This week we are reviewing the paper Irrational Dreams of Space Colonization. I am using a format based on the Lifehacker article Back to School: Keep an Academic Reading Journal.
Article Information
Title: Irrational Dreams of Space Colonization
Author: Lynda Williams
Date: January 2010
Volume: 22
Issue: 1
Page: 4-8
 |
Image by Flickr user Temari 09 (traveling) |
Article Overview
While the knee jerk reaction would be to attack this piece, this article offers a refreshing and an overview of all the most effective counter-arguments to space habitation. These counter-arguments should be understood and carefully considered by all space cadets; this paper asks the space community to seek Earth based solutions, instead of space based solutions, for many of the problems humanity faces.
Key Quotes and My Comments
"...we have five billion years, plus or minus a few hundred million, to plan our extraterrestrial escape. The need to colonize the moon or Mars to guarantee our survival is not pressing" Page 4.
My comment: I agree, it might not be pressing if we only consider the sun as out primary threat, but I still think we need to maintain an active space program and slowly work our way to leaving this solar system.
"There are many Earth-based technological strategies that can be developed in time to mediate [deadly asteroids and comets], such as gravitational tugboats that drag the objects out of range" Page 5.
"This is the core of the ethical dilemma posed by space colonization: should we put our resources into developing human colonies on other worlds to survive natural and manmade catastrophes, or should we focus all of our energies on solving and mitigating the problems that create these threats on Earth?" Page 5
My comment: This is a point that must be researched more by the space community. I feel there is a way to gain resources from NEOs to create a planetary defence against astroids...but the environmental issues are harder to solve with space. We need to find the set of world problems which space is the only solution, then we can have a real discussion.
"Currently, there are no means for generating the energy on the moon needed to extract the helium-3 to produce the promised endless source of energy. Similar energy problems exist for the proposed use of solar power on the moon, which has the additional problem of being sunlit two weeks a month and dark for the other two weeks" Page 6.
My Comment: This is a valid point that could kill a lot of plans for space habits on the moon and it also kills the helium-3 hype.
"To date, no space-faring nation has ratified [The Moon Treaty], meaning the moon, and all celestial bodies including Mars and asteroids, may be up for the taking" Page 6.
" Every year, since the mid-1980s, a treaty has been introduced into the UN for a Prevention of an Arms Race in Outer Space (PAROS), with all parties, including Russia and China, voting for it, except for the United States and Israel" Page 5.
My Comment: The two above quotes are really eye opening..despite all the talk of world peace through space settlements, there is still a high potential for a nation to go plant a flag in the moon and declare the whole moon their own...this would start WW3, easily. It's frustrating that we have to deal with all this political drama...not supporting these bills is short sighted...everone wins when we work together.
I think getting these treaties ratified should be the next major step of the space movement.
"Many young scientists are perhaps fueling the prophesy of our planetary destruction by dreaming of lunar and/or Martian bases to save humanity, rather than working on the serious environmental challenges that we face on Earth" Page 8.
My Comment: From my experience, many of the young space cadets are also environmentalists, but I need to prove that statement. That being said, more environmental action would be nice. However, I feel the space community is so small that we are not having a huge impact by working on space instead of the environmental movement. Personally, I support environmentalism because I know how rare this planet is...how lucky we are. I know how hard it would be to live else where. I do what I can to support green activies on campus...I think it's telling that we have no space club but a few environmental groups...but the author is right, I could be running a blog about saving the Earth instead of blogging about space habitation.
Questions Raised by the Paper
Can humanity pull off massive ecological action, space settlement and world peace at the same time?
Does the book Paradise Regained: The Regreening of Earth offer an effective counter-argument to the paper?
Can the Earth sustain future populations? (there is a ton of conflicting data out there, I may need a few posts to sort to all out)
Is it possible for one person to activily support and contribute to saving the Earth and space habitation?
Does the paper Space Colonization--Yes, But Not Now counter these arguments or further support them?
