Posted on Mar 29, 2016
Should We Colonize Venus Instead of Mars? | Space Time | PBS Digital Studios
993
1
4
1
1
0
Is NASA focusing on the wrong planet? I believe so. Read the article, watch the video, let me know what you think. Bullet points in case you don't have the time for either (or both):
--Venus is easier and less costly colonization target (the energy required for orbital insertion is less than mars, and even less than the moon)
-- Venus is closer to earth than Mars. Round trip is 30-50% shorter depending on launch window.
-- Venus has 4x more insolation than Mars. Read: energy.
-- Thick atmosphere protects from radiation and meteorites. And, a great deal of Venus' atmosphere is C02. C02 = easy oxygen.
-- This is a biggie: Venus is .9 earth gravity, where Mars is only .4. We know that this causes significant bone loss in long-term exposure.
-- At about 30 miles altitude, pressure and temperature become manageable…and the atmosphere is dense enough to float things…like cloud cities. NASA is working on this concept, termed (HAVOC): High-altitude Venus Operational Concept.
-- No space suit required. You'd only need protection from elevated heat, acid rains, and C02. All things we already easily manage here on earth.
-- It might be possible to sequester enough CO2 out of the Venusian atmosphere to cool it down…eventually allowing access to the surface.
http://www.citylab.com/tech/2014/07/the-surprisingly-strong-case-for-colonizing-venus/373560/
--Venus is easier and less costly colonization target (the energy required for orbital insertion is less than mars, and even less than the moon)
-- Venus is closer to earth than Mars. Round trip is 30-50% shorter depending on launch window.
-- Venus has 4x more insolation than Mars. Read: energy.
-- Thick atmosphere protects from radiation and meteorites. And, a great deal of Venus' atmosphere is C02. C02 = easy oxygen.
-- This is a biggie: Venus is .9 earth gravity, where Mars is only .4. We know that this causes significant bone loss in long-term exposure.
-- At about 30 miles altitude, pressure and temperature become manageable…and the atmosphere is dense enough to float things…like cloud cities. NASA is working on this concept, termed (HAVOC): High-altitude Venus Operational Concept.
-- No space suit required. You'd only need protection from elevated heat, acid rains, and C02. All things we already easily manage here on earth.
-- It might be possible to sequester enough CO2 out of the Venusian atmosphere to cool it down…eventually allowing access to the surface.
http://www.citylab.com/tech/2014/07/the-surprisingly-strong-case-for-colonizing-venus/373560/
Space
Science
NASA
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
0
0
0
"No space suit required. You'd only need protection from elevated heat, acid rains, and C02. All things we already easily manage here on earth."
Uh, no? The atmosphere is primarily CO2, with very little nitrogen (nitrogen forms the bulk of our breathable air). We would still need a way to breath.
There are constant winds of over 200 mph, which means the clouds are constantly moving, as would any "cloud city."
Uh, no? The atmosphere is primarily CO2, with very little nitrogen (nitrogen forms the bulk of our breathable air). We would still need a way to breath.
There are constant winds of over 200 mph, which means the clouds are constantly moving, as would any "cloud city."
(0)
(0)
SN Greg Wright
PFC David Johnston 'Protection from C02' patently means you'd need breathing apparatus. However, breathing apparatus does not equal space suit. I stand by the statement. The purpose of a space suit is to maintain pressure so that you don't ex-(or im-)plode. If that wasn't a problem, you could simply wear scuba gear in space, provided you had protection from the cold. Point is, at the altitudes we're talking about on Venus, pressure isn't a problem, so no space suit (as we define them now) needed. You would of course need a mask and a source of oxygen, as well as some sort of material to stop from becoming a puddle of mush from the rains.
As for the cities 'moving'...well. They're not tethered to anything. Why not?
Let me ask, did you watch the vid or read the article?
As for the cities 'moving'...well. They're not tethered to anything. Why not?
Let me ask, did you watch the vid or read the article?
(0)
(0)
PFC David Johnston
The combination of those protections would be pretty similar to a space suit.
Moving at over 200 mph would put a lot of strain on any kind of structure. Plus the risk of them ramming into each other if they are flying around freely.
I didn't read it yet, I was responding to your bullet points.
Moving at over 200 mph would put a lot of strain on any kind of structure. Plus the risk of them ramming into each other if they are flying around freely.
I didn't read it yet, I was responding to your bullet points.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google