Life Support Project
From: Terry Kok
Reply-to: "Dean Calahan, FoB"
Add
Addresses
> Hello- I think I should clear something up. I use homeostatic control. That > means a self-regulating system without external intervention. Essentially it > is 3 to 5 distinct biological cycles running simultaneously. While it uses > hydrponic media, it is a bio-active, organic system. I htink I caused some > confusion with mentioning the AI. I am developing that to aid inexperienced > operators, or to accellerate the learning curve. The AI does not control the > system. It analyses it and interprets it so the operator can make better > decisions. such as how much he can harvest, etc. >> RB
Say, is anybody into the idea of using sniffer chips (http://www.techreview.com/articles/july99/greenberg.htm) to measure concentration over time of literally hundreds of different chemicals within the system? You could do "discovery science": Stress the system in different ways, watch the concentrations of those species change, look for correlations, and attempt to reverse engineer the biochemical cycles. This would at least help you design crucial experiments, and if it gave you some sort of positive control over some aspects of the system, you might be able to design a smaller system for a given load. Always a benefit in spacecraft design!
If you aren't into that, how about using DNA chips to look at nucleotide production, and do the same thing - basically reverse engineer the activation and deactivation of genes, that takes place when you stress a system. Maybe we could either develop GM species to handle the load, or develop medicines for the system, to help it thrive under higher nutrient loads.
Of course, doing both together would be the best.
(That's a lot to say in just a few sentences. I'd be happy to explicate, if I lost anybody)
[ to Mars Society Arctic Base TF & discussion ] [ from Curtis Snow
At 12:04 -0700 2000.04.03, Terry Kok wrote:
>As far as distance - 30 meters maximum distance to the >HAB ...
I`d say 100m...the distance for standard ethernet in an non-reconstructed/unamplified "run"
if you look at what is happening in wireless stuff, 30m is a "non-starter"
in the next year or so there are going to be even more solutions for this type of thing w/reasonable range
when the industry shifts to NII devices we`re talking up to 50km (line of sight) at the top end of the EIRP (power) allowance
[EIRP = effective isotropic radiated power]
these are all devices under Part 15 BTW (no FCC licensing requirements)
"...the art of life is more like navigation than warfare..." - Alan Watts
SH: > Gm species? > GM : Genetically Modified. FrankenFerns, etc.
--- Shannon Rupert
Shannon, Might you know what the light levels (measurements) are in the arctic, season by season? I know certain plants can grow during the summer but the photosynthesis rate must be less than in the south. I'm looking for hard figures so we can calculate photosythesis rates. If you don't know, might you know where we can find out?
- Terry R. Kok at biostar_a@yahoo.com >> _____________________ > Shannon Marie Rupert > MiraCosta College > Department of Physical Sciences > One Barnard Drive Oceanside, California 92056 > 1-888-201-8480 x 6536 > 760-757-2121 x 6536 > e-mail: smrupert@mcc.miracosta.cc.ca.us >> UCSD, Biology, Kohn Lab > 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla, California 92023-0116 > e-mail: srupert@biomail.ucsd.edu >> "If we knew what we were doing, it wouldn't be > called research, would it?" > -Albert Einstein
--- KokhMMM@aol.com wrote: > Terry, >> I'd hate to see an animal free biosphere on Mars. >> It's hard to imagine how our kids could grow up to > be "humans" in such an > environment (to hell with Lovelock and his attitude > in "The Greening of Mars") >> Can we manage without polinators? I hope not. >> Bees would bring motion, color, honey, and mead. >> What about birds, humingbirds in particular, > butterflies, bats, squirrels? >> As to integrating animals into the biosphere in > other ways, talapia and > earthworms. >> Any other you think would be helpfull -- and which > would pay their keep in > biosphere service? >> Peter
I would love it if we still had pollinators left on Earth! Everyone around here is having trouble with the health of their bees. I agree with you about animals on Mars but I also understand that this might have to wait until we begin establishing colonies rather than initial research stations where the complexity, due to weight/shipping limitations, might mean we do without. That means we will have to hand-pollinate or utilize some sort of fan/wind system to achieve the same. Does anyone know if NASA or the Russians have brought bees to space? How did they fare?
- Terry R. Kok at biostar_a@yahoo.com
Reply-to: "Dean Calahan, FoB"
Add
Addresses
PK: >> I'd hate to see an animal free biosphere on Mars.
TK: > weight/shipping limitations, might mean we do without.
DC: Well, if we shipped eggs and sperm for some useful animals, perhaps we could hatch them en-route or en-planet. Or perhaps fertilized eggs, held in cold storage. Or Rats pregnant with elephants (or some such).
If there were pollinating mosquitos that didn't bite people, that might be useful.
For fear of beating a dead horse (they die when you dry them out), there are some animals that are fairly poikilohydric, like some nematodes.
(Now I can hear people saying, "well Dean, why don't you come up with a species list?". Hrm. Grmbl. Get to it. Blah Yak. Nature of dilettantism. Woof.)
From: Erik Biermann
Add
Addresses
It may be a little premature to discuss GMOs, sniffer chips and DNA chips. I think our goal here ultimately is to develop a system that uses homeostatic control primarily, but uses simple instrumentation to monitor it. I am not sure sniffer chips or dna chips fall into the simple category (although I have limitted knowledge of both).
As for GMOs, generally they can be designed to be more efficient in one aspect, but require additional energy inputs in another aspect of its life cycle. For instance the GM corn and soybeans can now resist the herbicide but can no longer compete against other plants for nutrients, water and space and therefore require additional energy input in the form of the herbicide.
I tend to think that our limited knowledge of genes at the moment can't compete with the billions of years worth of genes natural selection has already given us. (my humble opinion)
Just something to think about.
Erik Biermann
--- KokhMMM@aol.com wrote: > [ to Mars Society Arctic Base TF & discussion ] > [ from KokhMMM@aol.com ] > [ see end of message to unsubscribe ] >>> In a message dated 04/04/2000 06:44:19 PM, > biostar_a@yahoo.com writes: >><< Does > anyone know if NASA or the Russians have brought > bees > to space? How did they fare? >>>> Terry, to me that would seem irrelevant because > "space" is zero-G and Mars is > not. >> And NASA has never manifested any desire to create > and artificial gravity > environment in which we could experiment with how > plants and animals did in > 1/6th lunar or 3/8ths Martian gravity. As they have > no intention of > establishing a human colony anywhere, that would > seem to them a frivolous > issue. >> Peter > ----------
Somehow I think we need to see how bees take to the high energy levels of space travel to see if and how they are affected by the transit to Mars. Of special concern are the free iron nuclei which turn cells into a sort of swiss cheese. Larger biosystems (like humans) have a lot of built in redundancy. Bees are smaller and may not fare as well. In something as important as a pollinator, this could be crucial.
- Terry R. Kok at biostar_a@yahoo.com
--- KokhMMM@aol.com wrote: >> In a message dated 04/04/2000 06:44:19 PM, > biostar_a@yahoo.com writes: >><< will have to hand-pollinate or utilize > some sort of fan/wind system >>>> hand-pollination will be labor-intensive. That means > we have to import x > number of people (man-hours) plus their food and > other support in place of a > few bees etc. that could do the job much more > efficiently. >> only the grasses self-pollinate with the assistance > of wind because only > their pollen is light enough to easily become > airborne. >> nano-robot bees are a long way off >> so to me, there seems little alternative to doing it > right sooner or later >> Peter
I'm certainly not against carrying polinators but we better make sure that nobody has an alergy (or developes one) to bee stings. Also: is a small (6 person) CELSS we would need a mini-hive. A full hive would have far too many bees for the enclosed space. On the other hand LADY BUGS might do the trick quite well while also cleaning up some of the "accidental insects" which may very well hitch a ride (no matter how clean we try to be some eggs will find a way to get on board). I remember visiting the life support labs at the Marshall Spaceflight Center in Huntsville, AL and talking with the man responsible for sterilizing water. He said that it was impossible. Now matter what he did to the water (it was quite severe and intensive) bacteria still started to grow after the sterilization process was complete.
Terry R. Kok at biostar_a@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: [Civ-Culture] AGR bees
[ To Mars Society Civilization & Culture Group ] [ from Beverly Conolly
An interesting point now that we mention "stingless" bees... Australian native bees, which do make honey (known by Aboriginal people as "sugarbag" in certain outback areas), in contrast to European honey bees, *don't sting*. So, maybe we don't have to breed them after all. If this is something we want to follow up, I'll research it a bit more deeply.
Bev Conolly
In a message dated 04/04/2000 08:10:37 PM, beverly_conolly@scholastic.com.au writes:
<< Australian native bees, which do make honey (known by Aboriginal people as "sugarbag"
in certain outback areas), in contrast to European honey bees, *don't sting*. >>
Can you find out what plants they preferentially pollinate? It would seem that if they aren't fussy, we may be in luck. Some plant-pollinator collaborations are very specific. Others aren't. Actually, being fussy (plant or pollinator) is a strategic mistake, because if your collaborator becomes extinct, so do you.
Producing honey would be a nice plus, but it isn't the main thing.
Peter - --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mars Society Civilization & Culture Group email: civ-culture@chapters.marssociety.org www: http://home.marssociety.org/civ-culture/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:42:05 +1000 From: Beverly Conolly
>Can you find out what plants they preferentially pollinate?
Studies on native bee behaviour seems a bit thin on the ground, but I have found a list of bee-experts and the Native Bee Research Centre (which is located about 2 hours drive from my home), on the Web. I will enquire with the latter, who have published a booklet called "Crop Pollination With Australian Stingless Bees". Sounds promising --- maybe.
For anyone else who'd like to look at the Research Centre's page, it's:
Bev Conolly
[ To Mars Society Civilization & Culture Group ] [ from Tanstaaflz@aol.com ]
In a message dated 04/05/2000 03:21:51 AM, mystul@myavista.com writes:
<< I think to begin with, we farm those food plants that require only one or two different
species to polinate them.>>
I followed up on those Smithonian Magazine articles <> and one thing I learned is that pollinators may need more than just their primary pollen/nectar foraging plant species to maintain their full life cycle and to have food all year long, not just at blooming time. So it is going to have to be a bit more complex than that. But I do think that you are right in that we have to start with simpler operations. That may mean crops whose pollinators require a minimum of additional plants to maintain their life cycle.
Looks like a lot of research for a lot of people.
The rocket scientists may get us there, but it is going to be the chemical engineers and ecosystem people who allow us to stay. The Mars movement is lopsided with the hardware crowd and we need to make a deliberate effort to get these other people heavily involved - or forget about our dream.
How about this slogan (both for the society and for our Civ-Culture task force!):
"Mars. It's not just about getting there!"
<< But I don't see any other way to bring life to mars at the earliest possibility, except to create large (Superdome) sized vivariums. Small ones, that would be test beds, would of course precede these constructs. >>
We could do it in modular fashion JUST SO LONG AS the habitat biomes are contiguous and effectively continuous so that the pollinators can easily get from one area to another. I don't like the megastructure idea as it posits a very high threshold for realization, and then suddenly is too small. Modularity is better, and allows us to diversify our ecosystems as we go, so long as we maintain green corridors between sections to allow free flow of the wildlife species who will maintain it all.
Peter
From: KokhMMM@aol.com | Block address Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:09:10 EDT Subject: Re: Mars_Arct/ more Polinators etc. To: biostar_a@yahoo.com
Add Addresses
In a message dated 04/05/2000 09:52:30 AM, biostar_a@yahoo.com writes:
<< LADY BUGS >>
Nice option.
Also Bev Conolly writes that she knows of stingless Australian native bees.
And I think there may be some bees that do not have large hives, but that's just an impression.
Anyway, I realize the problems for a small scale operation. I was mainly interested in looking further down the road, towards an outpost on the way to becoming a settlement where we are going to want to establish something bigger in the way of ecosystems.
Peter
From: KokhMMM@aol.com | Block address Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:09:10 EDT Subject: Re: Mars_Arct/ more Polinators etc. To: biostar_a@yahoo.com
Add Addresses
In a message dated 04/05/2000 09:52:30 AM, biostar_a@yahoo.com writes:
<< LADY BUGS >>
Nice option.
Also Bev Conolly writes that she knows of stingless Australian native bees.
And I think there may be some bees that do not have large hives, but that's just an impression.
Anyway, I realize the problems for a small scale operation. I was mainly interested in looking further down the road, towards an outpost on the way to becoming a settlement where we are going to want to establish something bigger in the way of ecosystems.
Peter
I'm all for the eventual deployment of biodomes/ecospheres in craters on Mars. Now, does anyone know what we would make these domes out of? Inflatables would be the logical choice for "fast up" and "easy transport" from Earth, before we manufacture materials on Mars. The trouble is, at the current state of materials science, I know no material which will not leak! Diffusion of air (especially hydrogen) through the material is a real problem. Any ideas?
Terry Kok at biostar_a@yahoo.com
From: "Dean Calahan, FoB"
Add
Addresses
TK: >> I'm all for the eventual deployment of > biodomes/ecospheres in craters on Mars.
DC: First of all, I think you'd have to do something close to an actual cylinder, sphere, or torus. If you don't have an approximately circular cross section, you can add "impossibly strong materials" to your list of problems. At that point, you don't really need a crater. You can just suspend your sphere inside a tetrahedral truss, or let your torus sit upon the ground.
You will need a thick roof of regolith (or ice, I suppose, which would have the advantage of being transparent) to protect against galactic cosmic rays and solar storm particles.
To handle leaks: The system doesn't have to be totally closed if you can resupply it from native materials. Of course, you'd want to keep your leak rate low.
TK: > Now, does anyone know what we would make > these domes out of? Inflatables would be
DC: A bunch of "Transhabs" comes to mind as an option. Maybe you could make columns, trusses and platforms out of natively produced steel, to build your roof structure (with regolith on top), and deploy your Transhabs underneath those. Ultimately, you'd want to make the polymers on Mars.
Note: Aluminized mylar seems to hold helium really well.
--- "Dean Calahan, FoB"
VERY VERY LOW - The first CELSS (to supply life support to the first several missions) will not have the luxury of equipment/time/labor to bury a CELSS under regolith or ice. We'll be sitting on an exposed surface. - TK
> Note: Aluminized mylar seems to hold helium really > well.
But they do leak. Notice how balloons deflate over time? We need to do much better. Come on lurkers - see what you can find out and post the results here! - TK
--- KokhMMM@aol.com wrote:
> The transhab inflatable leaks less than the shuttle. > But this is a foot > thick sandwich designed to be meteorite puncture > resistant. You would need > less if you are going to cover it with regolith. >> Spheres have a very large height to square foot > ratio. >> Better would be a torus, which has a nice stable > footprint and a lot of > square footage per height. You could drop a works > core with all the goodies > in the donut hole, or better yet, design it as an > integrated hybrid > inflatable hard core - inflatable toroid walls > around a hard central work > core. The ideal package for transport in a payload > bay or under a faring.
I thought it might work to inflate around the TUNA CAN/HAB directly. - TK
> That is the philosophy behind TransHab, and which on > which I did a paper for > ISDC 91 in San Antonio.
Where might one locate a copy of that paper? - TK
> Why would you have free hydrogen? You wouldn't have > to worry about combined > hydrogen (water vapor, methane, etc.) leaking as > much.
Hydrogen slowly disassociates, even from water, under normal Earth conditions. It will end up as a component of the CELSS/HAB atmosphere whether we want it to or not. The bulk of the hydrogen may be tied up in hydro-compounds but some will get free. Besides that, there are other gasses which will leak as well. I've had some intense discussion with the "inflatable folks" in the past. There is still work to do on materials. So far the leak rate is too high for comfort, even in the Transhab. The space shuttle is like a leaky boat. - TK
> With the design I suggested, you could bring > concentrated (30:1) sunlight in > through optic fiber bundles designed into the top of > the works core for > delivery where needed, though now the research is > centering on red and blue > leds perched just above the plants.
I suggest LEDS too but you must use green as well otherwise the seeds will not be viable. As far as fiber optics and a concentrating collector - GREAT! Who knows about fiber optics? I'm sure there are going to be some collection and transmission losses. The collector would have to be quite large (larger than the growing space if we are trying to match Earth sunlight). Hey folks! Do some research and post the results here. - TK
> The torus idea has these extra advantages. With its > low-elevation profile, > you wouldn't need a crater but could just set it on > the surface and cover it. > And you can cluster them in a hex/honeycomb pattern > with connections between > adjacent modules at 120 degree intervals, 3 each. > That way, you could keep > growing and growing angd growing your > agricultural/biosphere complex as > needed or desired. >> Peter
From: KokhMMM@aol.com | Block address Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 15:47:34 EDT Subject: Re: Mars_Arct/ more biodome materials To: biostar_a@yahoo.com, Arctic-sig@lists.MarsSociety.org
Add
Addresses
In a message dated 04/05/2000 01:21:50 PM, biostar_a@yahoo.com writes:
<< the first several missions) will not have the luxury of equipment/time/labor to bury a CELSS under regolith or ice. We'll be sitting on an exposed surface. - TK >>
We'll, the plants can take some radiation, but not the agricultural workers. So if you aren't going to shield it (a false economy attitude we cannot afford) you'd want to have the operation highly automated so humans didn't have to "accummulate" much time inside.
And you'd have to keep your seed crops seperate in a shielded facility, if you want to avoid genetic damage.
I know Zubrin has a very cavalier attitude towards radiation. It is a "detail" with which he doesn't want to be bothered. That is a philosophy that can only end up digging us a nice grave.
If all we are going to do is a fast and dirty exploratory expedition ... - but that isn't the idea.
Deployment of shielding can be done slowly by robotic equipment if the structure is landed well before the crew arrives. You can trade mass of equipment needed for length of time you've got to get the job done. Space Studies institute came up with some good ideas using drag lines and a trio of pylons.
Peter "Mars, it's not just about getting there!"
From: rocky.persaud@utoronto.ca | Block address To: Terry Kok
Add Addresses
On Wed, 5 Apr 2000, Terry Kok wrote: > I'm all for the eventual deployment of > biodomes/ecospheres in craters on Mars. > Now, does anyone know what we would make > these domes out of? Inflatables would be > the logical choice for "fast up" and "easy > transport" from Earth, before we manufacture > materials on Mars. The trouble is, at the > current state of materials science, I know > no material which will not leak! Diffusion > of air (especially hydrogen) through the > material is a real problem. Any ideas?
Mike Dixon at the University of Guelph is building a greenhouse that will attempt to grow food in Martian atmospheric pressure and composition. There was an article about it today in the Toronto Star. He thinks colonists on Mars shouldn't bother with lugging construction material to build greenhouses at all--just grow food in the wild.
--Rocky
[ to Mars Society Arctic Base TF & discussion ] [ from sonja g holmes
I've commented below...
On Wed, 5 Apr 2000 12:59:39 -0700 (PDT) Terry Kok
and in my opinion, waste a lot of volume -sonja
>> Better would be a torus, which has a nice stable >> footprint and a lot of ..... >> .......core. The ideal package for transport in a payload >> bay or under a faring. >> I thought it might work to inflate around the TUNA > CAN/HAB directly. - TK
A team of students from the Technical University of Munich are working on just such a scenario - not sure of the details, as I've been a little too busy lately to keep up "so much time, so little to do... stike that - reverse it" -willy wonka .... - sonja
>> That is the philosophy behind TransHab, and which on >> which I did a paper for >> ISDC 91 in San Antonio. >> Where might one locate a copy of that paper? - TK
ditto - sonja
>> With the design I suggested, you could bring >> concentrated (30:1) sunlight in >> through optic fiber bundles designed into the top of >> the works core for ..... >> I suggest LEDS too but you must use green as well > otherwise the seeds will not be viable. As far as > fiber optics and a concentrating collector - GREAT! > Who knows about fiber optics? I'm sure there are going..... >
what about glass? according to an article I just read in Metropolis magazine (http://www.metropolismag.com/new/feb_content/gla.htm) glass is many times stronger than steel and can be made to filter out all kinds of things - including radiation, (http://www.hotcell.com/v0000006.htm). You can make any level of radiation shielding (including opaque to visible light) for whatever task. If it can be manufactured out of regolith - I think we've got it made. (and from an architecture student's standpoint - it's very nice to look at) It's a matter of sending the machinery up there to manufacture it, but that is problem with any solution... The big difficulty here is that there is not alot of data on glass's structural properties, I think because there is a certain prejudice against clear materials as structure... But that is another issue I suppose.. We're also dealing with joints, which is I'm sure where the leaking occurs. But you have that problem with any material (unless, of course you could create a complete enclosure out of continuous material - like a giant glass bottle... sci fi at this point...)
>> The torus idea has these extra advantages. With its >> low-elevation profile, >> you wouldn't need a crater but could just set it on >> the surface and cover it. >> And you can cluster them in a hex/honeycomb pattern >> with connections between >> adjacent modules at 120 degree intervals, 3 each. >> That way, you could keep >> growing and growing angd growing your >> agricultural/biosphere complex as >> needed or desired. >>>> Peter > Orthogonal schemes are much more efficient and flexib
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/