Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Colonization of Venus

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 115 posts

Re: Colonization of Venus

#71

Post by zackmorris »

If anyone wants breadcrumbs, I just did a deep dive and there are a couple of promising technologies that could terraform Venus on roughly a human timescale of 100 years:

* Sun shade/sail near L1 tipped up to 35 degrees to remain still: 5 micron polymer film (1.5-3.5 billion tons or 10-25 million SpaceX Starship launches at 150 tons each) or 50 layer graphene (15 thousand tons or 100 launches). Liquid CO2 ocean forms at 31 C or 88 F, or dry ice glaciers at -78 C or -108 F result in nitrogen atmosphere dropped from 92 times pressure to close to Earth's pressure. Shade rotation can simulate a 24 hour day.

* Comets to increase water and spin rate: 50-100 100 km diameter comets from Kuiper Belt at 30 AU, nuclear rocket using 1% of water to gravitationally slingshot comets by planets over 20-100 years to impact at equator, resulting in 50 day retrograde or 64 day prograde rotation (down from 243 days). Decreases temperature and sulphuric acid enough for microbes to start fixing CO2 and acid.

The "hard" parts are getting bots into orbit to blow graphene bubbles to form a honeycomb, and inventing open-ended fusion rockets to avoid containment issues.

5 cm by 50 cm graphene sheet grown in 20 minutes:

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep21152.pdf (warning PDF)

Direct fusion drive:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009457652... (PDF available)

Magnetic mirror concept for open-ended fusion rocket:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_mirror

Magnetic reconnection thruster:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=caM94mem5K4

I think the sun shade is probably how we'll slow global climate change until we can plant the 1-10 trillion trees it will take to reverse it (mechanical carbon capture can't be scaled enough practically), but I digress.

Note that the blocker is actually getting to low Earth orbit (LEO) since delta V is straightforward with ion engines. That will arguably be a solved problem once big "dumb" rockets like Starship scale. I'm a big fan of JP Aerospace's airship to orbit concept and other magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) craft, but it's unclear if they will be able to achieve heavy lift. Aerospike engines and exotic rockets are being evolved by AI currently.

Re: Colonization of Venus

#72

Post by aetherson »

glenstein wrote: post #25
Robotbeat wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Untrue. You can actually mine the Venusian surface for metals. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (the vast majority of the elements used by life) can be extracted from the atmosphere, as well as sulfur. So from an elemental standpoint, it actually could be self-sufficient. Not that you’d WANT to avoid trade with other planets, but it is possible. It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficu…

Yes, but! It's very hard. But you are a million percent right that the Venusian surface has lots of fantastic metals, largely tied up in basalt and volcanic ash. The bad news to my understanding is that they're kind of pulverized and evenly spread out and requires lots of refining/processing, and not necessarily so much in the way of veins/ore deposits ripe for harvesting (though I could be mistaken). But back to how…

It'd be interesting to try to imagine a Venusian colonization that's like two separated levels: an atmospheric area where most people live and where you grow food, and then a subterranean (yes, yes, sub... aphroditean?) where you mine and so forth, and there are brief, fraught transitions between the two layers but no actual habitation of the surface or lower atmosphere.

Re: Colonization of Venus

#73

Post by mikestew »

Robotbeat wrote: post #4
1970-01-01 wrote: post #3

It would be a colony constantly depending on Earth supplies and you would be constantly rebuilding it. Just like every other planet, nothing can permanently survive in upper atmosphere. It would be easier to have a massive ISS-style station in orbit, with a tethered cable elevator for research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_Microorganisms_in_the...

Untrue. You can actually mine the Venusian surface for metals. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (the vast majority of the elements used by life) can be extracted from the atmosphere, as well as sulfur. So from an elemental standpoint, it actually could be self-sufficient. Not that you’d WANT to avoid trade with other planets, but it is possible. It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficu…

It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficult than for Mars.

We’ve not terraformed anything, ever, but now we can compare the difficulty of terraforming of one planet versus another? “It’s possible”? So is turning lead into gold.

Re: Colonization of Venus

#74

Post by benced »

mikestew wrote: post #73
Robotbeat wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Untrue. You can actually mine the Venusian surface for metals. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (the vast majority of the elements used by life) can be extracted from the atmosphere, as well as sulfur. So from an elemental standpoint, it actually could be self-sufficient. Not that you’d WANT to avoid trade with other planets, but it is possible. It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficu…

It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficult than for Mars. We’ve not terraformed anything, ever, but now we can compare the difficulty of terraforming of one planet versus another? “It’s possible”? So is turning lead into gold.

Your point is taken but we've turned lead into gold: https://home.cern/alice-detects-conversion-lead-gold-lhc/

Re: Colonization of Venus

#75

Post by WalterBright »

teachrdan wrote: post #70
Robotbeat wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really doubt your veracity about this. It’s literally illegal for billionaires to geoengineer the Earth to stop global warming (at least in several states). Doubtless you would also object to that as well. In which case it’s not actually about solving Earth’s problems but about not liking those who are doing it.

Billionaires could trivially fund uncontroversial projects like planting trees or solar electrification, especially in the developing world, both of which would help stop global warming. But I'm not holding my breath waiting for Elon or Larry to start doing either of those things, or anything else that would actually help mitigate or reverse climate change.

There are a lot of complaints about the environmental consequences of data centers. Musk is investing heavily in putting data centers in space.

Re: Colonization of Venus

#76

Post by amanaplanacanal »

ShinyLeftPad wrote: post #66
b65e8bee43c2ed0 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>likely including the willingness to have many children. why exactly do you find it likely? on the contrary, most of the colonists would need to be highly educated professionals for the colony to be self-sufficient, so they would be even less likely to have many children than average people. besides, in very near future, the TFR of 1.5 will pass for "willingness to have many children".

Because willingness to have many children depends on safety. Birth rate falls not (just) because "education".

From my (admittedly limited) knowledge of the research, education of women is the best correlate for lower birth rates. Once women have other options, staying home and popping out babies is less popular.

I don't know exactly how that might work in the scenarios we are discussing though.

Re: Colonization of Venus

#77

Post by WalterBright »

zackmorris wrote: post #71

If anyone wants breadcrumbs, I just did a deep dive and there are a couple of promising technologies that could terraform Venus on roughly a human timescale of 100 years: * Sun shade/sail near L1 tipped up to 35 degrees to remain still: 5 micron polymer film (1.5-3.5 billion tons or 10-25 million SpaceX Starship launches at 150 tons each) or 50 layer graphene (15 thousand tons or 100 launches). Liquid CO2 ocean forms…

Mechanical carbon capture is a joke. There's no way it can scale enough to be measurable. It also requires energy - coming from where?

Trees, on the other hand, can scale, and they get their energy from the sun.

Re: Colonization of Venus

#78

Post by mikestew »

benced wrote: post #74
mikestew wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficult than for Mars. We’ve not terraformed anything, ever, but now we can compare the difficulty of terraforming of one planet versus another? “It’s possible”? So is turning lead into gold.

Your point is taken but we've turned lead into gold: https://home.cern/alice-detects-conversion-lead-gold-lhc/

I said it was possible. “…fleeting quantities of gold nuclei”, and probably worth far, far less than it cost to make. Given that, I stand by my statement. :-)

Re: Colonization of Venus

#79

Post by WalterBright »

empath75 wrote: post #10

Every time I read about colonizing another planet, I think about how we correctly don't want to colonize the bottom of the ocean or the Sahara desert because it would be completely uneconomical, and yet either would be much easier than this.

There's no reason to colonize the ocean bottom. For one thing, it's completely dark and cold. For another, I don't see any way you could build a spacious structure that could resist the pressure.

Re: Colonization of Venus

#80

Post by jsbisviewtiful »

Robotbeat wrote: post #4
1970-01-01 wrote: post #3

It would be a colony constantly depending on Earth supplies and you would be constantly rebuilding it. Just like every other planet, nothing can permanently survive in upper atmosphere. It would be easier to have a massive ISS-style station in orbit, with a tethered cable elevator for research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposing_Microorganisms_in_the...

Untrue. You can actually mine the Venusian surface for metals. Carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen (the vast majority of the elements used by life) can be extracted from the atmosphere, as well as sulfur. So from an elemental standpoint, it actually could be self-sufficient. Not that you’d WANT to avoid trade with other planets, but it is possible. It is also possible to terraform Venus, although much more difficu…

> You can actually mine the Venusian surface for metals

By "surface" do you mean the ground of Venus? The odds of a mining operation happening on the ground of Venus seems like science fiction at best, impossible at worst. Between the high winds, corrosive atmosphere, outlandish heat and extreme pressure any vehicle on the surface would be torn to shreds likely within a few hours (which has so far been the case for all landers that actually survived the landing) - and that's not even getting into the idea of getting things off the ground. Extraction from the atmosphere would likely be the only method unless something significant changes with the entire planet. Refining those materials would require a lot of machinery being in Venus's orbit that we'd have to get there, as well. Speaking of the conditions though...

> It is also possible to terraform Venus

Everything is hypothetical at best regarding this and would require a level of time and resources no government nor company would want to invest for an outstanding "maybe".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terraforming_of_Venus

Post reply on HN