We need to start terraforming Venus - it would be like the Apollo program

The technology we would develop by pursuing this goal would be tremendously valuable to us on Earth.

1. We need to use robotic automation to construct large solar shades from in-space material. We can use comets or astroids to produce a 250 million km2 thin film solar shade at the sun-Venus L1 point.

2. We can send a human or robotic mission to Hyperion, one of Saturn's icy moons, to set up a natural propulsion method to change its orbit around Saturn. With slingshots around Titan and then Jupiter, we can get it to Venus.

3. We need to construct rather high heatpipes on the surface of Venus via robotic missions. This is quite an endevour, but will teach us lots of stuff about large scale construction on different planets.

4. Setting up floating colonies on Venus at an altitude that provides a 1bar pressure.

Pic related is an artist's impression of a terraformed Venus.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera
orionsarm.com/fm_store/TerraformingVenusQuickly.pdf
youtube.com/watch?v=ueAYUp4rHZI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Excellent idea!

Now, where did I put that spare $1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

>Venus is a MUCH harder bet than Mars. While Mars could be terraformed in only a few thousand years, no gently-gently approach could ever work on Venus. First, alternatives to terraforming. It would be possible to live on Venus in the high atmosphere, in giant floating cities.Sep 12, 2013

Can't we just terraform the Earth as it goes to shit?

It does not cost 1 sextillion dollars. We just need a robotics program and an in-space manufacturing program. Not much more. This will take care of 1. and 2.

Number 3 is more tricky and number 4 requires a real human space program.

All this can be done by just doubling NASA's budget and putting Venus terraforming as their prime mission goal into their charter.

You want to take a moon out of saturns orbit and send it to venus..? There is a natural balance of things and you want to go fuck with that balance? If you want to play god you must first become energy without form. For free and for the sake of mankind I will help your soul be free of your body. What is the choice of execution you require to help you on your way?

>he fell for the "there are other planets besides earth being inhabitable" meme

Think it would be cheaper and less work to warm up Mars than cool down Venus, Germanon. Plus Mars doesn't have H2SO4 for an atmosphere, only a thin layer of mostly CO2.

Do tell me how you'd turn the air on Venus into something pH neutral though. I'm all ears.

>While Mars could be terraformed in only a few thousand years
Mars can never be terraformed. That is the truth. 0.38g is prohibitive.

Venus can be terraformed within 150yrs. No kidding actually. Totally possible.

Mars just can never ever be long term habitable.

>It does not cost 1 sextillion dollars.
How would you know?

You think that moving one of Saturn's moons into the inner solar system is something humans could do with a few new shiny robots, so it's pretty obvious that you know absolutely nothing about basic science.

>You want to take a moon out of saturns orbit and send it to venus..?
Hyperion is potato shaped - nothing special. Just 350km wide.

> There is a natural balance of things and you want to go fuck with that balance?
Nothing is natural. Everything can be changed by humans.

>If you want to play god you must first become energy without form.
BS, there is no God interfering into our universe. There is a God who created it, but he doesn't do anything any more.

terraforming venus.

the robots that landed on venus got annihelated by the sheer presseure and melted under the sheer heat in minutes.
successfully carried out their mission, providing the first direct observations of the surface of Venus. Since the surface conditions on Venus are extreme, the probes only survived on the surface for durations varying between 23 minutes (initial probes) up to about two hours (final probes).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venera

why not mars its alot more easy and cheaper.

>>he fell for the "there are other planets besides earth being inhabitable" meme
There are other planets besides Earth being habitable.

>why not mars its alot more easy and cheaper.
Because there's almost no atmosphere and, even if you could introduce a new atmosphere, the low gravity would let it escape quite quickly and, even if the atmosphere didn't escape, there's no magnetic field so everything will be sterile the moment it starts growing.

Colonising Mars is a complete waste of time.

>Think it would be cheaper and less work to warm up Mars than cool down Venus, Germanon.
Based on what? Warming up Mars is a major endevour on a planetary level on the Martian surface.

Building a 250 million km2 thin film sun shade at the Sun-Venus L1 point in-space via robotic missions is actually something we could do right now without sci-fi shit stuff. It is just producing a thin film solar shade, this is not high tech. And the materials for that are everywhere in space - and a sun shade can use the sun's particle pressure to sail into place.

>There are other planets besides Earth being habitable.
Probably, but they're all dozens or hundreds or millions of light years away.

I don't know, it is a wild guess. I say let us try it with 50 billion per year rather than some enormous sum nobody has. Ok?

Where are you going to get the resources for this?

and venus is worse the co2 effect in venus is exstreme.
it evaporated all if not most of the water.

It may have had water oceans in the past, but these would have vaporized as the temperature rose due to a runaway greenhouse effect. The water has probably photodissociated, and the free hydrogen has been swept into interplanetary space by the solar wind because of the lack of a planetary magnetic field. Venus's surface is a dry desertscape interspersed with slab-like rocks and is periodically resurfaced by volcanism.

The small killer detail all plebs miss. If humans can't not destroy Earth, how the fuck are they going to turn desert planets into gardens?

>the robots that landed on venus got annihelated by the sheer presseure and melted under the sheer heat in minutes.
Because they were not designed to last. Also, number 1 and 2 do not require any surface landing at all.

The point is to freeze out the CO2 atmosphere of Venus by blocking out the sun. That takes 100 to 150 years according to calculations ... but could be done in 50 years if we managed 3. - large heatpipes to help with getting hot parts of the atmospheres up in the upper parts of the Venusian atmosphere after the sun shade cuts out the sun.

Actually, digging into a bit more. Venus is almost completely overcast, very little sun makes it down to the surface.

Wanna know why it's so hot? I was partly wrong about the H2SO4, most of the atmosphere and there's a lot of it - is CO2. Very dense very thick layer of CO2 surrounds Venus.

The reason it's so hot is runaway greenhouse effect. You'd need some way of sequestering that CO2 to bring the temperatures down. Even so, you're dealing with an atmosphere much thicker than even here.

Anything's possible I guess - but it is a question of money and time.

>Probably, but they're all dozens or hundreds or millions of light years away.

Last I checked Venus is just 40 million km away at its closet point and we can terraform the fuck out of it.

No the gravity isn't what knocked out the atmosphere.

It's the lack of a magnetic field. Any terraforming would have to create a new magnetic field in the core, or alternately substitute it with something on the surface.

The reason that earth hasn't shredded it's atmosphere is because cosmic rays are deflected thanks to the spinning core. Mars's core is inert.

I'm not saying it's not possible, but it's going to require a little more than just "nuking the poles", as Elon Musk suggested, though it's a good idea in the short term till we develop the technology to simulate such an endeavour.

Honestly, we have the technology to genetically engineer algae to survive on mars's cold desert weather, there's plenty of existing examples. The existing atmosphere on mars is 99% carbon dioxide, but it's also some 1% of the earth's density. Most plants would die, but there's organisms on earth that could survive such a vacuum.

In fact, NASA actually decontaminate probes before they get to other planets so we don't accidentally spread life there.

The most we can do on Earth currently is run away when a hurricane is barreling down on us, but you want to tame the planetwide roaring hellscape of gas and wind on Venus so hot it melts lead and so dense it's harder to traverse than water? Not the mention that it's VERY volcanically active and spewing molten rock all over the surface?

Jesus Christ man, if we could terraform Venus, we'd already have the technology to solve all of Earth's problems and turn it into a perpetual paradise.

>the low gravity would let it escape quite quickly
You mean in 1000 years.

I'll contact my buddies to get their asses on it.

>Where are you going to get the resources for this?
Specify "resources". Do you mean the robots or the sun shades or do you just mean dollars to run the programs from Earth?

>I say let us try it with 50 billion per year

50 billion per year to move a moon from Saturn to Venus and construct a 250 million km2 solar shade?

Listen, I'm perfectly happy to explain why this is physically impossible, but only if you can convince me that pic is not related.

>The water has probably photodissociated, and the free hydrogen has been swept into interplanetary space by the solar wind because of the lack of a planetary magnetic field. Venus's surface is a dry desertscape interspersed with slab-like rocks and is periodically resurfaced by volcanism.


what is the piont its a litral rock the co2 effect eveporated the water
and solar wind took away the atmosphere.
also it lacks a magnetic field so the radiation would kill any plantlife.

>It may have had water oceans in the past, but these would have vaporized as the temperature rose due to a runaway greenhouse effect. The water has probably photodissociated, and the free hydrogen has been swept into interplanetary space by the solar wind because of the lack of a planetary magnetic field. Venus's surface is a dry desertscape interspersed with slab-like rocks and is periodically resurfaced by volcanism.

That is why we need to move Hyperion into a Venus orbit, then slowly break it apart and rain down ice over Venus every month or so for 15 years.

Of course after we have erected the sunshade and cooled Venus sufficiently to freeze out the CO2.

Wouldn't it be easier to remove an atmosphere than to add one?

>No the gravity isn't what knocked out the atmosphere.
Strictly speaking you're right. But (many thousands of years ago) I was taught that the lack of a magnetic field was partly explained by Mars' comparitively low mass. No doubt knowledge has improved a bit since then.

The massive quantities of gases needed to make the atmosphere of Venus inhabitable

>Actually, digging into a bit more. Venus is almost completely overcast, very little sun makes it down to the surface.
So? Doesn't change that you can freeze out Venus through the use of a sunshade. It is simple physics. Venus receives 2,000 W /m2 from the sun. If you shade Venus from the sun, that goes away and the heat radiation from the upper atmosphere of Venus to space cools down Venus over time.
>The reason it's so hot is runaway greenhouse effect. You'd need some way of sequestering that CO2 to bring the temperatures down.

Do you even know what the greenhouse effect is? It just means the dense atmosphere captures most of the energy that the sun throws at Venus. Hence a sunshade.

>Setting up floating colonies on Venus at an altitude that provides a 1bar pressure.
That would be one instance where the fall would kill you and not the sudden stop at the bottom.

>That is why we need to move Hyperion into a Venus orbit, then slowly break it apart and rain down ice over Venus every month or so for 15 years.


rain down ice in orbit?? what.

agian theres is no magnetic field so the radiation would kill youre plantlife.
and theres no wind since it was swept it away.

Would it work to put a giant sunshade at Venus' L!?

>The most we can do on Earth currently is run away when a hurricane is barreling down on us, but you want to tame the planetwide roaring hellscape of gas and wind on Venus so hot it melts lead and so dense it's harder to traverse than water?
Yes, pretty much. And don't underestimate what we can already do. Again, if we had to, we could manufacture sun shades in space from asteroid material. It is no problem, we can do that. We just have to get a heck of a lot better at mass production.

> Not the mention that it's VERY volcanically active and spewing molten rock all over the surface?
That only affects the time of the cooling, which is why it is calculated it takes somewhere between 100 and 150 yrs to cool down Venus with a sunshade. With little volcanic activity it is 100 years, with a lot of volcanic activity it will be 150yrs. With the heatpipes it will be closer to 50yrs until CO2 starts raining and snowing down.

>Jesus Christ man, if we could terraform Venus, we'd already have the technology to solve all of Earth's problems and turn it into a perpetual paradise.
This is a curious thing humans always do. They believe if we could do X (X being some big technological breakthrough) we can also make sure all other problems can be solved.

We landed a man on the moon and still can't make sure all humans have something to eat, birth control, a house, schooling etc. We sent a probe out of the solar system and still don't know how to cure a common cold.

Or, alternatively, you just build up enough of an atmosphere to buy you a few centuries before it dissipates again. Atmospheric loss by UV dissociation would take centuries, long enough to come up with a more permanent solution (ie artificial planetary magnetic field) while still being safe for people to live and work in.

The main problem with building up an atmosphere isn't building up raw density, there's more than enough subsurface CO2 to bring the planet up to a high enough pressure that you could survive without a pressurized suit... you could even break that CO2 down into O2... the problem is we can't live and work in a pure CO2 or even O2 atmosphere, we need buffer gasses, lots of em, and Mars' big problem is there is no source of buffer gasses (nitrogen, argon, etc) available in-situ.


It's worth mentioning that Venus doesn't have a magnetic field either. One more reason OP's idea is stupid.

>That is why we need to move Hyperion into a Venus orbit

This would require more energy than human civilisation will produce for the next 100,000 years

>then slowly break it apart and rain down ice over Venus every month or so for 15 years.

This would require more energy than human civilisation will produce for the next 10,000 years

venus day = 243 days

>50 billion per year to move a moon from Saturn to Venus and construct a 250 million km2 solar shade?

Yes, pretty much. Quite feasible with robotics.

As to moving Hyperion, it can be done by using a steam engine - essentially just using an energy beam to heat a certain area at Hyperion which ends up with quite a powerful steam engine.
>Listen, I'm perfectly happy to explain why this is physically impossible
Explain it then.

Again, what does 1 km2 of solar shade constructed of astroid materials by robots cost? The answer is: it costs as much as the robots. How much does 10 km2 cost? It costs as much as the robots. How much 1 million km2? As much as the robots etc.

>No doubt knowledge has improved a bit since then.
You're not far off - having a magnetic field depends on having a dynamo effect which requires a liquid core. The less mass you have the faster you cool off, so smaller planets cool faster, losing their magnetic fields and becoming geologically dead a lot sooner than larger planets. Mars still has isolated regions with weak magnetic fields on its surface, but it's smaller so it cooled down quickly and didn't have a giant moon to keep the friction and heat up in the core.

I like reading this threads cuss op is a fag

That's another problem OP is completely overlooking. Venus is basically just shy of being tidally locked at this point. Perfect if you're an extreme tanning enthusiast or a basement dwelling bitch hermit, but not much use to the other 99% of humanity.

>what is the piont its a litral rock the co2 effect eveporated the water
That is why we need Hyperion. The good thing about Venus is, it is pretty flat, so we only need a fraction of the water we have on Earth.

>and solar wind took away the atmosphere.
Not on Venus.

>also it lacks a magnetic field so the radiation would kill any plantlife.
This is incorrect. Venus has a weak magnetic field. Also, an atmosphere provides enough radiation shielding without a magnetic field - the magnetic field helps with atmospheric evaporation over millions of years.

The problem on Venus with radiation would be to make sure a viable ozone layer evolves once you have a stable nitrogen - oxygen atmosphere.

>As to moving Hyperion, it can be done by using a steam engine
This would require more energy than human civilisation will produce for the next 100,000 years

>Explain it then.
See above

>Again, what does 1 km2 of solar shade constructed of astroid materials by robots cost? The answer is: it costs as much as the robots.
Building such a fleet of robots would cost more money than the human economy will produce for the next 100,000,000 years.

Ya, because we'd never have a problem with the 1300 psi surface pressure.

Yeah but nitrogen's trapped in the rocks, which we could extract with simple heat.

>The massive quantities of gases needed to make the atmosphere of Venus inhabitable
What gases? There is enough nitrogen in the Venusian atmosphere to create a comparable nitrogen heavy atmo like on Earth. There is a shitton of CO2, which can be converted to O2. The real problem is to freeze out the massive amounts of CO2 and then put CO2 containment blankets over it.

Plus we need enough water from an icy moon to be broken up in Venus orbit and gently rained down on Venus.

...

Oh, that's right! I gave it to brown people!

>Would it work to put a giant sunshade at Venus' L!?

Specify what you mean. You mean whether we can construct it or whether it would shade Venus or whether it would remain at L1? The answer to all these question is Yes.

>
>Or, alternatively, you just build up enough of an atmosphere to buy you a few centuries before it dissipates again.
It would take over a million years for 2% of a 1 bar pressure atmosphere on Venus to dissipate due to solar wind. Look it up.

Nothing happens in centuries on a planetary levels.

I voted for UKIP, so there's no point trying to blame me for that.

>This would require more energy than human civilisation will produce for the next 100,000 years
Actually, it just requires 250m/s propulsion change on Hyperion. You get Hyperion to slingshot to a Venus orbit through encounter first with Titan, than Jupiter and then potentially with Mars or Earth if required.

250m/s through in-situ propulsion of a large object is perfectly possible.
>This would require more energy than human civilisation will produce for the next 10,000 years
Not really, it would require a few nuclear bombs at most, OR the same strategy used to change Hyperion's orbit at Saturn.

>venus day = 243 days
I am not overlooking this at all. You did read number 1. - the sunshade, right? The invidual units of the sunshade can be easily tilted to let through sun in a 24hour cycle. Even better so, you could move the sun shade to Venus orbit (a sun shade doubles for a sun sail) and then simulate a 24 hour cycle through a sun shade and a sun mirror effect.

>sun shade fails for whatever reason
>people get cooked
>jews control the sunshade

hmmmmmm how about no

Too bad in 2 more decades your people will drop all of this dreams of terraforming shit to drop 3 times a day and praise your god while reversing to goat Fucking.

Do a more constructive thing with your life and plot how to blow that Nazi bitch dictator you got to smithereens

>This would require more energy than human civilisation will produce for the next 100,000 years
No, it would not. It would require an energy beam focused on Hyperion's surface which ejects steam.

orionsarm.com/fm_store/TerraformingVenusQuickly.pdf
>Building such a fleet of robots would cost more money than the human economy will produce for the next 100,000,000 years.
Why would that be? We manufacture millions of thin film layers on Earth every year. Why should robots not be able to do the same? 1000 robots can easily build 1000 km2 per day.

>Actually, it just requires 250m/s propulsion change on Hyperion.
Great, so if we time it perfectly it'll only take 2*10^23 J to pull it off! Fantastic, that's only about... 400 times the world's total annual power consumption!

Let's get to work, people!

>>sun shade fails for whatever reason
>>people get cooked
>>jews control the sunshade

If 1 individual sun shade fails, you still got 250,000,000,000 others with 1000m2 that are still in place... not sure you understand how large scale sun shades would work.

Also, at a 1 bar atmosphere, the sun would not cook anyone. A normal Venus day at a latitude of say Germany would just be a few degrees hotter. Say instead of 20 C here, it would be 25C.

>You get Hyperion to slingshot to a Venus orbit through encounter first with Titan, than Jupiter and then potentially with Mars or Earth if required.
Sounds perfectly safe to me. What could possibly go wrAAAARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

>Great, so if we time it perfectly it'll only take 2*10^23 J to pull it off! Fantastic, that's only about... 400 times the world's total annual power consumption!

It would just cost 200 billion or so. Your calculations as to the power consumption are wrong. We are talking 10^18W energy required for Enceladus and a lot less, 10^16W energy required for Hyperion.

Youre thinking a bit too much about our robotic capabilities.

Self driving cars are still a challenge. Remote control drones are about the most advanced thing we have now. This is not comparable to designing autonomous robotic spacecraft, which have to be small enough to fit on top of a rocket to even get to space and then somehow need to start mining, smelting and processing facilities in the most hostile environment imaginable.

The most advanced thing we have done in space is the ISS or maybe the curiosity rover, we have never manufactured anything in space. The only attempt we ever made to land on a comet failed, with the lander bouncing around on the surface and ending up in a ditch where it died a pre-mature death. This was despite the best efforts of the most brilliant minds on the planet.

To compare, the curiosity rover cost 2.5 billion dollar to construct, that is just 1 small remote controlled robot with a camera and some sensors.

The ISS took 150 billion (just the construction, not the maintenance), 16 nations participated in its development.

Only a handful of probes have even been to the Jupiter system, this typically takes billions and decades of planning and design.

Your proposed budget and our current level of technology might get us either a couple of probes to Venus that allow us to start discovering the planet up close.

Which brings me to my final counter argument: we know too little of Venus to be able to do anything there. We have no real idea what happens on the surface, we don't know the exact atmospheric conditions besides what we can observe from space. What we do know only shows that Venus is absurdly hostile. High pressure, high temperature, acidic to the point that it will degrade any exposed alloys or organics. If you want to terraform anything, start with either Earth (which is has large regions that are hostile to human life) or Mars, which is calmer, less energetic and better explored.

>Sounds perfectly safe to me. What could possibly go wrAAAARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Not much. Space science is rather exact. Look at the Voyager probes, they could be slingshotted perfectly over vast distances. Why should it be any difference for a large icy moon of Saturn?

Actually, it could be a real cool astronomy event seeing an icy moon flyby around Earth. You would need a good telescope of course, despite a size of 350km of Hyperion.

>Suppose we ask for 90% of Hyperion to be delivered to Venus. We let the jet velocity be 2.5 km s-1 and require that delta V = 250 m s -1 be built up in 30 years

hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha

>Since the mass of hyperion = 1.5x10^19kg, this requires 10^16W of heat

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

>supplied over half of each orbit
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

>During the other half orbit the heat is used to vaporise water and store the low pressure steam in a chamber at the heart of the ice-moon
Oh, for a moment there, I thought you were being serious.

How many Hundred thousends years does it take to construct such a shield?

You are thinking too small.

Space exploration was at its best with rapid successions of missions. Both the Soviets and the US were launching tens of missions each year, not caring if they succeed or not.

The problem we have today is we are afraid of failure. So we spend a decade on planing and testing ONE single surface robot.

Also, surface missions are hard, astroid mission without a landing? Much better.

I am not saying this is all easy, I am just saying it is within our capabilities if we tried.

P.S. the ISS is as expensive as it is, because of human involvement in space. We need to be pampered, robotic missions do not.

If we started to focus on a dozen robotic missions to asteroids to try out the best way to make solar sails in space for a few years, I am pretty sure we could come up with a way to make them in space and make a lot of them eventually.

>Actually, it could be a real cool astronomy event seeing an icy moon flyby around Earth.

youtube.com/watch?v=ueAYUp4rHZI

>Which brings me to my final counter argument: we know too little of Venus to be able to do anything there. We have no real idea what happens on the surface, we don't know the exact atmospheric conditions besides what we can observe from space. What we do know only shows that Venus is absurdly hostile. High pressure, high temperature, acidic to the point that it will degrade any exposed alloys or organics. If you want to terraform anything, start with either Earth (which is has large regions that are hostile to human life) or Mars, which is calmer, less energetic and better explored.
We know the composition, the density and weight of the Venusian atmosphere in detail. We know the Venusian gravity. What more do we need to know to start construction of a solar shade and start a mission to Hyperion?

There is enough time to figure out things on Venus later on.
>Mars, which is calmer, less energetic and better explored.
0.38g. That kills any long term plans for Mars. Just does. People think it is not a problem, but it is. We humans are build for 1g, 0.9g on Venus, yep still works, but 0.38g? No, we will die in a 0.38g exposure after a while. Maybe not all of us, but a lot of us - no colonist will want to start a family on a planet where he knows his kid has a 2000% higher chance of death than on Earth and no chance of a real future. None at all.

Thats why you use Genetic engineering and artificial Wombs and tadaa you get Mars People who are perfect for the task.

Is cheaper and easier to do than Venus Mission that you want.

>How many Hundred thousends years does it take to construct such a shield?
Depends on how many m2 of shield we can construct per day in space, doesn't it? Let us assume aluminized or carbon based film with 5 grams per m2. Can a single robotic mission handle 10 tons of material processing into film per day? That would mean 2km2 per day, 700 km2 per year. Let us be generous and say 1000km2 per year. Which means we need 10,000 such robotic missions so we are done in 25 years.

>Thats why you use Genetic engineering
How do you genetically modify a being that is built for 1g to a 0.38g environment? Our organs are made to work at 1g - if you lie around for several weeks, you get seriously sick. Living at 0.38g is akin to lying around. You can do lots and lots of sport to mitigate low g exposure effects, but what if you are 80 years old or a toddler? You can't.

Face it, 0.38g is just not the way to go. We would have to construct giant accelerator domes on Mars that spin where we would have to live in to simulate 1g... not sure how we could survive the nausea that causes long term.

Why bother, you know the shitskins will just follow us and destroy another planet.

This problem needs to be solved here and now before we expand any further.

>Which means we need 10,000 such robotic missions so we are done in 25 years.
Who is going to maintain your fleet of 10,000 robots when they start breaking down, 5 minutes after they start construction?

Its possible and its cheaper, its way easier to do and the technology already exists.
Its in every way superior to a Venus Mission.

>Who is going to maintain your fleet of 10,000 robots when they start breaking down, 5 minutes after they start construction?

Other robots.

Also, we can also approach this from a different direction. How much material can a large plant handle per minute? Let us say 1 ton, which seems reasonable. That means we can produce 0.2km2 of solar shade per minute per plant or 700 km2 per day or 250,000 km2 per year. That means we just need 40 of those plants to be done in 25yrs.

If you want to, we can station humans at those 40 plants to make sure they run properly.

the logistic chain would be too complex.

Bio engineering Mars people with artificial wombs is cheaper and easier. deal with it.
also makes sure no pure Jews can survive there which a HUGE bonus for Humanity.

>Your calculations as to the power consumption are wrong.
You want a delta-V of 250 m/s.

You're moving an object with a mass of about 6*10^18 kg.

That's a change in kinetic energy of 1.9*10^23 J. There's no way around that. Even under the most perfect conditions, perfect efficiency, perfect power transfer, perfect everything... that is the BARE MINIMUM of energy you need to expend to make that change.

The fact that you're trying to measure ENERGY in watts, a unit of POWER kind of says all we need to know about how qualified you are to be talking about any of this.

>Its possible and its cheaper, its way easier to do and the technology already exists.
>Its in every way superior to a Venus Mission.

In what way? We are talking about terraforming. How would you go about terraforming Mars? Where would you get the nitrogen from? Where the oxygen? Where the water? Due to Mars' surface being a lot less flat than Venus, you would need a shitton more than one icy moon of Saturn to achieve enough ocean coverage. How do you get to a troposphere then? How do you heat up Mars?

Questions over questions and no answers, while for Venus we just need a freaking sun shade. A sun shade isn't rocket science, it is pretty much aluminum foil or a few layers of advanced carbon.

>Bio engineering Mars people with artificial wombs is cheaper and easier. deal with it.
>also makes sure no pure Jews can survive there which a HUGE bonus for Humanity.

I doubt it.

Also, how do you heat up Mars? For real. How do you add the required components for a 1 bar nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere? How do you get the water there to make oceans?

>How would you go about terraforming Mars?
Huge Underground Domes with different Biomes, with central heating by Nuclear Power, possibly Thorium or Fusion.

>Where would you get the nitrogen from? Where the oxygen? Where the water?
Via Algea and other shit, NASA has already plans for shit like that

>Due to Mars' surface being a lot less flat than Venus
Underground nigga

>Questions over questions and no answers, while for Venus we just need a freaking sun shade. A sun shade isn't rocket science, it is pretty much aluminum foil or a few layers of advanced carbon.
Too much work bro

My Idea is cheaper and easier to do.

>I doubt it.
Artificial Wombs already exist, Gene Modification already exists.

venus doesnt exist

Genesis 1:14-15
14And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

Fpbp we need a space elevator first and why the hell woudl we try to do anything with Venus before we did anything with the Moon or Mars

Lmao you showed him!
Have an upvote (+1) you kind sir! ;)

HUGE
UNDERGROUND
DOMES

Is the way to go.

Is a useful orbit in relation to venus and the sun even possible with this set up? You would need it to be static in relation to the line of sight of the sun while they orbit one another. Im not big on the physics but I think it would simplyfall out of orbit if it was stationary relative to Venus's rotation. So you would need a spheroid type formation around venus that is always blocking a given percentage. Much more material required, by a magnitude at least.

We would need 10^16 W of constant heat via large solar mirrors.

Or we use nukes. We just need 10,000 100MT nukes to sufficiently move Hyperion.

>1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
what is that, like a google-dollar?

We're never making it off this planet, user.

Why would you live on Mars underground if you can live in e.g. Siberia?

The point about terraforming a planet is that you can walk on the surface and breath air and watch a few rabbits humping each other in the morning sun in the fields.

>1. We need to use robotic automation to construct large solar shades from in-space material. We can use comets or astroids to produce a 250 million km2 thin film solar shade at the sun-Venus L1 point.

How do you plan to keep that solar shade in place and not have it solar sail it's way out of position?

Yes but why not do something with the moon first or build a space elevator? Once we do that we can much more easily build stuff on Venus or Mars

Literally read the next verse you dumb shill.

>Is a useful orbit in relation to venus and the sun even possible with this set up? You would need it to be static in relation to the line of sight of the sun while they orbit one another. Im not big on the physics but I think it would simplyfall out of orbit if it was stationary relative to Venus's rotation. So you would need a spheroid type formation around venus that is always blocking a given percentage. Much more material required, by a magnitude at least.
You do understand what the Lagrange point is, right? At L1, the sunshades would be stationary. Any fluctuations in movements can be simply adjusted for through a solar sail effect by tilting the shades and reflecting light to other shades to move them forward or backward.

Alright you autists.

Assume we could crash ice comets into Venus to cool the runaway greenhouse effect. Given its proximity to the sun, what would be the surface temperature of Venus if it had earthlike atmospheric density?

Segregation dont work, because you will have people that want to be near you no matter how you are.

You could have hittler, trump, and the gang creating a TOTALLY isolationist country at bir twill triangle (the only land at the world that is not claimed) and you would still have liberals going there

And the energy it would take to get that mass to Venus from Saturn would be absurd. Billions of giant nuclear explosions absurd.

sorry retard you cant leave the flat earth its physically impossible god built a dome over it

the biggest hoax in history was teaching atheists there was a universe