Will there be a million people on the moon by 2060?

[Vanadium 50]

Well, the compelling reason will be to monitor the Farside Telescope.

About 40 people winter over at the South Pole. So an argument for someday having 10 or 20 people on the moon for a long-ish term - say a month - might be made.

That is nowhere near a million.

 

[fresh_42]

That is nowhere near a million.

A closer look at what it takes to supply 1,000,000 people in a desert here on earth with fresh water leads to a devastating end of that crude dream. Las Vegas has only 642,000 citizens and you can watch it falling dry. And don't come with water on the moon. Even if, it takes a major industrial complex and a lot of energy to harvest it in the necessary amount.

 

[Astronuc]

at 100$/lb (an order of magnitude smaller than today) that‘s $4B per month.

?!?!?!

I'm not sure 100$/lb.

The annual GDP for Tulsa, OK in 2021 was ~60B. I don't think the majority was air freight and passengers.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NGMP46140

As I recall, the cost of 1 kg from sea level to LEO is ~$10k / kg. That's the number I was given in the mid 1980s. Just to get a 80 kg human to orbit would cost about $800 k, not including the infrastructure to support the human in space. 1 metric ton (1000 kg) in space would cost $10 M.

I haven't look at the cost/kg in a long time, but the energy require to put a kg in LEO is still the same now as it was then. The cost has probably increased.

One has to look at the energy requirements for the various systems, e.g., the requirement for liquid CH₄ (basically LNG) or LH₂ and LOX, and see what production capacity is required.

I remember vividly the grandiose plans for ISS, which when faced with reality shrunk in size and scope, while the budget ballooned massively by more than an order of magnitude.

 

[Frabjous]

?!?!?!

I'm not sure 100$/lb.

The annual GDP for Tulsa, OK in 2021 was ~60B. I don't think the majority was air freight and passengers.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/NGMP46140

As I recall, the cost of 1 kg from sea level to LEO is ~$10k / kg. That's the number I was given in the mid 1980s. Just to get a 80 kg human to orbit would cost about $800 k, not including the infrastructure to support the human in space. 1 metric ton (1000 kg) in space would cost $10 M.

I haven't look at the cost/kg in a long time, but the energy require to put a kg in LEO is still the same now as it was then. The cost has probably increased.

One has to look at the energy requirements for the various systems, e.g., the requirement for liquid CH₄ (basically LNG) or LH₂ and LOX, and see what production capacity is required.

I remember vividly the grandiose plans for ISS, which when faced with reality shrunk in size and scope, while the budget ballooned massively by more than an order of magnitude.

I meant if Tulsa was on the moon.

 

[Astronuc]

I meant if Tulsa was on the moon

$100/lb may be too low. Initial costs might be much greater. Ultimately, it will depend on how self-sufficient a lunar base would become, e.g., recycling CO₂ into O₂. And then there is processing of lunar minerals into structural materials.

One objective for a lunar base would be to support space exploration, e.g., missions to Mars and/or outer planets, since it costs less to launch a kg from lunar surface than earth surface.

Back and forth between the moon and earth is orders of magnitude more complicated than migrating across the earth, and round trips to Mars and beyond is way more complicate than lunar missions.

 

[phinds]

What do you think????

I think this whole thread is a waste of time. The idea that there will be 1,000,000 on the moon by 2060 is just silly.

 

[Frabjous]

$100/lb may be too low. Initial costs might be much greater. Ultimately, it will depend on how self-sufficient a lunar base would become, e.g., recycling CO₂ into O₂. And then there is processing of lunar minerals into structural materials.

One objective for a lunar base would be to support space exploration, e.g., missions to Mars and/or outer planets, since it costs less to launch a kg from lunar surface than earth surface.

Back and forth between the moon and earth is orders of magnitude more complicated than migrating across the earth, and round trips to Mars and beyond is way more complicate than lunar missions.

Probably, but $4B/month is way to high to be economically feasible.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I think this whole thread is a waste of time. T

Even the OP has bailed

 

[fresh_42]

Even the OP has bailed

Yes, but PF's first law applies: The sillier the thread the higher the number of posts.

 

[bob012345]

As to the original question Will there be a million people on the moon by 2060? Perhaps if Lunar industry follows the Las Vegas model.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Continuing on with PF's First Law - why don't we have undersea cities by now? Easier and closer, and nuclear submarines have a 15 year head start on rockets to the moon.

 

[TeethWhitener]

Millionth customer gets free groceries.

Yeah but the delivery fee is murder.

 

[MidgetDwarf]

I went to a tech conference in Marin County back in 2012, the kind of resort hotel where the best and brightest In Silicon Valley need to have the strawberries on the breakfast buffet labeled ‘gluten free’. Panelists and people in idle conversation were all seriously talking about dying on Mars, like there would be a one-way shuttle available in their dotage.

Dead

 

[berkeman]

When we get 1000 folks living on the Moon, we will re-open this thread. Thanks all for participating.