English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Besides issues with weight payload and international treaties.
Furthermore, why can't we harvest them for resources?

I know it is "morally wrong" but I don't know why.
Any views pro or con.

2006-08-30 09:58:23 · 19 answers · asked by kristadee4ever 2 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

I know its cost prohibitive, thats what I meant by payload.

I don't know if I'd be to happy jacking it into the sun, considering its our only source of energy.

2006-08-30 10:08:21 · update #1

19 answers

I think all the practical difficulties have been handled so I'll stick with the moral problem... Human beings (in recent times) tend to think that the whole planet (or in this case, universe) is for us to exploit and destroy just because we can. This plan would be another example - destroying another planet because we're too lazy and greedy to solve the problem at it's source, ie stop producing so much rubbish that we dont need. I really hope that we've learned to show respect for our universe before a plan like this becomes feasible. It would be a pity if we did to other planets what we've done to this one.

2006-08-31 01:39:11 · answer #1 · answered by dave_eee 3 · 1 0

A ... Because it would cost too much. But it would be nice if we could just launch it directly into the sun. The Solarians beings living on the sun wouldn't mind, they can recycle anything and would be grateful for the free food!

B ... Most important of all - it's potentially very risky. One serious accident above the earth in the attempt could cause widespread pollution and contamination by toxic materials spread over a very wide area and through the atmosphere. Imagine a ton of Plutonium or other nuclear or toxic waste vaporized in the atmosphere due to an accident. Just one of several spooky scenarios.

C ... The people of that other planet would sue us into oblivion in the Cosmic Supreme Court and the tabloids would have a media feeding frenzy. We know from painful experience many time before just how touchy the Martians are. They're just itching for any excuse to invade us again. We would never live it down. Our reputation in the universe is bad enough all ready.

But seriously, reason B is valid reason to give us pause.

2006-08-30 15:21:48 · answer #2 · answered by Jay T 3 · 0 0

I GOT IT!!!

Im sure a guy like richard branson has enough money to make a space ship for transporting rubbish to another planet or the sun. Land-fills are filling up fast and soon or later the earth aint goina have enough space for us and our shi* know what im sayin. So far all u guys who just been saying the cons, ALWAYS LOOK AT THE BRIGHT SIDE. If we somehow get rid of all our rubbish ( or trash as u put it) of this planet then we will be happier people. There are always risks to big things like this, if we keep polluting our minds with this negativity then we aint goina get nowhere! Richard branson , the guy who owns his own aviator business, can do this if he really REALLY wanted to cos i cant think of any1 else who has more money and more experience in this sort of stuff. If he wants a gain, he can always charge the governments for removing their trash of the planet plus if that aint enough, people will be lovin him for it and im sure he wouldnt mind more attention.

2006-08-30 10:17:35 · answer #3 · answered by jason6x6x6 3 · 0 0

WAY too expensive. It costs millions just to launch a satellite.

In regards to resources... still too expensive. You would never get a good return on an investement.

However, I have heard of some giant comet made of platinum that several companies have investigated the possibilities of harvesting that payload (maybe just a rumor...)

2006-08-30 10:06:39 · answer #4 · answered by Brad T 2 · 0 0

Because it wouldnt stay. There is no gravity so nothing would hold it there. It would just float off into space and end up god knows where. It might all lump together and form this massive trash heap over time and then pass too close to the sun and catch on fire and then plumet into earth with enough force to explode our planet into billions of tiny shards and wipe out all existing life. And all because we opted for plastic and not paper.

2006-08-30 10:07:57 · answer #5 · answered by trebobnagrom 3 · 0 0

I agree, the cost is the biggest detractor right now. Morally speaking, we as a species seem to not have much of a moral issue destroying THIS planet, why would it bother us to dump our trash on a dead planet. Or Planetum, or whatever those astronomers came up with for calling Pluto a NON planet.

But, yep, it all comes down to $$$.

2006-08-30 10:06:18 · answer #6 · answered by The Dude... 3 · 0 0

I don't fully understand the question but I would think throwing the garbage and waste out into space to never see it again would be a good idea. The fear that people have is that the rocket taking it out of Earth will blow up and if it has like radioactive materials in it then it will diffuse all over the place and kill everyone.

2006-08-30 10:05:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Chemical waste can perfectly be destroyed, no need to dispose.
Radioactive wase can be isolated in deep earth - stable geological layers, that have very small probability to reach back surface or contaminate aquifers in the next 100 000 y (that geologically is peanuts). Technology is geared towards "clean" production cycles, i do not believe we will need to send our rubbish into space.
A very expensive thing would be to export the "dirty processes" like nuclear fission plants to space - having nuclear power plants on the moon or so, near uranium findings, and let them transport it over high power laser beams to earth. But imagine that beam having a slight orientation error of 0.000000000001 deg. - major ecological disasters on earth due to whole cities or forests destroyed ! So lets protect space against human rubbish.
Shall we found "greenspace" ?

2006-08-30 12:06:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

RIGHT ON ALYSHA! we need to send all the nuclear waste right into the sun istead of dumping it in the oceans and burying it in Nevada... But yeah yeah, we all know Nasa has problems with foam chunks that make space shuttles blow up. Once its more feasible economically and safer we could send our junk to the sun to be incinerated. As far as sending it to another planet? not so much. What if we used Mars as our dump and 5000 years later, we find a comet or asteroid headed our way and we need to terraform another planet and move? But we've used our closest neighbor for a trash bin for too long... what then? RECYCLE people PLEASE!!!!

2006-08-30 10:16:06 · answer #9 · answered by dbs1226 3 · 1 0

that is a great idea. You could send toxic waste towards the sun and it would vaporize and be gone forever. Never hurting anyone.
It is just that those space craft cost a whole bunch of money.
When they can be massed produced and cheep and no one wants toxic waste around anymore that is probably what they will do. But right now it is just to expensive to use as a garbage truck. alex

2006-08-30 10:05:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers