformedVenus.jpghttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/TerraformedMoonFromEarth.jpg/280px-TerraformedMoonFromEarth.jpg

From left to right: terraformed versions of Mars, Venus and the Moon

The terraforming of such worlds would take a considerable amount of time, giving us ample opportunity to develop the technologies and material resources required to achieve interstellar travel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_travel), as well as the development of any social engineering required of some methods of interstellar travel. Depending on the technological and material resources available, there are a number of methods (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aj.html#lifespan) through which our interstellar colonists could achieve their objective. Once they arrive there, they could terraform any planets if needed, and start the cycle of development and colonisation once again.

http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=2110

A map of star systems within 3 parsecs, some of which may contain habitable planets

There is another approach to insterstellar colonisation which could be undertaken at the same time; the more gradual method which can be called "Stepping Stone" colonisation (http://orbitalvector.com/Interstellar%20Flight/Stepping%20Stone/Stepping%20Stone.htm). While the method of interstellar colonisation outlined before leaps from one star system to another, stepping stone colonisation goes from Earth to the Moon and Near-Earth Objects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-Earth_object), from there to the inner Solar System, to the outer planets, to the objects of the Kuiper Belt such as Pluto-Charon, Eris (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eris_%28dwarf_planet%29) and Haumea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haumea_%28dwarf_planet%29), from there to the Oort Cloud (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_Cloud) (Or perhaps colonists could hitch a ride on a number of suitable comets), and after that colonising any interstellar brown dwarf systems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_Dwarf) and planemos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planemo), before reversing the process once the margins of another system are approached.

http://www.revleft.org/vb/picture.php?albumid=170&pictureid=1357

A brown dwarf planetary system, with the Solar System for comparison. Orbital distances have been scaled down for practical reasons

In this manner, it hoped that the potential of this planet to provide a true home for human beings is realised, and that that realisation and it's legacy is preserved from any disaster, natural or otherwise, that could potentially afflict one planet or star system.

[Picky Bugger]

Ahh Noxion, I always enjoy your posts as they hold an deeply thought-out and cleverly conceived message which I enjoy reading. I will comment on the actual topic once the football and beer has drained from my already dull brain.

Hold this speace... :)

[piet11111]

and the next step after all that would be a full blown dyson sphere ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere


A Dyson sphere (or shell as it appeared in the original paper) is a hypothetical megastructure (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megastructure) originally described by Freeman Dyson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson). Such a "sphere" would be a system of orbiting solar power satellites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_satellite) meant to completely encompass a star (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star) and capture most or all of its energy output. Dyson speculated that such structures would be the logical consequence of the long-term survival and escalating energy needs of a technological civilization, and proposed that searching for evidence of the existence of such structures might lead to the detection of advanced intelligent extraterrestrial life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_life).

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

and the next step after all that would be a full blown dyson sphere ?

That depends. After the time it takes to colonise a number of nearby star systems, it might be possible to build one of these types of Dyson sphere (http://orbitalvector.com/Megastructures/Dyson%20Spheres/DYSON%20SPHERES.htm):


LIGHT PRESSURE DYSON SPHERE
Tech Level: 20

Also called a Gossamer Sphere or a Dyson Bubble, this is basically a star-englobing solar power array. This type of star envelopment is accomplished with a thin framework and large swaths of micron-thin solar-sail like material, used to gather the sunlight for the star for power. This energy is then beamed to nearby locations for use or storage.
Light pressure from the star alone is enough to keep the sphere rigid and "inflated," though it may also be rotated to help ensure structural stability. The sphere and its components need not revolve around the star either; the entire bubble may be nothing more than a collection of super-sized statites, counter-acting the star’s gravity through photon pressure alone.
Unlike other types of Dyson Sphere, a Gossamer Sphere need not take possible habitation into account, and can be constructed at a radius much closer in to the central star. The sphere may be a loose swarm or one consolidated sphere; both configurations would work as well for energy-gathering. A single consolidated Sphere would require less over all material, where as multiple layers of a swarm would allow for more redundancy.
In fact, a Gossamer Sphere would require much less building material than any other object of this class. Where other Dyson Spheres would require the disassemble of most or all of the terrestial bodies in a solar system, a Dyson Bubble could be built using only the mass of a single large moon.
I think Sirius (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius) would be an ideal location, using Sirius B (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf) as a source of raw materials.

[ZeroNowhere]

Have you got any sources on the feasibility of damming the Atlantic, and the possible effects of it?

[JohannGE]

This post was inspired by a realisation for the need of long-term planning of civilisation. Tell me what you think.


Superficialy reassuring.

Sounds remarkably like free beer tommorrow.

File away alongside the "Tommorrows World" style 60's promise of personal jet packs for everyone, 70's promises of lives of leisure for all as new technology removes the burden of work from our shoulders and 80's promise of scratchless CD's.

We won't get fooled again!

[Cult of Reason]

The damming ideas are crazy, in my opinion. The ecological damage caused would likely be horrendous (for a start, restricting flow of water into the Mediterranean would drastically alter the salinity and so kill off many species) and it is probably easier to simply cover more of the Earth with concentrating solar power especially as, assuming static population, we are unlikely ever to need to cover the majority of it.

Fiddling with the ocean currents is equally risky and unnecessary when it comes to electricity. Not worth the effort. The equivalent amount of material could more efficiently be spent on solar, wind, etc..

[Q]

I agree with the points raised by Cult of Reason. The changes in seacurrents and climate are important and may as well destroy more than we gain from it. Another example of this would be the mirror project of lighting up Siberia. Not only light gets transmitted by this, but also warmth, which has a major impact on climate aswell. Even a huge solar power station in the Sahara might have disastrous effects as it also would cool down the desert a lot, changing wind patterns. I'm not saying we shouldn't therefore do these projects, but that research into these effects is wanted and needed.

Other sources of energy which weren't (specifically) mentioned were fusion energy, which I think has the potential of easily being able to provide humanity of all their energy needs, and geothermal energy, which might have more of an impact on the short term.

[Killfacer]

If i ever become emperor of earth, then i'm having Q and cult of reason executed. Then i will make Noxion my cheif advisor so we can have loads of bad ass technological shit.

I've heard a lot about space elevators. I also heard something about nano carbon rods being involved. Anyone care to explain?

cheers.

p.s Great post noxion.

[Cult of Reason]

Even a huge solar power station in the Sahara might have disastrous effects as it also would cool down the desert a lot, changing wind patterns.

David Mackay, in his book Sustainable Energy - Without the hot air (the link to which is in my signature), considers this and concludes that there would be a small warming effect as the collection of the energy coutns as extra absorbtion. He notes that this effect is small in comparison with greenhouse gases. I.e. the climate effect of concentrating solar power in deserts is not a significant problem.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Have you got any sources on the feasibility of damming the Atlantic, and the possible effects of it?

According to this 2009 USGS report (http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/cement/mcs-2009-cemen.pdf), the world produced 2,900,000,000 metric tons of cement, the primary ingredient of concrete which is used to construct dams.

One of the links I provided gives the dimensions of the foundations for the dam to be 2.5km wide, and 300m high. The straight of Gibraltar's narrowest point is 14km wide, but the original plan called for it to built further out so we'll double it, giving the essential dimensions of the foundation to be 2.5 x 0.3 x 28km, giving it a total volume of about 21 cubic kilometres.

Regular concrete consists of 1 part Portland cement, 2 parts dry sand, 3 parts dry stone, and 1/2 part water. assuming these proportions to be average among concrete types (as no doubt a dam of this size would involve many different types of concrete), that means that cement will constitute just under one-sixth of the total volume of the structure. 21 / 6 = 3.5 cubic kilometres.

Concrete has an average density of 2400 kg/m³, meaning that the 21km³ dam would mass approximately 50,400,000kg or 50,400 metric tons (don't quote me on this as it feels too small despite doing the calculations at least two different ways), well within European production capacity according to the USGS report.

Herman Sörgel was an architect, so I trust that he did the necessary calculations with regards to material strength and whatnot.

As for environmental effects, I'm no ecologist, but I believe they would at least include increased salinity of the Med and shifts in precipitation patterns.


Superficialy reassuring.

Sounds remarkably like free beer tommorrow.

File away alongside the "Tommorrows World" style 60's promise of personal jet packs for everyone, 70's promises of lives of leisure for all as new technology removes the burden of work from our shoulders and 80's promise of scratchless CD's.

We won't get fooled again!

What the fuck are you talking about? If anything, it's attitudes like yours that strangle funding and resources before they even get off the ground. Either that or politics, such as the Nuclear Test Ban treaty hobbling our ability to use nuclear-powered spacecraft.

Promises of jetpacks, lives of leisure and scratchless CDs turned out to be wrong for a variety of reasons. Jetpacks have numerous engineering issues, not least of which is a propulsion system compact and powerful enough to take a human being any significant distance. The ability of technology to allow less people to do more enabled capitalists to squeeze more productivity out of workers. Scratchless CDs are entirely irrelevant in the era of MP3s and filesharing.

There's more to the issue than your simplistic dismissal.


The damming ideas are crazy, in my opinion.

It's only a small part of the whole plan, and despite my fondness for the idea it is entirely optional. Which is why I find it so strange that many in this thread have fixated upon it.


Other sources of energy which weren't (specifically) mentioned were fusion energy, which I think has the potential of easily being able to provide humanity of all their energy needs, and geothermal energy, which might have more of an impact on the short term.While I'm personally confident that nuclear fusion will achieve break-even point, the emphasis in my plan was on utilisation of technologies that we already have (Dams, CST, nuclear bombs etc) or are simply a matter of scale.


I've heard a lot about space elevators. I also heard something about nano carbon rods being involved. Anyone care to explain?

The cable of a space elevator would ideally be constructed of carbon nanotubes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_nanotubes) since they have the potential tensile strength required for the task. The real problem is producing them in long enough quantities.

[Cult of Reason]

[QUOTE]It's only a small part of the whole plan, and despite my fondness for the idea it is entirely optional. Which is why I find it so strange that many in this thread have fixated upon it.[/QUOTE

It is fixated upon because the hugely damaging effects it would have are obvious and out of proportion with the benefit.

[JohannGE]

[QUOTE=NoXion;1402694]it's attitudes like yours that strangle funding and resources before they even get off the ground. Either that or politics, such as the Nuclear Test Ban treaty hobbling our ability to use nuclear-powered spacecraft.[QUOTE]

Cheers, good to know it's all been worthwhile.

:lol:

[al8]

Other sources of energy which weren't (specifically) mentioned were fusion energy, which I think has the potential of easily being able to provide humanity of all their energy needs, and geothermal energy, which might have more of an impact on the short term.

On that note I recomend a video of a researcher that claims to have developed a viable small scale fusion reactor, much smaller than the tokamak design. Very exciting stuff;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhL5VO2NStU

[Picky Bugger]

Geothermal energy certainly isn't the answer as there are very few places where it can be harnessed to a useful degree and it is very expensive. I do believe smaller countries such as Finland use it almost entirely but the population is only around 4M, scaling it up to reduce more power is not very likely.

Someone mentioned the mirror project in Siberia now the issue of warming will most likely be minimal as it is likely that the albedo for these regions high as already high as it usually is in snow covered/ permafrost / tundra environments. This means that already the majority of the heat is reflected back, you have to remember that the area used for power generation would be relatively small in comparison to the region and that any warming of Siberia would have little affect upon the global heat system as a whole since Antarctica is overly dominant.

There are some very interesting ideas here and it is obvious to see why people would disagree, the damning of the Med for instance will never happen as there are too many parties that will hold different opinions never mind all the countries that will have to be consulted but this is only one issue.

With regards to the space travel I don't have enough faith in current society to believe that these projects will even begin in my lifetime but it is indeed something for the future.

[mikelepore]

Fiddling with the ocean currents is equally risky and unnecessary when it comes to electricity.

I think a good test would be to submerge a field of paddlewheels in the water for some portion of the path of the Gulf Stream that flows from the Florida strait to Newfoundland. The ocean current would be slowed down slightly, but the extent of the effect is adjustable. The technology isn't too different from what is already done at the Niagara Falls electrical power plant, where the water flowing from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario turns a bunch of 10-meter-diameter rotors.

[black magick hustla]

from what i gather from my profs terraforming is more of a "pointless fun" thinking scenario than anything that seems feasable. i mean the physics are sound but the efforts needed to accomplish those things are beyond the scope of everything

[piet11111]

from what i gather from my profs terraforming is more of a "pointless fun" thinking scenario than anything that seems feasable. i mean the physics are sound but the efforts needed to accomplish those things are beyond the scope of everything

if everything had to be accomplished in the time span of 1 lifetime then not much would be happening.

just think about the great wall of china that kept the Chinese safe for century's and took several generations to finish but i would never call that pointless fun because obviously it served its purpose.
the same goes for terraforming it will take generations (provided life extension does not take off) but the results will be more then worth it.

[mikelepore]

A problem with terraforming Mars (g=0.38 m/s^2) is that it doesn't have enough gravity to keep much of an atmosphere. The molecules with lower molecular weight are more likely to reach escape velocity, so oxygen tends to leave while carbon dioxide tends to stay. There reason Mars lacks a substantial atmosphere now is because it already lost the one that it previously had.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

A problem with terraforming Mars (g=0.38 m/s^2) is that it doesn't have enough gravity to keep much of an atmosphere. The molecules with lower molecular weight are more likely to reach escape velocity, so oxygen tends to leave while carbon dioxide tends to stay. There reason Mars lacks a substantial atmosphere now is because it already lost the one that it previously had.

It's not that great of a problem if you're willing to invest in mechanisms for oxygen replenishment. Any oxygen loss will be extremely gradual. I just wish I could find the figures, since Google isn't helping.

[black magick hustla]

A problem with terraforming Mars (g=0.38 m/s^2) is that it doesn't have enough gravity to keep much of an atmosphere. The molecules with lower molecular weight are more likely to reach escape velocity, so oxygen tends to leave while carbon dioxide tends to stay. There reason Mars lacks a substantial atmosphere now is because it already lost the one that it previously had.


also mars lacks a magnetosphere because it rotates very slowly, thus solar wind scraps the atmosphere too.

[Q]

also mars lacks a magnetosphere because it rotates very slowly, thus solar wind scraps the atmosphere too.

Mars has a slightly longer day that Earth. Maybe you're mixing up with Venus?

[black magick hustla]

Mars has a slightly longer day that Earth. Maybe you're mixing up with Venus?

Actually you are right. However, mars does have a very weak magnetosphere but this has to do more with the fact that its core has cooled and therefore it cannot act as a dynamo anymore.

[mikelepore]

Last year NASA put out a press release about that: "Solar Wind Rips Up Martian Atmosphere"

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2008/21nov_plasmoids.htm

[mikelepore]

Here's my wild guess. People will end up cutting bricks out of the surface of Mars, make a building out of them, and live indoors. The modules that they bring from home will be a lesser part of the volume of the habitat. They will also use genetically modified plants that will perform faster photosynthesis. If they don't find more water in the soil than they now know about, they may decide to live nearer to one of the poles, where water ice was already confirmed.