Terraforming Horror Show

[Shadowdancer]

There are many planets that are candidates for terraforming, and a lot of them are really horrible places.

Like the one I just stumbled across; 1.71G gravity, 1138K surface temperature, 678.39 atmospheres pressure of a mix that's 57.3% carbon dioxide, 40.2% water, and 1.9% nitrogen. In my book, that's just supercritical sparkly water from hell that you really shouldn't take the lid off :O

There are a lot of "terraformable" planets with similar qualities. Has anyone found a pattern except that they may be located near the habitable zone?

 

[DeRane]

Water is heaviest component of that atmosphere. Remove that and pressure goes down fast. So first thing is to dry the planet with water collecting tech.

Pressure going down is going to reduce greenhouse effect and the surface temperature. Next step would likely be technique to crack that CO2 down to C and O2. Remove C and what is left? Oxygen-nitrogen.

With most of the atmosphere gone, the pressure and temp on surface would be pretty close to normal and by choosing the amount of oxygen you re-release into the atmosphere you can actually use that 1.9% nitrogen to build 76-21 Nitrogen-Oxygen atmosphere (1.9% of close to 700 atm pressure is close to 75% of 1 atm pressure).

So yeah, that does look like good candidate. Better than most of those chlorine atmosphere monsters out there.

 

[Zieman]

Then there are those WWs & HMCs that have an atmosphere pretty close to Earth atmosphere, but they aren't terraforming candidates - weird.

 

[DeRane]

Then there are those WWs & HMCs that have an atmosphere pretty close to Earth atmosphere, but they aren't terraforming candidates - weird.

Out of goldilocks zone, I wager. What is the point of terraformining a planet, if it stills rains methane or snows dry ice once you are done?

 

[Shadowdancer]

I guess the insane amount of energy from condensing the water vapour (or liquid, it's hard to tell in that regime) could be used to do all sorts of funny synthesis, including converting the carbon straight to polymers.

Another thing that comes to mind: an (unfitted) Anaconda would float pretty high up in that atmosphere Landing (apart from the whole "it's a spaceship, so anywhere between zero and one" affair) would actually require downthrust.

 

[Zieman]

Out of goldilocks zone, I wager. What is the point of terraformining a planet, if it stills rains methane or snows dry ice once you are done?

This is one example - why not terraforming candidate?

upload photo

 

[DeRane]

This is one example - why not terraforming candidate?

[url]https://s5.postimg.org/fohgh83lj/Elite_Dangerous32_2015_07_13_01_14_26_50.png[/url]upload photo

Besides as tidally locked one side is boiling (70 C° surface temperature and that is an average) and other side is frozen (44% Ice)?

Point of Goldielock zone is, that on it the surface temp will settle on reasonable range after terraforming. As the star on that system map seems to be either M or proto-M (T-Tauri), a very cool star, it can't provide enough heat that far out on the system (next orbit beyond the one you pointed is already snowball). No point terraforming something, if it just turns out as ice body afterwards.

So terraforming candidates are only those that sit on the orbit where the ELW would sit, in the Goldilocks zone. On M stars that is first 2-3 orbits, around 100-400 ls from star. In other end I have seen terraformable around B star (extremely hot star) orbiting 4000 ls out as anything closer would have been way too hot for terraforming, even if there were a lot of planets.

 

[Zieman]

Besides as tidally locked one side is boiling (70 C° surface temperature and that is an average) and other side is frozen (44% Ice)?

Point of Goldielock zone is, that on it the surface temp will settle on reasonable range after terraforming. As the star on that system map seems to be either M or proto-M (T-Tauri), a very cool star, it can't provide enough heat that far out on the system (next orbit beyond the one you pointed is already snowball). No point terraforming something, if it just turns out as ice body afterwards.

So terraforming candidates are only those that sit on the orbit where the ELW would sit, in the Goldilocks zone. On M stars that is first 2-3 orbits, around 100-400 ls from star. In other end I have seen terraformable around B star (extremely hot star) orbiting 4000 ls out as anything closer would have been way too hot for terraforming, even if there were a lot of planets.

Compared to the OP's monster this one is already a paradise. And that one's terraforming candidate, this isn't - illogical.

 

[ArchEmperor]

Remember that terraforming is not only the method of making a planet inhabitable by humans.

You might want to terraform to allow better mining or harness phenomena, not necessarily good for human life.

 

[newman1702]

At Weyland-Yutani, these seemingly harsh conditions are not a problem. We make better worlds! *cue happy elevator music*

 

[iain666]

Compared to the OP's monster this one is already a paradise. And that one's terraforming candidate, this isn't - illogical.

Being tidally locked means that half that planet is going to be really, really cold. To get an average temperature of 357K at the surface the day side will be incredibly hot. The atmosphere isn't stuffed full of of effective greenhouse gases (unlike the OP) so getting the temperature down is going to be difficult. Humans can't survive at 375K, never mind whatever the local temperatures are on the day side.

The OP needs changing but it could reasonably be made habitable by changing the atmosphere, your water world hasn't got that option. Maybe with orbital mirrors to reduce insolation but that does not appear to be part of the ED terraforming tech suite.

 

[varonica]

Compared to the OP's monster this one is already a paradise. And that one's terraforming candidate, this isn't - illogical.

I also notice almost zero axial tilt on this one as opposed to nearly 25% for earth, that would mean no seasons and air flow that we are used to on earth, most plants would need to be engineered to adapt to the lack of growing seasons or grown inside with artificial seasons. Existing life would have adapted to the conditions. I suggest checking a few more and see if axial tilt has bearing on terraform possibility.

Sorry ignore that, I went back and checked and I now see 30% axial title, was reading the wrong figures lol. It's probably the tidal locking then, maybe the OP has that info for his own candidate.

 

[DeRane]

I think this bit differently it seems.

To me terraforming candidate isn't planet that is theoretically possible to terraform, but a planet which you could actually find some faction or power wanting to terraform.

So what kinds of planets would be seemed feasible for terraforming? The kinds you can use for something and only use for terraforming really is the food production and colonization that follows it. I have to disagree with CMDR ArchEmperor on this one; Any other reason and the cost-effective way would be building a closed structure outpost. Only planets that can be used for food production are those on goldilocks zone, so if planet does not fall into goldilocks zone, it doesn't matter if the atmosphere is 76-21 N-O2, it isn't a candidate since you can't find anyone to terraform it. That is what the game thinks as well, since all terraformables are in the zone.

The actual question this thread asked is interesting though. Are there planets in the zone that are rejected for some other reason? Some atmoshperic composition that can't be handled? Like pure Radon atmosphere (good place uranium mining).

 

[iain666]

To me terraforming candidate isn't planet that is theoretically possible to terraform, but a planet which you could actually find some faction or power wanting to terraform.

If that needed to be true in the short term then there wouldn't be CFTs more than a kly from the bubble, the galaxy is far too homogeneous for a planet 40kly away to be the closest feasible planet for what you want to achieve and so it's not going to be a politically viable terraforming candidate for centuries.

Since I've found thousands of them all round the rim they can only be categorised on technical viability of successfully terraforming the planet whether anyone would ever want to or not. Being in the goldilocks zone is just part of that technical viability assessment as outside that zone a planet will require either artificial heating or cooling to maintain human viable surface conditions.

 

[Zieman]

Being tidally locked means that half that planet is going to be really, really cold. To get an average temperature of 357K at the surface the day side will be incredibly hot. The atmosphere isn't stuffed full of of effective greenhouse gases (unlike the OP) so getting the temperature down is going to be difficult. Humans can't survive at 375K, never mind whatever the local temperatures are on the day side.

The OP needs changing but it could reasonably be made habitable by changing the atmosphere, your water world hasn't got that option. Maybe with orbital mirrors to reduce insolation but that does not appear to be part of the ED terraforming tech suite.

Hmm. Have to check more of those planets I wondered "Why not terraforming candidate?" when seeing their stats.
Very possibly I've been overlooking some factors.

 

[Section47ABH]

Then there are those WWs & HMCs that have an atmosphere pretty close to Earth atmosphere, but they aren't terraforming candidates - weird.

That is one of the first things that puzzled me. Water world, 275K surface temp (colder than earth average, but coat technology has not been lost by the 34th century, surely) and an atmosphere and pressure that I could breathe with equipment costing, retail, less than £40 brand new and on sale within ten minutes' drive of my house: a CO2 scrubber and a small supplementary oxygen tank. And it's not a terraforming candidate. It practically IS terraformed!

 

[Shadowdancer]

It practically IS terraformed!

That may be the "issue" for the really "nice" ones. Why want to terraform something that works?

 

[Zieman]

That may be the "issue" for the really "nice" ones. Why want to terraform something that works?

Because it would be relatively very cheap to get something that barely works to optimal levels.

 

[Shadowdancer]

Maybe terraforming architects just consider throwing in a handful of algae seeds and a bucket of fertiliser to be beneath them

Or those planets have something that We Don't Know about. [where is it]

 

[Karla]

I also notice almost zero axial tilt on this one as opposed to nearly 25% for earth, that would mean no seasons and air flow that we are used to on earth, most plants would need to be engineered to adapt to the lack of growing seasons or grown inside with artificial seasons. Existing life would have adapted to the conditions. I suggest checking a few more and see if axial tilt has bearing on terraform possibility.

Sorry ignore that, I went back and checked and I now see 30% axial title, was reading the wrong figures lol. It's probably the tidal locking then, maybe the OP has that info for his own candidate.

Are seasons that important? I know they are for some plants, like carnivorous plants, but I don't think it would be difficult to breed plants that could grow all the time.

I used to over-winter my super hot chilli plants so they would be getting lots of light all year round. They wouldn't flower all the time but they certainly flowered more than once a year.

Yes, I am telling the truth about them being chilli plants.