How the Race to the Bottom Blows Up Space Dreams

Cheaper and faster, those two ideas dominate current industrial economies and strangles progress towards space faring economies.

Consumption as the Old Driver vs. the Need for New Drivers

We are use to this the model, buy stuff to satisfy our wants and needs at low, low prices. In the space age will will be doing the same things but it will be STEM (Science, Tech, Math and Engineering) and design powered. However, STEM powered things are costly mainly because the people who dream up these STEM based things demand a high pay for their training.

The Race to the Bottom

Seth Godin in a recent post said “[t]here's a race to the bottom, one where communities fight to suspend labor and environmental rules in order to become the world's cheapest supplier. The problem with the race to the bottom is that you might win”. Seth Godin goes onto explain that companies were able to charge a higher price and workers were able to earn more because of inefficiencies in the system. Now, as we remove each inefficiency, wages and prices drop. It seems we are stuck in this cycle.

Macro-engineering is the Solution

Macro-engineering project change the game. They remove inefficiency but rise wages because of a higher quality product being produced. This is why space is so important, we can make better stuff in zero gravity. We can produce more energy in space. It is the difference between bargain beef and organic beef.

Photo by gynti_46

Why The Launch of the Falcon 9 is Significant

Infrastructure. There is a long list of reaons why this launch is important, but I think that list is missing what it means about the infrastructure supporting orbital space activity. It means that we are producing enough rocket scientists that hiring one won't break the bank because they are so rare. It means there are machines and companies that can produce parts at high precision with a reasonable price tag. It means our orbit has become a big enough part of daily life that launching rockets can sustain a profit seeking corporation. It is similar to the way business have an easier time when they have access to railroads, seaports and highways; investors now see a less harsh environment. In addition to that, it means to trail blazers can move onto building infrastructure to the next stop in space, the moon.

What do you think of my idea? Is it a valid point?

Image via SpaceX.

Infinite Regression

I had this idea after reading a few chapters of the book I'm reviewing, Space Mission Analysis and Design (It is really dense, it could take me a while to review everything). Basically, I feel one of the economic arguments for a moon base could be an infinite regression. Right now, moon bases have plans to become spaceports and spaceship factories. This is suppose to support voyages elsewhere. However, I ask why is it economical viable to go elsewhere. If the answer is to hop to the next place to get resources to keep hopping or to stop at the next spaceport, it is an infinite regression. This model will work for science exploration in space, but for businesses and to make a profit, you will have to justify going to elsewhere. If you do not have a great way to profit else where, the moon factory won't make money.

Now, a real reason that can be economically supported is launching satellites from a moon base. That could be a great reason to settle the moon.

Quantum Energy Teleportation and Space Habitation

Big thanks to @Astroengine for explaining this theory to me and linking to a post about it. You should follow him, he’s great.

Quantum Energy Teleportation could change the way we conduct space habitation. This game changing possibility works by copying the traits of on particle to another. Imagine two word documents, one call ParticalA.doc and another, blank one called ParticleB.doc, Quantum Energy Teleportation would be like cutting the contents of ParticleA.doc and then pasting that information into ParticleB.doc. Thus, you will move the file without moving the actual document. Only, Quantum Energy Teleportation destroys the source particle. 

First, there are a ton of really cool ideas for applications in space settlement in the first comment, written by MrT, to the Discovery News article Teleporting Energy. I think there are some really interesting ideas in that comment that should be explored. 

But I would like to explore another aspect of this technology. The search for energy is the driving force of space habitation. But, without the lost energy due to traditional means of transmissions, there would be no reason for humans to leave Earth. But, the critic may say “but there are rare resources and minerals that are abundant in space”.

I reject the criticism, with energy teleported to us directly from the sun and power planets on other planets would make artificial transmutation child’s play. The ability to transmit information faster then the speed of light would mean that telepresence can be established on any planet.

But, this might not all be bad for space habitation. This method of using space might be cheaper and safer then sending people, thus it would allow humanity to use space faster and maybe using those supplies will keep comfortable on Earth until we are ready to settle space.

In Case You Skimmed

-The ability to teleport energy reduces the market force of space settlement

Reactions

-Without energy demands driving us, what other reasons could we have for space settlement?

Resources

Photo credit: Flickr user Kliefi

arXiv:1002.0200v1 [quant-ph]

Ouellette,Jennifer , “Teleporting Energy” Weblog entry. Discovery News. February 4, 2010. February 8, 2010 <http://news.discovery.com/space/teleporting-energy.html>

SPC #18: Open Worlds

Welcome to the Sunday Paper Club. Every Sunday, this blog will offer an analysis of a paper on space habitation and other related topics. These are my opinions on a weekly scientific paper; basically I read the paper and write down my thoughts are I read it. They are subject to my perspectives and believes. I am open to debate, so if any reader believes I have misinterpreted something in a paper, please point it out. I'm only a student and I'm still learning how to read these papers and interpret them. All quotes and ideas are from the paper unless otherwise noted.

This week we are reviewing the paper Lunar Industries and Their Value for the Human Environment on Earth. I am using a new format based on the Lifehacker article Back to School: Keep an Academic Reading Journal.

Article Information

Title: Lunar Industries and Their Value for the Human Environment on Earth

Author: Krafft A. Ehrick

Date: August 1973

Journal: Acta Astronautica

Volume: 1

Issue: 5-6

Article Overview

Currently, humanity operates in a closed world system. We only extract resource from earth; we do not interact with another planetary body in a measurable way. However, an open world existence will give humanity to opportunity to grow endlessly, without damage to the biosphere. This is accomplished through the industrialization of space. Thus, the moon becomes critical because it sets the tone on how we use space. This paper shows use how we can exploit the moon in a profitable way and a path way to becoming a truly space faring species. 

Key/Interesting Quotes

“the information oriented and information controlled interaction with the lunar environment on the basis of synergistically integrating three aspects: extraction of lunar materials for local autonomy, cycling, and utilization of the "waste products" for industrial "export products", in order to supply orbiting installations and lay the foundations for the gradual evolution of a functionally integrated lunar and orbital industrial complex whose ultimate purpose is to reduce the ecological burden on the terrestrial environment, thus improving the human environment without reducing the level of productivity required by modern civilization.” Page 1

“We will never be able to develop or reach another inhabitable world unless we solve first the present crisis [population growth] on this one.” Page 1

“Open space is in many respects a more benign environment than the Earth's surface, to say nothing of the underwater environment”, in industrial applications Page 2

“…we do not live in a closed, isolated world—a ‘spaceship Earth’--but in an open world, on a planet that can be the future cockpit of the solar system.” Page 2

“…long-range thinking in the industrial world should raise its sights to an open-world development program whose central premise is the operative indivisibility of Earth and space” Page 3

“Openworld development means the upgrading of low living standards without destroying existing high living standards.” Page 3

“The central aspect of the extraterrestrial industrial expansion is the acquisition of new environments…” Page 7

“…the industrialization of the Moon will be crucial for the extraterrestrial industrial expansion” Page 7

“The open-world development concept places lunar operations into a new perspective by recognizing the lunar industrial potential and its value for the human environment on Earth. This philosophy adds the spirit of the industrialist to that of the explorer and scientist.” Page 8

“We must further think in terms of lunar production figures of thousands to hundred thousands of tons annually and of cislunar transporter capacities of several thousand tons, if we want to even begin making sense economically and being relevant to the needs of open-world development.” Page 8

A separate study “found that an investment of $150 billion over 30 years would provide a lunar industrial production and transportation capacity (within geolunar space) of at least one million tons annually of raw materials, semi-finished and finished products.” Page 9

“At the center of the lunar disc at high noon, the subsolar horizontal surface is offered 1.35 kw/m^2” Page 10

“The mare basalts are dark, iron-rich and relatively heavy. The anorthosite is a lightly colored, aluminum-rich, less dense material, a major rock-type of the lunar highlands. The lunar anorthosites are more depleted of potassium, uranium and thorium than the mare basalts.” Page 11

“…the Moon seems to be depleted in volatile elements and enriched in refractory elements [metals with high melting points]” Page 13

“even a shallow underground facility, or one covered with regolith, would be well insulated from the variations in solar heat input.” Page 14

“In the lunar environment we can apply strip mining techniques and expend vast amounts of cheap energy without ‘polluting’ the environment. Because this environment is "dead" there are no cyclic processes to consider.” Page 18

The moon’s purpose in space habitation is “the gradual reduction of the industrial burden on the terrestrial environment, thereby improving the human environment while the human industrial capacity continues to grow.” Page 19

“mining on the Moon does not mean going after a particular metal but rather extracting a large number of metals in proportion to their abundance and partly in proportion to the energy expended.” Page 25

Personal Response to the Paper

A while ago, I read the Hard SF article Can Space Colonization End Overpopulation? and I completely abandoned the argument that space habitation can help overpopulation. However, this paper may have proved that space habitation will aid over population indirectly. Population is limited by the resources available which in turn is limited by the amount of energy available. The moon provides an answer to both of these problems, industries can collect resources needed on Earth with abundant energy though solar and nuclear power.

However, I am not comfortable with one of the assumptions the paper makes. The paper assumes there is a seamless transition between the Earth and the moon. Due to the Earth’s gravity well and atmosphere , I feel this is not true. Lunar goods will need to be protected when they are brought down to Earth. Items from Earth while need powerful rockets. So, this paper is leaning towards a reusable system, which is extremely expensive to implement.

Questions Raised by the Paper

This paper assumes the moon is bone dry, now since NASA has confirmed water on the moon, how does the author’s argument change?

Can we be as carefree as the paper suggests when using resources in space?

Nuclear charges are used as the primary mining explosive in this paper, how do we over come the political obstacles to using nuclear explosives in space?

When do we see the return on the investment on the moon?

Do We Really Need a Space Habitation?

Today I’m going to put on my fringe science fiction hat today. Let’s assume, for this post, that that is an organization that has the most epic, l33t engineers who can build anything and unlimited money.

Let’s say this organization develops antigravity. One could use this device to make insulin crystals on Earth. One can make perfect spheres on Earth. All without the costs to leave the gravity well of Earth. This would be a nail in the coffin of space habitation.

This organization is just getting started. Let’s say they develop a machine that can remove carbon-dioxide from the astrosphere with a negative carbon footprint. While they are at that, the make a radar that can pick up every asteroid coming towards Earth 100 years in advance. Then, they make a device that can launch onto a asteroid and push it away. They make ways to stop earthquakes, tsunamis, and all the other humanity ending disasters. Why would humanity need to back up the biosphere? Humanity’s security would be guaranteed already.

Let’s say they developed a machine that can create any material, creating any rare resources that can be found in space in vast quantities. You know, seeing how we have no development obstacles, let’s develop a warp system to allow use to warp any Near Earth Object (NEO) we choose with low energy costs to Earth’s surface safely.

Of course, this organization would develop a power planet the size of a normal power planet that can supply the power humanity consumes now a thousand times over.

My question to you, would we need space habitation in anyway if this powerful organization where reality?

Reactions

-If all of the economic benefits of space habitation existed on Earth, would there still be a reason to inhabit space?

In Case You Skimmed

• If there is no economic reason for space habitation, it’s hard to justify.
• This is my experiment to see what justifications people come up with outside of economic ones.

SPC #7: Maslow Windows

Welcome to the Sunday Paper Club. Every Sunday, this blog will offer analysis of a paper on space habitation and other related topics. These are my opinions on a weekly scientific paper. They are subject to my perspectives and believes. I am open to debate, so if any reader believes I have misinterpreted something in a paper, please point it out. I'm only a student and I'm still learning how to read these papers and interpret them. All quotes are from the paper unless otherwise noted. All papers I review are available for free online.

This week we are reviewing the paper 21st Century Waves: Forecasting Technology Booms and Human Expansion Into the Cosmos.

Photo by Grant MacDonald

One of my favorite rebuttals for economic arguments against space habitation is the Maslow Window theory. However, when I asked a question on the blog Ask Me Anything, I found myself unable to explain this theory in depth. If I am going to continue to use this theory to support the space habitation argument, I must at least read the paper.

Basically, Maslow Windows are economic time periods that are similar to the 1960s, the height of the space race. Every major event in human history tends to be clustered in 56 year bursts. This theory suggests that economic booms are the driving force behind history's biggest wars and finest engineering projects.

An optimistic society is a more productive one. During times of economic prosperity, the people of the world tend to be happier. If they are happier they are more productive, plus they have the time and resources to dream. I can tell you right now, no major progress in space will be made during this recession. In my opinion, humanity is focused on the negative; we are a pessimistic society. I see extreme movements with negative opinions of the future, like the 2012 movement, forming and growing. If we think humanity is on a downward slide to it's doom, if we think that we will never return to the good old days, then we will not have the will to better ourselves.

I feel, right now, only the most passionate people are in the space field. You can only find people who where born to work in this field, supporting and funding this field. The general public simply doesn't care about space anymore. Dreams of space cities are crazy when your in a world stocking up emergency supplies for a end of the world date which was born out of fear for the future.

It is possible that this recession, a time where the space field is in danger, was born out of the lack of hope in the future. If you thought everything was going downhill, you would roll up into a ball and pull all your money into gold. Look at the news, just looking at this small sample of human event, it is very reasonable to conclude that we are all doomed. But, if you where to look at each industry, each area of human life in depth, there is reason for hope. "The critical factor is our belief about what's going to happen to us".

"Rene Dubos [said] [t]he most distressing thing about the modern world is not the gravity of its problems...it is the dampening of the human spirit...[o]ut very survival as a species depends on hope". I agree with and have first hand experience with this statement. I'm graduating from high school on Monday, yet the morale of my high school's class of 2009 is at an all-time low. My class has a sense of impeding doom; the child-free movement is strong in my class, 2012 is a favorite topic. My class does not have the ambition and passion and all the other characteristics of youth that a fresh, 18 year old, high school graduate should have. Let me give you an example, this is a discussion thread on Facebook. The names have been blacked out for legal reasons. My real name is Daniel Sims.

I see comments like this all the time. We are the youth and we are hopeless. Space dreams can not survive if they can't even seek refugee in our youth. The human spirit is crushed and with it, dreams of space. The Internet might be a factor in triggering the mindset change needed for space habitation. With the Internet, bigger audiences then ever are reachable. One person can try and comfort someone with a dark mind. The great events that happened today are easier to find.

Something I found interesting was the description of a Macro-engineering project: "although sometimes practical in purpose, they are often aimed at satisfying intangible needs of a spiritual or psychological nature and are highly inspiring". A mass space habitation project would be enough to push my classmates out of the dark frame of mind. Since it is a need, maybe, as we get darker, the support for any inspiration will grow. Just like how people start wanting to eat anything as they get hungry.

Maslow windows also call attention to the need for humanity to stop fighting each other. Maslow windows are often shattered by war. The reason we are not in an infinite time of abundance is because of the destruction war brings. "To a visitor from Mars, it must have appeared that the Western world in 1914 was on the brink of Utopia". WW1 brought us away from that joyous brink. Something that is stopping NASA from getting more funding is the Iraq war; if we weren't in Iraq, we might have more money for dreams.

Maslow windows are triggered by great technological developments. If someone where to develop a very cheap rocket, then humanity would less economic reasons not to go, and more reasons to go to space. Which we need to have because if we do not establish space habitations by 2025, according the the theory, we will have to wait till 2081.

Top 37 Reasons for Space Habitation

These are the top reasons I've found for space habitation. Some of these ideas are from spacequotes.com.

1.To provide a base for space mining
2.To allow for space manufacturing
3.To provide an environment for hazardous industrial processes
4.To use the hard vacuum of space for industrial applications
5.To use microgravity for industrial applications
6.To use extremes of hot and cold that are available in space for industrial applications
7.To reduce launch costs by building rockets in space
8.To use the sun's energy without the interference of the Earth's atmosphere
9.To have a place where we can move all industry
10.To use the materials found on other planets and asteroids
11.As an insurance policy against humanities extinction
12.To provide a base for planetary defense
13.As part of a multi-generational plan; to ensure that our great-great-great-great....-great grand children not only survive but prosper.
14.To have no regrets; to not miss the opportunity we have today to colonize space and not have the window close on us
15.To avoid having to face our sun dieing out with no way to survive; this is one task which we can not pull an one-nighter to finish, we need at act now
16.To ensure we past the critical point were we can either destroy ourselves or colonize space without destroying ourselves
17.To inspire humanity to go farther
18.To inspire children to pursue a STEM education
19.To give humanity a common goal
20.To give humanity a reason not to fight each other
21.To pull the global economy out of recession
22.To fulfill the need to explore
23.To advance science
24.To act on our knowledge
25.To live up to our commitment to those who have made our existence possible; we can not die out after so many generations of work and so much progress
26.To reduce our impact on Earth and it's resources
27.To again have an open frontier
28.To solve our most pressing problems
29.To gain a simpler, more independent, life
30.To create wealth
31.Reduce the pressures that limited land causes
32.To provide a field of almost infinite resources, thus reducing the sense of limited resources that causes humans to view each other as enemies
33.To reduce the pressures of overpopulation
34.To provide a chance for humanity to apply what it has learned from it's mistakes
35.To allow humanity's continued growth
36.To remove the psychological cap that a seemingly limited environment causes
37.To allow everyone to have a high quality of life


What reasons do you have for space habitation?Why should we make the huge effort to become a spacefaring species?
(Last updated: April 07, 2009)

The ISS might have an Economic affect

I was reading the article ISS: Closing in on completion, in the March 2009 issue of Aerospace America, written by Astronaut Tomas D. Jones and this part of the article caught my eye.

Congress declared the station a national laboratory in 2005, and NASA is actively seeking government and industry customers who want to use the ISS for a wide variety of research and applications. NASA will not charge for utilities and crew time, but experimenters must find their own transportation to the station, a major obstacle for smaller enterprises. Low-cost commercial transportation to [low earth orbit] (from SpaceX, Orbital Sciences and others) may offer relief.

By doing this, NASA and the US government is opening the door for any company to get involved in space. Yes, launching to space is expensive, but building a space lab is even more expensive and a well thought out plan should attract enough investors to fund prototype transportation. So, the ISS might be the proving ground for space industry as industrial methods are developed on the station. This could lead to a boom in the space industry as well as manufacturing in general as new materials and techniques as created.

Also, I strongly believe that space-based manufacturing will be the center piece to any space habitation efforts. By providing a incubator for space industry, the ISS could lead to space habitation. A mass scale space habitation effort, just like any other macro-engineering project, would be a huge boost to the economy.

Well, those are my thoughts, what does this quote mean for you?