Friday, May 4, 2007

A Floating City on Venus

Hellish Venusian surface. Courtesy NASA.gov
(Note: this is a part of The Space Colonization Series)
When space colonization is mentioned many things come to mind: Mars, the Moon, the future, terraforming, and even occasionally asteroids. One thing that rarely comes to mind, however, is Venus. And why should it? After all, Venus is Earth's sister planet from hell, registering a spicy 450 degrees C average on the surface or, in other words, hotter than Mercury. As if the temperature wasn't enough incentive to destroy any thoughts of visiting Earth's closest planetary neighbor, reaching the surface is practically impossible to do safely. Atmospheric pressure reaches 90 times that of ours on the surface or equivalent to being under 1 km of water. Venus also has a relatively slow rotation, completing one rotation every 243 earth days. Thus nights would last a very long time--not that you could see the sun during the day anyway. So, if Venus seems so obviously irrelevant to the idea of space colonization why make an article connecting the two? Well, it is Venus' hellish properties that ironically make it so appealing. The common misconception about space colonization is that colonies are built on the surface. The key to a Venusian colony is it's incredibly dense atmosphere. Remember, "...or equivalent to being under 1 km of water?" Well, things float on water; don't they...?

The Idea

The concept is actually based on a rather simple premise--buoyancy. So, we all know lower density materials rise to the top but how could this apply to Venus? Simply put, breathable gas has the equivalent lifting power on Venus as half of Helium's lifting power on Earth (about 1 kg per cubic meter). This property allows for breathable air domes to lift a colony in addition to their own weight. Tweaking the lifting power could also easily be done by storing helium or hydrogen (both extractable from the atmosphere) filled tanks. The Colonies would float at an altitude of roughly 50 km where the air pressure is equal to Earth's. At this altitude the former problems encountered with a surface colony start to disappear. The temperature chills to a much more normal range of 0-50 degrees Celsius or liquid water temperatures. This altitude also happens to sit above the thick clouds providing abundant solar energy. The clouds themselves are so reflective that pointing solar panels downward would provide almost as much energy as they would pointing upward. The solar power available above Venus' cloud top is approximately 1.9 times that of Earth's providing plenty of power for a potential colony. Ah, that sounds great, but the issue of incredibly long dark periods still looms doesn't it? Fortunately, Venus' atmospheric winds bail us out of that situation giving us a manageable 50 hour solar day and likewise, a 50 hour solar night. Increase the latitude of the 'Bubble' and everything could be packaged into an Earth-like 24 hour cycle.

Bespin from the movie Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back.
Other than the extreme density of Venus' atmosphere providing buoyancy, it also provides many important resources necessary for food and oxygen. Carbon dioxide and Nitrogen are very abundant in the atmosphere and could easily be harvested. Hydrogen can also be extracted from condensed sulfuric acid droplets, thus providing all of the basic elements required for human survival. Industrial minerals, also very important for maintaining an outpost or colony, could be mined from the surface. The hazards of reaching the surface drastically decrease in difficulty when making the attempt from an already established floating colony (or aerostat habitat). Large cables stretching the 50 km distance or less if the city lowers altitude temporarily could lift minerals from the surface directly to the habitat. Such a large habitat would have an incredibly large heat capacitance and thus be able to withstand momentary dips into much higher temperatures. So, it is starting to become clear how a floating city on Venus could theoretically become self-sustaining. That is great, but we are still left with a legitimate question: why should we want to go to Venus?!


The Reason

Obviously research of the planet is one simple and arguably lame reason to visit. That excuse could be made for practically anything. Everyone knows scientific research would take place. The type of research possible, however, could be highly relevant to our own planet. Global warming is currently a great debate across the globe and an in-depth look into Venus' extreme example of the greenhouse effect could open up many doors to explaining our own climate. Some other topics of interest include:

Before the runaway greenhouse effect, was early Venus temperate?
Did Venus once have an ocean? If so, did it ever have life?
What causes the geological resurfacing of the planet?
What is the nature of the atmospheric superrotation?
What are the aerosol particles in the atmosphere?
What is the —snow“ on Venus mountaintops?
What is the nature of the disequilibrium chemistry in the Venusian atmosphere? Could it indicate atmopsheric life?

View rest of paper [pdf]

[NOTE: pdf file is currently down so to view a transcript of the file I have decided to host it here.]
There are many other reasons to colonize Venus. First and foremost, human survival is dependent upon our expansion and colonization of space as Stephen Hawking recently made so clear. Venus is enticing for such a proposal for the three very important reasons: location, location, location. One, it is Earth's closest neighbor (excluding the Moon). Two, the colony is located in the dense atmosphere and thus it blocks harmful solar radiation naturally--problems that would be encountered on the Moon and Mars. The third is Venus' relative position to the coveted asteroid belt. It seems counterintuitive that Venus has a prime location for reaching the asteroid belt considering it is closer to the sun than Earth and the asteroid belt is even further than Earth but astrodynamics says otherwise. Here is more from the previous [pdf] explaining the concept in further detail:

In terms of flight time, Venus is closer to the asteroid belt than either the Earth or
Mars. This is shown in figure 3. For example, the minimum-energy trajectory to the largest main-belt asteroid, Ceres, takes 0.95 yeears from Venus, and 1.05 years from Earth. In terms of flight time, the closer you are to the sun, the more accessable the asteroids are. The asteroids are not actually close to each other, and hence if a habitat is to support prospecting and mining more than one asteroid, the asteroid belt is in some ways the worst location for it. An asteroid is as likely as not to be on the opposite side of the sun, and although the Earth is further from the sun, that does not put it closer, on the average, to any given asteroid. The higher orbital velocity of Venus actually makes transfer orbits somewhat faster, as well as increasing the number of transfer opportunities (that is, decreasing the synodic period).


View rest of paper [pdf]

Clearly, Venus presents a distinct advantage concerning mining asteroids, a potential 'gold mine.'

Establishing a floating city colony also gives humans much more 'practice' with inhabiting alien worlds. Learning to become air and land dwellers could prove to be a valuable asset in the future. Venus gives us a unique opportunity in regards to this because its gravity, at.904 G's, is only slightly less than Earth's. This means that colonists would not need to make frequent trips back to Earth to avoid bone loss or any other negative side effects of low gravity environments.

OK, but there are still problems right?

Of course there are. Many obstacles face a floating colony on Venus, though not as many nor the type that most would expect. The atmosphere is filled with sulfuric acid and other corrosive particles. Ceramics or some other type of layer would be necessary to prevent corrosion. Sulfuric acid fortunately has many industrial uses and could also be harvested for use. Scooping raw materials would also require quite an engineering feet, not to mention the whole project itself being a gargantuan task. The hazards overall are similar to any ambition of colonizing a planet. One big concern would be leaks. Fortunately, since the pressure is approximately equal on the inside and out, leaks of even large proportions would be slow and manageable.

Personally, I wouldn't say that colonizing Mars or the Moon first is a better or worse idea. Clearly those two options get the most attention and seem the most viable options to many. A floating city may not be as easy or as difficult as what has been proposed but the idea deserves merit. I believe the proposal is worthy enough for deeper consideration and more research. Hopefully my spreading of this idea has sparked a few of you with your own ideas. If anyone has any questions feel free to post them and I will try my hardest to address them and find an appropriate answer.

Related Articles:

53 comments:

Jon Goff said...

I'm glad I'm not the only one who has noticed this. It's a fascinating idea, not the least because the engineering for a lot of the habitat ends up being very terrestrial, and thus less exotic than say a moon base. So, it might be possible that a small floating outpost could be easier (relatively) to establish there than on the Moon or Mars.

The big challenge is coming up with a sufficiently solid market justification for such an outpost. Sure, there will likely be some scientific investigations, and sure, once the prices go down, I'm sure it'll attract some tourism. But what other markets are there that are near enough term that Venus could provide? I'm not really sure, but until one or two of those have been identified, I doubt the idea will go too far.

~Jon

Pat said...

Unfortunately, I think you're right. The biggest factor for setting up an outpost would most likely be mining the asteroid belt. The incentive for mining the asteroid belt seems to be relatively far down the road too. Maybe once it becomes cost effective, or even necessary, to mine the asteroids I think Venus would probably be the ideal first location. Once a company has an outpost on Venus they would pretty much have a monopoly and that in itself is quite a bit of incentive. But now we're talking 50+ years before the idea really even gets any attention.

I'm also glad that I am not the only one who has noticed this :). When looking for sources on this I only found one maybe two. The rest of it I either had to come up with on my own or do research independent of the Venusian colony to figure out how things would work.

Anonymous said...

The floating city picture is from the Empire Strikes Back artwork (I have a print of this from 1981 or whenever it came out). It's where they meet Lando :)

Brian Donovan said...

The links to the Venus Colony PDF in your post aren't working right now.

Anonymous said...

I thought of other big advantages.

1) earth like gravity. Humans are optimally adapted for that environment.

2) depolyment. it is a lot easier to deploy a baloon(s) to land in the upper atmosphere compaired to landing on a hard surface.

3) farming, I could envision billions of tiny capsules with plants in them being pushed out into the atmosphere to be harvisted at will later on. In fact, some have theorized that life exists there
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2843
It could be possible to make genetically modified life forms that breed and create trillions of tons worth of fuel, food, water, and resources ready for the taking.

4) fuel, looks like the chemichals there (or farmed plants) could be processed to make fuel for transportation or rockets.

Tony Pace said...

I've been working on this concept for a while as a science fiction role playing game setting.

Our rationale for the colonization of Venus is twofold. The first is that Venus is a very rich source of Deuterium, a crucial component for most forms of fusion. The second is that within our story Mars has descended into guerilla warfare, and tus Venus is the safest settlementlocation available.

If anyone is interested, try mailing me at gmail.

Josh said...

The problem with living suspended above anything is that as soon as the system that provides the suspension and protection from the elements fails, everyone dies, no exceptions.

Anonymous said...

Your concept art of the floating city with the unknown source, there ... I'm pretty sure it's a poster of Bespin, Lando Calrissian's floating mining colony in Empire Strikes Back.

Anonymous said...

The concept artwork you've posted is indeed from Star Wars IV: The Empire Strikes Back. It was painted by Ralph McQuarrie and is likely the property of Lucasfilm LTD.

Jack Killen said...

This makes sense. Hopefully we can get an administration that wouldn't imagine cutting funding for experimental/futuristic space innovation.

Anonymous said...

Josh: I bet there would be plenty of exceptions. I would guess that a Venus colony would at least have emergency backup systems in a manner analagous to a modern military ship. Anything bouyant enough to support your weight in the planet's atmosphere could work as a lifesaving device.

Pat said...

Thanks to everyone that filled me in on the source of the image. I can't believe I didn't recognize it when I first stumbled upon it.

Brian- Thanks for pointing out that the pdf is no longer working. I am hosting a copy of the pdf here( http://spacemonitor.blogspot.com/2007/05/copy-of-pdf-file.html ) for anyone who wants to see it.

Josh- I would have addressed your problem but it seems someone else already did the work for me :).

David- I like #3 a lot. Perhaps we could use genetically altered organisms to eventually terraform Venus. And you're right, Venus seems to have all of the major organic materials that we would need.

Anonymous said...

hi i agree with the articele i hopeeee lol

Jason said...

This idea has merit. Buckminster Fuller wrote that floating cities would be possible in Earth's atmosphere if the room-temperature city-sphere were at least a mile in diameter (If I remember correctly).

As for the failure of a floating city on Venus, you just compartmentalize the city and/or use multiple gas-bag construction. Perhaps direct sunlight and cloud-top reflected sunlight would both be used for plant terraces on the top and bottom of the floating city and a deep root or keel could use a thermal cycle (read geothermal, venerathermal?) for electrical generation.

I can imagine many services a floating venus colony could provide. It could be a base for solar observations and maintaining solar satallites which will be critical for warning of solar weather. It could farm food for earth's minions in an environment that is arguably safer than floating farms on earth's oceans or agri-forming currently non-arable land on earth. It could also be a major source of raw life support materials for colonies on the moon, Mars and beyond.

After thinking about the orbital speed, perhaps Mercury is also a good idea for supporting stations off-earth with structural material and emergency support missions. How about a blog on that. :-)

Pat said...

Actually that's not a bad idea. Colonization of Mercury is theoretically viable in the shadows of craters on the polar region.

And you're right about Mercury being an ideal place to 'gain speed.' The solar constant near the planet is roughly 6 and a half times the constant near Earth. This means a solar sail could potentially have 6.5 times the thrust!

Thanks for the inspiration :). It might be awhile before I can get it published because I'm working on a couple other articles at the moment but I would definitely be expecting something on it. Plus with "unpopular" ideas like these it can sometimes be difficult to glean materials on the subject.

Jason said...

BTW, I was lead to your site from a discussion at the Bad Astronomy - Universe Today combined forums site. (www.bautforum.com) In case you're not familiar with it, Bad Astronomy refers to Phil Plait, the famed Bad Astronomer, who debunks astronomy misperceptions. The aforementioned discussion is here (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=59971) incase you want to stop by to share or seed some ideas.

Pat said...

Thanks for the link to the thread! This is exactly the sort of discussion I was hoping for. It's things like this that sometimes make me want to add a forum to my blog but I don't think I quite have the traffic/demand yet. Hopefully things continue to grow and maybe one day I can open one up :).

BTW, I'll probably join BAUT under the handle Pat Says or SpaceMonitor. I haven't decided yet.

Anonymous said...

I think the floating Cities on Venus is by far the best idea in 50 years for getting our space faring feet wet. Here is my copy/paste from another linked site. I think Hollywood is destroying our ability to act on our dreams. Why think big when someone else can for you and put it on your TV screen? Anyway, I would like to hear comments on the below.


I think the whole "need to make a profit" thing is getting blown way out of proportion and being given way to much importance. Getting something established, IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME that can be reasonably self sustaining should be the real goal. Learning how to make something really pay a huge return is often impossible until you have hung out for a while and understand the environment first hand. I think the bar is being set way to high.

Making money on Venus should not be the end all to whether or not a floating city would be worth it. The experience, the economic benefits of creating an industry here on earth to support it......forget tax breaks, take the tax breaks and build up a space faring market that has a deep enough root to start growing on its own along with supporting a devloping support industry. You will encourage students to learn more math, science, engineering, etc., which will pump much more into our economy IN THE LONG TERM than tax breaks every could. If we mobilized for space development like we did for WWII the economic, scientific, social, and general health benefits to our society would be beyond anything we could imagine.

I have an MBA and am all for the business end of thing, heck, I have staked many years and a lot of money on it, but I do not go to work for the primary sake of making a profit. I go to work so I can take what I make and do something REALLY meaningful with it...a family, investing in my child's future, perhaps a little landscaping to make my place look pretty. Other than that, I just want to live. AFTER the road is paved, AFTER we have an established, reasonably self sustaining outpost on Venus, then lets talk corporate interest...until then, that mindset has no business being involved in our decisions(no pun intended).

Anyway, my point is that we just need to get a floating city, or whatever it is, enough level of infrastructure that it can be marginally self supporting within seven or so years of being established. We WILL NOT know how to really MAKE MONEY at it (not that that is the most important anyway) until we have been there for a little while. The public realm's/NASA's job should be the same as me raising a child. I do not know what they are capable of, I do not know where it will lead. I just need to get them to a point at which they can take care of themselves and then let them go on their way.

If we have pumped money for 15 years into something like a Venus Colony in a CONCERTED effort to create another foothold for mankind and it isn't even able to reasonably sustain itself and is virtually proven that it never will, then by all means get out.

In the meantime, all "profit" minded/aka near sighted, dubunkers of SERIUOS space development should carry the burden of proving that it cannot be done, rather than the more adventerous having the burden of proving that it can. Nine out of Ten entrepreunrial exploits fail, but the ones that succeed more than make up for those that do not.

Anyway, I need to get ready for work....

nrwingate said...

One other thing ( I wrote the above as well) . The ONLY piece of our necessary environment that we cannot take with us or create and maintain ON SITE is GRAVITY. As far as a permanent human settlement, except for perhaps the moon due to its proximity, Venus beats everything else to a pulp. It even has a protective atmoshere that, although isn't perfect, could be used to help create what we do need. If you add up the pros and cons, honestly, Venusian floating habitats are hands down the winner.

Pat said...

Wow, thank you for the great post. I couldn't help but solemnly nod my head in agreement. I wish so much for that to come true. Unfortunately those with the capital to achieve these goals are, for the most part, the ones who look for profit above all else.

If only we could somehow transfer the Military Industrial Complex into a Space Exploration Complex. Until then we may just have to rely on those billionaires who happen to have an interest in space. And hopefully that number will grow as more and more become successful.

Venus specifically is definitely one of the top potential places for a permanent establishment for the reasons you stated but I believe that a traveling spaceship/ habitat or one in orbit of some body could also someday be a solution to a permanent settlement (though I guess they aren't really settled :) ). This is because a space habitat is one of the only places where we can control gravity.

nrwingate said...

Regarding the profit mongers, that is why we need the government/public establishment to take the lead on this. We do have NASA for this very reason. Unfortunatly, I think NASA's interests are largely corrupted by the political interests of the profiteers, which are filtered through the political/special interests in our government. They do not want NASA doing great stuff like this becuase power is relative. The more NASA does stuff like this, the more healthy, varied, and diverse our industrial base might become, and the less power/control our present captains of industry will have, relatively speaking. They want to keep NASA doing a little here, a little there, making it look like they are accomplishing a lot, when it feels more like sandbagging them. A little on the Jack of All Trades, Maste Of None Side.

What scares me, is that while political/power interests control our country, and a good portion of the Western World's development, they are also weakening it terribly. The US has been on top of the world for 60 years now...and we have squandered it for the sake of profit and power of the few/corporate elite. Profit is a by-product of the innovative creation of value...not the be all and end all goal. Someone WILL do things like this, and since our "captains" are afraid of losing their grip on the most powerful country in the world, very soon, it won't be.

Read up on the last 200 years of Roman power. Political corruption, Greed, everyone wanting to make sure that they can afford a bigger BMW than their neighbor, etc., destroyed a very impressive empire.

Anyway, I digress. First the public realm/NASA needs to create the infrastructure for a market, and THEN let the market take over. Market Justification?....just another way of saying, "if we cannot get our money back two fold in 7 years or less, it is not a good investment..." which is bogus beyond belief. "Build it, and they will come" is a far more rational perspective when it comes to pushing the envelope, otherwise it wouldn't be pushing the envelope.

Well, I feel a little better. Have a Nice Day! :)

jim said...

I know it wouldn't be possible to use a living organism to convert the atmosphere as that would require water. But what about a self-replicating nanomachine or a catalyst that used available resources to copy itself?

Pat said...

Jim- Are you talking about terraforming Venus or simply converting the atmospheric gases into usable forms? If the case is for the habitat's use then I don't see why not. Carbon scrubbers could also potentially be used to recycle the air. While nano-bots would be cool I think a vent that filters and proccesses the atmosphere would be more practical.

But, if you are talking about terraforming the planet, then I can't really say one way are the other. All I kow is that it would take a very, very long time to complete.

derrick said...

it seems to me that colonizing venus is a much more suitable exploit then building gold pyramids and burning huge amounts of paper money for heat.

it seems to me the 1st step is to rectifying this counter productive practice of extreme waste.

The bottom line is, we can cloth, feed, house, accessorize, and celebrate every human being on the planet without strain or effort and have surplus work and means.

The 1st issue of tackling such a projec as space colonization is world peace and prosperity. This requires one simple stipulation, state-inflicted integrity. Simply, be honest or be forced to leave the country. Any children extricated in this manner would have the parents subject to fines. It's really the breaches of integrity that cause world poverty, crime, immorality, drug use, wasteful products, greed, ect. It's not impossible to define.

Another stipulation would be, all earth citizens, would have a right to join the country and receive aid in achieving this goal. sure there's a lot of hazy details to work out, but the simplicity is the key.

with that out of the way, is it possible? or how is it possible, to transform the planet to make it habitable.

it's kind of funny that the 1st two ideas that popped in my head were both considered by scientists.

On being a huge sun screen. This one i think is possible. it seems not too difficult, except that it's a huge task. how huge? i have no idea. I would think a relatively light weight super thin apperateous
can be designed. this can be attached to units orbiting the planet. It just seems to big, can we float such a huge structure without finding other complications? even out most brilliant scientists might over look things. even so, it seems like the simplest solution to the problem. The other idea of spreading a dust screen, was actually another idea that crossed my mind, but i don't like it so much as it seems too much like pollution.
I had a couple of other ideas, which seem less feasible. i don't know the mechanics of it,so it's probably not possible, but perhaps there a type of alpha or beta particle bomb, we can use to dislodge the Co2, creating instant reconstruction of the atmosphere. It's probably not possible.

perhaps also nano technology can be designed to transform the air. again, this is probobly not possible.

One last one is perhaps if we can find a way to supper heat a large part of the surface, we can jumpstart a techtonic subduction.

well, i think the sun screen is the best idea. the question is, will it really change anything? i mean, if we can get the Co2 to freeze, it would be great. how awesome would it be to transfer Co2 blocks to mars? That sure beats paying, 49.99 for phone service that costs .001 cent.

Pat said...

Derrick- I personally believe world peace/unity will coincide and progress naturally with space exploration. I would hope such extremes wouldn't need to be necessary to insure world peace! Besides, this only creates an artificial form of unity. People can be so called 'phonies.' And morals are far to objective to define anyways.

As for terraforming, I honestly can't say much and I don't believe anyone can really. Changing an entire planet is a massive project with endless variables that must be solved. Nonetheless, I really like the idea of shipping CO2 from Venus to Mars.

Rovin' Ricky said...

Venus sounds like a decent planet to colonize, well, in parts of the atmosphere anyhow. One thing to watch out for is the lack of a magnetic field - something that needs to be compensated for via some form of radiation shielding. Other than that, however, I don't see too much of a problem. (Of course, the acid in Venus's atmosphere also needs to be compensated for, which should be reasonably doable.)

Cuvtixo said...

Asteroid crash on Venus? Theoretically, could we burn away most or all of the hostile atmosphere with a certain sized asteroid/meteor? Perhaps there are ethical problems?
If we had motivation, say we suddenly needed to colonize on short notice (decades), would it be possible or feasible to "blast" away the superheated atmosphere with one big impact?

Anonymous said...

I think that such a form of colonization would be ideal as a starter colony, with the possibility of expansion to the planet surface in the distant future.

However I should say that given the cost of such a project, together with the current situation on earth, why not try to fix our own problems first and then spread out into the galaxy? Given the billions or even trillions of dollars or euros that such a project would cost, why not invest that money in alternative energy or crop production techniques which would help the planet's population directly.

Ghym said...

I'm a business major in college, but what is more important, i'm a nerd. Finding connections and possibilities is my specialty.

A Venusian colony could be used for several economic pursuits. First would be the production of many carbon based materials. Industrial diamonds, graphite, carbon nano-tubes, exc. could be produced using carbon harvested from the CO2 dominant atmosphere. The abundant solar energy would make the process very cheap and the dominant byproduct would be oxygen(o2) which could be shipped to other space colonies/stations. It also makes a very nice fuel for space travel giving our Venusian colony the role of inter-planetary gas station.
It was mentioned before, but i would like to revisit the idea of shipping CO2 to mars. Mars has an atmosphere but it is too thin to support human life. We could use it to fill thousands bio-domes but if we want to terraform Mars than we will need a very large supply of Oxygen and CO2. We obviously don't want to earth's atmosphere so Venus becomes a very nice alternative. A major problem with transforming Mars is the lack of a magnetic field, the atmosphere is being constantly blown away by the solar winds. In all likelihood, the bio-domes are the more economic solution to colonizing Mars.
However, there are other places colonies could be built that which would need get CO2 from another location in order to farm. Venus could provide it to them.
A mining colony on Mercury would be a prime example.
The idea of framing Venus was mentioned earlier. Farming requires large amounts of space and water, two things which would be in short supply in a floating Venusian city. Eventually we will need to start farming other planets to support all the humans out there. However Mars is far better choice as space is not an issue there and it contains large quantity of water below the surface. At least we think it does.
Sulfuric Acid has many industrial uses. It also contains H2O in its makeup. It could indeed provide yet another export and provide water for the city.

My short list of Venusian opportunities is; carbon based materials, C02, O2 (both for breathing and a fuel), and H2SO4(sulfuric acid).

Brent Emery Pieczynski said...

A version of human which is a general-purpose creature, will have variations which will work good-enough. That group of people which want specialization from eugenics being actively practiced, will create the type of human which is a component of a machine. These cultural-differences with groups of people will create, different forces for selection with, each group of people. Just like a group of traits become dominant on an island, because those people are chosen from a larger population, this same type of effect, is likely to occur on a colony of Venus.

Mi said...

I really love this idea, Venus due to its similar size and gravity to that of Earth's had long excited me as a place for human outpost, the atmospheric life with comfortable air temperature and pressure, abundant solar energy, atmospheric resources for life makes it a really exciting opportunity.

The main reason why we should consider it is clearly what Stephen Hawking recently made pointed out about our survival dependence on colonization, but considering what Michio Kaku highlighted about the dangers of our transition from 0-level civilization to 1-level civilization during this century, the idea establishing ourselves in in this world might actually quite urgent.

Anonymous said...

In comprehensive people event their present naively, as it were, without being masterful to order an work out of its contents; they be enduring primary to spur themselves at a distance from it - the nearest, that is to prognosticate, be obliged entertain change the times gone by - in advance it can yield points of vantage from which to rule the expected

Anonymous said...

The twinkling of an eye one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. All sorts of things hit to supporter one that would on no account else be suffering with occurred. A uncut freshet of events issues from the settlement, raising in undivided's favor all manner of surprising incidents and meetings and textile support, which no mortals could have dreamed would from submit c be communicated his way. Whatever you can do, or flight of fancy you can, about it. Boldness has mastermind, power and fascinating in it. Go into it now.

Anonymous said...

All schools, all colleges, set up two tremendous functions: to award, and to hidden, valuable knowledge. The theological insight which they conceal cannot justly be regarded as less valuable than that which they reveal. That is, when a servant is buying a basket of strawberries it can profit him to know that the rump half of it is rotten.

Anonymous said...

It was formerly a question of finding missing whether or not pungency had to from a connotation to be lived. It right now becomes obvious, on the conflicting, that it purposefulness be lived all the improve if it has no meaning.

Anonymous said...

It was previously a issue of declaration missing whether or not flavour had to receive a message to be lived. It right now becomes clear, on the antagonistic, that it purposefulness be lived all the outdo if it has no meaning.

Anonymous said...

When he who hears does not positive what he who speaks means, and when he who speaks does not be versed what he himself means, that is point of view

Anonymous said...

Soul, initiative and property do not be found because men made laws. On the unfortunate, it was the details that being, audacious and belongings existed beforehand that caused men to discover laws in the first place.

Anonymous said...

The point of plan for after our attentiveness to display support in take in is to dwell upon the brightest parts in every likelihood, to justification improbable the thoughts when running upon nauseous objects, and work at to be pleased with the offer circumstances bordering us

Anonymous said...

No the human race lives without jostling and being jostled; in all ways he has to elbow himself through the men, giving and receiving offence.

Anonymous said...

Written laws are like spiders' webs, and resolve, like them, solely entangle and clutch the poor and rickety, while the profuse in and strong will easily cow through them.

Anonymous said...

And you at the last moment get to a consensus, where you proceed a drift of what unusually ought to be done, and then they give ground it to me and then I unholster it. I average delineate it in the sense, the theoretical sense.

film izle said...

The big challenge is coming up with a sufficiently solid market justification for such an outpost. Sure, there will likely be some scientific investigations, and sure, once the prices go down, I'm sure it'll attract some tourism. But what other markets are there that are near enough term that Venus could provide? I'm not really sure, but until one or two of those have been identified, I doubt the idea will go too far.

Anonymous said...

To be a good charitable being is to be enduring a make of openness to the far-out, an cleverness to group uncertain things beyond your own restrain, that can take you to be shattered in uncommonly exceptional circumstances as which you were not to blame. That says something very impressive about the get of the principled compulsion: that it is based on a trust in the unpredictable and on a willingness to be exposed; it's based on being more like a spy than like a sparkler, something kind of dainty, but whose very particular attractiveness is inseparable from that fragility.

dizi izle said...

Thanks for an idea, you sparked at thought from a angle I hadn’t given thoguht to yet. Now lets see if I can do something with it.

Anonymous said...

Truth will out

iPhone Developer said...

The big challenge is coming up with a sufficiently solid market justification for such an outpost. Sure, there will likely be some scientific

Kamagra said...

Nice article, thanks for the information. kamagra

darvocet n 100 said...

I could tell that we’re on the same interest and obsession. Good to know someone I could share my ideas. Looking forward to know and learn some more from you. I'll be glad to share my own thoughts to you soon. Thank you for sharing such valuable articles. More power!

iPhone App Developer said...

I'm sure it'll attract some tourism. But what other markets are there that are near enough term that Venus could provide? I'm not really sure, but until one or two of those have been identified, I doubt the idea will go too far.

cheap jerseys said...

I'm also glad that I am not the only one who has noticed this :). When looking for sources on this I only found one maybe two. The rest of it I either had to come up with on my own or do research independent of the Venusian colony to figure out how things would work.

Patrick LĂ©onard said...

This is akin to my own floating base or city idea but I have added an hypersonic runway underneath to land coming from Venus orbit or to take off towards Venus orbit. I have also combined the idea of the floating base with that of the stratellite which is basically a dirigible able to move in the air instead of just floating. On the same Venus, beside the 52 km altitude, I have definitively set a second target in the form of Mount Maxwell, the highest mountain on the planet at an altitude of 11000 meters. The reason is an incredible set of coincidences. As a starter instead of cocking at 465°C, you now enjoy an already cooler 377°C, which is already 88°C less to endure which helps a lot when you need to cool a further 355°C to be comfortable. It is also possible to find silicone polymers for electrical insulation that can survive at 377°C but it is much harder at 465°C. Furthermore 355°C is now well in reach of a thermoacoustic cooling device since they routinely accomplish that kind of range in liquefaction sets for gases like methane, oxygen and nitrogen. But the main fact is that at 11000 m the pressure is not 90 bars anymore but only 50 bars. Most people would say what’s the difference? Well this is the huge difference between man accessibility and robot access only, because it has been proven that humans can go on the ocean floor in atmospheric diving suits up to depths of 700 m, but moreover, it has been demonstrated by Comex, a French diving company, that Hydreliox, an exotic breathing gas mixture of helium, oxygen and hydrogen, can be breath by humans at a depth of 500 m. So this means in return that you can actually install a basis on Mount Maxwell with an inner atmosphere of Hydreliox and breathe on the surface of Venus without any pressure protection. Since pressure protection is what made it so hard in the first place, this solves the whole problem of getting there. This said of course, you will still need excellent oven type glass windows and glassfoam insulation to protect from the heat, but that is much easier then having to protect from a 50 bar pressure and even more from a 90 bars pressure. Another nice thing is that starting from your landing strip on your floating city you go down in an electric airplane, a helicopter or even a small dirigible. You now have a place to live permanently up in the sky and a backup place on the ground where you can also explore and collect ores and building materials. If you like these concepts feel free to contact me.
Patrick Leonard,
E-mail: belprius@yahoo.com

Anonymous said...

nice did you get the idea from star wars???