Starting a Colony on the Moon

Here's a link to an article I found when I used Google to search on the phrase "why colonize the moon". Check out the statement by Philip Metzger, the scientist from NASA's Kennedy Space Center: "The Moon is a natural first step. It's nearby. We can practice living, working and doing science there before taking longer and riskier trips to Mars". That seems like a pretty good reason to me; hopefully, your teacher will think so, too.

1) The moon is a stepping stone to living on other planets - if we don't expand from the earth, mankind will ultimately go the way of the dinosaurs - our time here is limited.

2) Humans have always explored - it's in our nature. It's what we do best.

3) Science. What we learn as a result of colonizing the moon will revolutionize human life on earth.

4) The best reason is ... we don't know yet. Christopher Columbus came to find a cheaper route to the spice islands, what happened as a result during the next 500 years was beyond anyone's imagination. It's the same for going to the moon. Imagine the world 500 years from now if we don't colonize the moon. Imagine the world 500 years from now if we do.

from a purely scientific purpose it would be advantageous to learn about the moon and also to be able to eventually use it as a spring board to study and travel to other planets.

I think that is an excellent question.

1. The surface of the moon would be a great location for building a giant telescope. On Earth, the air can make it difficult for telescopes to see far into space. Also, light from cities can make it harder for large telescopes to see far away. You can see all the light from the cities that gets in the way of starlight in the picture below.

2. The moon colony could be a good place to study Earth. This is because the same side of the moon is always facing the Earth, which means that if you built a colony on that side, it would be able to monitor the Earth. The upper atmosphere and magnetic field of the Earth seem like good things to study from the moon.

3. The moon has much less gravity than the Earth. We can learn a bit about how the human body works by seeing how it behaves differently in smaller gravity for long periods of time.

4. The Sun is constantly shooting out particles at high speed. They never reach Earth because they are blocked by our magnetic field and our atmosphere. The moon has no magnetic field nor does it have an atmosphere, so it would be an ideal place to study these particles.

5. Perhaps the most fundamental reason is human curiosity. It is part of human nature to explore. Survival on the moon will require a lot of work and will no doubt produce technologies that will prove useful here on Earth (better solar power, better construction materials, etc.). When scientists has a specific goal, technology tends to develop more quickly because as a whole, we are more focused on the task at hand. Its like doing homework with the TV and music playing. It may get done, but it takes longer because of all the distractions. A clearly defined goal like a moon base keeps us scientists from getting distracted.

I agree. There are probably alot more constelations. ((My spelling is attrotious tonight. I just got home from work. I'm dead tired))

There are also good prospect for manufacturing in the moon. The moons is rich in silica. With less gravity moving material is rather easy. The moon will make a good starting point to get into astroid mining. That will be huge commerace in the future.

The same thing that has helped us make a mess here on earth, and the best one of all. "BECAUSE IT'S THERE."

The moon is a vaccuum, mars is a slightly less than a vacuum...0.7% of Earth's pressure...more or less the same degree of hostility to life.

Mars is a lot colder than the moon...on average. shaded spots on the moon are colder than Mars, unshaded spots are hotter. With pressure proof housing, with insulation both can be lived on.

Moon has no atmosphere to block particles, both meteoric and atomic and so on the Moon some bulk shielding is needed to replace the atmosphere of Mars, which acts to stopp most radiation and particles. This is not a problem as moon surface material can be banked around a dwelling and vehicles can be covered and stay out of solar storms.

So man can live in both places. Dust is an outside problem, but not an inside problem as the right level of humidity will dissipate the surface charge that allows dust to cloud in the vacuum zones. Machines can be made to deal with moon dust, as can spacesuits via flex seals instead of O-ring seals.

The moon is easier to get to and to get off than Mars, due to proximity and gravity.

Thus Moon is a better way station than Earth orbit as raw materials for rockets can be made from moon matter as can plant matter br grown in gree houses on the moon from CO2 and water sourced on the moon. It is anticipated that trace elements will also be found on the moon. The right farm can make all foods needed and all vitamins needed. Obviously at first most technical items will be earth made. semi-conductors etc. Bulk items can be moon made. In time if a large enough population can be eestablished a larger number of items can be made there to save freight.

will artificial weights and exercise be enough to prevent the loss of calcium from the frame? This will be a potential limiting factor to long term habitation. Astronauts excercise for hours daily, yet they come back very weakened

What can be done there.?? from the far side you can place radio telescopes as well as optical telescopes. They can also be placed in Northern and Southern lunar craeters for coverage in that direction. Both of the foregoing will not suffer from earthlight or earth radio contamination.

Low gravity research in medical areas, as well as chemistry. Extraction of metals for housing as well as organics from the farm in the form of wood/cellulose and synthetics can be made to use on the moon and Mars and beyond since the energy cost to lift them from the moon is 1/6th energy cost of lifting them from the earth. Since most fo what will be needed for Mars is propellant, this will be the major saving

Because this type of endeavor creates many technological "spin offs" that benefit man on Earth. Solving tough problems (and yes even endeavors of war also create such benefits though at a much higher human expense) inevitably results in civilian applications that create new industry, solve other human problems and benefit the economy. It may not be the flashiest or the most compelling reason but is far from insignificant, none the less.

Humankind is naturally curious. An earlier president of your country set it the challenge of placing a human on the moon and returning that human safely to earth before the end of the 1960s decade was out, "not because it was easy, but because it was hard", i.e. it was worth doing for the sake of it. It is a thing of great wonder that the challenge was achieved, much of mankind holding its breath as they watched, live, a tiny vehicle, containing less on-board computing power than today's washing machine (alledgedly), was placed upon the surface with 11 seconds of fuel left. It was truly "a small step for a man; a giant leap for mankind". I watched it live at about your age, and it was a thing of great wonder and emotion; I still get emotional thinking about it now.

Looking at the way mankind is currently depleting the reserves of this planet:

• Increasing inhabitant numbers
• Reducing drinking water per inhabitant
• Reducing air quality per inhabitant
• Increasing energy consumption per inhabitant
• Increasing ecological footprint per inhabitant,
• Increasing threat to other species etc., etc.

(all the concerns that future generations will be receiving as challenges commensurate with desires to increase living standards and quality of life with diminishing resources)

the need to expand the frontiers of human experience is growing. If mankind is to survive and develop then its intelligence needs grow and to spread further than the perimeter of the beautiful blue spheroid it currently inhabits, because if it is not careful (and today it isn't, particularly, as suggested above) then the blue spheroid will not be beautiful, or even blue, long-term. In such a case mankind's long-term prospects look bleak.

The Moon, the nearest available spheroid to the beautiful blue one, is the first step to going beyond the perimeter. Much can be learned from being there before moving on. There are risks, certainly. The benefits surely outweigh the risks?

The best answers to your question will indicate in simple terms that "it is worth it".

It isn't an engineering answer to your question, though I hope it helps.

If your teacher has a predisposed view against space travel or spending money for it as opposed to spending it here on earth to accomplish one ideal goal or another, there will be no reasons he/she will like.

However:

Most arguments in favor of space "stations" apply equally or better to building living facilities on the moon.

As pointed out in other posts here, there will be many technological advances accruing from an effort to establish and maintain a lunar colony, plus of course, all the money will be spent right here on earth for the forseeable future. Many of these advances will then be used to accomplish improving our own lives, reducing poverty, deaths from diseases and so forth as has happened from space related technology or its spin-offs already. For instance solar cells, now commonly used in parts of the third world to provide some power in remote villages is a good example. They would not have achieved their present development without the impetus that research and production technologies received from space programs. Satellites that perform innumerable valuable functions including weather and storm prediction are the result of technologies developed with money spent on various "space projects" originally. The lists of spin-offs is a very long one.

We have to learn more about our own planet, and be able to monitor our environment better because we are assuming the responsiblilty for managing it by our increasing numbers and consequent effects on nature. A base on the moon will be very helpful in that regard.

To even reach Mars, let alone "live' there, we must first solve the radiation problems present in space, which does not occur here on earth by virtue of our atmosphere. Again, a lunar base would be very helpful in many ways.

Finally the best reason of all is that it will afford mankind an unlimited supply of green cheese! Crackers anyone?

Wallace: "Aye, nice bit o' cheese Grommit..."

First off I would like to say good job to the 13 yr old girl who started what is probably the best thread I have read in a long time. No sarcastic posts, no flame wars... good job.

Second, I hope that the OP has taken time to watch NASA TV. http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html

I believe that she can impress her teacher most by learning what she can from the NASA site http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/main/index.html and formulate her own opinions based on that.

My opinions of why we should return and stay this time overlaps with most of the posts here, but I would like to add that it seems to be one of the better things that the United States Government spends money on.

I think that the amount of international relations we have in the space exploration is great. We have shared space missions with Japanese, German, and Russian astronauts/cosmonauts. I know people from other nations have played important roles as well, but in my less-than-basic knowledge of history these three countries come to mind when one speaks of major conflicts. I believe it is good to have something for all to work on together. Instead of a "space race" to colonize the moon, hopefully there will be a space partnership to set up an "international lunar station." If space exploration does nothing more than give uncommon nations a common goal to work toward together as they gain trust of one another then space exploration will, in my mind, be a success. How naive is that?!?!

Just think of the increased employment on Earth. The space program does not just create jobs for scientists, engineers, and astronaughts. These people need secretaries, research assistants, and people to build their rockets and experiments. For every person recieving a paycheck from NASA or one of its many contractors, somebody is building their homes, servicing their cars, growing their food, providing entertainment, teaching their children, and the list goes on.

For every person living in the lunar colony there will be thousands on earth providing all manner of support.

Great point Curious One, I would like to add to that a little bit if I may.

In a press conference "televised" on NASA TV, Michael Griffin was asked several questions about readiness of tanks for shuttle missions. I believe this was in the post STS-121 mission conference referring to STS-115 and 116 missions. After a couple questions of the "will lack of fuel tanks hold up the mission schedule" nature Mike did one of his almost rant type speeches that seems to take the media by the heals and shake their pockets empty. He said that the plant that makes the tanks that was hit by hurricanes, including effects of Katrina, is online and will be able to supply tanks. Then he went on to say that not only will there be tanks, but that those people working in the plant returned to first repair the plant, get it back to operation, and then supplied tanks to make STS-121 possible; all the while living in mobile homes and camper trailers in the parking lot. (I assume there was no need for parking space as they weren't driving their cars, if they could find them as nearly all of their homes were destroyed.) He almost showed emotion as he practically lined out reporters of how devoted the people were in doing their part so they could see the shuttle launch and NASA do it's part in ISS assembly; he thanked the workers for that repeatedly. I wish I could find that conference archive; I would link to it.

So yes I would most certainly agree that the trickle down effects of NASA projects and expenses are underestimated and nearly unnoticed. Of these effects include rebuilding areas tore up by natural disasters.

Sorry about firing up an old thread, but I found the transcript to the press conference I was referencing. The whole conference the tanks were being called the "pacing" item for turnaround for December's STS-116 flight as well as following flights.

It starts on page 37 line 18

http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/158574main_STS-115_post_landing_transcript.pdf

In my opinion, NASA Administrator Michael Griffin is a great speaker and a joy to listen to in press conferences.

In space, our cells do not reproduce as fast as they do here on earth, so it would be interesting to start a Cancer relief foundation on the moon.

Sorry, sweetie, but there just aren't any real GOOD reasons to try.

First off, your comment, lacking any attempt to justify your opinion and the fact that you choose to remain anonymous, renders it utterly valueless. Secondly, "sweetie", it is very condescending and inappropriate in addressing a young woman.

rcapper is correct. In addition we sit surrounded by tech marvels that sprang from basic research.....what is basic research?..It is a detailed and systematic plan to study some aspect of the physical world just to see what we can find out, and look what we found, look what we have found!!

In a similar manner research into lunar, solar and further exploration is basic research, we do not know what we will find but we will do the work and gradually expand the presence of man in these areas and there will be some benfits. It is possible there will be no benefit...some basic research finds nothing, but I do not feel this limitless cupboard will be bare.

People who think like our nameless 'guest' often find little reason to get out of bed and do anything, it is easier to carp at others than to try to do anything of merit.

His species is probably still in the trees, eating grubs and scratching their armpits.

The moon is just over the next hill. We've had a sneak peek but now is the time to walk over there and see if the grass we have here can be made greener.

To quote "To infinity and beyond!!!"

there are so many good reasons...but we should leave the moon alone...

Virtually everything we do/have done has a "double edged sword" feature to it. Nuclear energy, for example. That is not justification to sit in the cave and not play with fire. It simply isn't in our nature to not open Pandora's box.

You may want to start a colony on the moon and prepare for life on the moon in case we exhaust all of the planet ressources some day.

One thing is for sure, be it longer or shorter our time on this planet is finite. If we don't get it together to go somewhere else or at least take our waste somewhere and bring back new resources there is a point at which we will extinct ourselves and probably before the sun goes supernova.

Here's a simple good answer for you.

To live on the moon you have to create an Earth like environment. To create an Earth like environment you have to increase your knowledge of how the Earth's environment works and adapt it for the Moon. Increasing humankind's knowledge of the environment will allow us all to correct the problems we have created from a lack of understanding. The more we increase our knowledge of what it takes to live the more likely we are to be able to explore the stars and colonize the cosmos and in the end save humankind from complete extinction one of these millennia.