Exploring the Potential for a Floating Colony on Venus
Written on
Establishing a colony in the clouds of Venus may present a solution to the impending demand for combustible fuels, potentially making it a better candidate for colonization than Mars. This article will be divided into four segments: 1. Understanding Venus 2. Designing a floating metropolis 3. Converting Venus's atmosphere into fuel 4. Addressing the major challenges ahead.
To substantiate the viability of a floating colony on Venus, I will delve into some mathematical and physical principles. If you’ve ever fantasized about becoming a real-life Lando Calrissian, this exploration may pique your interest.
Before we embark on the design of this aerial colony, let's examine what we are up against.
Part 1: Understanding Venus
Gravity
- Gravitational strength of Earth: 9.8 N/kg
- Gravitational strength of Mars: 3.7 N/kg
- Gravitational strength of Venus: 8.8 N/kg
Given that Venus's gravity is quite similar to Earth’s, it would be relatively manageable for an average person to adapt. To comprehend the significance of this similarity, we must first explore the repercussions of living in low gravity.
One primary reason for the existence of the International Space Station is to investigate the consequences of prolonged exposure to microgravity. The findings are not encouraging; for example:
- Osteoporosis (bone calcium loss and degeneration)
- Excess fluid accumulation in the skull and eyes
- Muscle atrophy
- The heart's diminished ability to pump blood
- Challenges with reproduction in space
(For those interested, I’ll provide additional readings on microgravity's effects at the end of this article.)
As evidenced, long-term colonization of Mars, where gravity is only 38% of Earth's, may not be conducive to human health, leading to significant life expectancy issues for colonists after a few years. Thus, Mars may not be a suitable permanent residence.
Conversely, Venus boasts a gravity level at 89.8% of Earth's, which, with adherence to a rigorous resistance training regimen, would likely have negligible adverse effects on colonists. Venus is shaping up to be an attractive destination for interstellar exploration.
Getting There
The journey to Mars typically lasts around seven months with current technology, while a trip to Venus could be accomplished in slightly over three months. However, due to hazardous conditions in Venus’s atmosphere, immediate landing isn’t feasible. It would be prudent to establish our floating city beforehand, as we might have to remain in orbit until the necessary preparations are made.
So, what makes landing on Venus so challenging?
Venus's Hostile Atmosphere
At the surface, Venus experiences scorching temperatures of 465 degrees Celsius, hot enough to liquefy lead and zinc. Ideal for a sauna, but not much else. Additionally, the atmospheric pressure is approximately 93 Bar, equivalent to the pressure found 900 meters underwater on Earth. It is estimated that Venus's atmosphere is 93 times heavier than that of Earth, totaling around 400 Quintilian tonnes.
The atmosphere is comprised of 96.5% Carbon Dioxide, 3.5% Nitrogen, and traces of other gases, including substantial clouds of Sulfur Dioxide. In this article, I will also discuss how this carbon dioxide can be converted into fuel. However, Venus lacks O2 in significant quantities, possessing only minimal amounts of O1, meaning there is no protective ozone layer—unfortunate for any potential outdoor activities.
While the surface pressure is extremely high, carbon dioxide transforms into a supercritical fluid, which efficiently conducts heat. Notably, 99% of Venus’s atmosphere is concentrated between 30 kilometers from the surface, where wind speeds can reach 100 m/s—definitely not a conducive environment for umbrellas.
At altitudes of 40 to 65 kilometers above the surface, the pressure equals that of Earth at sea level, where oxygen behaves similarly to helium on Earth. This means helium balloons would be exceptionally effective for lifting on Venus.
The temperature at this altitude ranges from 27 to 127 degrees Celsius, providing favorable conditions for settlement. However, a day on Venus spans about 243 Earth days, while a year is approximately 225 Earth days, so keep a reliable timepiece handy.
Part 2: Constructing Cloud City (Lando Calrissian Not Included)
Warning: Mathematics Ahead! Proceed at Your Own Risk!
So, you aspire to build a floating city on Venus? You're in luck! As previously mentioned, at an altitude of approximately 50 kilometers, the atmospheric pressure stabilizes at 1 Bar, allowing us to utilize giant helium balloons—yes, the solution is that straightforward.
Given that Venus's atmosphere is primarily composed of carbon dioxide, we can easily calculate the necessary helium volume and balloon dimensions using established formulas for balloon buoyancy applicable on Earth.
The Mathematics of Buoyancy
Assuming our cloud city weighs as much as two modern oil rigs, we’ll estimate a total weight of 60,000 tons (including balloons). Our buoyancy equation is:
(Weight of helium used) + (Weight of the station plus balloons) = (Buoyant force of CO2 at 50 km)
We can define the weight of helium as (density of helium * volume of balloon) * (gravity on Venus), while the weight of the station and balloons translates to (mass of station and balloons) * (gravity). The buoyant force can be expressed as (Density of CO2) * (Volume of balloon) * (Gravity on Venus).
Upon eliminating gravity from the equation and rearranging, we derive:
(Volume of helium balloon) = (Mass of the station in tonnes * kg/ton) / (Density of CO2 - Density of Helium)
Plugging in our numbers yields:
(60,000 tonnes * 907.185 kg/ton) / (1.98 kg/m³ - 0.164 kg/m³) = 29,973,072.69 m³, roughly 30 million cubic meters of helium.
To calculate the radius of a spherical balloon:
(4/3) * ? * (radius)³ = volume
Thus,
(29,973,072.69) / (4/3 * ?) = 7,155,544, and taking the cube root gives us a radius of 192.7 meters.
Therefore, a 385.4-meter-wide helium balloon would be necessary to lift our station. However, this presents a significant logistical challenge, particularly as scientists estimate Earth has approximately 117 years' worth of helium remaining, necessitating a more sustainable alternative on Venus.
What about nitrogen? It is an inert gas, making it safer than hydrogen. Nitrogen accounts for 3.3% of Venus’s atmosphere, translating to approximately 13 Quintilian tonnes of nitrogen available for use.
Now, for our nitrogen balloon to lift 60,000 tons, we would need 66,786,625.77 m³ of nitrogen, equating to 1,113 m³ per ton of the station, resulting in a balloon radius of approximately 251 meters.
Utilizing only a minuscule fraction (0.000000000000006791%) of Venus’s nitrogen reserves, this option appears more feasible than helium. The process would involve transporting the station to Venus, assembling it in orbit, filling the balloons with nitrogen, and ensuring structural stability by employing multiple balloons at the corners of the station.
Engineering Considerations
One significant factor to consider is the corrosive nature of Venus’s atmosphere, which contains sulfuric acid. We would need to coat the balloons in Teflon, which is resistant to the aforementioned acids, to prevent degradation.
In case of a tear, modern advancements have introduced self-healing materials, allowing small punctures to repair themselves, thus preventing immediate deflation. Historical observations indicate that non-hydrogen-filled zeppelins do not burst when shot; instead, they deflate slowly, giving us time to make repairs.
What materials should our station utilize? While it is important to ensure the balloons are large enough to bear the weight, a surface that can withstand high temperatures and mild acidity is crucial. Aluminum or stainless steel are likely suitable materials. With Elon Musk's vision of constructing rockets capable of transporting heavy loads, and the potential development of space elevators, we can facilitate the transportation of materials into orbit and beyond.
Power, Oxygen, Food, and Water
Power is the simplest aspect to address, as Venus's atmosphere is ideal for wind turbines. The heat from lower altitudes could support geothermal or steam turbines, while solar energy remains a viable option in the sunlit areas.
Water and oxygen present greater challenges. Although water vapor is found in minute quantities in Venus’s atmosphere, hydrogen is scarce.
A promising solution may be extracting oxygen from carbon dioxide through the same process we will use to generate fuel. To produce water, we could combine sufficient oxygen with hydrogen; however, we must locate hydrogen on Venus and mitigate the risks associated with explosive reactions between hydrogen and oxygen.
Alternatively, we could consider the possibility of utilizing cyanobacteria, which historically contributed to Earth's oxygen levels. By harnessing CO2 from Venus and providing UV light, we could establish an efficient oxygen production system.
Regarding hydrogen, Venus’s sulfuric acid clouds contain H2SO4. We must determine a method to extract hydroxides and oxygen, a challenge we may overcome in the future.
Finally, food could be addressed easily by sending seeds to establish a farm on Venus. Perhaps by then, advanced technologies like replicators will exist, allowing for effortless food production.
Part 3: Why Bother Colonizing Venus?
The answer lies in ethanol.
A research team from the National University of Singapore, in collaboration with the University of Barcelona, has demonstrated that CO molecules facilitated by silver co-catalysts activate a mechanism on copper that converts CO2 to ethanol.
National University of Singapore / Phys.org (Link to the article — https://phys.org/news/2020-05-electrochemical-reduction-carbon-dioxide-ethanol.html)
With an estimated 386 Quintilian tonnes of CO2 on Venus, we could potentially create an ethanol production system through the aforementioned process.
Ethanol can be synthesized into heavier fossil fuels, such as diesel and kerosene.
One approach to meeting the rising demand for heavier middle-distillate fuels—such as diesel and jet fuels composed of hydrocarbons with typically 8–22 carbon atoms—is to derive them from ethanol. This review outlines the chemistries and processes involved in transforming ethanol into diesel and jet fuel substitutes.
Nathaniel M. Eagan et al. / Nature.com (link to the paper — https://www.nature.com/articles/s41570-019-0084-4)
Finding a long-term alternative to fossil fuels is crucial; otherwise, we may not make it to Venus. However, these fuels would be useful on other planets, such as our potential Venus colony or Mars, and could serve as a cost-effective rocket fuel.
If we establish orbital shipyards, we could construct massive rockets that do not need to be launched from the atmosphere. Imagine skyscraper-sized spaceships, similar to those in Kerbal Space Program 2, where we wouldn't need to worry about weight limitations.
With the ability to build colossal rockets and access virtually infinite fuel, the prospects are promising.
The motivation for colonizing Venus also stems from our need to establish a permanent settlement. With gravity nearly equivalent to Earth's, long-term habitation would be viable, unlike Mars or the Moon, where we would need to return home after a year.
Moreover, nearly all resources necessary for a self-sustaining settlement are readily available (aside from construction materials, which could be sourced through asteroid mining), making the prospect of floating cities on Venus a plausible next step in our exploration of the cosmos.
Part 4: Overcoming Initial Challenges
First, we likely need to create an orbital shipyard or a large station in Earth's orbit to construct a substantial transport vessel. Additionally, we must devise an efficient method for transporting materials back and forth. SpaceX's reusable rockets are a promising solution, and a space elevator could also be an option.
Second, we need a reliable method to deploy the colony and balloons without them crashing into Venus's surface while also filling them with nitrogen. A potential solution is to send a large hose from orbit to siphon nitrogen and fill the balloons in space before gently lowering them to Venus. This way, we avoid a perilous descent.
I invite you to consider how we might address these challenges.
Overall, while this endeavor poses significant challenges, it is entirely achievable. The mathematics confirms the feasibility of using balloons to support our floating city, and the atmospheric conditions at the proposed altitude are suitable for habitation. Our primary requirement is to develop the necessary space infrastructure.
In conclusion, Venus presents an exciting opportunity for a live-action interpretation of Disney's "Up." We must think ambitiously, exploring seemingly impossible ideas and discovering ways to bring them to fruition, likely through some mathematical ingenuity.
References
- Atmospheric Composition of Venus — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Venus
- Effects of Long-Term Microgravity — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11536970/
- The Formula for Calculating Buoyancy — https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xh6V4sEeUY & https://www.softschools.com/formulas/physics/archimedes_principle_formula/613/#:~:text=The%20Archimedes%20principle%20is%20a,gravity%20acceleration%20*%20volume%20of%20object