PDA

View Full Version : self sufficency on the moon



tater1337
2005-Jun-29, 02:19 AM
I plan on asking a LOT of questions about this, but I'll start with one of the most basic.

how are we to breathe on the moon?

now we could ship a bunch of co2 scrubbers up there and a bunch of compressed tanks of o2, but that really is not a closed system, not a long term solution. now we could use plants, but what type and how many and how much resources do they need? keep in mind that the moon base needs to be completely self sufficient so using a robust plant may be better than a fragile one that only produces 10% more o2.

Note; If I were planning a space program to get a base to the moon. the early test flights would be packed with all the equipment I'd need to get the base up and running, including seeds of our plants up above, soil, water, inflatable greenhouses. and such.

oh wait, I am planning a space program :)

aeolus
2005-Jun-29, 03:40 AM
One of the centennial challenges is aimed at having technology developed that will extract Oxygen from the Metal ozides in the Moons crust. see this for details:

http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/ai...il.html?1952005 (http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/air_lunar_soil.html?1952005)

antoniseb
2005-Jun-29, 04:13 AM
Originally posted by aeolus@Jun 29 2005, 03:40 AM
One of the centennial challenges is aimed at having technology developed that will extract Oxygen from the Metal ozides in the Moons crust.
Yes the bigger issues have to do with water and biomass. It is pretty expensive to send that stuff to the moon right now. It is possible that in a century we may have built sufficient infrastructure that we can grab carbonacious materials from asteroids and comets, and move them to the moon without having to lift them from the Earth. But for now, the only hope is to find these things in polar craters.

tater1337
2005-Jun-29, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by antoniseb+Jun 29 2005, 04:13 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (antoniseb @ Jun 29 2005, 04:13 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-aeolus@Jun 29 2005, 03:40 AM
One of the centennial challenges is aimed at having technology developed that will extract Oxygen from the Metal ozides in the Moons crust.
Yes the bigger issues have to do with water and biomass. It is pretty expensive to send that stuff to the moon right now. It is possible that in a century we may have built sufficient infrastructure that we can grab carbonacious materials from asteroids and comets, and move them to the moon without having to lift them from the Earth. But for now, the only hope is to find these things in polar craters. [/b][/quote]
well, i&#39;d prefer to ship plants to the moon, rather than pulling oxygen out of plants. can someone explain to me what would be required?

I remember having a terrarium long ago that did not seem to need a lot in the way of care. I really was thinking of setting something up along those lines.

Note: if all goes well, by the next decade I&#39;ll be testing rockets to go to the moon. since the test flights won&#39;t be manned, I am guessing that Ill have about 250 pounds of free payload space per flight.

in order to keep things redundant, I&#39;d like to split that 250 pound into five 50 pound payload packages.

x number of flights times five payloads of 50 pounds each could equal a lot of biomass......

also note that not all the payloads will be available for terrraiums, as I do plan on having an inflateable habitat, a telerobotic regolith mover, and ither such things

antoniseb
2005-Jun-29, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by tater1337@Jun 29 2005, 12:29 PM
I remember having a terrarium long ago that did not seem to need a lot in the way of care. I really was thinking of setting something up along those lines.
In terms of what would be required for humans to live in a terrarium, you might want to look at BioSphere II, which was deomnstrated to be too small to actually handle the (six?) people that were the BioSphere team. This was a lot of biomass. Note that the moon has just about no Carbon, Nitrogen, or Hydrogen (except possibly in the polar craters, but we really don&#39;t know the story there yet, and will have to send some special robots with deep drilling capability to know more.

If you want a terrarium that will house people, you&#39;ll need thousands of tons of Carbon and Nitrogen up there. 50 pounds might work as an experiment for salamanders.

I think if you really are likely to send 250 lbs to the moon ten years from now, the best stuff to send will be small tools that convert naturlaly occuring Al2O3 and SiO2 into solar cells, and structural alunimum.

piersdad
2005-Jun-29, 08:14 PM
think if you really are likely to send 250 lbs to the moon ten years from now, the best stuff to send will be small tools that convert naturlaly occuring Al2O3 and SiO2 into solar cells, and structural alunimum.
Not so silly that
we have already put some really heavy lunar modules on the moon and a 3 ton robotis plant/factory placed in the correct place and with sufficient power could mine materials and extrude alloy in any length from its innards.
this will leave large supplies of structural metal there for future use.
todays factories have some really good robotic machines and one on the moon would not be impossible with todays technology

wstevenbrown
2005-Jun-30, 11:50 PM
As stated in a previous rant, I favor lightweight &#39;dumb&#39; technology:


As I have outlined earlier, build a light funnel-- the collection by reflection is typically 95% efficient. Use the concentrated heat energy to drive a (hi-tech) closed-cycle gas turbine or a (lo-tech) Stirling cycle engine. At the low end, efficiencies are 40% or so. Use the rotary energy of either, with typical transmission losses of 10% or so, to directly drive a generator, at (say) 60% efficiency. Before storage, we have .95 X .4 X .9 X .6 = .2052 = 20.5%, more than twice as efficient from a standing start, using the low-tech approach.

The comparison being made was with high-tech solar cells. A light funnel&#39;s input power OTOH, depends only on how much reflective surface it has-- IOW, how much ultralightweight aluminized mylar did you bring?

Given electricity, three processes become available:

1) Electrolysis
2) Distillation (vacuum or high-pressure)
3) Electrophoresis

Everything you need is there in sufficient quantity, and if the efficiency of the extraction process is low, who cares? Use some of the metal from the electrolysis to make more foil, and with the additional power, build a mass spectrometer. Low-tech is much more maintainable.

Build your mine near a rille-- it gives you subsurface access for no investment. Also good for tourism--spelunkers will go ANYWHERE to find a new cave.

Best regards-- Steve

eburacum45
2005-Jul-01, 12:37 AM
There is plenty of oxygen on the Moon, combined with aluminium and silicon; it is hydrogen and carbon that are in short supply (and nitrogen, for that matter).
Only by importing these elements from elsewhere could we colonise the Moon to any great extent.
Just a little water might be found in various very cold, sunless regions of the Moon; if that is all we are going to rely on, the scope for self sufficiency on the Moon is going to be limited.
Volatiles will need to be imported fom Earth, or more imaginitively, from the outer solar system; there is plenty of water beyond the frost line in the Asteroid belt.

Francois
2005-Jul-02, 01:24 PM
I know this isn&#39;t exactly "basics" as the topic indicates, but I&#39;ve suddenly started wondering... It&#39;s all fine and dandy that everybody is wondering about how to survive on the moon, given the factors that we are accustomed to: food, water, heat, etc.. But, has anyone thought about defenses against inbound space rocks - big ones? I mean, the moon is Earth&#39;s defense against such things (look at all the moon craters&#33;), but the moon doesn&#39;t have a moon of its own, and neither does it have an atmosphere where such things can burn up. Just a thought.

aeolus
2005-Jul-02, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by Francois@Jul 2 2005, 01:24 PM
I mean, the moon is Earth&#39;s defense against such things (look at all the moon craters&#33;)
I&#39;m not so sure that is the case. While some incoming bodies that would collide with Earth might instead collide with the Moon instead, the Moon does not "protect" the Earth from asteroids, comets, etc. The Earth has many similar craters, but due to geophysical processes, they have been done away with. Since the moon has no active tectonic, atmospheric, or aquatic processes, the crater created at any time will stay there, virtually forever, whereas crater on the Earth have been eroded and swallowed by the Earth&#39;s own dynamic lifestyle.

But you&#39;re right that incoming stuff are a huge threat to moon life; however, on the micro level, as opposed to the macro. Space radiation from the sun and stars are bound to pose a much greater threat to the future settlers on our only satellite.

wstevenbrown
2005-Jul-13, 03:06 PM
There is plenty of oxygen on the Moon, combined with aluminium and silicon; it is hydrogen and carbon that are in short supply (and nitrogen, for that matter).
Only by importing these elements from elsewhere could we colonise the Moon to any great extent.
Just a little water might be found in various very cold, sunless regions of the Moon; if that is all we are going to rely on, the scope for self sufficiency on the Moon is going to be limited.
Volatiles will need to be imported fom Earth, or more imaginitively, from the outer solar system; there is plenty of water beyond the frost line in the Asteroid belt.

Something formed the rilles. Something that was liquid at a temperature too low to melt thru the underlying bedrock. Something that isn&#39;t inside the rilles now. I suggest volatiles, subsurface.

You are right in one sense, tho-- if we don&#39;t head out loaded for bear, we might as well stay home. S

John L
2005-Jul-13, 07:24 PM
Land a rocket onto a small to medium comet and steer it into the Moon. Sure the impact will scatter a lot of the material, but enough will be left in the crater to work with. From that impact you should be able to get tha carbon and nitrogen, plus hydrogen and oxygen. Now all you have to do is lasso a comet...

antoniseb
2005-Jul-13, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by John L@Jul 13 2005, 07:24 PM
Land a rocket onto a small to medium comet and steer it into the Moon. Sure the impact will scatter a lot of the material, but enough will be left in the crater to work with. From that impact you should be able to get tha carbon and nitrogen, plus hydrogen and oxygen. Now all you have to do is lasso a comet...
It would be pretty tough to move a comet enough to make it hit the moon. It would be easier (and take MUCH less energy) to process the materials in a factory on the comet, and ship them to the moon (or elsewhere) on a regular basis.

dbaer
2005-Jul-14, 05:43 PM
A low tech method of recycling co2 and some solid waste that doesn&#39;t get much attention these days is the good ol&#39; bucket of blue-green algae. It doesn&#39;t waste energy or mass growing leaves, stems, roots, etc., it gobbles CO2 quickly, loves to absorb human waste as food, and (if you are really hungry) you can rinse them in clean water, filter them out, dry them and mix them with flour. You can substitute up to 30% of the flour by weight with dried blue-green algae. The taste isn&#39;t too sporty and all the baked goods look green but you can eat &#39;em.
As for equipment, you&#39;d want a way to control the temperature of the tank of water, some litmus paper to track the acidity, a window to let in the sunlight, a grow lamp for the two-week-long night, a filter and some sort of simple method to stir the tank once in a while (a paddle would do).
Don&#39;t believe me? Give it a try at home. If you&#39;re squeemish about eating something that&#39;s been living on your waste, feed it some flour or corn meal.

aeolus
2005-Jul-14, 06:16 PM
The algae idea works once it starts, but we can&#39;t just bring a tank of water up and have them start to grow. Algae are made of H, O, N, and other stuff, too. Good once it gets going, but detting all the stuff there is the bigger challenge.