A book review on the latest Weinersmith creation. It’s true, there is so much we don’t know.

Just throwing this out there on this forum because missing technology is the problem that kills the dream of Mars, according to the authors.

  • SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    One of the things standing in the way of an"civilization" on Antarctica is that it’s illegal to build a civilization on Antarctica. We could absolutely do it, assuming we were willing to fight a war and the resources were worth it

    • lloram239@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      We could absolutely do it

      Every exploration into hostile environments heavily relies on goods and services imported from the rest of Earth. Biosphere 2 is as far as I know still the only time we ever tried to actually build a completely independent ecological system, but that was 30 years ago, in a non-hostile environment, only run for a short amount of time, still had tons of problems and would still be missing a lot of stuff to be truly self sustaining for long time periods (e.g. no industrial facilities).

      • scarabic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Biosphere 2 is a great story and I wish there were more follow ups. They tried to set up favorable initial conditions and then seal the hatch. They found that the environment inside shifted and became inhospitable. The crops they planned on didn’t all sustain. Then they called it all off.

        What if they had allowed the biosphere to keep shifting until it found its equilibrium point, and then set about finding advantages in that? Crops that would sustain in that?

        An iterative process could build on mistakes and learnings. A one-shot, naive, all-or-nothing attempt where your starting conditions have to be just right… no wonder that it failed, but where was the next iteration? Why give it all up instead of tuning? I know it’s about money, but I wish someone with money cared enough to keep this thread going.

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That’s not why it failed:

          “The vast majority of Biosphere II was built out of concrete, which contains calcium hydroxide. Instead of being consumed by the plants to produce more oxygen, the excess carbon dioxide was reacting with calcium hydroxide in the concrete walls to form calcium carbonate and water.”

          In any case, it is still in operation.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Every exploration into hostile environments heavily relies on goods and services imported from the rest of Earth.

        These would be the problems that are currently being worked on prior to manned Mars (and to a lesser extent, lunar) missions.

        We absolutely will not be shipping containers of food to Mars. That’s absurd.

        • WHYAREWEALLCAPS@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          We absolutely will not be shipping containers of food to Mars.

          We absolutely will be. You have no concept of the amount of energy and resources needed to feed a single human being on Earth for one meal, let alone a whole colony on another world without a breathable atmosphere and possibly toxic dirt for an indeterminate time. Farming under the best of conditions is extremely energy consuming, then there’s the need to either import hardware from Earth that is specially made for Mars or go old fashion and do a lot of it by hand. There is no where else in the solar system where you can just throw seeds at the ground in large enough quantities and feed whole cities. I do homesteading, my dad tried to be totally self sufficient foodwise when I was a teen. Guess what? Turns out that’s really, really hard to do. And that’s under the ideal conditions of Earth.

          • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            But you didn’t have NASA level technology. There is a lot you can do to increase food production using less space if you’re willing to pay the upfront and energy costs.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            I do homesteading,

            Lol no wonder you know so little about this

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is one of those things that will need baby steps.

          — using local water and dirt are probably a minimum for any non-trivial stay

          — yes we really need to be able to grow our own food, at least if we want to scale up from a temporary base for a handful to something larger or more permanent. Again, this is one of the things we probably need to go there to find out: is it possible to grow a lot of our own food?

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I disagree, I believe we would ship containers of food to Mars in the early days. Just like we do for mcmurdo in Antarctica.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’s doubtful we’d ship past the initial landing and support phases, which was my point. It’s likely we’d send several ships out for any permanent presence, but 18 months is just too long and too much investment between trips.

            • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              If you send say 20 people to Mars, let’s do the math. An average person requires approximately 2 to 3 lb of food per day. 18 months = 6,500 days x 20 people = 131,000 pounds of food, or about 65 tons. You could probably drop the weight significantly by freeze drying it and recycling the water.

              In any case, 65 tons isn’t a whole lot - that’s about what, half of a starship payload? Zubrin’s a case for Mars likewise discussed the need to bring all of your food supplies over with you.

              Now over many years you could build up enough buy a waste and build a recycling system to start recycling to buy a waste in a greenhouse, but we don’t know how viable like greenhouse on Mars will be for growing food. It’s likely going to have to be more of a grow lab/vertical farm setup. Very energy intensive.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah it’s just that the sheer scale of planetary colonization kind of makes this a problem for the year 4,000 or so.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      illegal

      Oh, right… that is what has stopped the Phony Starks from building capitalist Utopia in Antartica - it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it’s utterly inhospitable to human civilization at all.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        That and lack of exploitable resources, meaning a lack of capital. There’s no shortage of capital for the modern space age.

        • masquenox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          exploitable resource

          Yeah… because Antarctica lacks water. And wind energy. And some of the most protein-rich waters on the planet.

          Poor, poor Phony Starks… imagine being held back by legislation they could easily bribe into non-existence if they wanted!

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because Antarctica lacks water

            We’re not exactly hurting for water

            And some of the most protein-rich waters on the planet.

            This doesn’t require building a civilization of any sort

            • masquenox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              We’re not exactly hurting for water

              Oh really?

              This doesn’t require building a civilization of any sort

              I guess you’re the kind of fantasist that believe they invent food at the supermarket, eh?

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                California is a localized problem, as all water shortages are, because we live on a fucking water planet.

                Fishing does not require supermarkets. It requires driving a boat to where fish are, then driving home.

                • masquenox@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  because we live on a fucking water planet.

                  So… not like Mars?

                  It requires driving a boat

                  And the boat will be useful on Mars because…?