<p>There is nowhere in the solar system except for parts of Earth where humans have any hope of surviving without heavy technological support. There is next to no free oxygen anywhere, nowhere has a surface whose temperature remains in a range we can tolerate (generously let's say 230-320K) and nowhere has liquid water on the surface. So, at a minimum, we will need a sealed habitat and some form of protective suit when we travel outside it.</p>
<p>Terraforming -- transforming the environment of some planet to be close enough to Earth's to allow us to live without protection is much discussed, usually for Mars or Venus. Even the most optimistic detailed proposals I have seen suggest it would take centuries or millenia to complete.</p>
<p>Even more speculative is the idea of transforming humans to be able to live on other planets relatively unchanged. Although popular with SF, at the moment I don't think we really have the understanding to say anything specific about this.</p>
<p>So for short-term colonisation, we are left to decide which planet would present the least difficult technological challenges for hi-tech base.  There are a few somewhat serious contenders:</p>
<ul>
<li>Mars -- relatively close, has hydrogen, carbon and oxygen accessible on the surface (as ice and CO2), atmosphere protects against micro-meteorites and some radiation, surface temperatures not too far from habitable.</li>
<li>Venus (upper atmosphere) -- pressure and temperature are both reasonable; fairly close; limited hydrogen availability; no easy supply of metals; corrosive atmosphere; good micrometeorite and radiation protection; not much to do</li>
<li>Ceres -- very low gravity, no atmosphere, plentiful water ice, easy access to space, easy access to metals etc (from other asteroids), good for supporting space activity</li>
<li>Moon -- very close, no atmosphere, almost no hydrogen, enough of a gravity well to make landing and taking off non-trivial</li>
<li>Titan -- rather remote, plenty of oxygen, hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen, atmosphere protects against radiation, comfortable pressure -- you'd need a heated dry suit or equivalent, lots of interesting stuff in the neighbourhood, cold.</li>
<li>Europa -- plenty of oxygen and hydrogen, lots of radiation on the surface, deep in Jupiter's gravity well and no atmosphere for aerobraking, so not very appealing on the surface, but a &quot;submarine&quot; colony under the ice might be viable, the ice will provide radiation shielding and some warmth and you might be able to swim outside in just a dry suit and breathing gear.</li>
</ul>
<p>You pays (a lot of) your money and you takes your choice.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T13:07:51.587Z
You forgot to mention Europa. What are conditions like there ?
Peter U
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T15:52:45.800Z
@PeterU On the surface, pretty bad, no atmosphere, lots of radiation, cold and you're deep in Jupiter's gravity well, which makes it hard to get there. Callisto would be a better (less radiation and gravity well). A submarine colony under the ice might be possible on Europa though.
Steve Linton
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T19:47:11.657Z
Is there any possibility of any form of life, in this Ocean under the ice ?
Peter U
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T20:04:22.160Z
@PeterU Yes. Not impossible. Missions to investigate are being planned for the 2030s
Steve Linton
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T21:46:17.847Z
@PeterU Europa is talked about as much as it is, and a mission is planed to go there because of it's under-surface ocean and tidal heating.  It's one of the best candidates in our solar system for life, outside of Earth and maybe burred beneath the Martian surface.   But potential for life and good for humans don't automatically go hand in hand.  Europa would be a terrible place for a human colony, too much radiation on the surface and too much fracturing of the ice if we build an ice cave.  Ice caves actually might be a good option, just not on a moon that undergoes tidal flexing.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T07:55:04.693Z
2020-12-04T16:22:57.390Z
2020-12-04T16:22:57.390Z
Steve Linton
<p>I have read that Titan is the best candidate for humans to colonize in our Solar System.</p>
<p>However it has no water, it's atmosphere is not breathable and it is -290° F on the surface. It doesn't sound too hospitable to me. Have they forgotten that humans can't live without water?</p>
<p>If this is the best candidate then I think that humans are doomed. So why is Titan the best option for humans to colonize?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-03T23:24:37.067Z
Where did you read this?
notovny
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-03T23:41:21.043Z
Titan has loads of water. The surface is made of water. You have to melt it (and probably remove some impurities.
Steve Linton
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-03T23:44:35.100Z
Nothing. People like to circlejerk over Titan because it's the only other body with stable lakes of liquid. That's literally it. Remove that aspect and suddenly you'll realize Titan is just like any other outer satellite: A cold, frozen place where nothing can survive.
user177107
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T02:02:23.403Z
@Steve Linton It is liquid Methane
Peter U
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T02:21:52.277Z
Titan was so good... [*How good was it?*](https://movies.stackexchange.com/q/110906/45856) "I read somewhere that..." questions are sometimes difficult to answer because one can't argue against an invisible narrative. Can you add a link to, or at least cite where you've read this, and possibly even quote a passage from it within your question post? *Thanks!*
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T02:25:58.903Z
Also, I have a hunch that this question would be better asked in Space Exploration SE than here in Astronomy. I don't think colonization is an Astronomy topic.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T02:30:40.680Z
@user177107 what we consenting adult Titanians do in our free time is none of your business, but the presence of a primarily nitrogen atmosphere with a pressure slightly higher than Earth's offers plenty of serious advantages over an airless world. Convective excess heat dissipation rather than radiative (for power generation), aircraft transportation, habitats not requiring strength against high pressure differentials, pressure suits not requiring low-pressure 100% oxygen, the list is so long, it's.... wait for it... *Titanic!*
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T02:34:26.270Z
While an interesting question, I feel that this is *off-topic* for Astronomy SE since answers will need to refer to technology specific to human colonization of other solar-system bodies. However we are in luck because it's certainly *on-topic* in Space Exploration SE, so a speedy close and migration might be the best way for this question to receive good answers!
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T05:17:53.627Z
If it doesn't get an answer on SE, which is probably where it belongs, I'll just add that Mars' near vacuum of an atmosphere is problematic.   Cold is actually easier to work with than a near vacuum.  Mars also has a dust problem, so there are advantages to Titan, but it's so much further away.   Maybe the experts on SE could shed more light.
userLTK
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T05:29:25.217Z
There are many questions on space.SE related to Titan colonization. Look for them: https://space.stackexchange.com/search?q=titan+colonization
Nilay Ghosh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-12-04T07:37:08.513Z
@peteru and solid water.
Steve Linton
<life><earth-like-planet><titan>
For colonization purposes, what is so good about Titan?
Peter U
# For colonization purposes, what is so good about Titan?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-12-03)

I have read that Titan is the best candidate for humans to colonize in our Solar System.

However it has no water, it's atmosphere is not breathable and it is -290° F on the surface. It doesn't sound too hospitable to me. Have they forgotten that humans can't live without water?

If this is the best candidate then I think that humans are doomed. So why is Titan the best option for humans to colonize?

**Tags:** life, earth-like-planet, titan
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Where did you read this?  
> **username_2**: Titan has loads of water. The surface is made of water. You have to melt it (and probably remove some impurities.  
> **username_3**: Nothing. People like to circlejerk over Titan because it's the only other body with stable lakes of liquid. That's literally it. Remove that aspect and suddenly you'll realize Titan is just like any other outer satellite: A cold, frozen place where nothing can survive.  
> **username_0**: @Steve Linton It is liquid Methane  
> **username_4**: Titan was so good... [*How good was it?*](https://movies.stackexchange.com/q/110906/45856) "I read somewhere that..." questions are sometimes difficult to answer because one can't argue against an invisible narrative. Can you add a link to, or at least cite where you've read this, and possibly even quote a passage from it within your question post? *Thanks!*  
> **username_4**: Also, I have a hunch that this question would be better asked in Space Exploration SE than here in Astronomy. I don't think colonization is an Astronomy topic.  
> **username_4**: @user177107 what we consenting adult Titanians do in our free time is none of your business, but the presence of a primarily nitrogen atmosphere with a pressure slightly higher than Earth's offers plenty of serious advantages over an airless world. Convective excess heat dissipation rather than radiative (for power generation), aircraft transportation, habitats not requiring strength against high pressure differentials, pressure suits not requiring low-pressure 100% oxygen, the list is so long, it's.... wait for it... *Titanic!*  
> **username_4**: While an interesting question, I feel that this is *off-topic* for Astronomy SE since answers will need to refer to technology specific to human colonization of other solar-system bodies. However we are in luck because it's certainly *on-topic* in Space Exploration SE, so a speedy close and migration might be the best way for this question to receive good answers!  
> **username_5**: If it doesn't get an answer on SE, which is probably where it belongs, I'll just add that Mars' near vacuum of an atmosphere is problematic.   Cold is actually easier to work with than a near vacuum.  Mars also has a dust problem, so there are advantages to Titan, but it's so much further away.   Maybe the experts on SE could shed more light.  
> **username_6**: There are many questions on space.SE related to Titan colonization. Look for them: https://space.stackexchange.com/search?q=titan+colonization  
> **username_2**: @peteru and solid water.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2020-12-04. Score: 5

There is nowhere in the solar system except for parts of Earth where humans have any hope of surviving without heavy technological support. There is next to no free oxygen anywhere, nowhere has a surface whose temperature remains in a range we can tolerate (generously let's say 230-320K) and nowhere has liquid water on the surface. So, at a minimum, we will need a sealed habitat and some form of protective suit when we travel outside it.

Terraforming -- transforming the environment of some planet to be close enough to Earth's to allow us to live without protection is much discussed, usually for Mars or Venus. Even the most optimistic detailed proposals I have seen suggest it would take centuries or millenia to complete.

Even more speculative is the idea of transforming humans to be able to live on other planets relatively unchanged. Although popular with SF, at the moment I don't think we really have the understanding to say anything specific about this.

So for short-term colonisation, we are left to decide which planet would present the least difficult technological challenges for hi-tech base. There are a few somewhat serious contenders:

* Mars -- relatively close, has hydrogen, carbon and oxygen accessible on the surface (as ice and CO2), atmosphere protects against micro-meteorites and some radiation, surface temperatures not too far from habitable.
* Venus (upper atmosphere) -- pressure and temperature are both reasonable; fairly close; limited hydrogen availability; no easy supply of metals; corrosive atmosphere; good micrometeorite and radiation protection; not much to do
* Ceres -- very low gravity, no atmosphere, plentiful water ice, easy access to space, easy access to metals etc (from other asteroids), good for supporting space activity
* Moon -- very close, no atmosphere, almost no hydrogen, enough of a gravity well to make landing and taking off non-trivial
* Titan -- rather remote, plenty of oxygen, hydrogen, carbon and nitrogen, atmosphere protects against radiation, comfortable pressure -- you'd need a heated dry suit or equivalent, lots of interesting stuff in the neighbourhood, cold.
* Europa -- plenty of oxygen and hydrogen, lots of radiation on the surface, deep in Jupiter's gravity well and no atmosphere for aerobraking, so not very appealing on the surface, but a "submarine" colony under the ice might be viable, the ice will provide radiation shielding and some warmth and you might be able to swim outside in just a dry suit and breathing gear.

You pays (a lot of) your money and you takes your choice.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: You forgot to mention Europa. What are conditions like there ?  
> **username_2**: @PeterU On the surface, pretty bad, no atmosphere, lots of radiation, cold and you're deep in Jupiter's gravity well, which makes it hard to get there. Callisto would be a better (less radiation and gravity well). A submarine colony under the ice might be possible on Europa though.  
> **username_0**: Is there any possibility of any form of life, in this Ocean under the ice ?  
> **username_2**: @PeterU Yes. Not impossible. Missions to investigate are being planned for the 2030s  
> **username_5**: @PeterU Europa is talked about as much as it is, and a mission is planed to go there because of it's under-surface ocean and tidal heating.  It's one of the best candidates in our solar system for life, outside of Earth and maybe burred beneath the Martian surface.   But potential for life and good for humans don't automatically go hand in hand.  Europa would be a terrible place for a human colony, too much radiation on the surface and too much fracturing of the ice if we build an ice cave.  Ice caves actually might be a good option, just not on a moon that undergoes tidal flexing.  

---

