Living in space

[sevenperforce]

There have been a handful of threads recently about possible ways that colonizing Mars could prove economically viable. We haven't really gotten much solid consensus. In the near-term, it just doesn't seem like there is any slam-dunk reason to live on Mars.

Why not look a little closer to home? Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that some entity was willing to build a space station in orbit for long-term habitation. What, other than space tourism, would cause people to move there?

On a basic economics level, people will endure a higher cost of living if the income they can receive is correspondingly greater. Living on a space station in orbit would be the extreme example. The cost of living is very, very high...to grossly understate...but if there was a way to generate correspondingly greater income, people would live there. 

The trouble is finding a lucrative income source in space that is not available on Earth, while also requiring you to actually be physically in space.

The current jobs in in space come from NASA and other government-sponsored space agencies. That is mostly scientific research. While important, it doesn't serve as an immediate stream of revenue and so it probably doesn't fit.

I could imagine other types of research that would be more lucrative. I'm sure there  experiments which could only be conducted in microgravity, yet would result a lot of profit for companies here on Earth. Another opportunity would be zero g manufacturing and assembly. I don't know whether that market is big enough, or if there are aspects that would require human presence. 

Then there are more interesting possibilities. It might seem like a lot of trouble to set up a tax haven in space, but there may be certain business models (investment banking, stock option manipulation, encryption services, gambling servers, streaming servers, etc.) which would benefit tremendously if they could be conducted away from government oversight or control. The same goes for manufacturing of restricted substances. 

Finally, there's space jockey stuff -- going to repair satellites in orbit, assembling satellites, and so forth. 

Any other ideas?

[Snark]

I think that the biggest monkey wrench here is that our automation and AI technology is improving much faster than our space-launch technology is.  Which means that the longer we wait, the less reason there is to send humans up there, especially if it's in near-Earth orbit so that you have realtime links to humans on the ground.  It's enormously cheaper to do things with machines, so the only reason to send a human is if there's something a machine can't do.  And the category of "things machines can't do" is shrinking rapidly.

I wish that weren't the case, 'coz I would love for there to be a reason to send people up there.  But I have trouble seeing it happening.

About the only way that I could see something like this going on would be if we could drastically reduce the cost of getting humans to space-- far enough that there doesn't have to be such an overwhelming industrial-economic reason to do so (i.e. cheap enough that people could live there just because they want to).

[sevenperforce]

The cost of living is really going to be prohibitive unless there is some compelling need to be there.

Automation really does eliminate almost all reasons for working in space. So the only reasons I can think of would be the ones I mentioned above which depend on people being outside of any government's jurisdiction. 

[StrandedonEarth]

Space stations were originally envisioned as communication and observation posts, with humans there to operate the machinery and keep it running. But before a space station could even be designed, the machinery quickly became autonomous enough that humans weren't needed.

[RainDreamer]

Sorta related and unrelated: check out a visual novel called World end economica. It's about stock trading on a moon colony, and talk a lot about a space economy. Worth checking out.

[SpaceMouse]

On 3/10/2016 at 6:49 PM, sevenperforce said:

....which would benefit tremendously if they could be conducted away from government oversight or control. The same goes for manufacturing of restricted substances. 

Finally, there's space jockey stuff -- going to repair satellites in orbit, assembling satellites, and so forth. 

Any other ideas?

We should always be very leery of removing government oversight and control from companies. Even IF the effect to people on the planet is marginal. I Think even automation will benefit greatly from having human controllers relatively nearby, at least the safety of a ship or station. I imagine this would only be more practical around another planet. I think the most and possibly only reason you might get people to live in space is mining.
As you said though the infrastructure probably needs to get substantially cheaper before that becomes truly realistic. I'd love to live in space but i feel we may remain a rare breed for a long time. Unfortunately i imagine space tourism is cost-prohibitive to it's only real market.

Edited March 14, 2016 by SpaceMouse