Space has been on my mind here lately and I have in recent weeks rewatched both The Arrival and Lost in Space. They both touch on global warming and environmental issues as a plot point.
At least nominally.
In Lost in Space, the idea is that they are trying to colonize another planet because Earth will no longer be habitable in another twenty years, so theoretically it is a central driving plot point. In reality, a saboteur throws them off course and they have to engage their hyperdrive to escape being pulled into the Sun, which hurls them to a random place in the universe, which is why they are lost in space.
And then we essentially hear nothing further about how Earth is doomed while they try to figure out how to cope with their dire straits. There is no hand-wringing about how billions of people will DIE and Earth is DOOMED because we have failed our mission. Not a PEEP about that MINOR LITTLE DETAIL, no, while we worry about whether or not the hot military pilot will manage to hook up with the beautiful-but-stand-offish adult daughter of the Robinson family.
And in The Arrival, global warming is an alien plot to terraform our world so they can colonize it. So it sort of blames a random space alien for our predicament rather than wrestle with meaningful solutions for the Earth-bound human.
If we can just defeat the invading bad guys, problem solved! No need to live more lightly on this world, no.
I've looked at an article or two about why MARS and not THE MOON? [1] One of the articles I skimmed suggested that Mars is BETTER than the Moon because it has an atmosphere and it has gravity similar to Earth.
Yeah, I have a few things to say about that.
The average temperature on Mars is about minus 80 degrees Fahrenheit and can go as low as minus 200 degrees Fahrenheit.
AND the lack of atmosphere on the Moon is a PRIMARY cause of the temperature extremes. Meanwhile, Mars has untenably cold weather in spite of having an atmosphere.
We have places on Earth with significant diurnal temperature range. We call them deserts and there are people who live in such places.
That same Wikipedia article ALSO notes that a large average diurnal temperature variation is important to viticulture -- growing grapes for wine production. This means that in addition to growing potatoes as a food staple for local inhabitants, you could potentially grow grapes on the Moon.
You would need to establish an atmosphere, if only LOCALLY. Perhaps a sealed greenhouse type deal? [2]
The Moon is also close by, which makes it much, much easier to perform essential and inevitable course corrections as we figure out how to establish off-world human developments. People can be evacuated or emergency supplies brought up. People can spend a few weeks or months on the moon and return home. It's not a permanent relocation.
The Moon is close enough that we can simply supply it with food until local agriculture is sorted out, something not practical for Mars. The challenges in establishing a colony on the Moon also provide an opportunity to develop immediately relevant solutions to our problems here on Earth because we can do research in places like deserts, northern Alaska and the Antarctic for how to grow food in extreme climates that can help people here on Earth in the present in ways which may even help reduce the odds of a Lost in Space future scenario of trying to evacuate a no longer habitable Earth.
People who think the extremes of temperature on the Moon are somehow a more challenging problem than colonizing Mars likely haven't thought too much about the extremes of temperature human settlements already exist across here on Earth and are likely underestimating the degree to which it can be mitigated by expanding on knowledge we already have.
In some assignment in an Environmental Biology class, I posited that our definition of scarce resources will change as we begin to colonize space. Other planets and objects in the asteroid belt contain large quantities of metals and minerals that are scarce here on Earth, resources important to the development of technology.
We need to begin solving for a colony on the Moon. Mars is currently a madman's dream, not a practical goal furthering the welfare of humankind.
[2] I was able to track down the piece about fruit walls because I knew I had posted it to r/urbanforestry. Other pieces potentially of interest if we wish to look for less hostile microclimates on the Moon and begin local terraforming efforts:
I spent months bedridden. People expected to SLEEP for months to travel to Mars will NOT be fit to build a new civilization. It took me YEARS to recover from 3.5 months mostly bedridden, awake for about four hours a day and leaving the house once a day to eat a meal at a restaurant.
At least nominally.
In Lost in Space, the idea is that they are trying to colonize another planet because Earth will no longer be habitable in another twenty years, so theoretically it is a central driving plot point. In reality, a saboteur throws them off course and they have to engage their hyperdrive to escape being pulled into the Sun, which hurls them to a random place in the universe, which is why they are lost in space.
And then we essentially hear nothing further about how Earth is doomed while they try to figure out how to cope with their dire straits. There is no hand-wringing about how billions of people will DIE and Earth is DOOMED because we have failed our mission. Not a PEEP about that MINOR LITTLE DETAIL, no, while we worry about whether or not the hot military pilot will manage to hook up with the beautiful-but-stand-offish adult daughter of the Robinson family.
And in The Arrival, global warming is an alien plot to terraform our world so they can colonize it. So it sort of blames a random space alien for our predicament rather than wrestle with meaningful solutions for the Earth-bound human.
If we can just defeat the invading bad guys, problem solved! No need to live more lightly on this world, no.
I've looked at an article or two about why MARS and not THE MOON? [1] One of the articles I skimmed suggested that Mars is BETTER than the Moon because it has an atmosphere and it has gravity similar to Earth.
Yeah, I have a few things to say about that.
The average temperature on Mars is about minus 80 degrees Fahrenheit and can go as low as minus 200 degrees Fahrenheit.
The temperature on the moon can reach a blistering 250° Fahrenheit (120° Celsius or 400 Kelvin) during lunar daytime at the moon's equator, and plummet to -208 degrees F (-130° C, 140 K) at night.If you have ever lived someplace where it has ever snowed, the snow sticks around a LOT longer in the shadows of buildings and such. So you have microclimates that remain below freezing, preserving the snow for some period of time after the ambient temperature rises above freezing and melts the majority of the snow.
In certain spots near the moon's poles temperatures can drop even further, reaching - 424° F (- 253°C or 20 K) according to NASA.
One reason for these dramatic extremes is that the moon has no lunar atmosphere to insulate heat. Its lack of a gaseous blanket also means that craters and major dramatic landmarks do not erode the way they do on Earth, leaving perpetual pockets of darkness near the moon's poles that host the moon's most frigid temperatures. (source)
AND the lack of atmosphere on the Moon is a PRIMARY cause of the temperature extremes. Meanwhile, Mars has untenably cold weather in spite of having an atmosphere.
We have places on Earth with significant diurnal temperature range. We call them deserts and there are people who live in such places.
The daytime temperature averages 38°C while in some deserts it can get down to -4°C at night.According to Wikipedia, the largest known single-day change in temperature for any location on Earth is 102 degrees Fahrenheit, but MOST places see an average change below 50 degrees and as little as 10 degrees or less in tropical areas.
That same Wikipedia article ALSO notes that a large average diurnal temperature variation is important to viticulture -- growing grapes for wine production. This means that in addition to growing potatoes as a food staple for local inhabitants, you could potentially grow grapes on the Moon.
You would need to establish an atmosphere, if only LOCALLY. Perhaps a sealed greenhouse type deal? [2]
From the sixteenth to the twentieth century, urban farmers grew Mediterranean fruits and vegetables as far north as England and the Netherlands, using only renewable energy.Humans have a long history of doing local limited terraforming and fruit walls are just one of many examples. Our desert cultures and far northern cultures are existing potential rich sources of information and practices to draw upon to develop techniques for coping with the extremes of temperature on the Moon and to mitigate those extremes.
These crops were grown surrounded by massive "fruit walls", which stored the heat from the sun and released it at night, creating a microclimate that could increase the temperature by more than 10°C (18°F). Later, greenhouses built against the fruit walls further improved yields from solar energy alone. (source)
The Moon is also close by, which makes it much, much easier to perform essential and inevitable course corrections as we figure out how to establish off-world human developments. People can be evacuated or emergency supplies brought up. People can spend a few weeks or months on the moon and return home. It's not a permanent relocation.
The Moon is close enough that we can simply supply it with food until local agriculture is sorted out, something not practical for Mars. The challenges in establishing a colony on the Moon also provide an opportunity to develop immediately relevant solutions to our problems here on Earth because we can do research in places like deserts, northern Alaska and the Antarctic for how to grow food in extreme climates that can help people here on Earth in the present in ways which may even help reduce the odds of a Lost in Space future scenario of trying to evacuate a no longer habitable Earth.
People who think the extremes of temperature on the Moon are somehow a more challenging problem than colonizing Mars likely haven't thought too much about the extremes of temperature human settlements already exist across here on Earth and are likely underestimating the degree to which it can be mitigated by expanding on knowledge we already have.
In some assignment in an Environmental Biology class, I posited that our definition of scarce resources will change as we begin to colonize space. Other planets and objects in the asteroid belt contain large quantities of metals and minerals that are scarce here on Earth, resources important to the development of technology.
We need to begin solving for a colony on the Moon. Mars is currently a madman's dream, not a practical goal furthering the welfare of humankind.
Footnotes
[1] Recently, a couple of people have suggested to me that Elon Musk's desire to colonize Mars and go live there is about him wanting to find a place to live where he is beyond the law and in charge. Articles I've looked at about why MARS and not THE MOON? don't touch on human psychology but knowing what I know about people, I'm willing to go with the theory that Elon Musk isn't trying to do anything PRACTICAL and REAL. He just has some kind of personal FANTASY driving his supposed space ambitions.[2] I was able to track down the piece about fruit walls because I knew I had posted it to r/urbanforestry. Other pieces potentially of interest if we wish to look for less hostile microclimates on the Moon and begin local terraforming efforts:
- Western Architecture is Making India's Heatwaves Worse
- What the world can learn from Britain's humble hedge
- Greening of the Earth mitigates surface warming
- Could miniature forests help air condition cities?
- Planting trees in the desert
- The Ancient Persian Way to Keep Cool
- How modern cities fight the heat
- Desert cities as an ancient living example of ecocity
I spent months bedridden. People expected to SLEEP for months to travel to Mars will NOT be fit to build a new civilization. It took me YEARS to recover from 3.5 months mostly bedridden, awake for about four hours a day and leaving the house once a day to eat a meal at a restaurant.