Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 19, 2024, 12:26 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Would you live on terraformed Venus?
#21
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 7:40 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: The atmosphere is sulfuric acid, the surface temperature is 870 Fahrenheit (a result of a greenhouse effect that’s far worse than even the biggest global warming alarmist expects us to reach), the atmospheric pressure is 92 times that of Earth’s,  and it has active volcanos out the wazoo. At this point, you’d have to be high to think terraforming Venus is an option.

Yup.  By the time the technology, the capital, and the political will are available for terraforming Venus, they'll be spent on fixing the one bit of local real estate suitable for humans.

Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#22
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
The tech to terraform can come from fixing this place, it can be ludicrously profitable.

Will will will, in both cases, IMO.

(Not specifically for Venus, just as a comment on any off world colony in general)
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#23
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 7:40 pm)}Rev. Rye Wrote: The atmosphere is sulfuric acid, the surface temperature is 870 Fahrenheit (a result of a greenhouse effect that’s far worse than even the biggest global warming alarmist expects us to reach), the atmospheric pressure is 92 times that of Earth’s,  and it has active volcanos out the wazoo. At this point, you’d have to be high to think terraforming Venus is an option.

Actually, not much worse than the worst scenario of the biggest global warming alarmist.   If we really don’t tamper our release of greenhouse gas for, say, several centuries, we can get into a true runaway green house, which, once started, can not be slowed or reversed by any act of repentance we can currently envision.   The earth will inexorably lose all of its surface water, leaving a largely oxygen atmosphere orders of magnitude thicker than ours now, ready to be converted to CO2. When the conversion is complete, Earth will be a second Venus.

I’ve seen estimates which suggest the tipping point Or the beginning of unstoppable runaway greenhouse affect occurs when average global temperature increased by about 20 degrees centigrade.   Some projections Sees the world Moving 1/4 of  the way there in the next 100 years if no action is taken now.

Regarding the specific issue of terraforming Venus, some of what you say is not accurate.  Yes, Venus is covered with volcanos.  But Venus undergoes no little or no weathering despite sulfuric acid so all the Vulcano and lava flow ever erupted there in the last several hundred million years are all clearly visible and quite fresh looking.  So the fact that there are many more visible volcanos on Venus than on earth doesn’t mean there are more active volcanos on Venus than on earth.  In fact we’ve seen no evidence that any volcano has erupted on Venus since when we begin to maintain surveillance of Venutian atmosphere. Earth of course undergoes continuous volcanic eruptions at mid-ocean ridges as well as at several very active volcanos like Kilauea, plus around 50 significant discrete volcanic eruptions away from oceanic ridges each year.   So the level of volcanic activity on Venus May well be much lower than on earth.

Regarding the atmosphere, the upper Venusian atmosphere is nowhere near as hellish as near the surface.  There is a band of attitudes in the Venusian atmosphere where the temperature and pressure are similar to conditions near sea level on earth.  You will still need oxygen because Venusian atmosphere is almost all co2.  But you can survive in shirt sleeves wearing something like airline emergency oxygen mask.   So right now we can live in dirigibles or blimps in the Venusian atmosphere.

The key to completely terraforming Venus is extracting and fixing the carbon from the CO2  in Venusian atmosphere.   There are many ideas regarding how that can be done.  Some promising techniques involve using gene engineered microorganism to use photosynthesis to extract carbon from atmosphere CO2and fixing them as biological cell structure.  The cell structure will not return the carbon back to the atmosphere when the organism dies.

But the time frame of complete terraforming will be tens to hundred of thousands of years.  So if we don’t slow the rate at which we injection green house gas into earth’s atmosphere, we would lock the earth on an inexorable course towards becoming Venus long before we make the smallest dent with any effort to turn Venus more like earth. 

(August 3, 2019 at 8:02 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:
(August 3, 2019 at 7:40 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: The atmosphere is sulfuric acid, the surface temperature is 870 Fahrenheit (a result of a greenhouse effect that’s far worse than even the biggest global warming alarmist expects us to reach), the atmospheric pressure is 92 times that of Earth’s,  and it has active volcanos out the wazoo. At this point, you’d have to be high to think terraforming Venus is an option.

Yup.  By the time the technology, the capital, and the political will are available for terraforming Venus, they'll be spent on fixing the one bit of local real estate suitable for humans.

Boru

There are intractable problems associated with fixing a damaged and dilapidated building whose uncooperative residents are all still there, have political pull, and insists that they are not inconvenienced.   These problems need not be faced if one is building a new structure from scratch.

In fact part of the solution To the problem of fixing the building with uncooperative  residence could be to finish parts of the new building first and moving some of the residents there so work on the old building can proceed with Ed’s disruption.
Reply
#24
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 8:09 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: The tech to terraform can come from fixing this place, it can be ludicrously profitable.

Will will will, in both cases, IMO.

(Not specifically for Venus, just as a comment on any off world colony in general)

Like Mars, which I've actually heard some scientists consider a viable option.
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.

[Image: harmlesskitchen.png]

I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad.
Reply
#25
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 3:36 pm)zebo-the-fat Wrote: No point trying to live on the surface, but a floating colony would make a lot of sense (but you would need acid proof balloons!)

The Russians proposed teflon ballons.

https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=...mrc&uact=8

https://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=...mrc&uact=8

Teflon is immune to sulfuric acid.

It can be made out of the elements found floating within the atmosphere of Venus.

Said ballons could support colonies by being simply pressurized to one 'standard Earth atmosphere' wherein they'd float at a level where the pressure (If not necessarily the temperature) would be comfortable.

From there various cables and rovers could be lowered to the surface for mineral harvesting as the various methods are used to lower the amount of atmosphere Venus has.

Cheers. Smile

Not at work.

(August 3, 2019 at 10:36 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote:
(August 3, 2019 at 8:09 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: The tech to terraform can come from fixing this place, it can be ludicrously profitable.

Will will will, in both cases, IMO.

(Not specifically for Venus, just as a comment on any off world colony in general)

Like Mars, which I've actually heard some scientists consider a viable option.

Hi!

Mars is more talked about because it is simply less energy intensive to get to with the chemical rockets of today.

It takes more rocket reaction mass to go inwards, towards the Sun, that outwards, away from the Sun.

But then... if you've made it into Earth's orbit? You're practically half way to ever where else. Big Grin

Not at work.
Reply
#26
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 11:36 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: [g within the atmosphere of Venus.



Hi!

Mars is more talked about because it is simply less energy intensive to get to with the chemical rockets of today.

It takes more rocket reaction mass to go inwards, towards the Sun, that outwards, away from the Sun.

But then... if you've made it into Earth's orbit? You're practically half way to ever where else. Big Grin

Not at work.

Not true.   It is easier from space flight point of view to go to Venus than to go to mars.

Whether it is more or less energy intensive doesn’t depend on whether you go inward or outward in the solar system.    It depends on the relative energy states of the orbits of the destination planet.    As it happens, Venus approaches earth more closely and Net difference between orbital energies of Venus and earth is less than that between orbital energies of mars and earth.  So it is energetically easier to escape earth, execute a heliocentric transfer orbit to Venus,  and inject into orbit around that it is to escape earth, execute a heliocentric transfer to mars, and then inject into orbit around Mars.   It is also easier to get back to earth from Venus than to get back to earth from Mars.

The main reason why mars is more talked about is simply that Martian surface are:

1.  Mars is at present far less inhospitable than Venus.

2.  mars has almost limitless (compared to oUr foreseeable needs) reservoir of water near the surface where as Venus has none and all that would be needed would need to be carried there.

3. Our current understanding of the geology of mars suggests that the present surface of mars had experienced much the same hydrothermal and hydrochemical processes that on earth formed many of earth’s most useful and economically valuable mineral ore deposits.  So we have reasonable expectation that mars has varied mineral ore resources and will be able to supply a fairly sizeable number of raw materials needed of a self-sustaining colony.  On the other hand, our current understanding of the geology of Venus suggest the present surface of Venus formed after Venus had lost all her water, so Venusian surface is unlikely to have experienced most of the ore forming geological processes earth and mars has known, so Venus is likely to be largely devoid of important mineral ore deposits required to support a self-sustaining colonies.
Reply
#27
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 1:15 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: The fact that Venus rotates backwards is no problem.  Nothing I can think of depends on any planet rotating prograde.

Just looked up Venus and its rotation. I'd say the problem is that it does not rotate fast enough.

Why Venus Spins the Wrong Way

Quote:Our neighboring planet Venus is an oddball in many ways. For starters, it spins in the opposite direction from most other planets, including Earth, so that on Venus the sun rises in the west. Not that it happens often: a day there lasts a little more than 243 Earth-days, actually making it longer than a Venusian year, which is only about 224 Earth-days long.
Reply
#28
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 9:17 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:
(August 3, 2019 at 7:40 pm)}Rev. Rye Wrote: The atmosphere is sulfuric acid, the surface temperature is 870 Fahrenheit (a result of a greenhouse effect that’s far worse than even the biggest global warming alarmist expects us to reach), the atmospheric pressure is 92 times that of Earth’s,  and it has active volcanos out the wazoo. At this point, you’d have to be high to think terraforming Venus is an option.

Actually, not much worse than the worst scenario of the biggest global warming alarmist.   If we really don’t tamper our release of greenhouse gas for, say, several centuries, we can get into a true runaway green house, which, once started, can not be slowed or reversed by any act of repentance we can currently envision.   The earth will inexorably lose all of its surface water, leaving a largely oxygen atmosphere orders of magnitude thicker than ours now, ready to be converted to CO2. When the conversion is complete, Earth will be a second Venus.

I’ve seen estimates which suggest the tipping point Or the beginning of unstoppable runaway greenhouse affect occurs when average global temperature increased by about 20 degrees centigrade.   Some projections Sees the world Moving 1/4 of  the way there in the next 100 years if no action is taken now.

Regarding the specific issue of terraforming Venus, some of what you say is not accurate.  Yes, Venus is covered with volcanos.  But Venus undergoes no little or no weathering despite sulfuric acid so all the Vulcano and lava flow ever erupted there in the last several hundred million years are all clearly visible and quite fresh looking.  So the fact that there are many more visible volcanos on Venus than on earth doesn’t mean there are more active volcanos on Venus than on earth.  In fact we’ve seen no evidence that any volcano has erupted on Venus since when we begin to maintain surveillance of Venutian atmosphere. Earth of course undergoes continuous volcanic eruptions at mid-ocean ridges as well as at several very active volcanos like Kilauea, plus around 50 significant discrete volcanic eruptions away from oceanic ridges each year.   So the level of volcanic activity on Venus May well be much lower than on earth.

Regarding the atmosphere, the upper Venusian atmosphere is nowhere near as hellish as near the surface.  There is a band of attitudes in the Venusian atmosphere where the temperature and pressure are similar to conditions near sea level on earth.  You will still need oxygen because Venusian atmosphere is almost all co2.  But you can survive in shirt sleeves wearing something like airline emergency oxygen mask.   So right now we can live in dirigibles or blimps in the Venusian atmosphere.

The key to completely terraforming Venus is extracting and fixing the carbon from the CO2  in Venusian atmosphere.   There are many ideas regarding how that can be done.  Some promising techniques involve using gene engineered microorganism to use photosynthesis to extract carbon from atmosphere CO2and fixing them as biological cell structure.  The cell structure will not return the carbon back to the atmosphere when the organism dies.

But the time frame of complete terraforming will be tens to hundred of thousands of years.  So if we don’t slow the rate at which we injection green house gas into earth’s atmosphere, we would lock the earth on an inexorable course towards becoming Venus long before we make the smallest dent with any effort to turn Venus more like earth. 

(August 3, 2019 at 8:02 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Yup.  By the time the technology, the capital, and the political will are available for terraforming Venus, they'll be spent on fixing the one bit of local real estate suitable for humans.

Boru

There are intractable problems associated with fixing a damaged and dilapidated building whose uncooperative residents are all still there, have political pull, and insists that they are not inconvenienced.   These problems need not be faced if one is building a new structure from scratch.

In fact part of the solution To the problem of fixing the building with uncooperative  residence could be to finish parts of the new building first and moving some of the residents there so work on the old building can proceed with Ed’s disruption.

But more and more residents of the dilapidated building are coming round to the idea that their building needs to be fixed.  Imagine their reaction when they find out that the developers' solution is to construct another building an inconveniently far distance away, that won't be ready to move into for 1000 years.

Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#29
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 3, 2019 at 9:17 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Actually, not much worse than the worst scenario of the biggest global warming alarmist.   If we really don’t tamper our release of greenhouse gas for, say, several centuries, we can get into a true runaway green house, which, once started, can not be slowed or reversed by any act of repentance we can currently envision.   The earth will inexorably lose all of its surface water, leaving a largely oxygen atmosphere orders of magnitude thicker than ours now, ready to be converted to CO2. When the conversion is complete, Earth will be a second Venus.

We will not be able to maintain our release of greenhouse gases for several more centuries since we will likely be running out of economic fossil fuels before the end of this one. Further, the radiative forcing for CO2 is the same for any doubling of the CO2 concentration, regardless of how much that is in actual parts per million. This is because the infrared absorption bands become saturated as CO2 increases, so it takes more and more CO2 to warm the average temperature a given amount. So more CO2 will always cause more warming, but at a decreased rate. Due to how much of the Earth's carbon is safely sequestered in carbonate rocks like limestone due to the action of the ocean over millions of years, even with the release of carbon from the permafrost and from methane hydrates in the ocean, it would not be enough to lead to a runaway greenhouse effect. However, another major extinction of species would be very likely with that much warming over a relatively short period.
Reply
#30
RE: Would you live on terraformed Venus?
(August 4, 2019 at 6:22 am)Alan V Wrote:
(August 3, 2019 at 9:17 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: Actually, not much worse than the worst scenario of the biggest global warming alarmist.   If we really don’t tamper our release of greenhouse gas for, say, several centuries, we can get into a true runaway green house, which, once started, can not be slowed or reversed by any act of repentance we can currently envision.   The earth will inexorably lose all of its surface water, leaving a largely oxygen atmosphere orders of magnitude thicker than ours now, ready to be converted to CO2. When the conversion is complete, Earth will be a second Venus.

We will not be able to maintain our release of greenhouse gases for several more centuries since we will likely be running out of economic fossil fuels before the end of this one.  Further, the radiative forcing for CO2 is the same for any doubling of the CO2 concentration, regardless of how much that is in actual parts per million. This is because the infrared absorption bands become saturated as CO2 increases, so it takes more and more CO2 to warm the average temperature a given amount. So more CO2 will always cause more warming, but at a decreased rate.  Due to how much of the Earth's carbon is safely sequestered in carbonate rocks like limestone due to the action of the ocean over millions of years, even with the release of carbon from the permafrost and from methane hydrates in the ocean, it would not be enough to lead to a runaway greenhouse effect.  However, another major extinction of species would be very likely with that much warming over a relatively short period.

The runaway model usually cite the figure that the the upper crust contains something like ten thousand times more hydrocarbon than we’ve extracted.   As shale gas revolution in the petroleum industry illustrates, technology advances would likely offer economic access to ever more of that potential reserve than is predicted by any current estimates of available economic reserves.  

The model that has anthropogenic global warming leading to run-away greenhouse effect is a simple one that doesn’t fully account for how long evaporation of ocean and loss of water vapor to space takes, how little of earth would remain inhabitable to humans long before the tipping point is reached, and as a result how unlikely it is for anthropogenic activity to be able to power through and overcome the increased natural carbon removal rate due to increased weathering as water vapor becomes a more important greenhouse gas.  

So, we may be reasonably sure we won’t meet our end in runaway global warming  because the planet will kill us with mere ordinary warming to stop us from reaching the tipping point.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  We Live in an Ice Age? Rhondazvous 10 980 January 22, 2018 at 8:47 pm
Last Post: Joods
  Do you want to live in a world where everything can explained? L.A.F. 36 8315 June 8, 2013 at 12:24 pm
Last Post: Tartarus Sauce



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)