There are a lot of pages online about ways to terraform other planets into making them more habitable for human beings. Mars only has a third of our gravity so will never be a healthy place to live in all likelihood. Venus would require most of its atmosphere to be oblated away by asteroids before it could even approach becoming hospitable. Both of these projects would require supermassive engineering capability. Why not focus on a more realistic terraforming project. Australia!

Most of this ancient continent is dry desert and what keeps the rains along the eastern coastline is the great dividing range. Why not build a second one? We purchase a few thousand bulldozers and start piling up sandy loam. Just like they built up land in Holland and reclaimed it from the sea. We could slowly build hills all the way down the country. We put down a layer and then compact it. Over and over until a wind and rain break is established. All the dirt removed from the ground creates a long line of linked lakes to catch runoff from these hills.

It would reduce unemployment and create new land opportunities for farming and towns. That would mean more affordable housing. we could increase our population and become more competitive globally. This land once had rainforest from the Indian to the Pacific. We might not green Australia up that much but any increase in livable territory has to be good.

<<but any increase in livable territory has to be good>>

One cannot speak of something being good before agreeing on what "good" means.

I'm afraid some of the reasons you mentioned are not "good" to begin with:

Reducing unemployment = increasing slavery: More people forced to bid their boss's whims and bend their conscience around it; or forced out of bed early while still tired; not see their family enough; not have enough time to care for their own body and spirit; drive to the city at peak times; etc.

More affordable housing = more luxury, more waste, more energy consumption and ultimately more population.

Increased population = more mouths to feed, more demands, more specialization, more conflicts, less space, less privacy, less peace.

Globally competitive = more stress, more dependence, less compassion.

Willfulness is the problem, not the solution! Human effort is in vain, all success is fleeting and everything physical will crumble - but if efforts are made in the spirit of goodness, then it doesn't matter because the reward of goodness is goodness itself.

Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.

With that attitude to life its a miracle you haven't starved to death. Lifting food to your mouth must be agonisingly monotonous labour. More farms mean more food for more mouths. More people means more production and exports. That leads to a higher standard of living. Kevin Rudd wanted to increase the population but didn't address the realities of limited living space.

Presently the topsoil blows away in the outback because there is nothing to stop it. All the land needs is rain and it would become as green as the coastline. A second dividing range would protect the topsoil and trap clouds. With modern machinery it would be a lot less work than the snowy river scheme. Even a lazy ne'er do well such as yourself could learn to drive a bulldozer. You would be sitting on your backside all day.

Ofcourse the Greens would kick up a fuss about raping the natural state of this barren dust bowl. How dare we turn it into beautiful green hills and lakes! Thats easily taken care of. We give them what they want. If they want desert then we round them all up, drive them out to the middle of the Simpson and leave them there.

We are a long way away from that or even trying achieve it.
Very much needs doing before we spend many times the GNP it landscaping the country.

( :>|

!! !! !! !!

I don't know Belly.

Aren't our friendly greens trying to do just that. I thought they wanted to turn the country back to the garden of Eden as per 1769, & have us running around in the raw, looking for roots---& things.

PU,

This and your "rocket a day" thread are here for what reason? How labor can waste further billions, creating marginal farmland that farmers cannot make a profit on?

you hire 1000 bulldozers...run them at fast revs[and global warming brings in the seas]...its funny i thought when i read the topic it was going to prove mars cant supply and run the 1000 dozers nessesary to 'terror form mars'

clearly teraforming even on a minute scale/right here is much more important for now than trans-forming ..mars[here we got evertything..there would have nothing..[a broken fasn belt or hydro hose on mars..isnt like if that went down here..

there there will be no peons willing to work for pennies a day
and if you think helicoptering fuel to mars..like we now do in alfgunna understan..[via pakies/understan][but no doudt on mars they will be nuke powerd[or self cleaning so.lar sells']

anyhow terror forming aussie with 1000 dozers..dream on
[we had 10,000's of the beggers just compressing our garbage/farmers councils have got them[but they dont got the money to run them 24/7]..unless we divert some of the green funds..for diesal polutant]

just wait till the sea level rises..
[and the plate sinks]..and soon we get the inland sea..there dont that just feel better?..[sorry..but these dreams are far easier to dream than to pay peons to do]

but keep dreaming..its visionry..
but nukes can blow dirt arround much faster..than unionists on speed
but then i wonder how farmners will feel about us making their farm on foundations of sand and salt licks.

its a nice idea..but not with my tax dollar

Ludwig, bit verbose there mate! had trouble keeping up with your meaning.
I think our author is looking at a 3 century's long project.
And we can do better, make it law,for 100 years, three trees must be planted for every one removed.
Planted in marginal areas not farmland, we have plenty.
Pump all sewage treated in land for re use.
Turn some storm water back the same way, we let too much run out to sea.
House the homeless, it need not be over the top just clean neat and livable.
Fix forever the first Australian problems, stop the riders on the back of these folk and get on with improvements.
Dams, and rivers, increase holding so more is held not reducing over long term out flows.
Ludwig waiting your view keep it short mate.

<<I think our author is looking at a 3 century's long project.>>

But in 3 centuries we could do so much better: in 3 centuries we can reduce the human population to about 1% of what it is now, say 100,000,000 on the planet, bringing us back within earth's natural capacity, then we wouldn't need such drastic measures!

This is fascinating theory reminiscent of Ion Idress' book named roughly "The Giant Boomerang" written decades ago about chanelling water from the western side of the dividing range in Queensland down through outback NSW. It is impractical, expensive and never likely to happen. Just look at the massive damage done in the irrigation areas to our soil and water table. The fact is that masses of people can live west of the ranges in country so beautiful that it puts Sydney to shame. Nobody out west wastes water like Sydney people do. Traffic jams last 5 minutes, the air is clean, the country is flat. Land costs about a 10th of what it does in Sydney. NBN means you can work from there like we often do and deal with people all round the world as effectively as if you were sitting in a Martin Place office tower.