Should Exploitation Of The Moon Be Allowed?

[bibblebub]

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/japanese-engineers-plan-to-turn-the-moon-into-a-giant-solar-panel-station-8969866.html

A Japanese company is serious about creating a belt of solar panels around the moon's equator - a length of 6400 miles and width of 248 miles, so big enough to be visible with the naked eye. They intend to start constructing it by 2035.

But, even if it is feasible, should it be allowed? It feels like a desecration of our celestial companion, just for commercial gain. Or would it be simply another step for mankind into the type of future envisioned by science fiction?

[Zacs-Master]

I think I agree with the professor. Looks like a publicity stunt by Shimizu.

[atalanta]

reminds me of the old joke about the moon landings. Apparently the Russians got there first, after all, and started painting it red. The CIA and NASA got very hot under the collar, and asked the president to do something. He just told them not to worry, but the red bit got bigger and bigger until it covered the whole visible surface. Then he directed the US astronauts to land with lots of white paint, and write on the red background - huge white italic-script letters spelling out
"Coca Cola"

[LazyGun]

Beaming converted sunlight back to Earth from the Moon via either microwave or laser sound hugely inefficient, to me. And construction of such a ring on the moon would be fantastically costly.

Interesting blue sky thinking, but seems, right now, to be completely impractical.

However, were it ever to prove power and cost efficient, I would have absolutely no compunction about developing the moon in this way.

[EDDIE51]

Anything getting in the way of the microwave beam would be 'fried' in an instant.

[Hypognosis]

I vaguely recall some story (80s?) about a plan to put a Coca Cola sign in orbit which would be visible on the ground at night. Mirrors or prisms like a stadium scoreboard. It would have wrecked ground telescope observing sessions or time exposure photos so the plan was met with howls of derision.

If these panels aren't too reflective and painted the right shade, they might just blend in and there'd be no cause for complaints because we already know precisely when and where the moon is going to inconvenience deep sky observations.

Instead of beaming power to earth, couldn't they use them to power a moonbase or to split the much vaunted ice deposits of the moon into hydrogen and oxygen?

[bibblebub]

So, people wouldn't mind if they were to see a belt around the equator of the moon when they look up at the night sky?

[LazyGun]

@ bibblebub Well it would not bother me in the slightest :) For those worried about the aesthetic impact though, personally I think they have little cause for worry since I really cannot see such a construct happening.

[bibblebub]

Oh well, even it it were to come about I won't be around to see it.

[Hypognosis]

//and painted the right shade//

I don't half come out with some rubbish, sometimes. I'll put that one down to sleep deprivation :-/

It's an interesting principle though. How can any one country set about a project that blights the appearance of something that everyone on the planet has hitherto been able to enjoy, equally?

Arguably, we've already done this but, in the case of the ISS passing overhead, it only lasts for a few minutes and, with Iridium satellite flares, only a few seconds. If you don't use a phone app or a website to find out when these things are due, you wouldn't notice they are there.

But changing the moon would be an 'in your face' change.

[Old_Geezer]

What would be keeping the mood in natural pristine condition for ? It's there, it's a resource, it should be used. The question is how a civilised species comes to an agreement how it is done.