Let me go through the reasons why I don't believe the Moon is habitable.
First: Radiation. There is no shielding if you're on the surface. There is no atmosphere, nothing eqivalent to the Van Allen Belt. If you're on the surface, you're going to be exposed to the full force of the solar wind, not to mention cosmic rays. In short order, to borrow a phrase from Andy Weir's Mark Whatley, your cancers will have cancer.[1] The safer options would be to burrow deep and only spend much time on the surface at night, when you can use the Moon itself as a radiation shield. Daytime surface operations would be best handled by robots. But even they could break down from radiation. Not to mention if a solar storm sends a coronal mass ejection the Moon's way, being caught out on the surface would be a very bad thing.
Second: Dust and sand. Dust on Earth is soft. Sand is soft. On Earth, they are weathered; water and wind break down the jagged edges. Look at rocks that have been exposed for awhile, the edges are worn smooth. Water breaks down almost everything over time. The Appalachians are a very old mountain range that, in their youth, were likely as tall as the Himalayas. None of that happens on the Moon. As the Apollo astronauts found out, lunar dust gets everywhere. It will abrade everything. It will get into the mechanisms of any habitat. It will degrade optical sensors. It will erode everything.
Third: The gravity well of Earth. Almost everything will need to be send up from Earth, until such time, decades from now, that raw materials can be mined from asteroids. There are some raw materials, but not many. If there is water, it will be precious and likely fought over until exhausted by the tragedy of the commons.
The cost of sending anything to the Moon is exhorbitant. Artemis might lift 30 tons to the Moon, but that stuff has to be landed. If even a third of it is payload (ten tons), that works out to roughly $200,000 per pound ($4B/rocket). Plus, if it's needed on an emergency basis, it takes three days to get there, assuming that a rocket is fully fueled and sitting on Launch Pad 39B. If not, flinging something there will take months.[2]
Fourth: Lunar gravity. Humans have spent millions of years evolving to live on a 1G planet. We didn't evolve to live on a 1/6thG planet. It will take constant work for people to stay in shape to be able to tolerate a return to Earth, and, given human nature, long-term residents may not always put in the work. Further, any couple the desires to raise a family, including birthing children, will need to return home in order to do it. Having raising a child on the Moon will be a experiment on a nonconsenting individual, and we aren't Nazis.
I am sorry if I'm harshing somebody's calm about this. But I just don't see how the Moon will be habitable within the lifetimes of almost everyone reading this today. Not until somebody comes up with a far cheaper of launching mass to the Moon.
__________
[1] Mars, at least, has some atmosphere and increased distance from the Sun.
[2] There's the Starship booster, which has a better-than-even chance of blowing up.
This Should Be A Piece Of Cake, But…
4 hours ago
11 comments:
Moon regolith is basically abrasive as its al shattered rock. THis is known as we have been there and brought some back.
Eck!
You were supposed to live underground and have a source of water
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbsxNwSOzRI
I went back to reread President Kennedy's speech about going to the moon. Despite the difficulties and issues that you raise, I think it's worth the cost and effort of a well planned mission. Call me crazy and head in the clouds, but even if the payoff is after my lifetime (likely) that's ok with me.
That said, I agree with you that we need robust conversations about new missions in order to meet all the objectives, if we decide to go, and ensure they benefit everyone. We don't have to go it alone either as there will be nations that want to partner with us and help bear the burdens and share the rewards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_choose_to_go_to_the_Moon
This is better than any summary I could post.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/science/astronomy/the-real-reasons-nasa-is-returning-to-the-moon/ar-AA1LvwsK
The only reason to be there is an observatory on the far side, away from Earth's electromagnetic & light pollution. Considering the telescopes & so on already in space, I doubt we'd need a human presence after construction, short of annual (or longer) maintenance, or in case of a meteor strike or other damage.
If we need exciting & inspirational exploration, the oceans are sitting there waiting.
You're a Harsh Mistress, Comrade!
The level of commitment required to do it seems well beyond us as things stand. Read that a government stable across multiple decades and taxation high enough to properly fund it out of discretionary money that won't cause rifts in the stability of said government. And the willingness to wait the decades that it would actually take.
-Doug in Sugar Pine
Nice wrap, One quibble though: ain't no amount of exercise in 1/6G will maintain equivalence. A week or two might be ok, but prolonged stays mean no going back. Not to visit, certainly not the effort necessary to childbirth
There's a recent popular culture story line from one of the Star Traks: a species from a heavy-g planet joins the crew and in spite of her best efforts to maintain equivalence when she goes home she gets crushed
Heinlein touched on it too, before he went libatardian, in The Green Hills of Earth ...
What's a libatardian? From my education of many years ago liberals were open minded and willing to change and conservatives were stuck in the past and want to keep it that way. Liberals make up the majority of good writers. Even though personally I found Heinlein very boring by taking a good short story and stretching it out to a full length book. Must have been paid by the word.
Libatardian is Libertarian, Republicans smoking pot. Nothing 'liberal' about it
And since we've gone down the Heinlein rat-hole, those that know know there are no liberals; no pacifists, peace freaks. Only opportunists awaiting the opportunity to shake out the Jolly Roger ...
A world with no actual pacifists would be very sad.
I hate to be the one to break it to you on that last point, but "our" (Musk's) space program *is* run by nazis, in addition to literally the entire field and all of the early NASA programs being literally designed and run by good-old-fashioned German nazis.
Post a Comment