Musk: $9 million to Mars?

yoda9999 · Aug 16, 2006

spacefire: I think there are plenty of families of excentric millionaires who would want to play settler on Mars. Me: Yes, I think there will be many eccentric people, groups, and cults who will want to settle on Mars. I think I will want to try settling on Mars, but not on a one-way ticket. I want to be able to buy a ride home. Anyways, these rich eccentric people will first have to pay to test the artificial habitat enclosure in Antarctica or the Moon. If that enclosure works in Antarctica or the Moon, it might work on Mars. Once all the testing is paid for, they will have to pay for an enclosure to be developed or sent to Mars. Then they have to pay for the trip. Right now, we are still waiting for someone to build the first successful artificial closed ecosystem on Earth. It's an understatement to say that its very difficult to create closed ecosystem.

MeteorWayne · Aug 16, 2006

I agree. Lots of things are easy until you actually try to do them. It's going to take a lot of money, time, and effort before this steps froms dreams to reality. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

spacefire · Aug 16, 2006

once you don't have to haul stuff up from Mars' gravity well, you can send a lot of hardware there. the ISS is an enclosed eco-system, and if you were to put it on Mars it would be much easier to maintain and operate than in LEO of course, it's not self-sustainable as it relies on supplies from Earth, and Mars is much farther from LEO, but if you put enough equipment on Mars and keep sending stuff, eventually the colony will become self sustainable. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

MeteorWayne · Aug 16, 2006

Key point, the ISS is a closed ecosystem that would kill all on board within months if not resupplied from earth. It really has no relevance to a colony on moon or mars or vessel to mars. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

yevaud · Aug 16, 2006

Except possibly as a testbed for future closed environments for later refinements, that is. I'm sure as they go along, they have learned some things about the difficulties involved. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

MeteorWayne · Aug 16, 2006

Actually, I think more was learned on MIR, where they had to make do with more "duct tape and baling wire" repairs. Once you're light minutes away that get 'er done attitude will be necessary. As for a closed exosystem, I fear we are decades (i.e. way past the Bush 'we're going to Mars" goal) away from that. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not betting against me. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

yevaud · Aug 16, 2006

Oh, I understand. The problems involved with a closed ecosystem that has durability, flexibility, sustainability, and can safely be said to robustly support a crew for a few years is indeed many many years away at best. However, every small step forward is still a step forward. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

MeteorWayne · Aug 16, 2006

Agreed. We can (and should) take those steps. But for now all we have is the ISS, and the remains of the Biospheres, which proved we don't know enough yet. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

pathfinder_01 · Aug 17, 2006

“The lettuce and onions thing was about the fact that all the food needed for a Mars Settlement can be shipped there ahead of time and any locally produced food could be treated as a bonus. In fact you would be flirting with suicide to do other than that. A one-way approach would NOT be a suicide mission; on the contrary the idea is to direct resources more efficiently to the over-riding goal of survival. My own idea is to design the whole thing for a bit of luxury, so that if things don't go so well, you end up with survival instead of luxury. Not having to worry about returning every single settler frees up resources to do that.” I would seriously question that assertion that all the food could be shipped ahead of time. Preserving food reduces spoilage, but there is more to keep a crew feed than spoilage. Unless you are planning to ship items from earth indefinably you would need to send 30-60 years worth of food rations. Given 3 meals a day that could be a huge amount. Additionally it will be challenging to meet the crew’s nutritional requirements with such heavily preserved foods not counting what chemical reactions and radiation will do to the food over time. Your best bet might be to freeze it at extremely cold temperatures but then keeping it frozen in an ultra freezer (sorry your home freezer isn’t cold enough) for that many years could be an interesting engineering problem. Since freezers take power and generally are not expected to last 30 years.You could somehow store the items outside….but how to protect against the environment, and how to get it back in the shelter. And freezing really doesn’t solve the radiation problem. And I would hate to think of what it tastes like after 10 years. By the way Onions probably will not be among the first plants grown on mars. They release chemicals that can interfere with the growth of other plants in the soil. Lettuce might, but it is kind of poor nutritionaly. Try things

qso1 · Aug 17, 2006

pathfinder01: I would seriously question that assertion that all the food could be shipped ahead of time. Preserving food reduces spoilage, but there is more to keep a crew feed than spoilage. Unless you are planning to ship items from earth indefinably you would need to send 30-60 years worth of food rations. Given 3 meals a day that could be a huge amount. Me: Pathfinder01 explained the food thing better than I would have but the one thing I would add. You could probably spend the money you'd spend on ensuring food supplies more effectively by simply spending it on establishing the return path that one way mars advocates has suddenly said is so costly. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

yevaud · Aug 17, 2006

Actually, I would think that the very first plants grown on Mars would be Lichen and Mosses. They are the hardiest, and good precursors to further development. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

spacester · Aug 17, 2006

I would seriously question that assertion that all the food could be shipped ahead of time. Well I don't blame you for thinking that, but we did the math on the Mars Settlement threads and I stand by my statement. Have you done the math on the ratio of mass returned from Mars to the mass of infrastructure needed to do so? Believe me, it will take a lot of resources to bring everyone back, even with ISPP (In Situ Propellant Production). But back to the food: aseptic packaging (vacuum packed in foil and then cooked) has made huge advances. Did you know that vacuum-packed salmon (current technology, a recent arrival at your grocery store) is said to be good for 15 years? I can't prove that, but that's the claim. Even ignoring that, freeze-dried packaging is a known quantity. 3 years of food for, say 18 people, is really is not as much as you might think. Vitamins and other supplements are not massive either. (Just remember Kim Stanley Robinson's warnings on exposure to UV light, lol). The point about provisioning for 30+ years is quite valid; at some point, as soon as possible, the settlement (NOT colony! ) needs to produce a large percentage of its own food, and yes lettuce and onions are not the first choices. (It was an inside joke, OK?) Actually, I am not a huge fan of the one-way trip strategy, I just maintain that it is not totally nuts. IMO return trips need to be made available to all who want to bail out after each hitch (~2-1/2 years), but the idea is to make things work well enough that the permanent Martian Settler has reason to expect to live a full lifetime, and to continually grow the Settlement in that way. Also, for the record, I'm actually much more interested in a Lunar Settlement as the "Killer App" of spaceflight cost reduction. But no doubt you guys would think it's completely nuts as well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

qso1 · Aug 17, 2006

spacester: Actually, I am not a huge fan of the one-way trip strategy, I just maintain that it is not totally nuts. IMO return trips need to be made available to all who want to bail out after each hitch (~2-1/2 years), but the idea is to make things work well enough that the permanent Martian Settler has reason to expect to live a full lifetime, and to continually grow the Settlement in that way. Me: This makes more sense to me because if we really are destined as a species to go into space. Even if we did start a one way colony on Mars. Eventually, technology or the fact that the public might percieve it as marooning people, would eventually open the two way door. But on one way trips, I don't consider it totally nuts either. As long as were talking at least a few people as opposed to one person (Discussed in another thread). My whole position is that I'm not convinced that two ways are so costly and that we are so poor we cannot afford to do mars any way but one way. spacester: Have you done the math on the ratio of mass returned from Mars to the mass of infrastructure needed to do so? Believe me, it will take a lot of resources to bring everyone back, even with ISPP (In Situ Propellant Production). Me: From all the concepts I have seen, I do not see the big deal about returning and as I mentioned a few times. Nobody has shown me their math which demonstrates return trips are such monster obstacles. IMO, we go to Mars, establish a colony with two way capability. Present the estimated cost. Involve private industry to the extent possible. Go with a modified Zubrin plan. Or wait till we are capable of going. spacester: Also, for the record, I'm actually much more interested in a Lunar Settlement as the "Killer App" of spaceflight cost reduction. But no doubt you guys would think it's completely nuts as well. Me: As long as its not a one way trip. And where the moon is concerned, <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being:There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened. </div>

spacefire · Aug 17, 2006

what about growing mushrooms underground (to protect them from radiation), maybe next to the colony's powerplant, which most likely will leak some heat out. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

quasar2 · Aug 17, 2006

One-Way doesn`t necessarily mean staying on the Martian Surface. Who better to go to The Moon? Or L1? It should be a kinda relay system. In fact howbout using slingshot effects? I`ve advocated on here many times that Slingshots could get even better boosts if mass were dropped. Of course this makes the Mission a bit more difficult than Straight shots. But i`d`ve hoped that by now, we`d know enough Orbital Mechanics to make Slingshots easier. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

pathfinder_01 · Aug 17, 2006

“What about growing mushrooms underground (to protect them from radiation), maybe next to the colony's power plant, which most likely will leak some heat out” Sure you could do that although don’t get too close to the power plant as mushrooms like it cool. However mushrooms, like people are heterotopes. They unlike plants don’t make their own food. They decay things. Mushrooms might be a useful thing to turn organic waste into something eatable, but that’s about it. If a colony is going to be self sufficient it is going to have to make its own food and that will involve growing plants. Growing plants on mars has some draw backs….the lower light intensity means the plants will have less energy to convert( if you use sunlight which given mar’s global dust storms might not be a good idea.). Although there is plenty of carbon dioxide mars only has 2% Nitrogen as opposed to the 78% on earth and there are no nitrogen fixating bacteria to change the nitrogen into a form that the plants can use. Meaning your going to have to not only kept the plants happy but the nitrogen fixating bacteria as well (unless you choose to use fertilizer and figure out how to make it on the surface of mars....). However there is one advantage. In the lower gravity you could create strains of plants that are more productive than on earth with some genetic engineering or just old fashioned selection. The plants could have larger fruits or more of them without causing the branch, stem or whatever is supporting it to break. I don’t see a colony as a one shoot thing. I can see one growing out of a research station as people choose to spend more time on mars.

pathfinder_01 · Aug 17, 2006

", for the record, I'm actually much more interested in a Lunar Settlement as the "Killer App" of spaceflight cost reduction. But no doubt you guys would think it's completely nuts as well. " I don't think that's nuts at all. I am all for lunar settlement, but I very much doubt that any company could charge just 9 mill for a one way trip to mars in the forseeable future....

radarredux · Aug 17, 2006

> I very much doubt that any company could charge just 9 mill for a one way trip to mars in the forseeable future..../i> I don't think Musk expects it to be done in his lifetime; perhaps 2050 at the earliest. Here is a very optimistic timeline: 2030 -- First manned Mars mission 2038 -- First long-term outpost on Mars 2044 -- First corporate-sponsored support team sent to support government outpost (think of something like Bechtel or Halliburton) 2050 -- First independent commercial efforts attached to growing outpost (think bars, brothels, and food production) 2060 -- First settlements independent of government outpost 2072 -- Settlements start to take off Over the next 60-70 years a lot of technology changes will probably occur. For example, there have been recent advances in putting mammals into a hibernation state. If Musk's approach of economy of scale of simple motors, small operation teams, and lower booster re-use works as hoped, and if hibernation technology ends up working (dramatically reducing life support needs), then 1-way tickets to Mars in a hibernation state might be pretty inexpensive.

ragnorak · Aug 18, 2006

It certainly is an interesting idea, a one way trip to start a colony. Does anyone know if anyone has ever done a proper study of such an attempt? I guess the first problem is however good a regenerative life support system is it will ultimately need inputs from elsewhere. If you were located towards the southern Martian pole in a canyon (if there is one up that way) there might be seams of water ice exposed in the walls, ready to be tapped. What the other resources you would need and how you would cope wth children is an interesting challenge?

spayss · Aug 18, 2006

halman; excellent mature posts. Re those who write of growing mushrooms, lichens, moss. Are you really that ignorant of biology? I'm flabbergasted. None of these are any more adapted than humans. these are complex organisms that need specific ecosystems. a mushroom will no more survive on Mars than you or I. A moss is a vascular plant no less complex than you or I. a lichen is a symbiotic combination of algae and fungi no more adapted to Mars than you or I. Cripes, the ignorance of biology is a sad statement on the state of science education today. Organisms depend of specific conditions to survive. They also depend on specific bacteria which in turn depend on other specific conditions, etc....a whole ecosystem.

spayss · Aug 18, 2006

yoda: "On Mars, however, the human body will never adapt to or depend on the natural environment..' True. People don't understand that evolution is about natural selection and not some elusive process. A person born on Mars is no better adapted to Martian living than someone fron Earth. In fact, the person from Earth would be much healthier and more able to sustain the rigors of living in an artificial environment. We don't send poorly formed, weak individuals into harsh environments but fit healthy humans.

spacefire · Aug 18, 2006

spassys: we live in the 21st century and we have genetic engineering. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.comhttp://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </div>

pathfinder_01 · Aug 18, 2006

“spassys: we live in the 21st century and we have genetic engineering.” Actually there are some limits to genetic engineering. You probably can not genetically engineer a plant able to grow on the surface of mars. There are no life forms on earth that can stand the conditions. The lack of water, solar radiation, extremely cold temperatures not just cold but large temperature swings is too much. Only the toughest bacteria on earth could possibly survive as spores if they are in protected area (like the interior of a probe) but nothing known to man will grow there. Genetic engineering at this point in time pretty much consists of taking genes from one source and putting them into another. Genetically speaking plants are more complicated than we are. We don’t understand plant genetics well enough to make those kinds of changes. The plants like the people will require life-support systems. They will require water, oxygen, carbon dioxide., light, a source of useable nitrogen, iron, sulfur, phosperous and what ever else that particular species of plant needs. They will require that the soil or whatever media you grow them in be in a certain PH range and so on. Now what you could do with genetic engineering is make plants more productive in a mars greenhouse environment as opposed to say a field on earth. You could for instance make a plant that produces bigger fruit or more of it because with lower gravity the rest of the plant does not need to be as strong. You could turn off genes that plants use to make poisons that protect them (i.e. make tomato leaves which are poisonous edible) because hopefully your plants wont need the poisons to protect themselves since there are no bugs around. These plants would probably not grow well at all on earth but those are the sort of things you can do.

spayss · Aug 18, 2006

The macro needs of plants are the least difficult part. There is also a whole world of microbial interactions that help the absorption and procesing of nutrients, etc. There are no plants that could survive the conditions of Mars anymore than humans could. It's not a matter of just making a plant more cold hardy, radiation resistant, or drought proof, etc. Put a human of the surface and make him all those 3 advantages and he still is dead as a doornail...as is a plant. Re human genetic engineering. It will be a LONG time before we have the capability, and more importantly the immorality,to gentetically modify a fetus so the child can survive growing up in a confined box on Mars or anywhere else.

pathfinder_01 · Aug 18, 2006

“There is also a whole world of microbial interactions that help the absorption and procesing of nutrients, etc.” True, and so far plants have been grown in orbit, but that is a long way from creating a self sustaining artificial environment. I think it is possible with technology. I don’t think it is easy.

Musk: $9 million to Mars?

yoda9999

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

spacefire

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

yevaud

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

yevaud

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

pathfinder_01

Guest

qso1

Guest

yevaud

Guest

spacester

Guest

qso1

Guest

spacefire

Guest

quasar2

Guest

pathfinder_01

Guest

pathfinder_01

Guest

radarredux

Guest

ragnorak

Guest

spayss

Guest

spayss

Guest

spacefire

Guest

pathfinder_01

Guest

spayss

Guest

pathfinder_01

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page