Submitted by Aaron Arkin.
Recently, a highly publicized Blue Origin Mission to the edge of space, passively crewed by six celebrated female personalities, was the subtext for the idea that mankind’s future is in Space. In the headiness of the moment, and with the support of a hand-full of multi-billionaires, space tourism (for the ultra rich and/or the well-connected) plus plans for projects such as enclaves on the Moon, Mars and beyond, are receiving increased interest. Futurists even talk of Terraforming, morphing barren celestial spheres into Earth-like oases using a technology that has yet to be developed, and most likely never will.
Underlining these projects is the realization (and the fear) that Earth’s future is limited: Five billion years from now the Sun will become a Red Giant and engulf the inner planets. In a couple of billion years (unless disrupted by human activity) the Carbon Cycle, the process that moves carbon between plants, animals, microbes, and minerals in the Earth and the atmosphere, all of which makes life possible here, will cease to exist.
A finite Earth is a disturbing reality but only until one realizes we’re talking about events that will not take place for billions of years. This is a time scale that in all likelihood will long exceed human activity here, given that over 99.9% of all creatures that have ever existed on Earth, have gone extinct. To put it into perspective, dinosaurs were here for a mere 179 million years, while estimates suggest Homo Sapiens have been here for a paltry 300,000. Before thinking and worrying about long-term events, we should be more concerned that the Doomsday Clock is currently set at 89 seconds before midnight, the closest its ever been in its history.
Despite all of the viable habitable Earth-time ahead of us (assuming we don’t ruin it), there seems to be an urgency to move these Space projects forward. Strategies for accomplishing these efforts abound. But as they say in war, it’s not strategy that wins the day, it’s logistics. And the logistics for moving humans into space are formidable. Consider just the financial costs of moving people and equipment beyond the Earth. Most estimates put the total average cost somewhere between 20 million and 50 million dollars per person. Experts estimate that the fuel cost alone for the launch of the New Shepard Rocket, which was used for the 10 minutes and 21 second recent Blue Origin mission, was between 1 and 3 million dollars. And that was just to get humans to the edge of Space.
Accounting for the economies of scale (assuming we could scale up), it should be obvious the movement of large populations into space is not economically feasible. Even if we could establish enclaves on bodies within our solar system (until and if we develop the means of traversing the vastness of space and the limitations of time, humans traveling to other solar systems is off the table), consider what it would be like to live in such places.
Humans are uniquely adapted for conditions here on Earth. Off Earth, you would be exposed to radiation and gravitation effects that long-term Space Station residents have shown to be injurious. And, what amenities do you think you would actually have access to: restaurants, movie theaters, entertainment parks, sports events, overland recreational ventures? To travel outside your living module would require a pressurized suit and limited time exposure. You would for virtually all of your time there be camping out in a relatively small pressurized container with only a porthole view of what is outside. How long will that narrow-angle vista remain a novelty?
What you would definitely have however, is forced contact with a small number of people for months, if not years, on end. Contact with friends and family back on Earth would be limited, if even an option. Think of your existence as permanently living on the Space Station, except much further away. Can anyone seriously believe this is a model for civilizations with a viable future?
Then, there is Earth: to date the only place in the known Universe where life exists. For all the damage we humans have caused, it is still a rich, diversified and beautiful place, and worth preserving. We could commit to life thriving here and turn our efforts towards improving our environment: using fewer resources, planting trees, recycling more, reclaiming and salvaging damaged landscapes, trying more sustainable lifestyles, encouraging and supporting Green political movements, etc.
We are being presented with two futures: One, an extension of a Twenty-First Century version, if you will, of Manifest Destiny, a dream of new frontiers and modern human civilizations on other worlds; the second, a commitment to Earth, and a chance the agency of man can make things better. The first choice requires huge expenditures, more carbon pollution, and a siphoning off of resources that could be put to use here at home. The second asks us only to treasure and reinvest in our own planet.
I’m hopeful we will, before it’s too late, have the wisdom to preserve the garden we have been given, almost certainly the only garden we will ever know. So, I’m betting the future is here. It may not be a sure bet, but it’s the only bet we have.
Indeed, Mr. Arkin, thank you. The spiritual journey of the hairy ape that’s us should pay attention to our first to duty sensible stewardship of the gift given to self-aware capacity.
“Rare Earth,” by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee (UW), on the shelf for a quarter century, informs foundational wisdom for species survival. That begins with a reverence we’ve yet to adopt to the full measure indicated against the capitalist impulse of selfish regard that frames contemporary orthodoxy directing human achievement. In the end, as in the beginning, nature doesn’t care. Gravity rules, though we delight in brief, sometimes juvenile, attempts to overcome it. Michelangelo’s Sistine “conclave” ceiling inspires all who look up. Might he not tempt imagination today, showing a Hubble image at finger’s length between those famous outstretched limbs? Galileo would approve.