Xref: utzoo sci.bio:4540 sci.space:28084
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.space
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!aurora.physics.utoronto.ca!neufeld
From: neufeld@aurora.physics.utoronto.ca (Christopher Neufeld)
Subject: Re: Why bother? (was Re: Terraforming, sun shield)
Message-ID: <1991Mar6.012138.25077@helios.physics.utoronto.ca>
Sender: news@helios.physics.utoronto.ca (News Administrator)
Nntp-Posting-Host: aurora.physics.utoronto.ca
Organization: University of Toronto Physics/Astronomy/CITA
References: <PH49X2w163w@bluemoon.uucp>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 1991 01:21:38 GMT

In article <PH49X2w163w@bluemoon.uucp> bmb@bluemoon.uucp (Bryan Bankhead) writes:
>
>Terraforming is my least favorite option for creating living space for 
>humanity.. The energy cost estimated for the terraforming of mars, the 
>most earthlike planet in the solar system is in the area of 10^23 watts, 
>or about 100 million times as much as the entire energy consumption fo 
>humanity for all purposes.  and that is just to convert the atmosphere! 
>
   Well, nice big numbers, but meaningless. Watts are units of power,
not of energy. For instance, the Sun puts out a continous power of
4.24x10^26 Watts.

>There will still be an immense effor in setting up a self sustaing 
>ecology. for such a cost we could create billions of O'Neill colonies a 
>lot faster.
>
   Well, I believe that terraforming would be performed with life forms
doing much of the work. Earth was terraformed from a methane/ammonia
mess without the use of huge artificial power systems, it just took a
little while. Humans don't have the capacity now to generate even one
tenth of one percent of the power which the Sun pours down onto us, so
comparing energy costs with human power consumption or generating
ability is pretty pointless. At the moment, humans are a small
perturbation (in terms of energy) on the machinery of the Earth.
   According to some articles I was reading a few months ago, if the
surface of Venus were scarred, and liquid water made to collect on the
surface (two very big 'if's, but indulge me), a significant fraction of
the atmosphere would be absorbed into the exposed rocks. The water
catalyzes the reaction so that it occurs on the scale of centuries
instead of eons.

   As has already been pointed out, terraforming will not be used to
alleviate overpopulation problems on Earth. That doesn't mean it's
pointless, though I don't imagine that people will really want to make a
liveable gravity well out of it. Why go all the way out of this gravity
well just to leap down the next one? Mars might stand a better chance
than Venus of being terraformed, as it's a much more likely place for
colonization, and once there, some people might want to give their
surroundings some variety.


-- 
 Christopher Neufeld....Just a graduate student  | Note: new host.
 neufeld@aurora.physics.utoronto.ca    Ad astra! | helios will still
 cneufeld@{pnet91,pro-cco}.cts.com               | forward my mail to
 "Don't edit reality for the sake of simplicity" | me on aurora.