Mars colony of 500,000 people may not be possible

[nec209]

That say for example we had the technology to get to mars in hour and the cost of plane ticket!!  A mars colony of 500,000 people or million people may not be enough to support it self on mars!! Why? You need.
 

• doctors and surgeons
• nurses
• dentist
• construction workers
• maintenance workers
• office workers
• factory workers
• electrician
• plumper
• engineer of all types of fields buildings, bridges, electrical so on
• water and road workers
• drug companies
• people skilled in biology
• people skinned in chemistry
• people skilled in physics
• people skilled in computers and technology
• teachers
• professors
• cop
• firefighter
• EMT
• court system
• government system
• transportation system on land and air
• stores and shops every where
• goods and supplies
• other skilled people and blue collar workers
• office workers
• factory workers
• industry
• Engineering supplies and Medical supplies
• farmers
• miners to work in the mines for gold, ore, coal and other mineral
• you will need steel, aluminum, alloy so on how are you going to get this?

 

A colony of 500,000 people or million people may not be enough!! You may need 2 million people or more?

 

 

[Bufofrog]

6 minutes ago, nec209 said:

That say for example we had the technology to get to mars in hour and the cost of plane ticket!!  A mars colony of 500,000 people or million people may not be enough to support it self on mars!! Why?

Since we can make up advanced technology, let's say there is AI and robots to do most of those jobs.

Problem solved.

[nec209]

13 minutes ago, Bufofrog said:

Since we can make up advanced technology, let's say there is AI and robots to do most of those jobs.

Problem solved.

It depends how many people is needed to support a self system with out trade.

Germany was the only country on earth that did not trade and made every thing in the country. Not sure what the population was.

The US doing the 50's and 60's was the only other country at that time that came close to making every thing it its own country with almost no trade. Not sure what the population was.

Most other countries need trade to survive because of lack of people.

Using  these population numbers to see what mars may need.

 

 

Edited June 15, 2019 by nec209

[jebus1969]

It isn't size, but efficiency that is the concern.

I don't see a problem with it. Just use more automated equipment.

But, we should not be doing it at all.

I already had a conversation with the president and a general about this.

NASA will start extorting money out of us.

"We just need a few billion dollars more to feed the starving astro-nuts."

We don't need it.

It really is not much more than entertainment.

We have deep underground bases to preserve our degenerate species in the event of most natural disasters. A colony on one or more moons of Jupiter or even further out would make a lot more sense - in the event of a lasting change in solar emissions.

Maybe even an interstellar colony ship. But honestly we have no business doing it at this point.

As a species we are vermin and the word "colonize" would be more aptly replaced with the word "infest." Once we get our act together, make our wealthy and powerful quit eating children, quit stealing, quit cheating, quit the rape, learn to get along, then maybe...

[Ken Fabian]

2 hours ago, nec209 said:

That say for example we had the technology to get to mars in hour and the cost of plane ticket!!  A mars colony of 500,000 people or million people may not be enough to support it self on mars!! Why? You need.
 

• doctors and surgeons
• nurses
• dentist
• construction workers
• maintenance workers
• office workers
• factory workers
• electrician
• plumper
• engineer of all types of fields buildings, bridges, electrical so on
• water and road workers
• drug companies
• people skilled in biology
• people skinned in chemistry
• people skilled in physics
• people skilled in computers and technology
• teachers
• professors
• cop
• firefighter
• EMT
• court system
• government system
• transportation system on land and air
• stores and shops every where
• goods and supplies
• other skilled people and blue collar workers
• office workers
• factory workers
• industry
• Engineering supplies and Medical supplies
• farmers
• miners to work in the mines for gold, ore, coal and other mineral
• you will need steel, aluminum, alloy so on how are you going to get this?

 

A colony of 500,000 people or million people may not be enough!! You may need 2 million people or more?

 

 

I have similar opinions on this. I'm not sure what the minumum population would need to be but, yes, self-sufficiency requires a colony to be a working, advanced, industrial economy with a large population - likely more advanced than any nation we have on Earth. It needs thousands of technical specialties to support such a technology dependent economy - and I think the availability of resources will be a serious problem; every bit of equipment for mining and refining on Mars will be an exercise in serious innovation, even if the full range of mineral resources such an economy needs are even available as usable ore bodies. And I see advanced, high tech innovation as a luxury that only successful economies - Earth economies - can support.

An economy where absolutely everything is very expensive and every activity is more difficult than anything we deal with on Earth is an economy that is in trouble - and whilst AI may help, robotics are another layer of advanced technological requirements that a remote colony will struggle to support and sustain - I don't see robotics so much reducing the technology requirements but increasing the requirements for technology to be developed and supplied by Earth. Unless we are talking about AI - rather than humans - colonising Mars.

Can such an economy exist independently - and safely - on Mars? I'm doubtful but suppose it is probably possible. The biggest problem I see is that there is no sound economic underpinnings for the long process of such a colony's establishment - that between getting a base on the surface (or under it) and establishing mines and factories and farms and all the supporting infrastructure there are accumulating cost but an absence of means to repay the enormous Earthside investments needed in any form of material trade.

Edited June 16, 2019 by Ken Fabian

[zapatos]

2 hours ago, nec209 said:

It depends how many people is needed to support a self system with out trade.

Germany was the only country on earth that did not trade and made every thing in the country. Not sure what the population was.

The US doing the 50's and 60's was the only other country at that time that came close to making every thing it its own country with almost no trade. Not sure what the population was.

Most other countries need trade to survive because of lack of people.

Using  these population numbers to see what mars may need.

 

 

We only trade between countries because we have countries. If we had one world government we would not need trade between countries. Don't confuse politics with economics.

[Endy0816]

In many cases can have people who work remotely from Earth. Only a lag of 4-24 minutes.

Then there's always wearing multiple hats. Our ancestors were much less specialized than we are today.

Lot more resources available than there might appear. Biggest challenge will be in refining. Early on we'll probably use little more than easy to automate pit mines. Some things like coal would require Earth-like conditions(life, water, tectonics) to occur.

[pavelcherepan]

5 hours ago, nec209 said:

A colony of 500,000 people or million people may not be enough!! You may need 2 million people or more?

You're basing your assumption that a Mars colony will be a carbon copy of Earth society on a slightly smaller scale. This is unlikely to happen in reality until the colony has grown a lot. As others mentioned due to limited human resources, many people will fulfill different roles. I doubt that the size of 500k people will be sufficient to establish a modern-day capitalist economy and social-economic structure is likely to be more akin to socialism, closer to the likes of Norway or Sweden (but without money and much less private enterprise). 

With the lack of finance and other aspects associated with capitalism, the population will have a much higher percentage of blue collar and science workers and white collar population might be as low as 10%, compared to slightly over 60% in US currently. And majority of these white collar workers would be in government system as there is less likely to be widespread private business.

This all of course depends on whether you have the entire population in one main colony with some smaller mining satellites or scenario where these 500k people are divided into dozens of much smaller colonies. With each of them being 10-50k population and being created for a particular purpose, it's much less likely that modern day Earth-like social-economic structure will be established.

A colony will be created around original landing site, another colony will be created further away in the area with large amount of mineral resources, another colony close to the pole aimed at mining and shipping water ice. Possibly separate smaller colonies for scientific research in various areas of scientific interest. Other colonies for some other purposes, for example you won't place your refinery or a nuclear reactor next to your main hub and so it's likely be moved far away and become it's own settlement.

Therefore, your estimate based on the modern-day capitalist economy will not work at all. Unlike modern economy, there will be less competition within the same area, but rather there will be separate colonies working together to allow everyone to survive. 

Once overall population has grown a lot and there are multiple sources of everything the overall population needs, transition may start to a capitalism, but not at 500,000 people.

Edited June 16, 2019 by pavelcherepan

[MigL]

Don't know what's made Jebus1969 so cynical.
But Matt Damon survived on Mars, alone, for quite a while, eating potatoes, before being brought home.

[Sensei]

5 hours ago, jebus1969 said:

Once we get our act together, make our wealthy and powerful quit eating children, quit stealing, quit cheating, quit the rape, learn to get along, then maybe...

If there is no money, there is no wealthy..

If there is no money, there is no thieves..

If there is no money, there is no cheaters (the one who are interested in money)..

Money is a way to buy time of a person / force a person to work.

Illusion. Which many people "buy".

 

If you give Lottery ticket to ordinary man or woman, what they do the next day? Quit job. Why? They hate their jobs.

If you will give Lottery ticket to quantum physicist, that person will go to job the next day. Why? Because they love their job. Want to learn about Universe. Want to explore Universe. Want to find something nobody knew prior him or her.

 

On ISS, or any other spaceship, or in the future colony, there is no money also. Nobody has to earn money to buy food, to lend apartment (room on ISS). Everybody do their responsibilities. They are scientists. They love to be cosmonauts or astronauts.

 

[pavelcherepan]

58 minutes ago, Sensei said:

They love to be cosmonauts or astronauts.

I agree with you, with the caveat that some people (by the time colony gets to 500k people) will have been born on Mars and quite possibly some don't want to be there. It wasn't their choice really.

But as for money, you are correct. In fact, market economy is not possible unless you have excess and diversified sources of all critical resources. Otherwise, there is no opportunity for negotiation, as in the absence of agreement, situation becomes a very clear lose-lose for both parties. 

[Sensei]

Slightly different perspective:

if you are astronaut, cosmonaut, colonizer... you are origin of entire civilization on the other exoplanet... If you'll survive, millions or billions of newly born children will share your genes...

..on different planet.. perhaps on different galaxy..

If somebody tells "give me xxx money for yyy now" (on space station) is simply silly [...] ....

 

[Endy0816]

You have novel tech options too.

IVF for more rapid population growth using a colony of only/mainly females to start.

Control over oxygen percentage. Can deal with both fires and a some criminal activity that way. Either simply decreasing activity levels or incapacitating people.

[nec209]

21 hours ago, zapatos said:

We only trade between countries because we have countries. If we had one world government we would not need trade between countries. Don't confuse politics with economics.

Globalization vs Protectionism?

Germany and China in the past practice protectionism with grate wall of China and did not pan out that well for them!! They where less industrialized and more primitive.

US of 330 million people cannot support it self with a population of 330 million people and thus need trade to support it self today.

We trade with other countries because of a shortage of goods and people and are not self-sufficient. I know of no country on earth that is self-sufficient or come close to being self-sufficient today.

When countries practice protectionism and anti-trade they normally have a economy of third world country and are dirt poor and massive shortage of goods and supplies. And these are countries with way more people than 500,000 people or million people you want to send to mars.

So if you cannot do it on earth how are you going to do it on mars?

Germany was the only country on earth that did not trade and made every thing in the country. But not sure what the population was at that time.

 

[nevim]

Why would you need ‘people skinned in chemistry’, nec?

[zapatos]

53 minutes ago, nec209 said:

Globalization vs Protectionism?

 

No. What I am saying is that you can plan a colony on Mars without taking International Trade into consideration.

[nec209]

On 6/16/2019 at 6:08 PM, nec209 said:

Globalization vs Protectionism?

Germany and China in the past practice protectionism with grate wall of China and did not pan out that well for them!! They where less industrialized and more primitive.

US of 330 million people cannot support it self with a population of 330 million people and thus need trade to support it self today.

We trade with other countries because of a shortage of goods and people and are not self-sufficient. I know of no country on earth that is self-sufficient or come close to being self-sufficient today.

When countries practice protectionism and anti-trade they normally have a economy of third world country and are dirt poor and massive shortage of goods and supplies. And these are countries with way more people than 500,000 people or million people you want to send to mars.

So if you cannot do it on earth how are you going to do it on mars?

Germany was the only country on earth that did not trade and made every thing in the country. But not sure what the population was at that time.

 

 

On 6/16/2019 at 7:06 PM, zapatos said:

No. What I am saying is that you can plan a colony on Mars without taking International Trade into consideration.

What I'm trying to say is if we cannot make self-sufficient city or country on earth with protectionism no trade than how are we going to make a self-sufficient mars colony.

I'm surprised NASA has not ran any numbers on how big the colony would have to be to support it self with out trade?

[J.C.MacSwell]

On 6/16/2019 at 12:58 AM, MigL said:

Don't know what's made Jebus1969 so cynical.
But Matt Damon survived on Mars, alone, for quite a while, eating potatoes, before being brought home.

Maybe that...

On 6/16/2019 at 7:25 PM, nevim said:

Why would you need ‘people skinned in chemistry’, nec?

Not the type of people you want let loose in a lab...

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, nec209 said:

What I'm trying to say is if we cannot make self-sufficient city or country on earth with protectionism no trade than how are we going to make a self-sufficient mars colony.

 

EARTH is self sufficient. Mars can be too. Just don't introduce political jurisdictions that fight against each other.

[Moreno]

Do you think Mars does have any perspectives for colonization in the forthcoming centuries? I would think it is very doubtful. Too small, too low gravity, too little solar radiation, no significant reserves of water or other hydrogen compounds (from which water could be made). Only mentally ill will move there.

[zapatos]

8 hours ago, Moreno said:

Do you think Mars does have any perspectives for colonization in the forthcoming centuries? I would think it is very doubtful. Too small, too low gravity, too little solar radiation, no significant reserves of water or other hydrogen compounds (from which water could be made). Only mentally ill will move there.

Why? Because anyone who doesn't think like you is mentally ill?

Quote

The non-profit Mars One Foundation hopes to send teams of four spaceflyers on one-way Mars colony missions starting in 2023. Its initial 19-week application window closed on Aug. 31, with a final tally of 202,586 volunteers.

https://www.space.com/22758-mars-colony-volunteers-mars-one.html

[Endy0816]

12 hours ago, Moreno said:

Do you think Mars does have any perspectives for colonization in the forthcoming centuries? I would think it is very doubtful. Too small, too low gravity, too little solar radiation, no significant reserves of water or other hydrogen compounds (from which water could be made). Only mentally ill will move there.

Going to be a challenge to obtain, but there's ample ice at the poles and likely existing beneath the surface.

Less area than Earth but still plenty large. Some areas could use more research, but we'll probably do fine with about 1/3 gravity.

[Moreno]

7 hours ago, Endy0816 said:

Going to be a challenge to obtain, but there's ample ice at the poles and likely existing beneath the surface.

Less area than Earth but still plenty large. Some areas could use more research, but we'll probably do fine with about 1/3 gravity.

Doesn't this "ice" consist of CO2, primarily? This is not "watery" ice doesn't it? The entire surface is the size of Eurasia, but to have stable climate it will need an oceans, what will reduce the habitable territory even more? Otherwise, why someone needs to go so far, to spend all his life in the space suit and live in some underground city? Why do that if there is no hope for the terraforming?

Economically Mars colony will not be self sustainable. The only thing it may offer to Earth is minerals, but the extraction total costs will be uncompetitive. Therefore those people who will move there will need to account for complete Autarky. 

Edited July 6, 2019 by Moreno

[Endy0816]

3 hours ago, Moreno said:

Doesn't this "ice" consist of CO2, primarily? This is not "watery" ice doesn't it? The entire surface is the size of Eurasia, but to have stable climate it will need an oceans, what will reduce the habitable territory even more? Otherwise, why someone needs to go so far, to spend all his life in the space suit and live in some underground city? Why do that if there is no hope for the terraforming?

The ice(H2O) is with the dry ice(CO2), but there is estimated to be over 21 million cubic kilometers of ice available.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_on_Mars

It would be an adventure visiting another world. That could be reason enough. We likely won't terraform it. Be a long term project, possibly destroying existing buildings.

I think a mix of tourism and money for research will be big early on. Enogh to get basic trade going and infrastructure built.

[Mordred]

Assuming we had the technology to actually move 500,000 ppl to Mars it is quite reasonable that the colony can use the same ships to mine the asteroid field which would be closer than it is to Earth 

With the lower gravity one would save on fuel costs.

 Ice could very well be one of those resources mined