Life Support Project
From: Terry Kok
[ to Mars Society Arctic Base TF & discussion ] [ from Joshua Lamorie
Gidday there,
Well, I do embedded networking and control systems for love and money. What type of requirements for data gathering do you want? MHz/kHz... mHz? There are many options, but I assume we want something small, cheap and small.
Something like Dallas' one-wire set of units would be good for very low data rates, and very low power consumption. They can also be arranged to have fairly good redundancy. Otherwise, there's always old daisy chained 'raw' serial. Using some cheap PIC's/STAMPs etc is a great way of doing it.
I might have a minor clue about the sensors.. but not about the job you want to do. So, if you could give us some more requirements about the data flow (from sensor -> network -> DAQ -> Funky SLide Presentation at Mars Society Convention) that would be good.
Joshua Lamorie MarSoc Montreal(Ottawa)
From: KokhMMM@aol.com | Block address Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 16:30:02 EST Subject: Re: Mars_Arct/ life support plans and more To: biostar_a@yahoo.com
Add Addresses
In a message dated 03/27/2000 10:51:18 AM, biostar_a@yahoo.com writes:
<< Is the design set up for complete recycling/reuse of the water or is this aiming at producing a product clean enough to be dumped into the local environment? If the latter, then how will the Flashline Station be resupplied and does this constitute a "Mars analog"? >>
Terry, I'm delighted to see you holding their nose to the wheel. Yes! This is the philosophy we have to take. We are doing the Devon Island thing not for publicity (tho that helps) but as a dry run, and we have to take it seriously.
Peter
From: "Lily Cella"
Add
Addresses
>>On the fast track (2000) I can see a simple gray water >system. On the longer track (2001 or 2002) I can see a >CELSS. I see no reasonable need to fall short of these >goals unless we want to be laughed at by the >International life support community of which I am a >part. If we're not shooting for a CELSS I'm not sure >why I'm posting so much CELSS related info on the >Arctic-sig. What does everyone else think? Speak up >please! > Terry, You probably won't recognize my email address- I've mostly been lurking on this list, as I am too busy to actually be much of any help, and even then don't have direct applicable experience in designing CELSS systems. I signed up early on to help with some of the other hab aspects, my experience so far is that almost none of the people who were initially planning to help with the hab, CELSS included, are actually doing anything. I think the real problem here is distance, as well as leadership planning. Stuff is not getting delegated. People don't know what other people are capable of, because people are not meeting face to face to discuss these issues in real time. Reading the list has kept me minorly updated as to what is happening, I still feel like I really lack an idea of what is going on or how this is all going to pull together. I know if I were trying to design a system there is no way I could do it with the scant information we've received. I don't think Kam is purposely trying to exclude people from the decision making process, my feeling is that he is simply very busy and is working with a small number of people face to face and those are what he considers his team. It's very hard to think of something happening online as 'real' in the same sense as face to face meetings are. If anything is done by people who are NOT in the Colorado you need someone who has physical proximity to the people who are planning this to delegate tasks to the folks online, otherwise you will totally lose any cohesion or sense of continuity. Problem is, not being in CO myself, I don't know who has enough time to undertake this onerous task. Trying to coordinate anything remotely, especially of this nature, is a bit like herding cats. Lots of hard work, for what often appears to be very little actual product. I know you've been pushing to get people in your area to meet- I agree with you in theory but I'm not sure it will work, simply because of commute times. As I mentioned earlier, when all of this was being discussed in the conference at Boulder, people were forming into various work groups, with the full intention of doing work. Since that time those groups have mostly fallen completely apart because people can't meet and aren't in contact with HQ and so really don't know A) What's going on B) What needs to be done C) What's already been done, and D) who did it. In terms of the future of the Mars Society, I firmly belive projects are the way to go, to get both more credibility and more funding, which in my opinion go hand in hand. (As politics stands now, I doubt operation president or any political lobbying will do anything except raise the general public's awareness that there sure are a lot of weirdos out there). I think building a base of support in the scientific and educational communities is the way to go, at least for now. Here is the problem as I see it. We need to do the Haughton project *well* in order to gain the credibility needed to fund more projects, prove that we could carry it off. But, we don't really have the infrastructure to or money to carry it off. I think money is the lesser issue. So far, to state the obvious, we really haven't organized ourselves well. Why? Well, judging from the people I've met, we just don't have a lot of people who are good at dealing with, and organizing people. Mostly, we're all project people, we'd rather be doing the work then managing it! Unfortunately, without effective coordination little work is getting done except by a few people like kam and pascal who are being pushed to their limits. Other people could certainly take on some of their tasks, if it was coordinated and they were in communication. I think the feeling so far has been that that would be too much of an added complexity, and that simpler is easier and thus better at least in the short term, which is what you are running into now. Reading your post I got the sense that you were pretty irritated and felt that what you had to offer the project was being wasted, and were taking it personally. It's not, it's just that kam doesn't have the time or energy to be connecting with many people. Nor do I think anyone else in his position could, it should be a whole separate job. The project just doesn't have the structure to utilize the diverse talent of everyone involved- it's main weakness. But now that the wheels have started turning, it will take monumental effort to change the way things are set up. I think the best thing we can do is keep this in mind and PLAN BETTER NEXT TIME! I think that whatever can be done to enhance the Haughton project should be done. Truthfully, even though it *should* be easy, I'm not sure a CELSS could be installed this year, just because of lack of good communication. That's the issue. Not the technology, or the ability of the individuals involved. Because of this, I have a feeling that even getting a greywater system up there will be hard. But please don't give up! We need all the cohesion we can get, and you've been one of the main ones working on this and posting. I know it hasn't been very productive communication so far, but right now it's kind of all that's between us and a complete breakdown of communication, which will mean pretty much mean that any chance of mobilizing projects will be shot to hell, unless it's done by people hired by HQ. And where will that money come from if Haughton flops? And, if we do want to get a CELSS up to Haughton in a couple of years, we will need people who can work together efficiently, and not have to go through this whole communications mess all over again. It's very aggravating for me to watch this all happening, but I'm not really in a position to do anything about it. So to sum this very long note up, I think you shouldn't get your hopes to high as to what people manage to accomplish this year. But I want to get more involved, time permitting, and don't want to lose you as a potential resource! I think the best thing to do to work towards getting a CELSS that works for Mars analogue purposes is just to get whatever can be done now done, and take notes as to what worked and what really hindered progress, and then, if you are going to Toronto this year, hash it out with everyone there, and get some sort of people/task force thing organized that has clear lines of communication from HQ to the designers, and back, and which allows people to work together in something that approaches real time. Because until then, you are pretty much working in the dark, with no design specs, no real timeline, and no knowledge of what HQ is thinking or planning, and their reasons for doing what they're doing. This isn't a diatribe, nor am I faulting anyone. Everyone is doing their best. We just need to examine why this isn't working and then make plans to avoid those mistakes in the future. Lily Cella
From: "Josee and Francois Gauthier"
Add
Addresses
Hello,
Biological containment of waste products will be critical in the first Mars missions (which should be designed to search for Martian life - not Earth introduced bacteria and microbes originating from human feces).
To close the environmental loop, an artificial micro-ecosystem should be part of the design of the hab/greenhouse. The use of marsh and pond ecologies, plants, algae, microorganisms and snails and small fish can be used to filter and clean the water (using a mixture of anaerobic and aerobic decomposition, with filtering though a variety of plants, sands and gravel. Ultraviolet light exposure kills any remaining bacteria). Throughout the ecosystem, plants used to filter the waste water are used to grow vegetables and spices for human consumption. The exiting water is clean enough to be reused.
These processes were implemented in an enclosed ecosystem for sewage treatment by John Todd, Ph.D., from Ocean Arks International and constructed by Living Technologies Inc. It has been implemented successfully in one of The Body Shop's facturies with treated waste water feeding plants used in the manufacture of body creams, soaps, lotions and other health products.
Enclosing the Flashline Station biosphere (human explorers, their foods and waste products) and proving that it can be done is critical for proving that a self-sustaining human habitat can exist on Mars without outside intervention and the continual resupply of water. Again, it is also critical that no Earth contaminents (biological organisms) escape into Mars so that any life found can be proven to be from it.
Flashline Station must be a working model for an actual mission, or else, what is the point?
Also, if we are going to go to Mars just to leave behind our sewage and garbage, we might as well stay on Earth. Humanity is already ruining a perfectly good planet with that same mentally, why waste another?
The above description of an enclosed ecological system for waste treatment is complex, yet so is sending 4 human beings millions of kilometers from Earth. Sending a few thousand bacteria cultures, plants, algae, snails and fish along with them should not be any more difficult.
Regards,
Francois Gauthier
P.S.
The Devon Island location should not be a new sewage dumping ground. It is much too beautiful an area to destroy "testing new systems". Has anyone seen pictures of Mount Everest lately? The "great explorers" have made areas of it environmental wastelands of empty oxygen canisters, empty food and water containers and broken equipment. What a waste to carry that same mentality to Mars.
If we are going to do it, let's do it right, from the very beginning!
From: "Ruth Waterton"
Add
Addresses
Thanks very much for this - I'd already had it via someone else but I was certainly interested. Read the Harrison and Clearwater study "From Antarctica to Outer Space" about 18 months ago and always meant to follow it up further. Now, who are you? Please forgive me if I ought to know - since I took on the ED job at RPRI I've been making so many new contacts I lose track of it sometimes!
Thanks again,
Ruth
Ruth Waterton Executive Director Red Planet Research Inc
tel +44 161 434 2873 fax +44 161 445 8507 ICQ #68556159
"Thinking systematically about alternative, plausible futures has a strong impact on all one's thinking." (Reed Riner)
[ to Mars Society Arctic Base TF & discussion ] [ from "Dean Calahan, FoB"
(Hey, maybe we can "fast-track" another meeting/telecon; doing this by email is kinda inefficient, eh?)
I think I can help clear up some of Terry's concern here (although I would bet that Kurt is simultaneously editing a msg to do the same!) >> Gee, I thought I was one of the life support system > designers. If I am I should be seeing some preliminary > plans from whomever is actually designing this so I > can add my professional 2 cents to the project. > I consider Terry to be one of the designers as well. The other identified eco-engineer types who constitute the actual design team are Dave Blersch, Eric Biermann, and Mindy Jacobson. Drs. Pat Kangas and "Hoop" Ives-Halperin are identified as "Executive Designers". Dave is kind of "in charge" of the direction of the team. Dave is supposed to post the minutes from our last meeting, but I haven't seen any communication from him recently.
Mindy and Kurt recently visited the work in progress on the hab. There must be some drawings or info that people can work from.
>> I didn't see the posting about the telcom until after > the fact so I didn't know this. I'm looking forward to > seeing the data so I know what the team is designing > for. > I'm sure we will be trying to publicise these better, but I know that there was email to the group (hey, maybe we need a mailing list to make sure these always go out to the whole group!) at least a week in advance, I think it was more.
[Skipping a buch of stuff better addressed by KAM]
> On the fast track (2000) I can see a simple gray water > system. On the longer track (2001 or 2002) I can see a > CELSS. I see no reasonable need to fall short of these > goals unless we want to be laughed at by the > International life support community of which I am a > part. If we're not shooting for a CELSS I'm not sure > why I'm posting so much CELSS related info on the > Arctic-sig. What does everyone else think? Speak up > please! > For 2000, they are using marine a marine toilet. I believe they are primarily concerned with logistics and mechanical things. I have a feeling we'd be more "in the way" by obtruding at this point.
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 08:58:22 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Kok
Add Addresses
Joshua,
I'm not a computer/sensor person but I have a good idea of the perimeters we need sensors on. Here are the basics:
HAB ATMOSPHERE: H20 vapor (humidity), temperature, CO2 levels, O2 levels, CO levels, assorted trace gasses (we'll get to this one later)
CELSS ATMOSPHERE: (same as above)
CELSS WaTeRS (Waste Treatment and Resource Recovery module): PH, BOD (biological oxygen demand)
CELSS V-GES (Vegetable Growth Environment System): PH, BOD, nitrate/nitrite levels, E-coli
CELSS POTABLE H20: (same as above)
We need a system in which alarms sound when levels fall outside our set perimeters, with the ability for the system to be able to trigger appropriate shifts in fans, pumps, etc. It would also be nice to have a track record of the levels over time. Both the HAB and the CELSS need light intensity meters and thermometers as well. Thanks you for asking!
- Terry R. Kok at biostar_a@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:44:56 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Kok
Add Addresses
Hey folks,
WE NEED A MEASUREMENT STANDARD! I don't care what it is but I do INSIST we come to some agreement on metric or what and stick with it. Why? Look at the last two Mars probes and the reason why they messed up: incompatible measurement systems confused by humans. Someone make an executive decision here. Due to the international nature of this project I suggest using metric.
Does anyone know the day light intensity levels on the surface of Mars? - by season? How about the arctic? This is very important. My guess is that it may be too low to support photosynthesis. This point has great design implications. Please post answers.
MONEY: I don't think it will be much of a problem procuring equipment free of charge for an arctic CELSS (2001-2002 version) if we offer the supplying companies a visible sticker on the Flashline Station CELSS and a mention in the website/MS literature. This sort of donation is good advertisement for their products. Commentd anyone?
DISTANCE: I don't think it is a problem that we live so far apart from one another. If I was the coordinator of this team I would ask people to research specific topic areas (hardware, horticulture, processing/preservation, monitoring/sensors, etc.) and spend my time sorting it into a usable database of useful facts so the construction teams (yes, I think we should have more than one) can use this data to build systems. I already have a huge collection of data on hand and the resources, location, and will to construct a working CELSS testbed here in Indiana. If other folks have the resources, they should build CELSS too. Individual parts (subsystems) of the whole system could be made and tested in various locations to see if they work in the lab, with the data being posted for everyone to use. I would (if in charge) assign a number of experiments (most very simple) to folks, according to their skills.
CUT COSTS OF RESUPPLY - One of the reasons why I am strongly pushing for a CELSS is that, with 100% recycling, we would cut the costs of resupply! The money saved transporting food and water to the Flashline Station would more than cover the cost of the CELSS itself. Think this through. I know. I've been living in a CELSS testbed (closed gray water loop and photovoltaic/wind electrics) and I'm accustomed to not having to pay utility bills while lowering my food costs as well. A 100% recycling CELSS is not that much different than what I am currently living in.
If the Flashline Station is not going to have a CELSS attached, then we need another Life Support mailing list focusing on long term CELSS research so this kind of project does not get put on the back burner. CELSS are essential on Mars and may be (in the long run if ecological collapse continues) on Earth as well.
Terry R. Kok - Starlight Technology POB 1328, Bloomington, IN 47402-1328 (812) 275-0694 biostar_a@yahoo.com
"Ask and you shall receive!"
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:51:23 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Kok
Add Addresses
Somewhere about $1000 per person if we are going for a completely closed system. This is a ballpark figure. I'm currently researching the actual costs for a 2 person CELSS I'm planning to build on Lothlorien: http://www.elflore.org and will post these figures a month or so from now. - Terry at biostar_a@yahoo.com
--- Curtis Snow
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2000 09:54:12 -0800 (PST) From: Terry Kok
Add Addresses
I forgot something - It would take about a month of construction with a team of three people to build the whole thing and another month to get it functioning. - Terry at biostar_a@yahoo.com
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com