Should we use Saturn as a future base for colonization?

Question

Despite being a gas giant, and being chilly cold, there are a few reasons I believe Saturn would be an ideal habitat for future colonisation, and here are a few justifications:

• Saturn actually has a closer gravity to Earth than even Venus- Saturn's gravity is only 6% higher than Earth, compared to Venus having nearly 10% lower gravity than Earth. 10% may not seem like a BIG difference at first glance, but if a astronaut ever returns from Venus after a very long time, there might be chances of slightly weakened bones. And stronger gravity on Saturn means that humans can actually develop strong bones and muscles, without at the same time be crushed to death, by immense forces.
• Saturn has lower radiation levels- As per my understanding, Jupiter has Chernobyl-level radiation, as its moon Io regularly spews out volcanic material, which forms a strong radiation belt that can kill humans, if they decided to colonize areas near Jupiter such as Europa. However, as Saturn doesn't exert enormous tidal forces on its moon, there is virtually no radiation belt, or atleast something that is comparable to Earth's radiation belts (Van Allen belts) or even lower.
• Saturn is a reserve of geothermal Kronothermal energy- One reason why airships can actually function on gas giants, is because, gas giants have immense heat in their interiors. A future airship colony could plunge conductive cables into the deep atmosphere to harvest heat to heat up the hydrogen gas so that they can get sufficient lift to float in a hydrogen-dominated atmosphere. Jupiter could also be used to harvest geothermal Zeuthermal energy, but as I mentioned, crushing gravity and intense radiation make it an uninhabitable place.
• Saturn is a reservoir of wind energy- Wind speeds on Saturn are immense, about 1700kph. If we could use wind turbines to harvest the wind on Saturn, we could possess immense power. Neptune is also a candidate for this, but it requires a long time to be reached by humans, hence omitted.
• Saturn has low radiation levels- Before people read my previous point and point out that Mars and Venus are easily reachable, they should perhaps see that Venus and Mars are bombarded with UV radiation the likes of which has never been seen before on Earth. Saturn is far away from the Sun, and thus receives virtually no radiation.
• Saturn has useful chemicals and elements- Although there is no soil on Saturn, there are a few chemicals in its atmosphere that can be used for making fertilizers, pesticides etc. Ammonia, a crucial gas that is used for making fertilizers on Earth, is present in abundance in Saturn's atmosphere, and sulphur compounds can be used to make pesticides and important chemicals such as sulfuric acid. Soil cannot be found here, but since there is a virtually inexhaustible source of fertilizers, there would be no problem of soil exhaustion, or fatigueing shipments of soil from Earth. Compare that to Mars, which has alkaline, toxic soils, and Venus, which has virtually no soil at all.

The main question is:

Are there any problems in my justification for using Saturn as a future base?

Answer 1

• Saturn's gravity is only 6% higher than Earth

Saturn in fact doesn't even have a surface. "Surface gravity" for gas giants is defined as the 1-bar level, where atmospheric pressure is similar to Earth's. This severely limits the available materials for building and sustaining a colony and greatly complicates the problem of building anything there.

Additionally, while the "surface" gravity is only a little higher than that of Earth, the escape velocity from the same level is far higher...35.5 km/s, over 3 times Earth's 11.2 km/s. The delta-v cost of reaching a minimal orbit will be greater by a similar proportion. Realistically, we don't have any propulsion system capable of the sort of delta-v required to reach orbit from Saturn.

• Jupiter has Chernobyl-level radiation...

This is an argument for not colonizing Jupiter or its inner moons, not for colonizing Saturn.

• Venus and Mars are bombarded with UV radiation

...which can be blocked with sunscreen. Someone exposed enough to be vulnerable to UV radiation on either of these would be far more concerned about their imminent death by asphyxiation, immolation, or exposure to near-anhydrous sulfuric acid. They would not survive if similarly exposed on Saturn, either.

• Kronothermal energy

You will not be able to simply dangle cables into the warm interior to collect energy. Aside from the wind issue, to generate power you need a conveniently accessible temperature gradient, not just a hot location.

• Saturn has useful chemicals and elements

Saturn's atmosphere is almost entirely hydrogen and helium, with only trace amounts of other substances. Even if you could collect useful amounts of ammonia and sulfur compounds from the clouds, there is little you can do with those in the absence of, well, everything else on the periodic table. Saturn's atmosphere is cripplingly resource-poor.

Venus at least has a surface you could conceivably gather materials from, and the surface of Mars is rich in useful minerals, while the toxicity issues are ridiculously overblown: perchlorates are a little more toxic than table salt, their low-level effects can be reduced with iodine supplements, they are rapidly excreted rather than accumulating in the body, and they are quite easy to remove or destroy.

Answer 2

Saturn has an escape velocity of 35.5 km/s compared to Earth's 11 km/s. It means you need about 9 times the energy to get to orbit.

The maximum temperature is 151 K, which is about 30 degrees colder than the coldest temperature ever observed on Earth.

The atmosphere is 96.3% Hydrogen, 3.25% Helium, 0.45% Methane, and traces of other stuff.

So, not exactly a garden spot.

Answer 3

Bad idea

First, BillOnne's answer is quite correct - anyone who goes there is staying there permanently, the delta v to get to orbit is prohibitive. Which does not, in and of itself, make colonisation impossible, just a one way trip with no escape possible if things go wrong. Which leads to the next points...

You note (peak) wind speeds of 1700 km/hour as an advertisement for wind power. However, the real issue is 1700 km/hour relative to what. You have correctly assessed that colonists would need to be occupying airships "floating" in the atmosphere, since the pressures at depth would crush any human-occupied structure easily. Which means that if everything was going well, a human-occupied colony airship would be zipping along at 1700 km/hr relative to an outside observer, but at close to zero relative to the atmosphere it is floating in. Practical upshot - usable wind speed for power generation is nowhere near the windspeed perceived by an outside observer. Although there still will be relative wind speed, as described below.

It gets worse, though. Systems with high wind speed are never a uniform speed all the way through and are never a consistent speed at all altitudes. (Note that most aircraft do their best not to fly into hurricanes / cyclones - it's not the absolute speed but the windshear and turbulence that make this an activity reserved for hardened aircraft and harder pilots conducting weather research.) As Saturn's wind systems interact any habitat will be tossed around like a kite in a tornado, making normal life impossible. The difference in speeds at different altitudes will also make it impossible for any cables to allow geothermal/kronothermal power generation to last more than a fraction of a second before snapping.

Short version, any colony dropped into Saturn's atmosphere will be tossed around in the very cold, stormy air, with no way for colonists to escape or find somewhere safe to effect repairs when something breaks.

Answer 4

Frame Challenge: Saturn itself is a poor choice for colonisation, but some of its moons, Titan and Enceladus in particular, are not bad options. It won't be paradise, but both have a solid surface and exploitable resources, probably enough for a future human civilisation to survive there, with the occasional resupply ship.