Jon Goff has a truly excellent post on what will be required for space settlements, with useful historical analogies. I've always considered the LDS analogy quite apt, both in terms of types of technologies and infrastructure needed for the emigration, and the motivations. As he notes, unfortunately, the space community often uses unuseful historical analogies and/or fails to recognize where they break down.
But what he describes would be a true "Interstate Highway System" for space, as opposed to what Mike Griffin considers one (Ares/Orion).
Good post. Freeman Dyson had a good discussion of self-financing colonization efforts in (IIRC) "Infinite In All Directions", in which he compared the economics of the Mayflower Pilgrims to that of the Mormon emigration. The Pilgrims were actually pretty prosperous people for their time, middle- or upper-middle-class in the country with the highest (or maybe second-highest, after the Netherlands) per-capita GDP in Europe. Dyson believes, reasonably so, that space will never really get settled unless people can afford to self-finance their settlement, or at least belong to a group that can collectively self-finance the project, as the Mormons did. The equivalent of the Pilgrims' situation would be to imagine an upper-middle-class family in Connecticut or California liquidating their house(s), their 401 Ks and other investments, selling their BMWs, etc., and paying for their tickets with those funds - - probably several million dollars.
Jim,
Exactly--Monte also brought up that point in a comment on my blog. Really makes you realize how far we need to go, and how woefully inadequate the current space transportation evolutionary path truly is. I'm pretty sure it's possible to get the price to the point where a wealthy middle-class family could self-fund a colonization attempt. Probably even before I'm too old to try it myself.
But there's a *lot* of stuff that has to happen between now and then. And the current path things are on right now *does not* lead where I'm interested in going.
~Jon
...the current path things are on right now *does not* lead where I'm interested in going.
That depends on which path you mean. Certainly the NASA path doesn't, and never has. But I think you're currently participating in a different, more hopeful path. Which is presumably why you're doing it...
I'm still trying to figure out why enough individuals would go to into space on a permanent basis to make a self-sustaining colony. I know why the species would benefit from having eggs in a second basket in case of an asteroid strike or bio-weapon malfunction, but "for the greater good" usually doesn't convince people to accept undertakings of this magnitude.
Both the Pilgrims and the Mormons were seeking religious freedom. Given the political climates in the nations of the world today, that doesn't seem like it would provide a driver. Too many nations like the EU, US and Canada serve as a pressure valve accepting the religious minorities of other lands. There's no need to go to the Moon. Moreover, the weather sucks.
I concede and agree that the Moon and the Asteroids may have many useful and profitable to exploit resources, but that doesn't make them colonies any more than oil rigs out at sea are. They're temporary hardship posts at best. They don't have the draw of an under-populated New World.
The only strategy that I see working is "Moon as Australia." India and/or China decide they want the material and energy resources on the Moon, and they're willing to send political dissidents, prisoners, whatever to work the mines to get them. These worker colonies, left alone long enough, produce second and third generation residents who simply consider it home. From there a living colony may attract further (free choice) colonists later on.
Rand,
Quite correct. I was mostly referring to the current direction mainstream aerospace (both NASA, AFRL, and many of the people in the primes and in aerospace academia is headed.
Brock,
While religious freedom seems pretty reasonably protected in most Western countries, there's many people concerned about civil rights and political freedom. Between many people on the left (and right) trying to turn the US and much of the rest of the Western world into a nanny state, and those who seem interested in letting the US slide into a police state, there's some people who might be interested in getting off this rock.
But the biggest thing is that while right now, it may not really be clear what motivations will make people want to leave, that doesn't necessarily matter. Even if people had a good reason to want to leave, the technologies and infrastructures needed to actually leave are going to need to be developed in a market oriented way. Ie as parts of various business plans that are addressing real markets that come up along the way. Many of those markets make zero sense right now, but will be quite profitable at some point when the infrastructure is far enough along. The important point is finding what markets there are that are here and now (or at least near enough term to be economically interesting), and start working in the right general direction. That way, even if the vast majority of the human race isn't interested in space colonization, at least it will be possible for those of us who are. After all, in spite of how challenging moving 5000 people off planet every year would be (as I mentioned in my blog), that's less than 1/1,000,000th of the population of earth. I'm sure if the cost could be dropped to the point where it was affordable to upper middle class families in the US for example, that you could probably find plenty of people who have their own reasons for wanting to go.
~Jon
I'm still trying to figure out why enough individuals would go to into space on a permanent basis to make a self-sustaining colony. I know why the species would benefit from having eggs in a second basket in case of an asteroid strike or bio-weapon malfunction, but "for the greater good" usually doesn't convince people to accept undertakings of this magnitude.
In addition to religious freedom, previous colonists committed themselves to difficult and dangerous journeys for personal reasons like adventure or for financial opportunity. Today, if you want to live an adventure-filled life, you don't have a lot of options.
Are there enough modern-day immigrants who're willing to risk it all to take off for distant lands or has most of that been effectively been bred out of us? Is life too comfortable to be willing to confront the hardships of off-planet colonization (if it were technically possible)?
Larry J wrote:
Are there enough modern-day immigrants who're willing to risk it all to take off for distant lands or has most of that been effectively been bred out of us? Is life too comfortable to be willing to confront the hardships of off-planet colonization (if it were technically possible)?
============================================
There are plenty of people that risk their lives, families, and everything they own to come to this country every year. It may have been bred out of some population segments, not all. The deserts of the south west, and the waters of the gulf have the bones to prove it.
First you need industry. It doesn't have to be mining but that would do. Industry needs labor (even if just to push the emergency stop button on the robot.) Labor wants family (are the salaries good enough for one more ticket?)
Another thought is it's just a question of intersection. $20m gets you to orbit. Who knows what the cost to be outfitted would be, but let's say it's another $20m. How many have both the desire and money? Drop that to $5m total per person and the number jumps up considerably.
When it gets to the price of a house in NY, FL or CA the rush is on.
On the wagon train you owned your wagon, but the space wagon could be leased. If built durably it could last for generations. You only need it long enough to reach your destination (you're not coming back) and drop your supplies at the new homestead. It's probably a cycler.
Enough people and they start helping one another (within reason) so you don't have to have everything yourself. People start to trade. Some become indentured. Others become fantastically wealthy (selling the equivalent of picks to miners no doubt.)
...or food, water and air. It's a living.