When will we be able to afford space settlement?

I think its well established here that space settlement can't really
progress in the absence of commercial incentive, save for giant
command economy space programs that could possibly start tiny,
enourmously expensive settlements of a few hundred glorified
vacationers.

Its often been suggested in the giant megathreads on the sf and
sci.space.policy newsgroups that we will have no commercial incentive
to go to space, so we won't; I'm not attempting to redredge that
argument. I however don't think there is much commercial incentive now
outside of the communications industry, and that it will be
unprofitable for a long time for a rational investor to put money into
most space programs.

I believe that as the economy grows and technology advances,
commercial space ventures will become affordable, but not for a long
time. Does anyone want to look into the crystal ball and see whether
space is still dominated by government prestige and defence programs
still by 2050?

Looking at previous postings (what will space exploration be like in
2050) about 5 years ago, where are we since then? It seems it was
mostly William Mook painting a pretty picture that I find a little
overoptimistic in the terms of commercial utility of space, and
criticisms of his projections. Still a fun read:

http://tinyurl.com/263ak

If we have no major wars, revolutions, or other like disruptions, we
can expect the global economy to be about 4 times larger than it is
currently, with the top economies being China, US, and India.

Much of the worlds economies will be geared for industrial production.
We may hit the singularity with AI development; or it may just be the
entire world buying better cars and having more leisure time. But at
some point commercial space travel will be affordable, if for no other
reason than the growth of economies to the point of indulgence on
whim.

So when will commercially viable settlement be affordable?

(Dez Akin) wrote in message om...
I think its well established here that space settlement can't really
progress in the absence of commercial incentive, save for giant
command economy space programs that could possibly start tiny,
enourmously expensive settlements of a few hundred glorified
vacationers.

Its often been suggested in the giant megathreads on the sf and
sci.space.policy newsgroups that we will have no commercial incentive
to go to space, so we won't; I'm not attempting to redredge that
argument. I however don't think there is much commercial incentive now
outside of the communications industry, and that it will be
unprofitable for a long time for a rational investor to put money into
most space programs.

I believe that as the economy grows and technology advances,
commercial space ventures will become affordable, but not for a long
time. Does anyone want to look into the crystal ball and see whether
space is still dominated by government prestige and defence programs
still by 2050?

Looking at previous postings (what will space exploration be like in
2050) about 5 years ago, where are we since then? It seems it was
mostly William Mook painting a pretty picture that I find a little
overoptimistic in the terms of commercial utility of space, and
criticisms of his projections. Still a fun read:

http://tinyurl.com/263ak

If we have no major wars, revolutions, or other like disruptions, we
can expect the global economy to be about 4 times larger than it is
currently, with the top economies being China, US, and India.

Much of the worlds economies will be geared for industrial production.
We may hit the singularity with AI development; or it may just be the
entire world buying better cars and having more leisure time. But at
some point commercial space travel will be affordable, if for no other
reason than the growth of economies to the point of indulgence on
whim.

So when will commercially viable settlement be affordable?

Depends on what you mean by settlement. I will assume a community of
at least a few hundred, some planning on staying permanently, with a
locally-produced product, sold on Earth, that isn't subject to
cancellation by any particular government's whim. My guess: this will
happen within 20 years after the cost to Low Earth Orbit gets down to
$100US per pound.

Depends on what you mean by settlement. I will assume a community of
at least a few hundred, some planning on staying permanently, with a
locally-produced product, sold on Earth, that isn't subject to
cancellation by any particular government's whim. My guess: this will
happen within 20 years after the cost to Low Earth Orbit gets down to
$100US per pound.

What product will that be, exactly?

John Ordover wrote:

What product will that be, exactly?

Climate modification.

Paul

On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:39:19 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Paul F.
Dietz" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

John Ordover wrote:

What product will that be, exactly?

Climate modification.

Freedom.

h (Rand Simberg) wrote in message .. .
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:39:19 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Paul F.
Dietz" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

John Ordover wrote:

What product will that be, exactly?

Climate modification.

Freedom.

Freedom isn't free. And you can't sell it.

h (Rand Simberg) wrote in message .. .
On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 19:39:19 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Paul F.
Dietz" made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a
way as to indicate that:

John Ordover wrote:

What product will that be, exactly?

Climate modification.

Freedom.

Pet pevee: Space isn't kind to anarchists. Or at least not to
human ones. A space station and especially the early ones is
inevitably going to be a immensely complicated technical system
that requires a _lot_ of labour to keep running, and you can't very
well have multiple competing "air-water&nutrient-recycling
corporations.* and the labour must be extracted from the population
of the habitat somehow or everybody dies. So really you are pretty
inevitably going to wind up with "pay your taxes or stop breathing."
I can see a space station being a very socially liberal and highly
democratic place, in a Canada/Sweden/university campus-in-space
kind of way, but freer than the more enlightened earth-side polities?
Please..

*well you could. Eventually. For *extremely* large habitats.

"Paul F. Dietz" wrote in message ...
John Ordover wrote:

What product will that be, exactly?

Climate modification.

Paul


On Earth? Wow, wait for that, you'll wait a very long time.

John Ordover wrote:

What product will that be, exactly?

Climate modification.

On Earth? Wow, wait for that, you'll wait a very long time.


You may not be correct, John. My BotE calculations suggest
that surprisingly little mass need be moved to the Earth-Sun L1
point to significantly reduce insolation at Earth, if you arrange
the system properly.

The idea I have would be to mine the moon for materials that can
be vaporized near the Earth-Sun L1 point. The atoms and small clusters
in the vapor would scatter sunlight in certain narrow bands by
resonance scattering or fluorescence. The gas would be accelerated
toward Earth by light pressure, doppler broadening the bands (the
higher the acceleration the better.)

An alternate idea would be to fabricate very small dipole scatterers
and releases them near earth-sun L1 (essentially, micron scale solar sails.)
Short carbon nanotubes could work.

Paul

"Paul F. Dietz" wrote:

John Ordover wrote:

What product will that be, exactly?

Climate modification.

Namely, Solar power satellites, which displace fossil-fuel power
stations.