reply to post by Gorman91
I think this is the best goal as hawking said.
He thinks that humanity will be wiped out with one of the many
very likely planet killers.
He said we get into space or we will be wiped out, and I think he is right.
He is a pretty smart guy, I will take his word on a lot of things.
There is evidence of a DNA bottleneck about 74,000 yrs ago
about the same time the Super Volcano Toba went off.
We have several of those on the planet, and at least two of them
have not erupted in quite awhile and still considered geologically
active, some have even called them over due.
To me the logical progression is as follows:
1) Moonbase or L5 space station.
Moonbase can get helium-3 from regolith of the moon to power
a helium-3 reactor like the one they have running at Univ. of Wisconsin.
The L5 space station is where you build your space craft that travels
between planets but does not land on them, it stays in space.
Most of the space junk in orbit could be cleaned up and recycled to
this task, likely need more than that though.
Let solar powered robots do most of the work as humans require
food, water, and medical care and solar power is several times
stronger outside the atmosphere.
2) Mars base or Ceres base.
I lean toward Ceres for one very simple reason.
It may have more freshwater than earth.
Mars would be good for mineral mining, but to be honest we'd be
better off just recycling all the junks yards and mothballed warships.
Ceramic coated canisters for heat shields would allow us to rail
gun material it into space.
3) Europa is likely to have water as well and would make a good
next base in my books.
Out past Jupiter it is going to get VERY cold, I think we'd need
time just to deal with trying to do things pretty close to absolute zero.
On pluto it gets as cold as -400 F.
Most things become brittle and do not work well at those extreme
We'd need a very durable material for the space craft.
[edit on 28-8-2010 by Ex_MislTech]