The best way to colonize space?

[Oni Koneko Damien]

I've been trying to put together a sci-fi universe that, while not 'realistic', at least doesn't completely fuck over the rules of common sense. One problem I've come across is the colonization of other planets. The likelyhood of a planet having temperature, air pressure, gravity, and atmospheric contents similar to Earth, I'm guessing, is probably incredibly low. Thus my intrepid colonists head out to other planets/planetoids with the assumption that the ones that have stuff they need, that are worth establishing permanent outposts at, will be highly inimical to life as we know it.

So what is the best way to design these outposts, given technological capabilities somewhere beyond Star Trek, but probably short Star Wars. My humans have discovered processes and resources that, once properly utilized, can produce energy at such an efficient rate that each 'reactor' (terms will become more precise when I work out more exact nature of this energy source) can provide millions of times the output of today's most advanced nuclear reactor for the next several hundred years. Plus they have the ability to convert that power into 'battery' form, ranging from football sized powerpacks to generator-sized batteries to car-sized batteries that can power medium sized starships for years (larger ships will have their own reactors).

The only real limiting factor in design is the actual materials used to build it with. With the invention of these types of reactors, providing essentially free energy, the most valued spots in space are asteroid fields, which can be mined for huge amounts of resources without the hassle of dealing with planetary atmospheres and other hazards.

What I've come up with so far are orbital platforms and underground complexes. Orbital platforms, properly constructed, are far easier to maintain, modify to fit changing needs, and travel to and from. On the other hand, underground complexes provide much easier access to whatever it is on that particular planet that they are on. Also, being underground they are much easier to defend against limited orbital bombardment, any harmful radiation or other conditions that surface structures would have to deal with, and are much easier to make airtight to keep the atmosphere within non-lethal.

Am I missing something that would be obviously superior in colonial design? What would be the biggest problems face with establishing these sorts of things?

[xammer99]

If you don't have a terrestrial world...why bother settling in a gravity well? You've lost the prime benefit of the freebie on life support already, so why not just build where the easy to get at resources are? ala asteroid belts?

[Slacker]

In my universe, I wrote into the backstory the dominance of oxygen breathing, carbon based lifeforms through the last few hundred million years. The details of why that particular branch of life is dominant is sort of lost to the ages, as are the majority of the species responsible. The end result, though, is that there are literally tons of terraformed worlds scattered through the Orion Arm. Many of them aren't terribly Earth-like, mind you, with biospheres radical and different, but they're a step up from places like Mercury or asteriods.

Xammer's right, though, once there's no biosphere, there's no real compelling reason to bother with a gravity well in the first place.

[Zor]

Along with establishing colonies in on the various planets and moons of our solar system, i say that a big part of this is the Universal Century route, sans mobile suits of course.

Zor

[NoXion]

If you want to access planet-bound resources, space elevators sound like they would be trivially easy for your civilisation to construct. Even though you could most likely use brute force to overcome planetary gravity wells by the sounds of it, cheap surface-to-orbit transportation is not to be sniffed at.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

If you want to access planet-bound resources, space elevators sound like they would be trivially easy for your civilisation to construct. Even though you could most likely use brute force to overcome planetary gravity wells by the sounds of it, cheap surface-to-orbit transportation is not to be sniffed at.

That was something else I was considering, but I didn't know if space-elevators would be cost-effective compared to normal surface-to-space transport.

[Cykeisme]

Obviously space elevators would not get you around the cost of supplying gravitational potential energy to get an object up and out of a gravity well (CoE), but it would likely be more efficient than a rocket relying on thrust exhaust, and eliminate the need for consumable supplies like fuel and/or reactant mass.

Also, didn't you just say the civilization in your story had reactors that provided effectively unlimited energy?
What's the worry? Elevator away!

[Cykeisme]

Oh, silly me.

I just thought about it, and even energy cost aside, the cost of obtaining the materials to build a space elevator would likely be far greater than the cost of obtaining reactant mass for a gazillion surface-to-orbit trips.

If your story for some reason involves constantly moving large amounts of materials up from the surface to space, then it might be practical to construct space elevators.
Otherwise not so much.

[NoXion]

Oh, silly me.

I just thought about it, and even energy cost aside, the cost of obtaining the materials to build a space elevator would likely be far greater than the cost of obtaining reactant mass for a gazillion surface-to-orbit trips.

What? you only have to build a space elevator once, and if you're starting off on the planet's surface you only need to provide enough energy to overcome the planet's gravity well once - when you're up there, send down some materials procured from the nearest asteroid, use the weight of the material to send up something only slightly lighter at the same time, like a pulley system.

I don't see how that can be less resource intensive than finding reactant mass to run millions of surface-to-orbit craft, especially since you will need to replenish that reaction mass every time, whereas you only need to build and maintain one space elevator, which can constantly transfer goods from surface to orbit at minimal energy expenditure.

If your story for some reason involves constantly moving large amounts of materials up from the surface to space, then it might be practical to construct space elevators.
Otherwise not so much.

Establishing a colony on the surface of a solid body is likely to involve the transfer of large amounts of stuff, especially if the body is poor in suitable construction materials. Once established, the space elevator can be reeled back up and used to aid the construction of another colony, or it can remain there if the colony in question is expected to have a lot of visiotrs or produce a lot of goods.

[Junghalli]

Yes, I believe one of the most efficient chemical rocket fuels is just hydrogen and oxygen, you could get it by simple water electrolysis.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Space elevators are by far the most efficient since they don't require you to lift reactant mass along with your payload, and the reactors can be sited on the ground or in orbit, whatever is cheaper. Or just massive banks of solar panels. Also, consider lifespan. An elevator is a permanent structure; a 727 doesn't last nearly as long as, say, a Roman aquaduct. You'll more than recoup your structural materials costs with a space elevator over a long period of time. Thus it depends on if the government has lots of foresight or not.

[Adrian Laguna]

Space elevators are by far the most efficient since they don't require you to lift reactant mass along with your payload, and the reactors can be sited on the ground or in orbit, whatever is cheaper. Or just massive banks of solar panels.

Their efficiency also means that the first group to build one effectively wins the space race, permanently. Once you have one space elevator, building another one is comparatively trivial, which means you are guaranteed to always have more elevators than your rivals. This, in turn, means that you will always have more lift capacity than anyone else. More lift capacity allows for a larger orbital infrastructure that's also built faster. This infrastructure leads to permanent off planet bases, which leads to the discovery and exploitation of off planet resources, which feed back into the space program, allowing it to grow exponentially.