Artist concept of a cutaway view of the Stanford Torus free space settlement. Credits: Rick Guidice / NASA
Can humanity explore and develop space responsibly by learning from some of the mistakes made throughout history while settling new lands? In an article called “To Boldly Go (Responsibly)” on LinkedIn, CEO of Trans Astronautica Corporation Joel Sercel provides a vision for how we should conscientiously manage space settlement in a manner that respects human rights and the rule of law, but also maintains stewardship of the space environment.
“Through space settlement, we have a chance to show that humanity has learned from history and is evolving morally and culturally”
Sercel warns of the “Elysium effect”. In the words of Rick Tumlinson, who coined the term in an article on Space.com, “…as entrepreneurs like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson spend billions to support a human breakout into space, there is a backlash building that holds these projects as icons of extravagance.” Ironically, these New Space pioneers actually have the opposite goals of lowering the cost of access to space for average citizens and preserving the Earth’s environment by moving “dirty” industries outside it’s biosphere.
Public space agencies and private space companies can help open the high frontier responsibility through cooperation on development of common standards and international agreements in accordance with the Outer Space Treaty. Sercel believes that an urgent need in this area would be establishment of salvage rights for defunct satellites and dormant orbital debris like spent upper stages which under the OST are the responsibility of the nation that launched the payloads.
“That’s a legal impediment for companies developing satellites to clean up orbital debris and firms eager to recycle abandoned antennas and rocket bodies.”
Some work in the area of orbital debris mitigation has already been started by the Space Safety Coalition, an ad hoc coalition of companies, organizations, and other government and industry stakeholders, through establishment of best practices and standardization for space operations. And just last month the Orbital Sustainability Act of 2022 was introduced in the U.S. Senate that will “require the development of uniform orbital debris standard practices in order to support a safe and sustainable orbital environment.”
Good progress on interagency cooperation in space has also been made with the creation of the Artemis Accords, Principles for a Safe, Peaceful, and Prosperous Future. Signed by seven nations thus far, the agreement provides a legal framework in compliance with the OST for humans returning to the Moon and establishing commercial mining rights.
Sercel thinks that before establishing a permanent human presence on Mars we should first thoroughly explore the planet robotically for signs of life to ensure that we do not disrupt any indigenous organisms if a biosphere is found to be present there.
Another example of space ethics, discussed on SSP in previous posts, is determination of the gravity prescription, especially the human gestation component. The answer to this critical factor may drive the decision on where to establish permanent long term settlements so colonists can raise families. It may turn out that having children in less than 1G may not be biologically possible and therefor, for ethical reasons, may change the long term strategy for human expansion in the solar system favoring free space settlements with Earth normal artificial gravity over surface settlements. Sercel believes that determination of the gravity Rx should be a high priority and suggested on The Space Show recently a roadmap of mammalian clinical reproduction studies starting with rodent animal models producing offspring over multiple generations progressing to primates and then, only if these are successful, initiating limited human experiments. Such studies would prevent ethical issues that may arise from birth defects or health problems during pregnancy because we don’t know how lower gravity would effect embryos during gestation.
Dylan Taylor of Voyager Space Holdings has advocated for a sustainable approach to space commercial activities to ensure “…that all humanity can continue to use outer space for peaceful purposes and socioeconomic benefit now and in the long term. This will require international cooperation, discussion, and agreements designed to ensure that outer space is safe, secure and peaceful.”
Sercel is calling for the National Space Council “…to coordinate private organizations to include think tanks, advocacy groups, and the science community to work together to define the field of space ethics…to guide the development of laws and regulations that will ensure the rapid and peaceful exploration, development and settlement of space.”
SSP has addressed the gravity prescription (GRx) in previous posts as being a key human factor affecting where long term space settlements will be established. It’s important to split the GRx into its different components that could effect adult human health, child development and reproduction. We know that microgravity (close to weightlessness) like that experienced on the ISS has detrimental effects on adult human physiology such as osteoporosis from calcium loss, degradation of heart and muscle mass, vision changes due to variable intraocular pressures, immune system anomalies…the list goes on. But many of these issues may be mitigated by exposure to some level of gravity (i.e. the GRx) like what would be experienced on the Moon or Mars. Colonists may also have “health treatments” by brief exposures to doses of 1G in centrifuge facilities built into the settlements if the gravity levels in either location is found to be insufficient. We currently have no data on how human physiology would be impacted in low gravity (other then microgravity).
The most important aspect of the GRx with respect to space settlement relates to reproduction. How would lower gravity effect embryos during gestation? Since humans have evolved in 1G for millions of years, a drastic change in gravity levels during pregnancy could have serious deleterious effects on fetal development. Since fetuses are already suspended in fluid and can be in any orientation during most of their development, it may be that they don’t need anywhere near the number of hours of upright, full gravity that adults need. How lower gravity would affect bone and muscle growth in young children is another unknown. We just don’t know what would happen without a clinical investigation which should obviously be done first on lower mammals such as rodents. Then there are ethical questions that may arise when studying reproduction and growth in higher animal models that could be predictive of human physiology, not to mention what would happen during an accidental human pregnancy under these conditions.
Right now, we only know that 1G works. If space settlements on the Moon or Mars are to be permanent and sustainable, many space settlement advocates believe they need to be biologically self-sustaining. Obviously, most people are going to want to have children where they establish permanent homes. If the gravity of the Moon or Mars prevents healthy pregnancy, long term settlements may not be possible for people who want to raise families. This does not rule out permanent settlements without children (e.g. retirement communities). They just would not be biologically self-sustaining.
SSP has suggested that it might make sense to determine the GRx soon so that if we do determine that 1G is required for having children in space, we begin to shape our strategy for space settlement around free space settlements that produce artificial gravity equivalent to Earth’s. Fortunately, as Joe Carroll has mentioned in recent presentations, the force of gravity on bodies where humanity could establish settlements throughout the solar system seems to be “quantized” to two levels below 1G – about equal to that of the Moon or Mars. All the places where settlements could be built on the surfaces of planets or on the larger moons of the outer planets have gravity roughly at these two levels. So, if we determine that the GRx for these two locations is safe for human health, we will know that we can safely raise families beyond Earth in colonies on the surfaces of any of these worlds. Carroll proposes a Moon/Mars dumbbell gravity research facility be established soon in LEO to nail down the GRx.
But is there an argument to be made for skipping the step of determining the GRx and going straight to an O’Neill colony? After all, we know that 1G works just fine. Tom Marotta thinks so. He discussed the GRx with me on The Space Show recently. Marotta, with Al Globus coauthored The High Frontier: An Easier Way. The easier way is to start small in low Earth orbit. O’Neill colonies as originally conceived by Gerard K. O’Neill in The High Frontier would be kilometers long in high orbit (outside the Earth’s protective magnetic field) and weigh millions of tons because of the amount of shielding required to protect occupants from radiation. The sheer enormity of scale makes them extremely expensive and would likely bankrupt most governments, let alone be a challenge for private financing. Marotta and Globus suggest a step-by-step approach starting with a far smaller version of O’Neill’s concept called Kalpana. This rotating space city would be a cylinder roughly 100 meters in diameter and the same in length, spinning at 4 rpm to create 1G of artificial gravity and situated in equatorial low Earth orbit (ELEO) which is protected from radiation by our planet’s magnetic field. If located here the settlement does not require enormous amounts of shielding and would weigh (and therefore cost) far less. Kasper Kubica has proposed using this design for hosting $10M condominiums in space and suggests an ambitious plan for building it with 10 years. Although the move-in cost sounds expensive for the average person, recall that the airline industry started out catering to the ultra-rich to create the initial market which eventually became generally affordable once increasing reliability and economies of scale drove down manufacturing costs.
What about all the orbital debris we’re hearing about in LEO? Wouldn’t this pose a threat of collision with a free space settlement given their larger cross-sections? In an email Marotta responds:
“No, absolutely not, I don’t think orbital debris is a showstopper for Kalpana.
… First, the entire orbital debris problem is very fixable. I’m not concerned about it at all as it won’t take much to clean it up: implement a tax or a carbon-credit style bounty system and in a few years it will be fixed. Another potential historical analogy is the hole in the ozone layer: once the world agreed to limit CFCs the hole started healing itself. Orbital debris is a regulatory and political leadership problem, not a hard technical problem.
Second, even if orbital debris persists, the technology required to build Kalpana…will help protect it. Namely: insurance products to pay companies (e.g. Astroscale, D-Orbit, others) to ‘clear out’ the orbit K-1 will inhabit and/or mobile construction satellites necessary to move pieces of the hull into place can also be used to move large pieces of debris out of the way. In fact, I think having something like Kalpana…in orbit – or even plans for something that large – will actually accelerate the resolution of the orbital debris problem. History has shown that the only time the U.S. government takes orbital debris seriously is when a piece of debris might hit a crewed platform like the ISS. Having more crewed platforms + orbital debris will drastically limit launch opportunities via the launch collision avoidance process. If new satellites can’t be launched efficiently because of a proliferation of crewed stations and orbital debris I suspect the very well-funded and strategically important satellite industry will create a solution very quickly.”
To build a space settlement like the first Kalpana, about 17,000 tons of material will have to be lifted from Earth. Using the current SpaceX Starship payload specifications this would take 170 launches to LEO. By comparison, in 2021 the global launch industry set a record of 134 launches. Starship has not even made it to orbit yet, but assuming it eventually will and the reliability and reusability is demonstrated such that a fleet of them could support a high launch rate, within the next 20 years or so there will be considerable growth in the global launch industry. If larger versions of Kalpana are built the launch rate could approach 10,000 per year for space settlement alone, not to mention that needed for rest of the space industry. This raises the question of where will all these launches take place? Are there enough spaceports in the world to support it? Marotta has an answer for this as well. As CEO of The Spaceport Company, he is laying the groundwork for the global space launch infrastructure that will be needed to support a robust launch industry. His company is building distributed launch infrastructure on mobile offshore platforms. Visit his company website at the link above for more information.
Conceptual illustration of a mobile offshore launch platform. Credits: The Spaceport Company
For quite some time there has been a spirited debate among space settlement advocates on what destination makes the most sense to establish the first outpost and eventual permanent homes beyond Earth. The Moon, Mars or free space O’Neill settlements. Each location has its pros and cons. The Moon being close and having ice deposits in permanently shadowed craters at its poles along with resource rich regolith seems a logical place to start. Mars, although considerably further away has a thin atmosphere and richer resources for in situ utilization. Some believe we should pursue all the above. However, only O’Neill colonies offer 1G of artificial gravity 24/7. With so many unknowns about the gravity prescription for human health and reproduction, free space settlements like Kalpana offer a safe solution if the markets and funding can be found to make them a reality.
Artist concept of a free space settlement. Credits: Don Davis / NASA
Al Globus has just published a set of cogent responses to objections made by those who question why space settlement should be considered as a goal for humanity. A link to the piece is on his website Free Space Settlement. His analysis first defines what space settlement is, then why it should be pursued and finally refutes point by point, arguments against the endeavor.
Globus positions the case for space settlement around surviving and thriving. Surviving centers on dispersing humanity’s eggs outside of Earth’s basket as a hedge against the risk of catastrophic threats such as “…climate change, major asteroid hits, supervolcano eruptions, nuclear war, pandemic, nearby supernova, and technology run amok.” Even if humanity does survive these potential hazards, in about 5 billion years our sun will transition to a red giant making life on Earth uninhabitable. Clearly our future on the home planet is not assured forever. At current population growth rates, we will have exhausted Earths resources long before then.
Thriving recognizes that expanding into space is the next step in human evolution. Globus reminds us that “…living things want to grow and expand, to thrive, not simply exist.” By settling space “…resource wars are unlikely and unnecessary because our Sun provides billions of times the energy used on Earth and the asteroids provide enough material to make new orbital land hundreds of times greater than the surface area of the Earth.”
To the objection that space is too expensive and that funds would be better spent on Earth, there are two talking points. First, it is always prudent to allocate a small percentage of outlays on planning for the future. NASA’s funding in 2020 was less then 1/2 of a percent (0.48%) of total US expenditures. The US spends quite a bit more on social programs so this argument is very weak. Second, the benefits we receive from space activities in our economy pay significant dividends. SSP has covered the return on space investments and the value of space infrastructure previously.
The next general category of objections falls under “It Can’t Be Done” such as farming in space is not feasible, radiation levels are too high and weightless conditions are intolerable for humans. Globus easily addresses each concern with technological solutions well represented on SSP’s ancillary pages.
An interesting set of protestations are described as “Power Plays” raising the specter of space wars, settlements attacking Earth or cult factions taking over space settlements. And there is the ominous possibility of “Deudney threats” as described in Daniel Deudney’s negative prediction of our space future in his book Dark Skies: Space Expansionism, Planetary Geopolitics, and the Ends of Humanity”. Globus handled these objections quite well and links to his critique of the book in the The Space Review.
Other miscellaneous complaints by doubters are addressed easily by Globus. His talking points are valuable tools to be used in persuasive dialogs with those who may be uninformed on the promise of space development. They should help in building consensus toward moving peacefully out into the solar system and establishing prosperous settlements throughout the galaxy.
a) Artistic rendering of a megasatellite constellation of habitats with inclined mirrors for collection of sunlight – detail of individual habitats shown in b). Credits: Pekka Janhunen
Pekka Janhunen of the Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland has just posted a paper on the arXiv server describing his concept for a megasatellite space settlement in orbit around Ceres and constructed from materials from this dwarf planet in the asteroid belt. Ceres is chosen because of the availability of nitrogen and water needed for life support. A space elevator is proposed as an efficient means of lifting materials off the surface.
Janhunen works out the physics and mass budgets for a collection of settlements comprising the megasatellite, each providing 1g artificial gravity and a closed-loop life support system. The assemblage is made up of a collection of self contained rotating habitats which are interconnected and could potentially grow to house billions of people with 2000 square meters of living area per person. Each habitat would include soil thick enough to enable biomes with trees and ideal weather.
SSP covered another free space settlement concept by this author last April a bit closer to home at L5 in the Earth-Moon system. Janhunen discussed this duel-dumbbell design on The Space Show in May of last year.
One of the biggest challenges of space settlement facing humanity is procreation off world. We simply don’t know if its possible for a baby to be carried to term in less then one gravity. There are obvious ethical considerations of simply going there and trying it out. NASA is studying the problem but until we have a variable gravity centrifuge facility in space that will enable us to determine the “gravity prescription”, it will be a while before we have an answer.
In an article in The Space Review, Fred Nadis discusses some of the medical challenges of human reproduction in space and why one company, SpaceLife Origin, who’s mission was to enable human reproduction in space decided to suspend its planned missions for “Serious ethical, safety and medical concerns …”
These medical unknowns about reproduction in any gravitational field less then 1g is the obvious attraction of O’Neill type free space settlements which provide Earth normal gravity. But the huge scale and investment necessary to build such large scale settlements puts this approach far in the future. Al Globus thinks a better way might be to start with smaller spinning habitats in low earth orbit.
Asgardia’s has a key scientific goal of facilitating the first human childbirth in space which they believe is a crucial step on humanity’s “path to immortality as a species”. In preparation for that goal, the organization is creating the first sovereign nation in space. A good introduction to their plans can be found in an interview with Dr. Lena De Winne, the Head of Administration to the Head of Nation of Asgardia, who appeared on the Space Show recently.
Artist’s impression of the first human born in space. Credits: Asgardia
Checkout the trailer for the upcoming documentary The High Frontier: The Untold Story of Gerard K. O’Neill which was shown for the first time yesterday on the live stream of Yuri’s Night annual celebration party. The trailer begins with an introduction by Rick Tumlinson at 2:57.
