Assuming we get to a point technologically where we can put industries into orbit or on the moon, Mars, Triton, wherever we want in the general neighborhood…
Are we going to have activists protesting the pollution and environmental destruction of the moon? Does it make sense to have environmental concerns about a lifeless rock ball? The asteroid belt is “non-renewable”, should be avoid it?
I’m also assuming, of course, that we DON’T find life. If we DO, then obviously these questions are relevant at least where the life is found. And I understand that anything we put into earth orbit is likely to fall back on our heads sooner or later, so let’s say the question apply to stuff that won’t fall bak on earth.
No, we shouldn’t be particularly worried about environmental concerns on the moon, and yes, as soon as we start doing things up there that modify the landscape the usual suspects will be out protesting and claiming that we are destroying a valuable environment.
Well, at least on Earth, if you chop down a tree, another one can grow back to replace it - nature will try to recover. On the Moon, once a surface feature is gone, it’s gone. Whether that’s important or not is the question. I’d say as long as it doesn’t radically alter our view of the Moon here from Earth, a) let the lunar geologists have a look at the site if they want, and then b) build away!
I wonder how one would try to preserve the Apollo landing sites, particularly the footprints. I’m sure there would be plenty of tourists who would want to see them!
Personally, I feel that lunar landscapes can be very beautiful. Any sort of intervention in them is therefore not costless, particularly since its effects will be permanent. This is not necessarily to rule out either settlement or even industry, but the answer to your question has to be “yes”.
The lunar landscape is nothing more than a bunch of holes punched into a round body by random bits of of flotsam. Why should that be any more beautiful than what man could create?
If the moon were turned into a glowing jewel of artificial lights and manmade structures, would it not also be beautiful?
But quite frankly, nothing we can do on the moon is going to affect the way it looks from Earth. The scale is just too large. You could strip-mine an area larger than the biggest open pit mine on the Earth, and it wouldn’t even be visible other than through the most powerful telescopes. And there is a LOT of lunar surface, since there are no oceans.
How about if we chew up the dark side? Does anyone care about that?
I think it would be cool to put something on the moon that we could see with the naked eye. On one of the Apollo landings, they scattered reflectors around the landing site. Scientists on earth bounced a laser beam off them to get the most accurate to that time measurement of earth-moon distance.
I could see laying out a design across the surface of some kind of mirroring powder. I just hope it’s not the Golden Arches or a Smiley Face.
Mangetout: Sure, far side. Whatever. The side we don’t have to see.
But I’ve never understood the desire to maintain some kind of ‘purity’ on the lunar landscape. It’s just a big rock with a bunch of pulverized dust and big holes. The universe is full of airless spheres. Why should we keep our hands off the one closest to us if it suits our needs to develop it?
If there was a giant lunar city miles across that shone like a jewel on the moon’s face when viewed from Earth, it would be a beautiful and inspiring sight.
Because human beings are the only known critters that can reason out the likely outcomes of their interventions and make an informed decision based on the benefits and costs of different courses of action.
It may be that the best available deposits of [Strangelove]Bal-Thorium G[/Strangelove] can be found on the Moon’s surface, and we need it.
On the other hand, it may be that more members of the human race would like the Moon to remain untouched.
Since it doesn’t make sense to try to apply property rights to the Moon (yet), we should regard it as the common property of all mankind and act accordingly: i.e. use its resources wisely and by consensus.
Actually, I agree with you. However, I don’t want to make the assumption that everyone would find it so.
Just a nitpick:
Shouldn’t we compare the visibility of a strip-mine to the size of the biggest strip-mine on Earth? An open pit mine is a somewhat different thing. Also, I think if we can assume miners on the Moon, we can probably also assume tourists on the Moon.
Pick a topic. Someone in the world will protest. Anyway…
If the world is lifeless (like the Moon), then the concern is not really “environmental” but rather a scientific or economic concern of preserving information/resources that may be useful. For example, if we terraform Mars, that may wipe out all information about the geologic history of Mars (good scientific info…but that society will have to decide what is worth more when the time comes). Or maybe exploitation of one resource would negatively impact the potential to explore another resource on that world.
If the world has life (speculating about microbes on Mars or life in the oceans of Europa/Ganymede/Callisto), then environmental concerns do arise. That plus ethics & science…if not simple “thou shalt not kill” or “Mars belongs to the Martians” moralities, then at least there’s the scientific insight into the formation & evolution of life that could be lost if we wrecked that lifeform’s ecosystem.
Personally, I think we should venture to & work on lifeless rocks using “best practices”. (But, Sam, I’m not so sure I want to see the Moon shining with industry. Maybe the light from a scientific outpost would be inspiring, but a Pizza Hut logo would make me extremely p.o.'d) (didn’t they consider this once?) Terraforming lifeless worlds may be a good idea too (an inevitable responsibility in order to preserve life from this planet?) I’d advise a hands-off approach for worlds with life due to their scientific value…but I’d like to see sterile robotic studies…assuming the life is non-intelligent of course.
Some may consider it to be no problem to mess up a place on a lifeless rock like the Moon (say, from a strip mine). After all, there’s plenty more real estate there to be had. But that’s the kind of mentality that has us in trouble now on Earth. Wetlands used to be considered useless/nuisance swamps…now we spend tons of money to restore/save them.
In short, it’s cheaper to work cleanly than to try to clean-up afterwards. Just move to a new area on the large Moon? Easier said than done. It would be expensive to travel to and branch out to new areas (need to bring/create fuel, isolated life support systems, new infrastructure, etc.). Human history is mainly expansions of existing settlements and once a colony is on the Moon, it would be easier to add-on to that then to move to a new area. And of course, a colony would be situated right next to the work area (strip mine). So, they would be living amid any mess (e.g., acid drainage from strip mining techniques…perhaps this would be a hazard for the structures or for the block of ice they found to use as a water source). Or maybe recreation will be the big industry instead of industry…and a messed-up view is worth less than a “pristine” view of the Moon.
Well, it’s important to maintain a sense of proportionality when devising codes to regulate industrial practices on the Moon.
First, bear in mind there is no ecosystem on the Moon.
Second, industrial activity would have to be on an incredibly vast scale to noticeably alter the Moon’s appearance. You could level an entire mountain or crater and it wouldn’t matter. Much different than here on Earth where people view beloved geological features every day.
Personally, I wouldn’t mind a city that becomes visible from Earth as a tiny point of light. Huge advertising billboards are out, though.
In short, although we wouldn’t want to allow absolutely unlimited alteration, there is considerable leeway between what is physically possible within the next 1000 years and what ought to be considered unacceptable.
And at least there aren’t any NIMBYs on the Moon. Yet.
