|
> Every colony is expected to earn, this is the history of colonialization. The problem with a Martian (or even lunar) colony is that... there's not actually anything valuable there. So a traditional "earning" colony is basically off the table, and aside from the technological hurdles, is probably why the drive to do it just hasn't been there. Of our closes celestial neighbors, well, Venus is just useless entirely what with how hostile the atmosphere is to our... everything, Mars is quite far away, several months via current technology, and it's incredibly, devastatingly thin atmosphere and lower gravity means any given colony will require a lot and I do mean a LOT of support from us here on Earth to function. Colony isn't even really an appropriate word here, as colonization implies some level of living at the destination and between the lack of breathable atmosphere, lack of any and all flora, and lack of water, you're basically requiring regular supply drops or everyone is just dead. Really the moon is far better in the transit aspect, which since you're supplying your colony from here, is a huge data point. And even then, what does that colony then do? The moon doesn't have much of anything we're really hurting for, certainly nothing to make up for the exorbitant cost of mining there. I could see it as a valuable location for low-G construction of larger, further-going spacecraft I suppose? But in terms of "expected to earn," I think either the red planet or our friend in the sky is going to be pretty dire. |