Ownership fights are normal

...the IAU believes it is the only organization that has the right to name geological features on other planets.

They'd be wrong, wouldn't they? This is what happens when you fight a natural right. It is a natural right for people to name things. Naming things is part of property rights. Property rights are another natural right. Expect things to be renamed again once people actually start claiming property by possession.

Update: Uwingo says...

New Russian Navy

Chinese ship built by Russia

They are adding 40 new warships (and stealing two from the Ukraine.) Russian navy now larger than American!!! !!! !!! These are not all rust buckets (some are) many are very capable ships that are dangerous to ours. Our navy is still better with the operational capabilities our aircraft carriers and subs give us but Obama could certainly fix that. Our carriers are vulnerable and take a long time to replace. We could drastically lose capability in a very short period of time. We might not recover from such a disaster.

We're downsizing our navy. My son will have to translate Russian for me in the new world order.

Ukraine is toast. Arm Poland while there is still time (Is there still time?)

Istanbul and Sevastopol strategically linked

Do you think Putin is stupid enough to invade Turkey? That would keep him busy for a while, but they've already experienced Afghanistan. Poor Georgia would suffer more though.

We really need to start looking beyond the Ukraine. Russia isn't sitting on their borders for a picnic.

The other shoe.

Update: Remember these gathering rust? Might any be put to good use to defend the Ukraine? Do any of them work?

Visiting Mom

So I will have internet access for the next week or so. Mom keeps it on the chance that I'll come for a visit (it's part of a bundle.) She'd like to use it but doesn't. She wants to use email but hasn't since last time I was here and set up a yahoo account for her.

My 73 y.o. mom (who smokes like a chimney, is overweight and has two bad knees) is starting work at McDonald's today. Apparently she got the job by complaining about the service (the manager over heard her) and giving an awful interview ("I wouldn't have hired me," she said.) Did you know individual stores had bookkeepers? Corporate HQ sure, but individual stores? Anyway, I worry about the potential outcomes but hope for the best. She hasn't worked in over a decade and lost that job because she complained to the owner about decisions her supervisor made. Mom was right about the issue, having much more business experience and talent than the supervisor she had but misjudging how the owner would react lost her a job she enjoyed that didn't overtax her physically. This one will be two hours a day part time and involves daily deposits and setting up register drawers. I can see potential fall outs but I worry too much as a general rule. The store is across the street from the barber shop where (step-)dad works which is nice for both of them. Imagine Floyd the barber on the old Andy Griffith show... only Floyd also smokes like a chimney and spends much of his day sitting in front of the shop.

Every six months I renew my car insurance which is what brought me back to town. I don't have to come back to town for that, but it gives me an excuse to visit and I schedule medical appointments around the same time. I have one this coming Tuesday and will visit some other local businesses as well. I went in to see my agent around lunch yesterday so only the owner was in the office. I made some changes to my policy which brought it down from $239 to $210 even adding $3 a month for towing. I have no deductible (which is nice, but surprised me because my last policy before State Farm had a $500 deductible.) I had a nice visit with the owner who passed along a box of Girl Scout cookies (I guess it's that time of year) which I gave mom.

I left Phoenix two days ago and arrived here yesterday. I went through Payson rather than Globe but didn't take the direct route, instead taking I-17 toward Flagstaff and catching hwy 260E at Camp Verde. Phoenix is getting too warm and this place is too cold but I'm not staying long. I know a girl in Phoenix that I saw before I left. She's not the type I'm normally attracted to (too thin and blond) but I am. She has a story that would break your heart including a 32 y.o. son that is in and out of prison (out at the moment) and lives with her when he's out. She doesn't really like me, but will spend some days out with me. I'm a moth to her flame. She says I make her feel human. She also suffers from depression.

My brother-in-law says he didn't get the postal money order I sent him last december (I have no idea why he waited so long to tell me) so I'm probably going to be out another $175 (I can't find the receipt but he's checking his deposits and will get back to me. That was the final payment on a loan and it was a really good feeling to get it out of my way.) Last year I paid my bills. This year I plan to save. Next year I plan to make the money I save work for me. So far the only part of the plan working is I'm keeping myself alive. I have to keep away from entanglements with people. It always hurts me financially because I'm too giving and always see others as being in worse shape and deserving more than I do. Sure I'm a fool and know it. That's a choice. I'm working to make other choices. Anyway, I won't be sending $175 to him in the mail, so if he doesn't find the deposit (he has the onset of Alzheimers) he'll get paid on my next visit in a few months depending on my gas budget (he lives south of Sacramento giving me a chance to visit my stepson who lives in Sacramento.) My ex-wife is out of the picture now since the cold reception I got on my last visit. I didn't actually see her, but she got quiet on the phone when I said I was in town on the last trip. That told me all I needed to know. She's never quiet. So I didn't visit and haven't talked with her since. She's been horrible to her daughter-in-law (if I mention she seems to be describing a nice girl she would hang up on me) so her son limits his contact with his mom as well. I can't worry about it. Another reason to not be entangled in other lives. I've got to fix mine first.

Update: Mom's two hours took four because a supervisor brought in to free up the managers time to train her kept interrupting both of them. Both agreed the supervisor was a jerk. She's getting along well with the manager who lost his brother to suicide recently. Her first day on the job and she has to encourage the manager not to punch out his boss from out of town that seemed determined to demean him in front of his employees. My advice was not to try to fix anything and support that manager as much as she can. I think she will do well there. I've got to meet this manager. He seems more than your usual employee.

Also met a nice candy store owner (I avoid sugar generally, but then I was there wasn't I?) She actually seemed interested in my thoughts which went on for almost two hours. She even picked the topic for the next time I happen by... note to self: avoid entanglements. I'll be gone in a few weeks, but she was very nice.

News coverage in Poland has been wall-to-wall Ukraine...

...and should be here as well. What the hell is wrong with America!!!

Obama! We don't need no stinkin' defense our mole in chief says.

Correlation is not causation - though sometimes it's the opposite.

What first opened my eyes (I admit to being a AGW believer in the late 90′s) was the CO2-temperature graphs. They’;re beloved by the AGW crowd because they show a relationship (correlation) between the two, a very strong one. They use this to argue causation. Turns out, there’s a huge problem with that.
The CO2-temperature graphs show a close tracking for the last 400,000 years (ice core data). If, as was done, the two are separated by height on the graph, only the relationship is evident. (and that, I suspect, is why they present it in that format)

The real eye-opener is when you overlay the two lines. Then, you clearly see what isn’t easy to see on the most commonly used charts – a time lag. It varies from 2 to 10 centuries (it trends toward the lower limit in warming periods, the longer in cooling)

It’s the time lag that’s the key. What it boils down to is the cause must come before the effect.
Short version: it’s absolutely clear in both the Greenland and Antarctic ice cores that there is a relationship between CO2 and temperature. Temperature goes up, *then* CO2 does the same. Temperature goes down, so does CO2. The two, when graphed, do track each other. But it’s temperature, not CO2, that’s the leader; CO2 follows temperature (by several hundred years) not the other way around.

This is most clearly evident at both the start and end of the most recent glacial era. At the end of the Eemian interglacial, temperature and CO2 diverged massively; CO2 continued to rise for several hundred years after the drop in temperature. Likewise, at the end of the last glacial era, temperatures rose several hundred years before CO2 began to rise. This is also true (though based on antarctic ice cores only) of the prior four glacial eras, so five glacial eras in all. It’s evident through the entire timeline not just at the glacial era interfaces, but it’s most obvious there.

So, unless we want to assume violations of the law of cause and effect (or time-traveling CO2) then it’s abundantly clear that temperature drives CO2 levels, and not the other way around. This makes sense, because while it’s difficult to beleive that a gas that’s a tiny fraction of earth’s atmosphere (four hundredths of one percent) could have a major impact on temperature, it’s very easy to see how temperature, through its effects on both geochemical and organic processes, could have an effect on trace gas levels. (and also, why there’s a time lag in this effect).

Now, we get to the Eemian interglacial era (the last interglacial warm period prior to the one in which we live). CO2 levels then were lower than today, and also lower than our per-industrial levels, yet the climate then was both hotter and wetter, worldwide. This is seen clearly from the fossil record in many location on earth; hippopotamus fossils on the Thames in the UK, iguanas in Greenland, tropical shells in presently-temperate areas… and most glaring of all, raised coral islands worldwide. (surface level coral reefs in the Eemian, when sea levels were about 17 feet higher.) It’s true that in some cases raised coral islands are caused by geologic uplift, but that’s not the case with most. Yet, all over the globe, even in areas where it’s currently too cold for coral, we see raised coral islands of approximately the same height, all dating from the Eemian.

The AGW claim is twofold. First, they denied (ahha, deniers!) that the Eemian was warmer than the present (Much as they currently still do regarding Holocene warm periods, such as the Medieval Warm Period, that was warmer than today) . Then, they adapted, and now the current commonplace AGW explanation for the Eemian is that this warmth (that they denied) was due to solar forcing, not CO2. If that were true, it would, amongst other things, negate the cause and effect they claim from the close tracking of CO2 and temperature.
Some of the current warmist claims are that the Eemian was only warmer in non-polar regions, and was colder at the poles, and that’s why polar bears didn’t go extinct, and thus global temp averages weren’t warmer than today. Unfortunately for them, this doesn’t pass the snicker test; the ice cores, especially in Greenland, show this isn’t the case, and it also ignores the higher sea level. Even if every bit of Greenland ice (the only significant ice volume in the northern hemisphere) melted, it’d raise sea levels by about six feet. The sea ice on the arctic ocean is meaningless for sea level changes, because it could all melt and not raise sea levels at all (it’s floating, of course).
So, that leaves Antarctic ice as the source of the majority of the Eemian high sea levels (the water had to come from somewhere, and that’s the only source large enough). So, taken to a logical conclusion, the current AGW claims for the Eemian can be summed up as “the ice melted because it got colder”. They can’t claim sublimation; precipitation was higher then, too.

But, that makes just as much sense as time-traveling CO2.

While the cat's away, the rat will play.

Ken is still away, so I'm taking this opportunity to post a piece I've been working on;

The remaining barrier to the colonization of Mars, and a way around it. 




    At the current time, we either have, or are close to having, the hardware and technology available to place colonists on Mars.

On site resource utilization can provide some of the essentials, such as shelter, water, and oxygen. 

There is one glaring exception that's even more important than the above, and unless we find a solution, it makes survival on Mars, or anywhere outside cislunar space, impossible.

This massive sticking point is the shelf life of the fruit of the coffea arabicia; the coffee bean. After harvesting, the clock is ticking, and it's remorseless. The coffee beans require roasting within two months of harvest, and after roasting, they fade within weeks. (Refrigeration can help slightly, but not enough). Going beyond these critical bounds degrades the coffee to supermarket-tin level, which is utterly incapable of sustaining human life. 

Coffee can be grown in greenhouses, and thus on Mars, but it takes several years for a bush to reach production age. The colonists would therefor be facing an utterly unsurvivable coffee bean gap. I suppose it's theoretically possible, sort of, for them to survive this hellish period by utilizing instant coffee, but... could anyone endure such hardships and survive? I think it's both highly unlikely and absolutely inhuman to even contemplate it. 

The answer, the ONLY answer, is a high velocity cargo delivery system for Mars.Conventional cargo transport is simply too slow.

How do you do such a thing? First, keep it simple and focused on the goal. All it has to do is carry a small amount of cargo to Mars and land it on the surface. How much cargo? For a 20 person colony, 50 kilograms a month should suffice, with only a little deprivation.

Travel time? A month or less is needed.  Two weeks would be ideal.

Chemical Rockets? Nowhere near fast enough. The New Horizons Pluto probe (which had the fastest departure speed of any spacecraft) crossed Mars' orbit 39 days after launch, but only via having a small, light payload atop an enormous three-stage rocket, and that's just about the best chemical propulsion can hope to achieve.

Solar-electric? Useless for this purpose due to the time it takes to accelerate.

Fusion propulsion? We ain't got it, which makes using it a tad problematic.

In order to ensure speedy arrival at even sup-optimal orbital alignments, we need a delta/v of about 50 kilometers per second. We absolutely have to have it, so how do we get it? 

The only answer, and thus a necessary prerequisite to any form of deep space or planetary colonization, is electric launch from the Moon. Use a linear accelerator (a rail gun) on the lunar surface. The good news is that very high G rates are obtainable, but the bad news is that unroasted beans are a bit delicate, so at most could handle about 5 g's. (easily obtainable with current tech, even for a capsule weighing a few hundred kg). 

There are a few minor technical problems to address, the first of which is that a 5g rail-gun would need to be several thousand miles long to achieve the needed speed, and we'd need a lot of them to provide the needed launch azimuth flexibility dictated by planetary orbital cycles. The answer is easy enough; the rail gun does not need to be perfectly straight. It can be built at the lunar equator, fully encircling the moon. Once the capsule is accelerated to 50kps, it can simply be released on the appropriate trajectory point.

The second minor issue is power, but a few hundred square miles of solar cells should suffice. 


The coffee transporter vehicle will arrive at Mars at around 55 KPS. This is going to be a very challenging entry profile (atmospheric deceleration is the only option here) but by keeping the payload small and light, you can have a deployable heat shield much larger in diameter than the payload, thus also giving you the ability (via center of gravity adjustments) to do a negative-lift reentry (which you need to stay within the atmosphere at those velocities).

If great care is taken in the design, the attenuated entry heat can be used to roast the beans (though more research is urgently needed on the matter of whether or not hypervelocity Mars entry heating is suitable for optimal roasting of the beans).    


So, we'll need to build a large lunar base in order to construct the launcher.This project will easily be the most expensive in human history (vastly more costly than even a large Mars colony, by several orders of magnitude)  but it's the only way.

I propose to call it "Project Espresso". 

Moving rock on Mars

A very interesting event has occurred on Mars; a rock that wasn't there in an earlier photo from the Opertunity Rover appeared in a second photo, much to the puzzlement of scientists. (pics and story at the link)

In other news, our blogger, Ken, has been gone for a while to parts unknown. Perhaps very, very distant parts?

I think these two events are overly coincidental, so are likely connected.

Ken, why did you move that rock?

A modest proposal: How to get massive public financial support for a Mars colony

One of the nagging questions regarding a Mars colony is funding. Sure, some think they have that solved, but only via cutting a lot of corners.

So I ask; wouldn't it be better to go with massive financial support? Yes, it would, and the good news is there's an easy way to get it - while doing a lot of good along the way. 



The answer, in brief, is to use the SLS as the launch vehicle for the numerous launches required, and more importantly, having it live up to its moniker: Senate Launch System.There's also the point that this is probably the only way the SLS will ever be of worthwhile use.


What I'm proposing here is to make Congress, all of it, the colonists, while also asking people to donate via the slogan "Send Congress on a one way trip into space!" I guarantee that the money would flood in. 

Convincing Congress to go is the easiest part; simply point to polls showing that voluntarily leaving Earth would make them very popular with the electorate, and whisper in their ears the magic words "guaranteed reelection!" 

As for the colony, you wouldn't need to worry about (or spend money on) implementing ISRU, life support, or any other infrastructure. Congress, once on Mars and when in need of something, could just do as it usually does and vote for it, paying no heed to any practical considerations whatsoever. If they need food, they can simple tax the locals - being a rock is no excuse for not paying taxes. If they need water, they could appropriate it by legislative fiat. If they are hindered by the low G, they could simply amend the  law of gravity. If they're a couple of days from running out of oxygen, they can simply declare the issue an "Oxygen deficit" and thus ignore it.

But why stop there? Let's do this right and send all politicians on this grand adventure to create a thriving, livable world - called "Earth".

Water issues on Mars

When it comes to deciding where to place a colony on Mars, one issue oft overlooked is water availability.

Mars has water (which is what makes it the best choice for colonization) but it's not evenly distributed. Some areas are akin to the moon, where water can be found only in tiny concentrations. Extracting it via mining and heating would be enormously costly in terms of energy and infrastructure, even if we assume that Curiosity's results of a water concentration of 1.5 to 3% for Martian soil are representative of other areas of Mars. 

What this boils down to is that unless a colony is located near the north polar ice cap, you probably need an aquifer.  There may well be liquid-water aquifers on Mars, and in fact there almost certainly are. However, we don't know where they are yet.

Synthetic aperture radar may be the answer. A technique has been developed, but it has yet to be utilized on Mars.
JPL has an article about it, which highlights the fact that it's proving quite useful here on Earth. (I"ve often said that one of the prime "exports" of a Martian colony will be innovations in technology, and this is an early example; a technique developed for Mars being used on Earth).

However, even if aquifers are located, that alone isn't enough to select a colony site. Even here on Earth, wells still come up dry even when over a well-mapped aquifer. There are also cases where groundwater has unwelcome substances in it, such as arsenic or salt, which would require the water to be distilled (not a deal-breaker, but something you'd need to know in advance). So, what you need is a test well if an aquifer is your source.

Drilling a well on Mars would be a daunting, expensive task. It could be done with automated systems and robotics, but it would require a lot of mass. The drill pipes alone would weigh many tons. You'd need such a rig to drill a well for a colony anyway, but it's still a lot of upmass.

That leaves us with near-polar sites. There, water access is easier and definite; we already know there is water there, and it's on the surface in the form of ice. That saves the up-mass of a drilling rig, and the need to drill pre-site-selection. The only downside to such a high latitude site is that it reduces the available solar power, primarily during winter (Due to Mars' thin atmosphere, sunlight is not hindered when the sun is closer to the horizon, as it is on Earth). You also might need sunlight for greenhouses.

There's a way around that issue, a better way; nuclear power. With it, you don't need energy storage as you do with solar. For farming, you can use LED lighting, which you may well need even in an equatorial location; sunlight on Mars is weaker than on Earth due to distance, and would be further reduced by passing through the needed thicknesses of glass needed to deal with the near-vacuum of the Martian surface. Plants needing full sun on Earth would not do well in Martian sunlit greenhouses (though reflectors could be used to compensate).

Small reactors are closer to being available than is commonly thought; the Department of Energy and several companies are working on small modular reactors now, and those designs could easily be modified to reduce mass via dispensing with some shielding (On Mars, the shielding could be soil.).  

Via exchanging a small, lightweight nuclear reactor for the drilling equipment and solar collectors, you'd actually save net mass, as well as enabling the colony to be in a more advantageous location and be energy-rich. 

  
Edit to add: I'm not saying that a reactor is a prerequisite for a Mars colony; it isn't. However, if one is available, I think it would be preferable to solar-based energy for a colony.

Food on Mars

For a Mars colony, food will, of course, be a critical issue.

The situation is simple; they can either produce food, or import it from Earth. The latter is very costly, especially long term, due to the price per pound of getting it to the Martian surface.

There are ways to reduce the mass of transported food, such as via dehydration. However, the cost will still be enormous. As Ken said in the post below, around $76,000 per kilogram.

What this means is that colonists will need, in a fairly short timeframe, to produce most of their food.

As has already been noted on this blog, farming should be one of their first tasks. This is a nececity, and fortunatly, there appear to be no show-stoppers in using Martian soil (It might need preprocessing to remove some iron and most perchlorates, both of which are easily accomplished.)

Therefor, within a few months, the colonists ought to be able to be harvesting many fast-growing crops. Yeilds could be increased via the simple expedient of increasing the partial pressure of CO2 (this has been often demonstrated here on Earth in experimental greenhouses).

However, there is a serous issue that I've not yet seen addressed; farm animals. Some will be vital, such as earthworms, though fortunately those are not hard to transport. What is of concern is meat animals; without them, the colonists will be condemned to exist as vegetarians.

During the early days of a colony, they will be unable to afford the production losses of using their farm produce for animal feed, but that should soon change. Then, they will need meat animals.

This begs the question, one I've yet to see raised anywhere; how do you get farm animals to Mars?

For chickens and turkeys, the answer seems obvious; send fertile eggs and incubate them on Mars. However, this is not as feasible as it sounds, due to the time constraints on per-incubation storage. A fertile chicken egg has lessening chances of developing after a few days, and after three weeks, incubation is impossible. Turkey eggs are better, but only by about an extra week before incubation percentages drop to zero.

It takes approximately 21 days of incubation for a chicken egg to hatch, while a turkey egg takes 28. So, if eggs were launched inside an incubation system that held them in cold storage first (for a maximum of about two weeks to maintain a sufficient incubation percentage) your hatchlings would emerge approximately 5 weeks after liftoff (6 weeks for turkeys) 

The key problem; a minimum-energy Mars voyage takes about 6 months at minimum.

Can hatchlings survive in zero G, even with humans aboard to care for them?

The answer, sadly, appears to be "no". The Russians performed some experiments on their Mir space station, which included hatching quail eggs.   http://finchwench.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/cosmoquails/

Does this apply to chickens and turkeys as well? We don't know, though the evidence from the quail experiments is hardly promising. Even incubation in zero G caused issues.

The zero-g incubation issue can be dealt with via a small centrifuge, but even so, that would require a journey time of no more than 5 weeks. Therefor, it's quite possible that the only way to get chickens and turkeys to Mars is to do it very fast; a small craft on a very high-energy trajectory. The fastest probe ever launched was New Horizons to Pluto, and that took 78 days to cross Mars' orbit. What we need is something that can do it in half that time. This can be done; a very small Mars entry spacecraft launched by a very large rocket with multiple upper stages could attain the needed velocity, though engineering it to enter and land with an entry speed of over 100,000 mph will be an engineering challenge, and very costly.

What of other needed livestock; pigs, for example? Pigs might have a good chance, though they have, as yet, not been flown in space. All we have to go on are data from other animals, such as dogs, cats, and monkeys - and none of that is long-term. Theoretically, If launched young, piglets, if cared for by a human crew, could probably survive months in zero-g. Or, they might not. We simply do not know.

Sending cows to Mars (A single female calf would suffice, along with a stock of frozen fertilized eggs to be implanted) would be harder yet.

There might be one way around the zero-G issue. Artificial gravity. Connect two Mars-bound transport habitats by a long cable, and then spin up the resulting assembly. In this way, the need to make a fast transit could be eliminated. It may, in fact, be the only viable alternative.

The need to send livestock to Mars might be a longer-term concern, but it is something that will need to be done at some point in the early years of a colony. 

What are we waiting for?

We've never had liberty. When the pilgrims arrived in 1620...

...some of the passengers proclaim[ed] that since the settlement would not be made in the agreed upon Virginia territory, they "would use their own liberty; for none had power to command them..."

This could not be allowed, so the Mayflower Compact, signed aboard their ship, would allow some to rule all. It seemed simple enough...

combine ourselves together into a civil body politic; ...  such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.

Is submission and obedience good for the colony? Let's say you have a colony of two. Which should be master over the other? Now three; should one be the slave of the other two? Liberty, ownership and free trade requires no masters or slaves. True consent (no force allowed) benefits everyone.

400 years later, this same choice is ours again. No government cares about mars because it's too far. This is an opportunity. The first colonist can choose liberty, strong property rights and extremely limited government (because really strong property rights means no eminent domain, no taxes, etc.)

Liberty has never been tried. We need the home of the braver, willing to truly be the land of the free. What are we waiting for? I'll tell ya.

To get to mars we need a lander. Mars One has it on their schedule if they get the funds. SpaceX has the design which needs to be produced and tested. Not having a lander is a show stopper. If the lander meets specifications ($190m/2500kg) we have a surcharge of $76k/kg for anything imported to mars from earth. This is potential wealth for any colonist that arrives according to the settlement charter. New colonists may trade some of their goods knowing it has great value if not the entire value of the surcharge.

Before the lander is ready we can proceed with another requirement. The refuelable ship that will take them to mars orbit where they will transfer into the landers that take them to the mars surface. That ship is a profit center before taking anyone to mars. It should be taken on shakedown cruises around the moon to be certain they are good enough to take colonists to mars orbit. These shakedown cruises are themselves a potential source of profit. This should be done now.

Are we brave enough to grab hold of real liberty? Time will tell.

Profit is one reason for going to mars. It is profitable now, but it does require someone with vision and resources to pay for it.

Notice anything about this picture?

It appears ready for the Falcon Heavy!

The local mars economy

How is that going to work on mars? Well, we have to start with some assumptions.

People will get to mars by whatever means they do with whatever political baggage they carry. So there may be many groups but with all of mars to choose from they should keep themselves from causing each other too much trouble. Survival will suggest they are helpful to each other regardless of where they came from. Political baggage is unavoidable. However, we are going to assume the members of our local community are fiercely independent and have all agreed to the settlement charter which is to say strong property rights. Nobody can take anybody's property except in free trade. No eminent domain or property taxes by any name will exist. No country is going to find it worth the expense to send enforcement to mars to collect any tax and the martians will mostly ignore them were they to try. We will discuss the exception to this after we've finished with our assumptions. Land will either be owned or unowned. If unowned anybody could mine it but it is subject to claim by any newly arriving member of the charter at which time mining must stop until arrangements agreeable to the new owner are met. So it would be unwise to invest too heavily in unowned property.

We have to understand the time value of money. Which simply means future dollars have a cost which reduces their buying power. If you borrow money, expect to pay a fee.

Since we have no better numbers we will assume the Mars One lander parameters. $150m to $190m will buy you one to the surface of mars with 2500 kg of stuff. Let's use the higher number but say that includes the 9 mo. time value of money. So imports from earth will all have a $76k/kg surcharge. The buyer also owns that lander which has 18 dracos, 8 superdracos, tanks, and about 4 tons of aluminum. Aluminum is 100% recyclable. They may keep that lander as an emergency habitat or scrap it. It is their [strongly enforced by the locals] private property. It may be that none are ever purchased to be sent to mars, outside of the settlement charter contract, but that's ok as you shall see.

Contract law is the law of the land and commodities will be traded and assume whatever natural exchange rate free trade determines. Mars will have no fiat currency. They will have members that do have fiat currency and perhaps other assets on earth. We will assume that most members arrive on mars in a four person lander with personal items. That would mean 625 kg per person (including their own mass.) However, the settlement charter requires the transportation company to provide 1000 kg per person so they will deliver that extra 375 kg separately. So any colonist that severed all ties with earth and sold all their earthly assets would still arrive on mars with over 400 kg of resellable items worth a minimum of $30m. in surcharge value and claim one square kilometer with about 500 plots all of which is potential collateral at a mars bank to start any business they might choose. It should be quite common for arriving settlers to trade some of these imported items for a habitat when they arrive and sell the rest over the course of time.

This may eliminate the need for other resupply from earth essentially making martians independent in that sense quite soon. But wait, $76k/kg? Who on mars could afford that? Probably nobody, so what happens in a free market? People trade. People compete. People will compete by finding ways to make some of those imports ISRU. People will involve themselves in the local economy in individual ways, no central planning required. There are no gouging laws. If something is scarce it will be able to demand a higher price. Things that demand a higher price will look good to somebody wanting to produce and sell such items ISRU. More sellers competing brings the prices down. The laws of economics work everywhere.

How about liquidity? Money exists for a reason. You don't want to have to carry around barter items for day to day transactions. That's where banks come in. Anyone that gains the trust of the community can be a banker. Strong contract law protects everybody. Banks collect commodities (metals most likely, but anything not perishable would do) and issue bank cards that act as money. They do not produce money through fractional lending. They make their money in the commodities exchange and commercial lending to people that all have collateral. Everybody is going to have internet and card readers will be a common item for anybody in business (probably built into the cell phones everybody has.) To avoid multiple bank cards, banks may all agree to just use a personal ID card with the user choosing what bank to draw funds from for any given transaction (martians are very rational you know.) It's quite likely the protocols will be worked out early so the mars ID card (with an extra backup) is part of every arriving colonists stuff. The balance on the card may be kept in grams of silver. So in making a deposit at a bank of iron, copper, gold or whatever, banks will compete on rates to turn that into silver. Business would naturally advertise their wares in grams of silver (about 64 cents here on earth at the moment.) Bank runs should never happen as long as banks use their assets wisely. If it did happen, depositors might have to accept other than silver to cover their deposits. It's not fractional banking. They will be able to pay their depositors. They will have to make all their assets available in reports to everybody over the internet and inspections would be something for the locals to determine (you really can't get away from some politics.) They might have a bank regulations that limit how much exchange rates can change in a single day but that's not essential and something for the locals to determine for themselves. It will all be written in contracts. Caveat Emptor.

All of this economic activity on mars will create value and wealth. Companies on mars may someday go public on earth. This makes earth wealthier without importing a single gram from mars. The banks themselves might have public stock issued on earth.

With people possessing and developing land on mars, people on earth will have confidence that they could buy land as an investment knowing it will go up in value over time. Price determined by a free market. The companies transporting colonists according to the settlement charter would no doubt be able to make more money faster in other ways. But with 500,000 half acre plots to sell for every person they transport, they have a very large potential return on their money even if it takes decades to break even. I expect once people are living on mars and lots of people want to go to mars (having millions of dollars in assets the moment you arrive might be considered an incentive... at least 200,000 people want to go now even without that incentive) the value of land will appreciate rapidly and return on investment for transportation may only take months once the ball is rolling.

So now, what about those countries that do want to take the assets of some that are left on earth? Being smart (my ex-wife believe rich is the definition of smart) they know they will need to protect their assets from confiscation. They will (the rich are funny that way.) Everybody else will not have any assets on earth for them to confiscate. Really that may be the main attraction of mars... getting a fresh start without nanny looking over your shoulder. That's Galt's Gulch.

I want to talk about two more things, dust and food (but not dusty food.)

Dust blows all over mars and some quiver at the dangers. But economically that dust has value. It will be collected for the minerals in it (refined and deposited at your local bank.) They will decide for themselves how to channel that dust on their property with walls and wind breaks.

The early colonists must be provided with enough food to survive. This means they should not depend on local farming at all to start. We don't really know how local farming is going to work out except by doing in on mars, hands on. It won't be nothing. I believe a 50m Zubrin hobby farm will feed three to four. Whatever the true rate of growth per acre is they will be able to grow something. That's what the early colonists will find out for us. That will determine how fast new colonists can arrive. It's not something to wring our hands over but it would be good to know how much it will cost to keep the early colonists alive.

Water is not a problem as long as they have power. They need enough power to take care of all their needs and in addition enough power for the industry to create more means of getting power. So we should be absolutely certain that we oversupply them with power. This is not negotiable. The colony will not survive without this. If you have power and water you have air. So food is really the only issue.

They will need 2.5kg of food per person per day or about 650g if freeze dried. Let's say a combination being about 1kg or $76k per day. To keep a dozen colonists alive would cost over $300m per year. That's a lot of money. That's $650m every 26 month for food supplies or 3.25 landers. So if we don't want to spend $650m a second time they will have to learn to grow enough food before the second wave of colonists arrive. Can they?

Absolutely they will. Even if they don't start with as much variety as they eventually will have. Potatoes alone grow dense enough that nobody is going to starve, but they will have more variety. Food will have value. People will grow it not just for themselves but for others. Expect thriving farmers markets on mars.

Update: This is where I will provide some food production numbers after I've done a bit more research on the topic.

Best wishes to SpaceX on today's launch

Via Rand.

Update: It's aborted. Perhaps I should have said, "break a leg?"

It's not just Obama

The incredible list.

Is ObamaCare like chappaquiddick?

I mean, mentioning chappaquiddick is all it took to derail Ted Kennedy's run for president.

Can we mention ObamaCare to discredit future democrats?

Leaving this wednesday

I'll be back on the road in a few days. I hope CJ will find something to keep this blog alive during that time (no pressure CJ, it's all in fun.) I'll check back in from time to time. I'm on a mission.

After landing - What then?

CJ brought this topic up and it's a good one. I'd like to explore it a bit more. But I have to back up just a bit to set the scene...

In mars orbit are a dozen colonists in a ship with supplies on the first human mission to mars. They have three landers in orbit with them each capable of safely landing four crew at a time with 30 days of supplies within a 10 km. landing ellipse. On the surface of mars are prepositioned supplies in a number of landers scattered about within a 50 km. radius circle. They also have 3 more supply landers in orbit with them, one of which will follow each crew lander to mitigate any landing that doesn't come within a maximum range of a prepositioned lander.

The first crew of four is chosen by whatever means and lands within 5 km. of the center of the supplies circle. After announcing, "the Canary has landed," the first four spend the first hour on mars doing a quick survey of their immediate area from within their lander. The eight in orbit are making their congratulations while they wait for the earth on time delay to do the same. Before they can really get to business they have to perform the first step ceremony having selected the youngest member of their crew to perform. She's a bit nervous, but somebody's got to do it. History books have to be written ya know.

With that out of the way, it's time to get to work. It's a balmy -40 degrees outside. Helmets are already on from the first step ceremony so it's time to start unpacking. Care must be taken because anything wet will immediately adhere to any surface at that temperature and be almost impossible to separate without damage. They don't want the first death on mars to happen so soon. They will not be getting anything wet for now. Two of the crew will immediately begin setting up an array of solar panels. These will charge batteries that remain on the lander. The other two will use the plastic of a 50m Zubrin hobby farm to set up as a supply tent. This tent will have 10 psi of warm breathable air and power from the lander batteries. It will have a simple airlock for getting in and out. They will move all supplies from the lander into this tent except the water tank and batteries that will remain on the lander. They also have rover batteries that will come out of the lander when they are ready to assemble the rover.

For their first meal on mars they will all gather in the supply tent. Only a quarter of the solar panels have been laid out but this is enough since they haven't assembled any rovers needing charging yet. Each member has an identical cell phone computer which fits into a suit pocket on their arm and is now showing them a map of supply lander locations along with a list of supplies they contain. Tomorrow, two of the crew will go to a nearby supply lander and get what they need for the following days work to continue preparing this first camp. They will need to build a shelter with better radiation protection. For that they need better equipment than their gloved hands.

The first night on mars they sleep under the stars while the crew in space handles communications with earth.

In the morning they assemble the small tractor rover that will pull the unfolded trailer they will ride on to the supply lander they've chosen. They are mainly going for the trenching rover they will bring back to start building the first permanent habitat on mars. The dirt from the trencher is a precious resource since it holds liters of water in every cubic meter for filling their water tanks. In a month this new habitat will be finished and ready to hold more than their dozen crew. Then the second four will land and begin helping to develop their first base. Later they will retrieve one of the two big tractor's parts so they can assemble it to pull the nuclear reactor power lander closer to their underground community industrial production center.

They designate the base, which sits on a corner of an established square kilometer, as Ellis Island community base. With eight sets of hands to do the work they build the town square pykrete public water tank capable of holding enough water for a small town as part of their initial industrial base.

After about two months, when the last four have arrived and the ship begins its slow ion drive journey back to earth, they select by lottery the order in which they will each claim ownership of each individual's private one sq. km. piece of real estate according the settlement charter they agreed to before leaving earth. Part of the daily Mars reality show being broadcast on earth has been showing people the landscape narrated by various colonists. The first dozen agreement has been they will all work together to build two habitats for each colonist on their separate lands. One to be a personal habitat and the other to sell to those that arrive two years later on the next mission. They will also build one 50m Zubrin Hobby farm for each colonist. Private ownership prevents the tragedy of the commons. Not only will they produce shows showing the various activities, but they will show details of their growing industrial capabilities along with requests for designs for things they will need. Earth will not only be a resource for speculators purchasing real estate and shares of local mars community company stocks, but will be a huge source for public domain designs. The frontier spirit will invigorate in two directions.

As a small growing community they will share their labor to help each other just like small ranch communities do on earth. But each individual will be free to choose what they will contribute to their small society in a free market system. Property rights will be absolute with no 'public right' to take anything away from anybody without their true consent. True consent meaning without any force what so ever. This will be an absolutely new experience for humans. It's never been tried before.

As the community gains experience they will let earth know what skills they wish introduced the most. This will determine who goes on the next mission which will include several dozen new colonists. By this time the sale of unimproved 40x50m plots will have established a value that makes thousands of potential new colonists want to make their own claims. Being transported for free and arriving with ownership of about 500 plots they can sell for thousands of dollars in profit each after improvement is the beginning of the great mars colony land rush.

The company claiming 1000 sq. km. for each colonist they transport to mars is finding many willing buyers on earth speculating that the value of their land will only go up in time. Meanwhile all the governments on earth keep passing laws none of the martians are willing to fall for.

Twenty years later three of Elon's sons arrive to establish the mars branch SpaceX manufacturing plant. Elon remains on earth to manage his tenth startup which needs his personal attention. One of his sons starts up the TelsaMars SuperRover company.

Splitting water

A better way?

The case for space and against mars

Everybody knows I believe a colony on mars is the fastest way to open up the entire solar system as the economic sphere of humankind. So I've found two articles with counter arguments to discuss...

First, 'The Case Against Mars', and second, 'The Case for Space.' I will consider their arguments...

As usual there is a certain economic myopia that some bring to the argument...

Mars is not even in the running. Jesco von Puttkamer of NASA, an apparent advocate of men-to-Mars admits that "... Such a program would be unlikely to provide nonterrestrial materials in the foreseeable future as a lunar base or asteroid mining program might do..." Since hardly anyone argues otherwise, this should seal the case against Mars as a goal for the next phase of space development.

Mining is certainly important and it is forgivable that most focus on this. However, it is not the most important nonterrestrial requirement for space development although it will certainly be a factor in that which is. Considering why we haven't made much progress since landing on the moon should hint at what is. The most important issue is an intangible which accounts for its exclusion from most considerations. Mining will become important but it will take decades. During that time, mars can become the giant of offworld industry entirely because it alone harvests the most important factor in development... the liberty of free enterprise. Nothing else has the potential for such explosive economic growth. Nothing ever has. It's too bad we can't convince earthlings of this!

It is not just... Others [that] suffer from an attack of false analogies since the word immediately preceding this comment was Antarctica.

Mars also benefits from the misconception that human needs demand whole planets (when even the smaller asteroids contain billions of tons of resources).

Again missing the point. While a certain amount of free enterprise will be unleashed by various companies mining resources it will not be as fine grained as what the martian colonists will be able to do. Mining asteroids and mars will be done by companies. But in addition, mars will allow independent entrepreneurs to follow their own individual dreams and develop new companies as well without the stark hurdle required to do the same in places other than mars. Mars is going to be a place with large industrial malls owned by individuals (if they take to heart the principles of free enterprise. This is why they should get off to a good start with strong property rights... no eminent domain and no property tax.) Update: Imagine where we would be today if there were no SpaceX. Now imagine a planet full of Elon's because that's what frontiers full of independent people with resources does.

[Martians] will need suits and pressurized hulls like those needed in space.

Well yes, except very shortly after starting the colony (a few years at most) martians will have enough livable work space that most may never use their space suits at all. Space they can even expand without the need for a space suit (if you can't imagine how, you are having the same problem as the author of the case against mars article.)

...sending people on long trips through space in what must, if flown any time soon, be poorly shielded spacecraft.

Ever notice how the case against mars is more so a case against space? Martians will only spend a few months in space, then settle into habitats with plenty of radiation shielding which includes the atmosphere they disdain.

The martian atmosphere does contain about 2.5 percent nitrogen — an element rare in asteroids.

And a real show stopper if you plan on growing food. This is a huge plus for mars.

[Martians] would have to dig themselves into the ground.

As opposed to spacers who would have to import that ground for the same purpose. It's not that they can't do this, but that it is a limiting factor in growth.

because no sound economic incentive for settlement has been advanced, housing on Mars must be built using tax money and maintained using still more tax money.

True for space, but absolutely false for mars. Mars has 144 million sq. km. of real estate, almost worthless today but after possession will appreciate in value enough to pay all the costs of colonization in a very short time. Not only should not a dime of tax money be used to develop mars, government involvement should be unwelcome for the most part. Dennis Tito's recent begging of government for his Inspiration Mars mission is a perfect example. Just a bit of rethinking (see my comments) would mean he could do his project with less risk and cost without inviting in the government regulations monster. But betting on SLS & Orion almost guarantees failure.

As a matter of fact, it is settlement of mars that creates a huge market for the resources from space in order to get there (a one time cost for martians, but a continuous cost for spacers.) Fuel cost is the number one cost for getting to mars as the vehicles will be reused and amortised over hundreds of missions.

Mars does not need terraforming. It will be terraformed the same way earth is, a habitat at a time (in most places on earth we do not live naked under the sun.) If the martians want more, let them do it. It's not earth's problem.

From NASA's perspective, a Mars mission offers another Apollo-like project that would bump down the old, familiar tracks that once led to glory — and there would be no awkward threat of competition from private enterprise.

What stone age thinking! Or rather, childish marxist thinking. They can't even imagine what free enterprise can do even with all the examples from history. They continue to believe it would work if only they got to control it. They can't even fathom that no tax money is required or desired. This is perhaps the strongest argument for mars. It may even be THE argument.

We need not support all proposals for spending money in space. Indeed our credibility and our goals may on occasion be better served by opposition.

I could not agree more.

The second article is nicely arranged under these bolded arguments...

Sunlight Available 24x7

Life and industry require energy and space close to the sun has the advantage in most cases. However, as long as we have all we can use, anything above that is moot. The one case where it isn't an advantage in space is plant growth. Plant growth, by the way, is how most energy on earth is collected and used (you thought it was oil, didn't you?) Mars offers the same sunlight as some places on earth (once UV is taken care of which is very simple) and could be concentrated to offer the same as other places on earth. Space activities will import food from mars.

For industrial power, martians will not depend on solar panels and batteries. They will not have to deal with the regulatory whackos we have here on earth (see THE argument above.) Power really will be too cheap to meter on mars.

Convenient Access to Zero Gravity

Getting rid of waste heat is admittedly more difficult in space than in a planetary environment.

Which is a reason mars will be able to develop huge industry. Why is this argument being made under the topic of zero g? Because that's how the author intends to address this mars advantage.

All Gravitational Options Available

Orbital habitats will [have to] simulate gravity by rotation. 

It is assumed this is a good thing. Is it?

Living at the Top of a Well

This is why mining asteroids to bring materials back to Earth is just barely a possibility for the future, whereas Mars mining would probably not be able to compete due to the tariff which gravity imposes.

Again the myopic mining issue. I suggest that not a gram of mars is required to import to earth for economic success. Wealth has no mass, making it extremely cheap to transport to earth (in the form of digital certificates of various sorts.) Mining asteroids will not be for import to earth either. The minerals are already in the place they are most valuable.

No Weather, Save What We Make for Ourselves

Yeah, mars has seasons like earth. What a burden.

Warning! Warning! Meteor Storm!

Not an issue as they agree.

Convenient Communication with the Homeworld

So space habitats aren't free from earth? You don't say. Mars will have continuous communications even on the far side of the sun through relays.

Convenient Travel to the Homeworld

This is the point they miss. Wealth is all that must travel and that costs almost nothing.  Economic activity is local. Once on mars, most people may never need to leave. Ever. However, getting to mars orbit using reusable vehicles will cost about the same as an airline ticket. From there the costs are the same (because now you are in space.) 

Making A Living

Although a Martian economy may someday become possible, it seems likely to remain a local economy. There seem to be no marketable products that Martians could sell to Earth which would be worth lifting out of the gravity well of Mars. Martians might sell real estate to Earthlings, provided there was some compelling reason to want to live there, and living conditions on Mars were reasonably pleasant.

All economies are local. Nor may there be anything worth dropping onto earth from space. Martians can sell real estate to earthlings that don't want to live there. Living conditions on mars can become pleasant fast under two conditions (private ownership by individuals and abundant power.) Private ownership by individuals pursuing their own dreams is a huge advantage martians will have over spacers living in somebody elses ship.

...it's difficult to see how the process can get started in the first place without expectations of a return on Earth-originated investments.

Absolutely true. Most people do have a problem seeing ROI which is ironic since ROI is exactly why you choose mars. Growth on mars represents growing wealth on earth. Wealth has no mass.

A Staging Post for the Belt?

Mars will have the fastest growing industry in the solar system at least until every square kilometer has been claimed which will take over a century. That means they will have the infrastructure to make the huge ships and variety of ships that spacers will need. The cost of getting to mars orbit will be negligible to the overall costs. The real point is that spacers have to spend resources travelling to grow industry. Martians don't have to go into orbit to do even more, faster. They will not take months getting to resources. They will take days, hours or minutes.

Room To Grow

Long term space wins. Short term mars wins. Short term is how you get to long term.

Location Options

See Room to Grow.

Spreading Interstellar

See Room to Grow.

Getting What You Need

On Mars, the ores needed are literally underfoot.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh huh huh.

Robert Zubrin's Views

might take a millennia to add sufficient oxygen to the Martian atmosphere to make it breathable.

We don't need mars air to be breathable. Is this really an argument for the advantage of space?

Conclusions

Hey, if you have to pigeonhole me, you can call me a planetary chauvinist. You'd be wrong because I have nothing against living in space. I am in fact a proponent. Which is why I advocate colonizing mars because I believe it is the fastest way to do just that. Living in space can only be helped by the industry mars can offer and the creation of a market by those traveling to mars to stay.

Postscript

I think orbital settlements are the obvious winners in the incremental expansion category.

Obviously wrong (see getting what you need.)

While Mars certainly masses more than the belt or even the moon, this argument doesn't consider the issues of ease of access, or costs of exporting resources.

Exporting resources is not a factor in industrial growth. Exporting wealth is, and is easy. Mars wins ease of access not only because of the distribution on mars (a solid platinum asteroid sounds like a good thing, but economically it's not) but because of the distribution of individuals that will use those resources.

One of the more frequent posters to the threads stated that Mars is more popular, and expressed the opinion this single fact overrides all other considerations.

Because even if not consciously aware of it, people understand the benefits of liberty in their bones.

Arguing that 'Type III civilizations...' is arguing too far into the future. Mars is available the moment we demonstrate a lander which Mars One already has specifications for from SpaceX.

The biggest hurdle for mars is making the colonists pay for the trip and arriving destitute and dependent on some nanny. THAT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE. Colonization will never happen if the colonists have to pay for it. THEY DO NOT HAVE TO NOR BECOME SLAVES TO THOSE THAT DO PAY FOR IT. It just requires a light bulb. Wanting something doesn't matter if you can't pay for it.

The most productive source of fiber

You need fiber to make pykrete so what's the best source? Hemp.

Per acre, hemp is the most productive fiber on earth, making 10 tons of bast fiber, for canvas, rope, lace and linen, and 25 tons of hurd fiber, for paper and building materials.

There ya have it. Mars is for stoners! Seriously though...

...hemp was among the first crops cultivated by our ancestors over 10,000 years ago, and may be the first crop purposely sown.

It could be used for many useful products such as car parts on the road today! Bathroom parts would probably be of interest to martians with molding being a very early martian trade. Yes, everything and the kitchen sink.