I am currently working on a futuristic sci-fi story and here comes the world building part. I have been doing researches and brainstorming for days, but I feel like I may seek creative opinions from others before going on to next steps.
It would be a future era which humans spent the last bit of resources and left the apocalyptic earth for an exoplanet. The humans settled down for a tidally locked planet - not the best place to colonize, but humans survived anyhow. The humans started in the twilight zone for habitability, faced a lot of troubles and ended up spreading on both sides of the planet. The protagonist was born in many generations after, so humans had already adapted to the environment and had solutions to overcome many problems. (Like immense solar activities, storms, temperature imbalance and insomnia on the day side) The day and night hemispheres were like two huge confronting nations, and most humans had never seen people from the opposite hemisphere they were born.
It is not going to be a hard sci-fi, but I would still love to have a convincing world setting. Humans had the technology level to interstellar travels already, so yes I'm aware technology can be a solution for many, yet I don't think I or anyone would appreciate careless "it's just like that" solutions. Below is my list of concerns:
1) I have read how bad a tidally locked planet can be. To ease the climate extremes between two hemispheres, the planet will be set to have a thick atmosphere with oceans, so heat can be slightly more distributed on both sides. But how much land:water ratio is a big problem to me. The amount of land determines the capacity of the human population, and population may have significant effects on the story. I find this one unexpectedly hard to do research on. Though I can easily find articles about habitability of a tidally locked planet, they mention no (or only a little) geology/climate effects on different models.
2) Because of the temperature difference, the heat flow between two sides creates deadly storms and hurricanes. Is it more realistic if most humans, if not only our protagonist, live in a place surrounded by mountains so most of the wind/storm effect is reduced to a more habitable level in order to sustain a stable living and population growth?
3) To sustain life, apart from the natural solutions to decrease temperature extremes, is it probable to have artificial devices to further equalize temperatures? Well, not exactly equalize, maybe more like humans could still freely go outdoor. So it feels like, for example, a cold winter night in the Scandinavia on the night hemisphere, and just any equatorial countries on the day hemisphere. I'm thinking of an optical device that deflects sunlight and changes its levels by detecting outdoor temperatures, so the temperature of a certain area can be maintained in an acceptable level for outdoor activities. Also I'm not very sure if any devices can be put to increase air/water flow to balance temperature differences (which uses up energy) or instead the heat flow should be made used of for power plants (which creates energy)? Or can they coexist and still be work-effective? Can't think of a way though.
4) Energy is also a key element to the plot. Since humans are separated into two opposing "nations", solutions may be different for energy and they don't share new technology to each other. Quite obviously solar energy is going to be widely used on the day side, like every building, every family. What about the night side? I may need a spare, yet ultimate solution for sustainable energy source for the night side, that the day side didn't have. (can be obtained through technology difference) Our protagonist lived on the day side, so this may not be revealed until later in the story - but it's important. I can't think of anything a bit more convincing than nuclear fusion though.
Oh, and in case you are wondering, though the two hemispheres were confronting each other, they were only "politically" or "diplomatically" enemies. That's why if such devices as temperature balancing existed, both sides needed to work on it and maintain the system at work. Neither side would shut it down to mess with the other because both sides needed it. Until maybe when one side figured out a better solution and decided to shut it down, it then would lead to wars by worst circumstances. In this model either the climate devices or energy sources, or both will lead to conflicts between two sides - that's the idea, and also why I need to be careful in these settings.
Would be appreciated for inputs from anyone, thank you.