Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

louis · 2014-02-19 19:11:07

We need to think more, and more positively, about the economic opportunities that will come from colonisation of Mars. My aim here is to identify source of revenue and paths to economic development which will ultimately cover the costs of missions to Mars and thus pave the way for colonisation of the planet.

The analysis has been set out under the following categories:

- Short term (0-5 years, or pre-mission)

- Medium Term (5-20 years after)

- Longer Term (20 years plus)

Basing my analysis on a figure of $20,000 per kg for transit from Mars to Earth, I think the following revenue earners could be pursued by early colonists -

[Assumptions: The analysis assumes that a cost of $20,000 per kg is the cost of Earth-Mars and Mars-Earth transit (surface to surface). It assumes that a Mars landing project will take ten years from conception to landing. It further assumes that the project will be undertaken by a consortium including national space agencies, private space companies, and philanthropists.]

1. Short term (Years -10 to +5)

(a) General and specific commercial sponsorship - $700million. The commencement of colonisation of Mars by humans from Earth will be an event of momentous importance. It will dominate news channels for many weeks. It will provide the basis for news and science documentaries, acres of newsprint and countless articles on the Internet. However, sponsors will benefit from a long build up to the mission, as well as the final landings. It is considered that Olympics sponsorship provides a good point of comparison.
General sponsors could include firms like Coca Cola,Microsoft, Nike etc.

The sponsorship available for the initial landings should be on a par with the Olympics. But there will be opportunities for ongoing sponsorship e.g. of exploration missions to Olympus Mons or the Grand Canyon of Mars or to the polar region. Commercial sponsorship of the Olympics amounts to about $1000 million over the Olympic cycle. Conservatively one could expect the Mars landings to garner at least $500million – possibly with staged release of funds over a ten year period.
It is expected general sponsorship could continue at perhaps $100 million per mission. . It should be noted that the activities on Mars will be of continued interested to news and science programmes, and sponsors can gain from that continued interest.

There will be continuing opportunities for specific sponsorship for exploration missions e.g. perhaps a rover mission to explore Olympic Mons. Companies may well wish to secure sole sponsorship rights on these missions, so we might have “The Nike Expedition to Olympic Mons” for instance. Or “The Toyota Mission to the Mars North Pole”. Subsequent explorations should be able to clear at least $200million a time I would say, in the short to mid term.

(b) Sale of Mars TV rights $550 million. Clearly exclusive TV rights to the initial Mars landings would have huge value. I think we could be talking about $200-500 million – with the globe parcelled up into about 10 lots.

But later exploration missions TV rights (e.g. to Olympus Mons) will also command high prices. So we c2an expect something like $10 million per annum (with no significant mass transfer)

(c) Sale of regolith- $2000 million The Mars pioneers should be able to return with substantial amounts of Mars regolith.

I think a figure of $100,000 per kg will be quite reasonable. Even ordinary Mars dust will be a very valuable commodity (as is ordinary lunar dust). My analysis suggests several thousand institutes around the globe would be interested in acquiring Mars regolith (just as there is great interest in lunar regolith). I think earnings of $200-$400 million per annum for the first ten years are possible.

(d) Sale of meteorites - $2500 million. Meteorites on Earth are collected by both scientists and private collectors. Rare meteorites can be worth millions of dollars. Mars meteorites will be rare almost by definition. I think we could be talking about $500,000 per kg for the right meteorites. Geology.com offers advice over the web on the pricing of meteorites. At the cheap end these can start at around 50 cents per gram. But rare Mars and lunar meteorites may sell for $1,000 per gram or more – much more in some cases. So a kilogram meteorite could cost around a $1million or more. For the first ten years, I think the value of meteorite exports could be in the region of $250-500 million per annum.

2. Medium Term (+5 to +20 years)

(a) Export of gold, platinum, diamonds and other precious metals and stones $750 million (over 15 years) . With gold alone currently trading at over 50,000 dollars a Kg, this category could be a major source of revenue. Of course it does depend on the colonists discovering exposed gold sources on the surface – no reason why not as no one else is prospecting for gold. Similarly other precious metals and stones could produce huge amounts of revenue. Earnings of $50million per annum don't seem impossible.

(b) Sponsored colonists $3000 million (over 15 years). The “gap year” student. There will in our view be no shortage of young, suitably qualified personnel who would wish to be part of the experience of building the Mars colony as part of an interval between education and work. And, who can doubt that employees back on earth would be keen to employ young enterprising people who take part in this way and show determination, fortitude and a high level of skill acquisition? Of course the gap year concept will be extended somewhat – it may be a round trip of 2.5 years, with perhaps 1.5 actually spent on Mars. Earnings at $50m per person might give an average of $200million per annum in the medium term period.

Who would do the sponsorship? Firstly the super-rich providing the ultimate experience for their adventurous offspring. Secondly, international companies seeking to raise their profile and attract graduates. Thirdly, smaller space agencies wishing to make their mark on Mars and conduct experiments. Lastly universities and research institutions wishing to undertake research.

(c) University of Mars franchise $800 million (over 15 years). . Establishment of a University on Mars. This could be the subject of competition between the best endowed seats of learning on Earth. Those with a strong planetary science and astronomy bias might be tempted to sink a lot of money into such a project, especially if they were being guaranteed a head start over their rivals. Mars University of Harvard? Sorbonne Mars? Kyoto Mars University? It might begin as a small postgraduate teaching and research facility. A University, possibly with a benefactor’s backing might be prepared to sink several hundred million dollars into such a foundation and continue to fund at a significant rate. Endowments of $100-500m are not uncommon on Earth. So, I think a $500m endowment for this unique foundation is possible.

3. Longer term (Years 20+ and after)

(a) Sale of land and bonds. As the economic potential of Mars becomes clear, so will the urge to invest. If there is a legal framework backed by a group of Earth nations or the UN, this will allow the sale of land (perhaps on long leases) and investment bonds. If a million square kilometres was sold off at $10,000 a square kilometre, that would raise $10 billion. If the Mars Consortium can start earning say $1 billion per annum, then bonds of several billion dollars could be sold.

(b) Once agriculture is up and running, there will be a significant market across Earth for luxury foods and wine from Mars. How about a bottle of “Mars Champagne” at $200,000? Any takers?
Perhaps $1 million per annum.

(c) Luxury goods – e.g. a Mars Rolex. The mechanism might be made on Earth, but the watch is finished on Mars with Mars gold. This could be really big I think. Imagine watches selling at $100,000. I see no reason why the Mars Rolex couldn't sell 5,000 of those per annum - $500million.

(d) Sale of “real time” interactive experience on Mars. If we can beam back 3D data from Mars, there would be scope I think for interactive facilities on Earth.
Eg. on Earth you get to move replica rocks around with an automated digger, but the automated digger on Mars performs the same action. And perhaps drills into the rock to analyse it. This could be linked in with Mars museums or theme centres. Global visitors at $20 per person per annum?? - maybe generating $80 million per annum.

(e) Mars tourism. If we can develop direct shot rocket technology, I think there will be scope for development of Mars tourism – people coming to Mars for perhaps 2 month stays and going on treks to the major tourist sites (e.g. Olympus Mons). Of course, initially, this will be the province of the super-rich but if the colonists can master home grown rocketry prices could come down significantly. By year 20 tourism might be taking off and it could generate several hundred millions of dollars per annum.

Last edited by louis (2014-02-19 19:13:02)

GW Johnson · 2014-02-21 12:29:47

Hi Louis:

There are some interesting ideas listed here. My 2 cents' worth: perhaps the best export would be intellectual property, because it can be sent electronically between planets, and at the speed of light.

I'm personally suspicious of staying in the mode of thinking "resource extraction" too long, and there are a lot of variations on that basic theme to be wary of. It is the thing most folks think of first, when establishing settlements "anywhere-not-here", and has been for centuries. Hard habit to resist.

Yet many of the modern countries (not all but the majority) that were colonies in the 16th century Spanish empire are 3rd world today. Spain stayed too long in the resource-extraction mode of thinking too long. Same for France: look at Quebec and especially Haiti today.

One has to be careful about unforeseen implications of whatever one does, though. For what is now the USA, the 3-way trade economy that replaced simple resource extraction was slaves-molasses-resources (mostly timber and raw crops). That caused vast social problems that are still with us today, but it did lead to colony prosperity generally, by the end of the 17th century.

GW

louis · 2014-02-21 18:44:24

GW Johnson wrote:

Hi Louis:
There are some interesting ideas listed here. My 2 cents' worth: perhaps the best export would be intellectual property, because it can be sent electronically between planets, and at the speed of light.
I'm personally suspicious of staying in the mode of thinking "resource extraction" too long, and there are a lot of variations on that basic theme to be wary of. It is the thing most folks think of first, when establishing settlements "anywhere-not-here", and has been for centuries. Hard habit to resist.
Yet many of the modern countries (not all but the majority) that were colonies in the 16th century Spanish empire are 3rd world today. Spain stayed too long in the resource-extraction mode of thinking too long. Same for France: look at Quebec and especially Haiti today.
One has to be careful about unforeseen implications of whatever one does, though. For what is now the USA, the 3-way trade economy that replaced simple resource extraction was slaves-molasses-resources (mostly timber and raw crops). That caused vast social problems that are still with us today, but it did lead to colony prosperity generally, by the end of the 17th century.
GW

I would certainly agree that Mars long term economic development could well be linked to IP.

Another suggestion I've heard mentioned is Mars as the ultimate safe depository for back up data storage.

But I think we shouldn't also forget that the Mars economy will be very self-sufficient. The small population will benefit from an incredibly high level of per capita investment in the early years, which they can turn into high levels of per capita production.

Terraformer · 2014-02-22 09:01:22

Urrgh. Even leaving aside the disgusting nature of what you're suggesting, trying to base an economy on "Intellectual Property" is a foolish endeavor, because hardly anyone of the last two or three generations believes in it, it is by nature easy to replicate, and open source is replacing it. Sure, you could refuse to transmit unless you are given several million dollars, but you need Terra more than they need you, so they can just shrug and leave you to be - even if you are 10x as productive per person, and have a million colonists, they're still going to have a 700x advantage over you.

No, you need to look at stuff which is scarce. In space, that's habitable real estate. Build entire colonies on order from groups immigrating, and lease, sell or rent them out. Maybe you can charge for upkeep services - if it's a small group, they may not have life support specialists who can run everything, and need to pay you to keep it going.

RobertDyck · 2014-02-22 09:59:33

Well, we've been over this before. I suggest the space economy will harvest precious metals from metal asteroids: gold, silver, platinum, and platinum group metals. Also fuel from carbonaceous chondrite asteroids. There are a lot of asteroids, you would start with Near Earth Asteroids simply because they're close. Asteroid 16 Psyche has been identified as metal, and 3552 Don Quixote has lots of water. Mars low gravity would make it ideal to service the asteroid mining industry.

Now that we've passed Peak Oil, we can't afford to waste any petroleum products. Catalysts to make full use of what's left will be imperative. Refineries need platinum, palladium, or rhodium to crack heavy oil into gasoline or diesel or fuel oil. Platinum (or the other two PGMs) are required for catalytic converters for cars, or hydrogen fuel cells. So even if the economy shifts to hydrogen for cars, PGMs will still be needed.

Europe has banned lead solder from electronics, because disposed electronics in land fills leach lead into ground water. The alternative is silver solder: 60% tin, plus copper and silver. So silver will be more necessary. Gold is used for electrical contacts, including edges of circuit boards such as video cards. I don't see electronics slowing down any time soon, so demand for gold and silver will only increase. There's limited supply of precious metals on Earth, so asteroid mining will be lucrative.

But the primary economy on Mars will simply be land. People will move to Mars simply to get away from government regulation. No taxes, and minimal regulation. Come to Mars to be free! This will be big business. I've described this scenario many times: a large corporation establishes a regular route with a large spacecraft to carry settlers to the Red Planet. They will harvest fuel in space to run their own spacecraft. They could harvest 3552 Don Quixote, or Deimos/Phobos, or Mars itself for fuel. Operate a fuel depot in Earth orbit. Aerocapture at both planets. Establish mining, refining, and manufacturing on Mars to maintain the spacecraft. Even food would be grown on Mars to supply this spacecraft. Once it starts, all operations would be supplied by the space economy: asteroids and Mars. But all settlers would pay in Earth currency: dollars, euros, pounds sterling, etc. So for the corporation, once they've made their initial investment, they rake in the profits.

Fuel to military spy satellites, weather satellites, resource prospecting satellites, etc, would be additional revenue. And the same big corporation will provide equipment and supplies to all those homesteaders on Mars. Someone setting up a home based business (cottage industry) would be strongly encouraged to do so. Can you out-compete the big corporation? Can you supply a better Mars helmet? Or better Mars boots? Rover? Or better oxygen generator? Fine! The there will be so many things that Mars needs that the big corporation can always make something else. There will always be demand for something; it'll be a very long time before Mars has everything. Besides, the primary income of the "Corporation" will be one-way tickets for settlers, so if someone is successful then they'll be used for recruitment ads on Earth.

Again, I'm reminded of the advertising slogan in the movie Blade Runner: "A new life awaits you in the Off-World colonies. A chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure."

RobertDyck · 2014-02-22 10:42:05

Live off the land! Minecraft on Mars!

I can make it sound silly, but I'm serious. This has become a world of restrictions, no room to move. Wouldn't you like to just collect resources, make your own stuff? Forget getting a job. When I was young people were pressured to get a university education, only losers went into shops. Today they found a shortage of trades people. But the real problem is qualifications. It used to be only highly skilled professionals required certification. Manual labour jobs were taught on-the-job. A couple years ago I met a lady with two part-time jobs: housekeeping and laundry, both for a hospital. She worked two jobs to add up to full-time. The problem is they required her to take a college course in the job she had been doing for over 2 years. We're talking about house keeping and laundry! Each training course would take three months, a cost thousands of dollars. After that she was required to complete a "practicum", which meant working 6 months full-time for free. That's each job! And doing the same job she had been doing for over two years. All employees were required to do this. The hospital was simply scamming their own employees for money. How many more manual labour jobs are like this? Manual labour jobs used to be for grade school drop-outs, trained on-the-job. Today you require not only high school, but community college, and often certification on top of that. It's ridiculous!

You want to tell everyone to screw all that? You will take care of yourself? Where can you collect resources? All land is owned by someone now. If you try to collect resources, that's theft from someone's yard. You can't just go out into the "wilderness", collect resources to make your own stuff. So Minecraft on Mars!

Yes you too can be free! Mars is your golden opportunity. Enter your credit card number here: only ninety-nine ninety-nine ninety-nine.

Terraformer · 2014-02-22 10:56:05

Dollars, Cents, Satoshis, Doge, Grams, Yuan... what currency do you take?

Mars4Liberty only works as long as you don't get people trying to set up states there, or claiming vast tracts of land for "development", which they plan on selling.

louis · 2014-02-22 16:16:14

Terraformer wrote:

Urrgh. Even leaving aside the disgusting nature of what you're suggesting, trying to base an economy on "Intellectual Property" is a foolish endeavor, because hardly anyone of the last two or three generations believes in it, it is by nature easy to replicate, and open source is replacing it. Sure, you could refuse to transmit unless you are given several million dollars, but you need Terra more than they need you, so they can just shrug and leave you to be - even if you are 10x as productive per person, and have a million colonists, they're still going to have a 700x advantage over you.
No, you need to look at stuff which is scarce. In space, that's habitable real estate. Build entire colonies on order from groups immigrating, and lease, sell or rent them out. Maybe you can charge for upkeep services - if it's a small group, they may not have life support specialists who can run everything, and need to pay you to keep it going.

Talking up a conflict between Mars and Earth sounds rather urrgh to me. The two will not be in conflict. Their interests coincide. Earth wants to learn more about the solar system and the rest of the universe, and the Mars community wants to thrive and prosper.

A policy of development based on general permanent immigration seems to me unlikely to succeed. Musk, whom I generally respect, does seem to have some sympathy with that approach (talking about getting immigration costs down to $250,000 IIRC) but I think Mars will be a pretty demanding environment at least for the first 100 years or so. It's not (as Musk often references) analogous to moving to California...it's like moving to the Antarctic...which no one does. Mars will be a place of temporary settlement in my view, but that period of settlement will on average increase as time goes on. To begin with it may just be around 2 years, but probably after several decades many people will move there for extended periods of 5-10 years, and gradually a minority will become permanent residents. The key issue will be whether you can raise a family there.

louis · 2014-02-22 16:19:01

RobertDyck wrote:

Well, we've been over this before. I suggest the space economy will harvest precious metals from metal asteroids: gold, silver, platinum, and platinum group metals. Also fuel from carbonaceous chondrite asteroids. There are a lot of asteroids, you would start with Near Earth Asteroids simply because they're close. Asteroid 16 Psyche has been identified as metal, and 3552 Don Quixote has lots of water. Mars low gravity would make it ideal to service the asteroid mining industry.
Now that we've passed Peak Oil, we can't afford to waste any petroleum products. Catalysts to make full use of what's left will be imperative. Refineries need platinum, palladium, or rhodium to crack heavy oil into gasoline or diesel or fuel oil. Platinum (or the other two PGMs) are required for catalytic converters for cars, or hydrogen fuel cells. So even if the economy shifts to hydrogen for cars, PGMs will still be needed.
Europe has banned lead solder from electronics, because disposed electronics in land fills leach lead into ground water. The alternative is silver solder: 60% tin, plus copper and silver. So silver will be more necessary. Gold is used for electrical contacts, including edges of circuit boards such as video cards. I don't see electronics slowing down any time soon, so demand for gold and silver will only increase. There's limited supply of precious metals on Earth, so asteroid mining will be lucrative.
But the primary economy on Mars will simply be land. People will move to Mars simply to get away from government regulation. No taxes, and minimal regulation. Come to Mars to be free! This will be big business. I've described this scenario many times: a large corporation establishes a regular route with a large spacecraft to carry settlers to the Red Planet. They will harvest fuel in space to run their own spacecraft. They could harvest 3552 Don Quixote, or Deimos/Phobos, or Mars itself for fuel. Operate a fuel depot in Earth orbit. Aerocapture at both planets. Establish mining, refining, and manufacturing on Mars to maintain the spacecraft. Even food would be grown on Mars to supply this spacecraft. Once it starts, all operations would be supplied by the space economy: asteroids and Mars. But all settlers would pay in Earth currency: dollars, euros, pounds sterling, etc. So for the corporation, once they've made their initial investment, they rake in the profits.
Fuel to military spy satellites, weather satellites, resource prospecting satellites, etc, would be additional revenue. And the same big corporation will provide equipment and supplies to all those homesteaders on Mars. Someone setting up a home based business (cottage industry) would be strongly encouraged to do so. Can you out-compete the big corporation? Can you supply a better Mars helmet? Or better Mars boots? Rover? Or better oxygen generator? Fine! The there will be so many things that Mars needs that the big corporation can always make something else. There will always be demand for something; it'll be a very long time before Mars has everything. Besides, the primary income of the "Corporation" will be one-way tickets for settlers, so if someone is successful then they'll be used for recruitment ads on Earth.
Again, I'm reminded of the advertising slogan in the movie Blade Runner: "A new life awaits you in the Off-World colonies. A chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure."
http://www.technovelgy.com/graphics/content06/blimp-bladerunner.jpg

I think you are underestimating just how cheap recycling on earth is compared to space mining, at current launch costs. You can reclaim many rare metals from street dirt - it's just we haven't quite reached that economic tipping point yet but we are close.

louis · 2014-02-22 16:26:44

RobertDyck wrote:

Live off the land! Minecraft on Mars!
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/pn1aeMlWOJo/mqdefault.jpg
I can make it sound silly, but I'm serious. This has become a world of restrictions, no room to move. Wouldn't you like to just collect resources, make your own stuff? Forget getting a job. When I was young people were pressured to get a university education, only losers went into shops. Today they found a shortage of trades people. But the real problem is qualifications. It used to be only highly skilled professionals required certification. Manual labour jobs were taught on-the-job. A couple years ago I met a lady with two part-time jobs: housekeeping and laundry, both for a hospital. She worked two jobs to add up to full-time. The problem is they required her to take a college course in the job she had been doing for over 2 years. We're talking about house keeping and laundry! Each training course would take three months, a cost thousands of dollars. After that she was required to complete a "practicum", which meant working 6 months full-time for free. That's each job! And doing the same job she had been doing for over two years. All employees were required to do this. The hospital was simply scamming their own employees for money. How many more manual labour jobs are like this? Manual labour jobs used to be for grade school drop-outs, trained on-the-job. Today you require not only high school, but community college, and often certification on top of that. It's ridiculous!
You want to tell everyone to screw all that? You will take care of yourself? Where can you collect resources? All land is owned by someone now. If you try to collect resources, that's theft from someone's yard. You can't just go out into the "wilderness", collect resources to make your own stuff. So Minecraft on Mars!
Yes you too can be free! Mars is your golden opportunity. Enter your credit card number here: only ninety-nine ninety-nine ninety-nine.

Whilst I have a lot of sympathy with you about exploitation of workers on earth (the "work for free" intern system is one example) I don't think this is relevant to Mars development. The Mars community will be much more like a giant university campus transferred from Earth to Mars. It will be highly educated and science-orientated in the early decades.

Terraformer · 2014-02-22 18:28:37

Also, it will be unsustainable, and so will be cancelled after a decade or two.

Temporary bases do not a colony make.

If you want to colonise Mars, colonise Mars. Don't play around with tinker toys on the surface and pretend you're a multiplanet civilisation.

RobertDyck · 2014-02-22 23:54:09

Terraformer wrote:

Also, it will be unsustainable, and so will be cancelled after a decade or two.
Temporary bases do not a colony make.
If you want to colonise Mars, colonise Mars. Don't play around with tinker toys on the surface and pretend you're a multiplanet civilisation.

You're going to have to explain that. What "temporary bases"?

Terraformer · 2014-02-23 06:10:49

I was responding to louis, who seems to envision Mars as having no colonies for the next hundred years, only bases with temporary personnel - like Antarctica, only more expensive, and easier to cancel. Of course, when they get cancelled, private endeavours could pick them up for pennies on the dollar...

SpaceNut · 2014-02-23 12:03:05

All of this starts from investors and lots of air tight contracts to funnel the cash into making mars mission happen.

louis · 2014-02-23 12:08:05

Terraformer wrote:

Also, it will be unsustainable, and so will be cancelled after a decade or two.
Temporary bases do not a colony make.
If you want to colonise Mars, colonise Mars. Don't play around with tinker toys on the surface and pretend you're a multiplanet civilisation.

The way I see things developing, "real" colonisation - permanent individual settlement and births on Mars will follow in due course, but how soon is difficult to say. People can't just up sticks and move to Mars. To keep yourself alive on Mars requires a whole range of skills and equipment that the individual will not possess. The priority in the beginning will be to create a viable Mars community not to encourage enthusiastic but underskilled homesteaders.

GW Johnson · 2014-02-23 16:48:13

Living on Mars will be much like living at South Pole Station, for a very long time, except it will be worse: nobody at South Pole Station needs a pressure suit, needs a radiation shield, or runs the risk of low-gravity-induced diseases.

At South Pole Station, we have a science base supported from the rest of civilization, for over half a century now. They have workshops and repair capabilities, and even some self-administered medical care, but all of this is based on supporting parts and materials shipped in every Antarctic summer. There is no infrastructure to support self-sufficiency at South Pole Station, nor is there likely to be any, for many decades yet.

We have already seen the limits of existing medicine without supporting medical infrastructure at South Pole Station, with two critically-ill persons having to be rescued in weather not normally considered flyable with jet fuel and hydraulic fluids. I know what kind of airplane could fly at -120 F to South Pole Station in winter, but that's a different discussion, for a different forum.

The same is going to be true at any base or settlement established on Mars. You can ship in supplies and materials from Earth roughly once every 2 Earth years, but the infrastructure to support self-sufficiency is just not going to be there for decades. Although, I find supporting infrastructure development on Mars more likely than at South Pole Station, because of human motivation. There is motivation to become self-sufficient on Mars, there likely will be no such motivation at South Pole Station, ever.

The medical care thing will likely be the first driver toward self-sufficiency on Mars. This is simply because of the impossibility of mounting rescue missions that far from Earth, not until something like a "Star Trek warp drive" gets invented. That is just one of the reasons a base on Mars is different from the base we have at South Pole Station. I think that kind of travel technology is still a very long way away. Centuries. Plural. Unlike flying to South Pole Station at -120 F.

As far as supporting infrastructure technology goes, regarding Mars, very little of what we do here will transport directly to Mars "as is". That is because the environmental and atmospheric conditions are so different there than here. You will not make steel the same way there that you do here. Same for aluminum. Same for copper. Same for plastics. Same for rocket propellants. Same for glass. Nothing we do here "fits right" in a cold, thin, CO2 atmosphere. And, just what the hell do we use for concrete? Some applications might substitute "icecrete", most cannot.

That's what the initial Mars base (or bases) is really for: to find the answers to those infrastructure technology questions. To find the answers to food production. To find the answers to water production. To find the answers to radiation protection. Etc.

Most of our preconceived ideas will prove to be wrong, I predict. Because they always have, for millennia, here. Where it's not so challenging. Not so different.

GW

SpaceNut · 2014-02-23 18:52:20

Then there is the ISS which is the other end of the space extreme much in the same boat with all the partner nations that give the aid to keep crews alive all the while to do research science. Some systems that are simular to mars there will be plenty that will be different. What mars does have is a natural resource that the ISS does not have...Mars. It is hard to make something out of nothing.

louis · 2014-02-23 19:48:54

GW Johnson wrote:

Living on Mars will be much like living at South Pole Station, for a very long time, except it will be worse: nobody at South Pole Station needs a pressure suit, needs a radiation shield, or runs the risk of low-gravity-induced diseases.
At South Pole Station, we have a science base supported from the rest of civilization, for over half a century now. They have workshops and repair capabilities, and even some self-administered medical care, but all of this is based on supporting parts and materials shipped in every Antarctic summer. There is no infrastructure to support self-sufficiency at South Pole Station, nor is there likely to be any, for many decades yet.
We have already seen the limits of existing medicine without supporting medical infrastructure at South Pole Station, with two critically-ill persons having to be rescued in weather not normally considered flyable with jet fuel and hydraulic fluids. I know what kind of airplane could fly at -120 F to South Pole Station in winter, but that's a different discussion, for a different forum.
The same is going to be true at any base or settlement established on Mars. You can ship in supplies and materials from Earth roughly once every 2 Earth years, but the infrastructure to support self-sufficiency is just not going to be there for decades. Although, I find supporting infrastructure development on Mars more likely than at South Pole Station, because of human motivation. There is motivation to become self-sufficient on Mars, there likely will be no such motivation at South Pole Station, ever.
The medical care thing will likely be the first driver toward self-sufficiency on Mars. This is simply because of the impossibility of mounting rescue missions that far from Earth, not until something like a "Star Trek warp drive" gets invented. That is just one of the reasons a base on Mars is different from the base we have at South Pole Station. I think that kind of travel technology is still a very long way away. Centuries. Plural. Unlike flying to South Pole Station at -120 F.
As far as supporting infrastructure technology goes, regarding Mars, very little of what we do here will transport directly to Mars "as is". That is because the environmental and atmospheric conditions are so different there than here. You will not make steel the same way there that you do here. Same for aluminum. Same for copper. Same for plastics. Same for rocket propellants. Same for glass. Nothing we do here "fits right" in a cold, thin, CO2 atmosphere. And, just what the hell do we use for concrete? Some applications might substitute "icecrete", most cannot.
That's what the initial Mars base (or bases) is really for: to find the answers to those infrastructure technology questions. To find the answers to food production. To find the answers to water production. To find the answers to radiation protection. Etc.
Most of our preconceived ideas will prove to be wrong, I predict. Because they always have, for millennia, here. Where it's not so challenging. Not so different.
GW

I agree with a lot, probably most of what you say GW, but here are some comments:

1. There is a degree of ISRU and self-sufficiency at some of the Antarctic stations e.g. PV panels and indoor cultivation of salad vegetables under artificial lighting.

2. I agree the motivation and practical requirement to create self-sufficiency at the Antarctic stations is not present. Mars will be different.

3. I think possibly you underestimate the possibilities of recreating the Earth's industrial infrastructure on Mars on a small scale - a micro-industrial economy, that makes use of small scale
machines, furnaces, recycling etc. Generally that will probably mean trying to avoid doing v. difficult things and concentrating on the easier things...e.g. better to grow bamboo, make glass, produce steel and use basalt - than try to recreate a wide-ranging polymer industry. Careful recycling may also be important on Mars - I can't imagine the inhabitants would just throw away old electrical wiring. It would be collected carefully. All the copper would be extracted and the polymer covering would be reclaimed as well. This would all make economic sense on Mars in a way it doesn't on Earth.

4. I tend to disagree with you on medicine... the reason is that producing pharmaceuticals is incredibly complex and costly and will be beyond a nascent Mars community of maybe a 100 persons. Likewise for the medical infrastructure of conducting complex medical surgery and procedures. Medical care will be good to excellent in what was available but limited in scope. No doubt it would be a priority to have medically trained personnel who can deal with fractures and so on but realistically the starting point will be that all the early colonists will be relatively young and exceptionally fit and healthy. They will be unlikely to develop cancers, heart disease and so on. Serious trauma injuries may require evacuation back to Earth - I am sure Mars will be well provisioned with morphine.

5. Production of steel and so on will take place in warm, artificial environments on Mars and so should replicate Earth processes. Obviously materials exposed to the extreme cold of Mars are more likely to be imported I would think as they probably require a lot of specialist processes. Most of what Mars people need to use, they will use in their warm artificial environments, not outside.

6. I agree that one of the prime objectives of the early Mars colony will be to research Mars ISRU - of crucial importance to further expansion.

louis · 2014-02-23 19:55:19

SpaceNut wrote:

Then there is the ISS which is the other end of the space extreme much in the same boat with all the partner nations that give the aid to keep crews alive all the while to do research science. Some systems that are simular to mars there will be plenty that will be different. What mars does have is a natural resource that the ISS does not have...Mars. It is hard to make something out of nothing.

Mars has water, silica, basalt and iron ore in great abundance - that's a v. good start. Like the whole of the solar system, it has a ready source of energy as well.

GW Johnson · 2014-02-25 22:44:44

Well, some drugs are difficult to make, and some are not. There is more to "medicine" than drugs, too.

Decades ago, in high school chemistry, I (and all my classmates) made aspirin in the lab. It really was aspirin, but was not pure enough to use: it would give you a headache instead of curing one. But, there's a lot of older drugs that could be made with only a little better facilities than my old high school chemistry lab.

Most of the routine medicine needed will likely be treatment of injuries: cuts, abrasions, burns, broken bones. and similar. I really don't see treatment like that as being "too difficult" to achieve by occupants of a base on Mars. They'll need supplies shipped from Earth like bandages, sutures, plaster for casts, etc. But the skill to use them lies merely in a medical school education and post-schooling training.

If memory serves, the "blueberries" that produced such a stir when first found turned out to be iron oxide nodules. Something similar to limonite, at 65-70% iron by mass, I believe it was. Limonite is hand-crushable with simple tools. All you need to mine it off the surface is something like a front end loader to scoop up the surface material, in a bucket with a built-in sieve to let the sand drop through.

Then you need a reduction method to remove the oxygen from the iron oxide (chemistry helps reduce the direct thermal energy input, you'll need hydrogen for this). Then you need a source of carbon (not carbon dioxide, real carbon, here even coal and charcoal isn't pure enough, it takes a material called coke) to turn iron into steel.

To do all of this requires a lot of energy. Here on Earth we use things like Bessemer converters for this, but they "presume" an atmosphere with lots of oxygen, which burns with fuel to release the heat you need. We'll need to use a different direct reduction process on Mars. A more chemical one. I don't know what it is, though. Doesn't matter, you really don't want to do this (however you do it) inside a pressurized structure full of oxygen. Take a look at any steel mill in operation to see why. This has got to happen outside in a cold, super-thin (next to vacuum) CO2 atmosphere.

GW

Last edited by GW Johnson (2014-02-25 22:50:24)

louis · 2014-02-26 19:55:33

GW Johnson wrote:

Well, some drugs are difficult to make, and some are not. There is more to "medicine" than drugs, too.
Decades ago, in high school chemistry, I (and all my classmates) made aspirin in the lab. It really was aspirin, but was not pure enough to use: it would give you a headache instead of curing one. But, there's a lot of older drugs that could be made with only a little better facilities than my old high school chemistry lab.
Most of the routine medicine needed will likely be treatment of injuries: cuts, abrasions, burns, broken bones. and similar. I really don't see treatment like that as being "too difficult" to achieve by occupants of a base on Mars. They'll need supplies shipped from Earth like bandages, sutures, plaster for casts, etc. But the skill to use them lies merely in a medical school education and post-schooling training.
If memory serves, the "blueberries" that produced such a stir when first found turned out to be iron oxide nodules. Something similar to limonite, at 65-70% iron by mass, I believe it was. Limonite is hand-crushable with simple tools. All you need to mine it off the surface is something like a front end loader to scoop up the surface material, in a bucket with a built-in sieve to let the sand drop through.
Then you need a reduction method to remove the oxygen from the iron oxide (chemistry helps reduce the direct thermal energy input, you'll need hydrogen for this). Then you need a source of carbon (not carbon dioxide, real carbon, here even coal and charcoal isn't pure enough, it takes a material called coke) to turn iron into steel.
To do all of this requires a lot of energy. Here on Earth we use things like Bessemer converters for this, but they "presume" an atmosphere with lots of oxygen, which burns with fuel to release the heat you need. We'll need to use a different direct reduction process on Mars. A more chemical one. I don't know what it is, though. Doesn't matter, you really don't want to do this (however you do it) inside a pressurized structure full of oxygen. Take a look at any steel mill in operation to see why. This has got to happen outside in a cold, super-thin (next to vacuum) CO2 atmosphere.
GW

Decades ago a good friend of mine made serious explosives from chemicals stolen from school! LOL Fortunately he didn't kill himself or anyone else.

In terms of medicine, I don't doubt the early colonists could make some basic medicines but -

1. The early colonists will nevertheless be dependent on some v. sophisticated medicines designed to counter the effects of minimal gravity and they won't be able to produce those.

2. Everything in the early days is a very important opportunity cost decision. It might be true that the early colonists can produce basic drugs. But if they devote their time to that it means they (and they will be numbered in tens not thousands) aren't making steel, aren't growing food, aren't producing rocket fuel etc. Much easier to just import these lightweight drugs.

3. Not sure why you think scaled down steel production can't happen in artificial Earth atmosphere on Mars.

SpaceNut · 2014-02-27 19:00:44

I hear that in the days of Apollo that the LM landing had technicians weighing the bandaids that they would bring with them to the lunar surface. Landing on Mars will be little different in order to maximize the items which we will want to bring with us....

louis · 2014-02-27 19:33:01

SpaceNut wrote:

I hear that in the days of Apollo that the LM landing had technicians weighing the bandaids that they would bring with them to the lunar surface. Landing on Mars will be little different in order to maximize the items which we will want to bring with us....

Except in my conception of how best to go about it, I think we should land tonnes of material beforehand - habitat, medicines, mini-rover, PV panels, basic food supplies etc. - include all the scaled down machines that will allow the first colonists to create a basic industrial infrastructure - enabling them to fashion tools, containers, furniture, supports for habitat and so on.

Last edited by louis (2014-02-27 19:33:56)

SpaceNut · 2014-02-27 20:02:42

Large quantity of supplies is how we skip the ToeHold and FootHold stages,, that brings back memories....

louis · 2014-02-28 17:46:05

SpaceNut wrote:

Large quantity of supplies is how we skip the ToeHold and FootHold stages,, that brings back memories....

Ha-ha - that was a long time ago now.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2014-02-19 19:11:07

Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#2 2014-02-21 12:29:47

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#3 2014-02-21 18:44:24

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#4 2014-02-22 09:01:22

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#5 2014-02-22 09:59:33

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#6 2014-02-22 10:42:05

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#7 2014-02-22 10:56:05

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#8 2014-02-22 16:16:14

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#9 2014-02-22 16:19:01

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#10 2014-02-22 16:26:44

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#11 2014-02-22 18:28:37

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#12 2014-02-22 23:54:09

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#13 2014-02-23 06:10:49

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#14 2014-02-23 12:03:05

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#15 2014-02-23 12:08:05

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#16 2014-02-23 16:48:13

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#17 2014-02-23 18:52:20

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#18 2014-02-23 19:48:54

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#19 2014-02-23 19:55:19

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#20 2014-02-25 22:44:44

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#21 2014-02-26 19:55:33

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#22 2014-02-27 19:00:44

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#23 2014-02-27 19:33:01

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#24 2014-02-27 20:02:42

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

#25 2014-02-28 17:46:05

Re: Mars - a multi-billion dollar economy within 5 years

Board footer