Moon Exploitation

[Phenix]

Hello,

I would suggest to set our Natural satellite under International protection laws that would forbid Man kind to exploit or even build anything on its surface or on orbit.

Thanks

[joertexas]

Hello,

I would suggest to set our Natural satellite under International protection laws that would forbid Man kind to exploit or even build anything on its surface or on orbit.

Thanks

Given that the moon is a ready source of aluminum, titanium and probably water, I don't think that's a very practical course of action for short term access to space.

Later on, once a stable infrastructure is in place in Earth orbit, then we could see about limiting or eliminating our presence there.

JR

[Phenix]

Given that the moon is a ready source of aluminum, titanium and probably water, I don't think that's a very practical course of action for short term access to space.

Later on, once a stable infrastructure is in place in Earth orbit, then we could see about limiting or eliminating our presence there.

JR

Why should we transform the Moon as a big trash as we have already done already in lots of Earth's regions. Could we let the Moon's beauty as it is for the next generation.

What would you say to next generations when a child would ask you "I saw in an historical book a picture of the Moon, please explain me why there is so much dust around it now ?"

[Boxy]

I am curious as to how territorial rights will be assigned to the Moon, and what the legal basis will be for settlement. Will the Homestead Act from the States be applied to the Moon, i.e. those who settle it first will claim it whole hog? Will there be set radii around settlements that will be assigned to the country that settled it? Will international treaty partition the moon? Or will it be subject to its own laws and regulations, to be decided by the future Mooninites?

I suppose only time and legal disputes will prove which course turns out best.

[Phenix]

I would KISS mankind if there is no Moon exploitation :D

[moonus111]

you'll kill us all.

[Phenix]

you'll kill us all.

No, certainly not, on the contrary I am worried about preserving Earth and all life that is why I am taking distance from any Moon exploitation concepts. I am certainly NEO oriented as for the Space economy boom. I really do not understand your assessments.

[Rhyshaelkan]

Tis a shame. I want to take PERMANENT in an Moon first direction. Instead of an asteroid mission.

However proof of concept seems to be more of what PERMANENT is after. In which case, an asteroid mission that returns useful items is relevant. But it is doubtful to return a profit in the short term. An manned asteroid mission would be slow to return a profit to investors.

Expanding industry in space is the direction I would like PERMANENT to take. However that will not show profits early. It will take years, perhaps even decades to turn a profit.

Luna is the door to the Universe for mankind. Industry on Luna will cut the leash requiring every scrap to be launched from Terra.

I could enumerate many reasons why Luna is key. But I have done so elsewhere on the forum already ;)

[Phenix]

However proof of concept seems to be more of what PERMANENT is after. In which case, an asteroid mission that returns useful items is relevant.

IMO, It does make sense.


But it is doubtful to return a profit in the short term. An manned asteroid mission would be slow to return a profit to investors.

Since the first rocket launch, what kind of profit is there besides commercial satellites ? Again, to make something happen as the good physics, action=reaction, the questions on the "action" are who, why and where to start from. There are zillions of anwsers on the how and what are the investments considerations. Chris Colombus went through the storms of all the questions "who", "why", "where" and "how" and finally got to the destination. Yes, it takes time to make profit and I guess all the merit is on the progress and perseverance to target the objective slowly but certainly. I just hope that I will be still alive when the Space economy will be at its dawn and share the pleasure of the achivement.



Expanding industry in space is the direction I would like PERMANENT to take.

I am sharing with you, Rhys, the same thought on what direction should PERMANENT take actions on expanding the Space industry but on a global scale.

[joertexas]

IMO, It does make sense.


Since the first rocket launch, what kind of profit is there besides commercial satellites ? Again, to make something happen as the good physics, action=reaction, the questions on the "action" are who, why and where to start from. There are zillions of anwsers on the how and what are the investments considerations. Chris Colombus went through the storms of all the questions "who", "why", "where" and "how" and finally got to the destination. Yes, it takes time to make profit and I guess all the merit is on the progress and perseverance to target the objective slowly but certainly. I just hope that I will be still alive when the Space economy will be at its dawn and share the pleasure of the achivement.



I am sharing with you, Rhys, the same thought on what direction should PERMANENT take actions on expanding the Space industry but on a global scale.

I'll be delighted when we have a permanent presence in space, with some real infrastructure and the capability to expand further out-system from LEO.

JR

[jsteele235]

I'm totally in agreement with Rhyshaelkan on this one. I would be absolutely livid if the U.S. signed any treaty banning lunar resource utilization.

[Rhyshaelkan]

'He that controls the Moon controls the Universe'. From a human stand-point at least. It is the perfect stepping stone into the beyond.

More later. But admin duties call.

[moonus111]

I'm going to try to pull this down to reality a bit.

There are real world reasons to go to Luna Today. Prior to today there have been no economical reasons to do so. Only now are the economics coming around. Unless somebody wants to destroy earth there is no reason to advocate making a "park" out of the moon. If colonizing the moon can save the environment and the economy the only shortfall is that people do not know.

It is simply unethical to preserve the moon and not the earth. I was born in California, and grew up there, I have seen how unhindered unethical environmental tactics can have a detrimental effect on the environment itself.

I am staunchly of the opinion that Global warming has two parties. The party that is in the issue for political power, and the party that truly believes in saving the world. Place me in the second of the latter. Any man that denies the potential behind Space Power Satellites, and Colonizing the moon, is a demagogue bent on maliciously depriving people of their god given right to freedom. This issue has the ability to expose those who seek such hatred of mankind. Phenix needs to continue to make his case, because we need these criticisms to be fully capable of identifying the "haters" and the underlying philosophy. Why would someone worship the universe and advocate the death of man?

Only conjecture: Nihilism, suicidalists, fear that communism will never be, fascism may require a subdued humanity.

This is a real world issue and it is a TODAY issue, bickering over the details and being shy about the promises is not the way to go! Colonizing the moon has the potential to save life itself because where man goes he must take life to new bounds. Who would deny life it's right to live?

[Phenix]

Mr. Knox,

I really do not like the orientation of your taking on this thread based on darken insunations you have concerning Life ! I joined this forum to participate on the Space development concepts without any demagoge or what so ever ridiculous thoughts your are expressing. Again, I am worried on preserving Earth and all Life.

By doing this, you are destroying the freedom of expression and in the same time giving a very bad picture of what I am sharing. If your intention is to discredite what I am saying, that's up to you and if you do continue is that direction I will simply quit my participation, because of being pissed off with seing so many discussion having such tendencies to discredite persons based on stupid assumptions openly on the Web without knowing that person. It is your behaviour problem, resolve it.

[Rhyshaelkan]

We are here to talk about PERMANENT's goals. If we cannot stay on topic I will close the thread.

If any member cannot discuss a topic without attacking a member, we will space that member.

[moonus111]

Again, I am worried on preserving Earth and all Life.

We agree on this.

Phenix,

Apologies about the flame. I have read this thread several times over the past few days, and I think I've begun to understand your concern. Pollution on the moon, is an issue that needs to be addressed. However, banning men from setting foot there is something that can hurt so many people. I think this is what you are talking about. If not correct me please.

Currently there is no anthropogenic moon pollution at all. Any perception of dust around the moon is due to the earths atmosphere. There is a phenomenon whereby the sun statically charges dust on the moon and it rises up a few feet, but it falls back down to the ground when the sun goes down and it cannot be seen from earth.

Certainly when man sets a permanent foothold on the moon there will be dust thrown up by our manufacturing processes, and this issue will become a major problem when our numbers become to great. This will not be an issue at first, because there will be to few of us. As our numbers grow it will become a problem. There are things that can help mitigate this problem.

Notes & Ideas:
- Preserving a large part of the earth side moon (but not all because the best ores are on earth side theoretically)
- Relegating any large manufacturing site to be underground, and on the far side of the moon
- Limiting He farmers based on dust measurements
- Men will live in burrowed out caves at least 30 feet below the surface this will limit large amounts of pollution
- Banning the use of nuclear weapons, nuclear energy sources, and any nuclear strategy (come on there's enough energy to go around up there!)
- Since the Earth-Moon economy will likely revolve around energy for fertilizer (solar panels for fixed nitrogen, carbon, and hydrogen) If earth nations feel that development is harming the moon the "persuasive" tool will be sanctions limiting the sale of fertilizer to the moon.
- Since there are much more resources furthur out the moon may become a staging point rather than a permanent Nation. This would limit moon pollution, due to a limited population.

Is this the issue you are bringing forward?

[Rhyshaelkan]

I am against any sort of trashy behavior. I have to remind others and myself in my own home to pick up after ourselves. With the speed of things in orbit it is not just an appearance problem but a true lethal problem.

With all these things in mind though, I am still quite in favor of an Moon First plan. Lunar industry will open the pathways to, literally, everything else in the heavens.

In addition, due to it having come up before, while I do not live in fear of mankind destabilizing the orbit of Luna(simply too much mass). While material will be taken from Luna, material will also be brought to Luna. Also, rocket science is rather precise. Too many kg one way or another is bad for rockets. So there will be logs of all material that come and go to Luna.

However I might point to something I heard long ago, what we humans do pales compared to the natural order of things. The Earth picks up some 40000 tons a day of asteroidal and/or interstellar dust. Man and his efforts are minuscule.

[Phenix]

Apologies about the flame. I have read this thread several times over the past few days, and I think I've begun to understand your concern. Pollution on the moon, is an issue that needs to be addressed. However, banning men from setting foot there is something that can hurt so many people. I think this is what you are talking about. If not correct me please.

Certainly when man sets a permanent foothold on the moon there will be dust thrown up by our manufacturing processes, and this issue will become a major problem when our numbers become to great. This will not be an issue at first, because there will be to few of us. As our numbers grow it will become a problem.


Thanks for the apologies, Logan, yes, my concerns are about pollution, the number of us that would settle on the Moon as great numbers.

I am against any sort of trashy behavior. I have to remind others and myself in my own home to pick up after ourselves. With the speed of things in orbit it is not just an appearance problem but a true lethal problem.


Rhys, exactly, Human behavior and Moon land claims as territory wars are the lethal problems that can put in danger Earth and all Life.
I hate to say that, and I am no antropologist at all, but historically what drives for wars are for territories and what is being driven by business and personal interest since Cromagnon.

My question is : Are we mature enough to control ourselve and to avoid catastrophy on always picking up after ourselves ?

[Rhyshaelkan]

I suppose another reason to colonize other places is for that very possibility. We are not mature enough as a race. To that end we need "insurance policies" so that if one area of human residence is destroyed, through human action or inaction or exterior event, the race will go on. Luna, Mars, Asteroids, they all have great possibility for colonization.

While there are great arguments for and again Lunar usage. Even though it is not as efficient, in delta-v terms, as other locations in the solar system. Every two weeks Luna lines up with Terra's equator allowing easy access. Not so much if you are trying to colonize/work with a certain asteroid.

If you can get a fuel pump, of any various fuels, on Luna then you can cut the delta-v required by an Terra launch by a great deal. More cargo can be cargo instead of fuel-cargo. Allowing for cheaper lower-mass launch vehicles, or more cargo per launch from Terra