The Ethics of Terraforming

In article ,
(John Ordover) wrote:

We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars, save if the cost drops
to near to nothing due to some kind of magical technology. If we want
to terraform someplace, how about the Austrailian outback or the
Sahara or Antartica? Let's get our own deserts blooming before we
worry about any other planet.

It appears that Australians don't want to increase their population too
much, so they don't have that much incentive to convert their deserts to
farms.

You have the cause and effect backwards. Also, the largest
terraforming project in history is being seriously discussed in Aus..
The idea is to reverse the flow of a river that run to the see - send
it running in-land and use it to fill an artificial lake. Not sure
where the project stands - but it's been seriously looked at.

That could almost be the Snowy Mountains Scheme you're alluding
to--except that that's been finished for several decades. (The 30th
anniversary of its completion occurs next year.) The SMS involved
diverting the east-flowing snow-fed waters of the Snowy River into the
west-flowing Murray & Murrumbidgee rivers for irrigation &
hydro-electric power generation purposes, and involved the damming of
rivers and the building of tunnels under the Great Dividing Range
(Australia's equivalent of America's Appalachians).

To be more specific:

"Sixteen major dams, seven power stations (two underground),
a pumping station, 145kms of interconnected trans-mountain
tunnels and 80kms of aqueducts were constructed."
--http://www.snowyhydro.com.au/levelTwo.asp?pageID=66&parentID=4

All this took over 20 years and involved over 100,000 people from over
30 countries. That certainly made it Australia's largest civil
engineering project, but I hesitate to label it "the largest
terraforming project in history".

(It is also safe to say that such a project would not even get off the
ground today, not just because since much of the project took place in,
around, and under one of Australia's largest national parks but also
because the price paid was to turn the Snowy River from a torrent into a
trickle, which in more recent times has led to enough fears that the
Snowy was slowly dying for some of the diverted waters to be put back
into it--much to the chagrin and anger of irrigation farmers over the
mountains.)

More recently someone did float what might have proven to be an even
larger project farther north. I cannot remember much about it except
that which would have diverted the waters of one or more of rivers over
the mountains to the water-hungry cotton-farming areas of the west.
Nothing seems to have come of it, though.

--
Stephen Souter

http://www.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/souters/

In article ,
"Mike Rhino" wrote:

It appears that Australians don't want to increase their population too
much, so they don't have that much incentive to convert their deserts to
farms.

How much of the deserts of the south-western United States have been
turned into farms?

--
Stephen Souter

http://www.edfac.usyd.edu.au/staff/souters/

We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars, save if the cost drops
to near to nothing due to some kind of magical technology. If we want
to terraform someplace, how about the Austrailian outback or the
Sahara or Antartica? Let's get our own deserts blooming before we
worry about any other planet.



There is nothing magical about nanotechnology.

Tom

(TKalbfus) wrote in message ...
We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars, save if the cost drops
to near to nothing due to some kind of magical technology. If we want
to terraform someplace, how about the Austrailian outback or the
Sahara or Antartica? Let's get our own deserts blooming before we
worry about any other planet.



There is nothing magical about nanotechnology.

Tom

Nor can it do the marvellous things that have been promised for it -
maybe some day, not anytime soon.

There is nothing magical about nanotechnology.

Tom

Nor can it do the marvellous things that have been promised for it -
maybe some day, not anytime soon.


Well you said, "We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars," you didn't
say, "We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars soon." I don't know how to
prove or disprove what your saying about the timing of nanotechnology
developments, the only thing to do is wait and see what happens.

Tom

(John Ordover) wrote in message om...

We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars, save if the cost drops
to near to nothing due to some kind of magical technology.


That prediction, like most of yours, suffers from the fact that it's
meaningless beyond about 20 years ahead, like ALL economic
predictions.

You'd actually make a good general case for your views if you didn't
keep declaring them as open-ended certainties.

Shermanlee

On 7 Dec 2003 20:11:08 -0800, in a place far, far away,
(Johnny1A) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

(John Ordover) wrote in message om...

We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars, save if the cost drops
to near to nothing due to some kind of magical technology.


That prediction, like most of yours, suffers from the fact that it's
meaningless beyond about 20 years ahead, like ALL economic
predictions.

You'd actually make a good general case for your views if you didn't
keep declaring them as open-ended certainties.

His worship of "magical technology" would be kind of touching, if it
weren't so stupid and uneducated.

That prediction, like most of yours, suffers from the fact that it's
meaningless beyond about 20 years ahead, like ALL economic
predictions.

Not at all. I can confidently state that 20 or even 40 years from
there will not be McDonalds on the top of Mt. Everest, in the middle
of the Sahara desert, and the middle of the Austrailian outback.

All of those technologically possible but economically pointless - and
will remain so, save for technology so far beyond ours it is
indistinguishable from magic.

The same applies to Mars.

(John Ordover) wrote in message . com...
That prediction, like most of yours, suffers from the fact that it's
meaningless beyond about 20 years ahead, like ALL economic
predictions.

Not at all. I can confidently state that 20 or even 40 years from
there will not be McDonalds on the top of Mt. Everest, in the middle
of the Sahara desert, and the middle of the Austrailian outback.

All of those technologically possible but economically pointless - and
will remain so, save for technology so far beyond ours it is
indistinguishable from magic.

The same applies to Mars.

Nice try, and technically correct. But only as far as they go.

No, there won't be a McDonalds on top of Everest. There either will
be (or may already be for all I know) be McDonalds franchises _near_
Everest, assuming it remains as big a tourist attraction as it is now.

The 'middle of the Sahara Desert' is a big area. If a deposit of
something useful were to be found, or the like, there might very well
be a McDonalds (or equivalent) there 20 years from now. Economics
changes with technology, with personal preferences (which change in
unpredictable ways from both fashion and taste), and with changes in
religious and social background.

Ditto Australian Outback (though for all I know, McDonalds may have
franchises in the vicinity of Ayers' Rock now).

So you'll have to do batter than that.

Shermanlee

Rand Simberg wrote:

On 7 Dec 2003 20:11:08 -0800, in a place far, far away,
(Johnny1A) made the phosphor on my monitor
glow in such a way as to indicate that:

(John Ordover) wrote in message om...

We will never, ever colonize or terraform Mars, save if the cost drops
to near to nothing due to some kind of magical technology.


That prediction, like most of yours, suffers from the fact that it's
meaningless beyond about 20 years ahead, like ALL economic
predictions.

You'd actually make a good general case for your views if you didn't
keep declaring them as open-ended certainties.

His worship of "magical technology" would be kind of touching, if it
weren't so stupid and uneducated.

Well, colonization is a lot different than terraforming.

The colonization could happen given a sufficient reason to
expend the money required.

Terraforming might require some of that "magical" technology,
at least in the Arthur Clarke meaning.

Mike Walsh