Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

RobertDyck · 2003-10-04 13:01:56

A nuclear power plant is not "easy" due to high technolody...

A nuclear reactor is actually much simpler than you make it sound. It is basically just a kettle; uranium gets hot, which boils water, when drives a turbine. Because water run through the reactor can pick-up radioactivity, the primary coolant is run through a heat exchanger to transfer its heat to a secondary water supply. The primary water is recirculated. The secondary coolant is run through the turbine. The heat exchanger is just like the radiator of your car, but instead of water inside and air outside, it has primary water on one side and secondary water on the other. You could fully cool and recirculate the secondary water as well, but rather than radiate the heat into air they sometimes just use water from a river or lake and use that as secondary coolant.

Getting the uranium hot is also easy, get enough of it together so its natural radiation builds up sufficient radiation density to start a chain reaction. U238 absorbs much of the radiation, keeping the reaction slow so it doesn't explode. You can add moderators to make the radiation easier to absorb, or enrich the uranium to have more U235 so it just has more radiation to start with. Moderating radiation can be done by heavy water, graphite, or other materials. One thing you do have to be careful about is that radiation has a tendency to convert elements it touches into other elements, so the material the core is made from gets converted into something else. That tends to cause degradation of the core. That can be aleviated by picking materials that get converted into something that is still strong, and doesn't expand or contract from what it started as.

The tricky bit is actually political. Nuclear reactors break uranium into highly radioactive waste. That can be exposed to controlled radiation to convert it into something non-radioactive. However, such reprocessing plants are banned in the U.S. due to political crap.

A fission reactor seams pretty simple to me.

Palomar · 2003-10-04 13:19:30

I feel insulted by GOMs inapproprate introduction of religion into an otherwise scientific discussion. If you really want to be fundamentalist, there is no martian future, just the apocalypse. Such superstitious hogwash.
I remain firm. Advances in technology will make the future far richer than it has already! Compare today to the year 1900. We are fabulously wealthy by comparison, thanks to technology. As for God, He has no place on this thread.

*Hi Tyr. The last I recall, Adrian is moderator of the message boards and it's -his- call as to what's appropriate for a thread and what isn't.

GOM stayed on topic, in my opinion, and though I am not religious, I respect GOM's right to interject God and/or religious sentiments into his/her posts. I didn't view his/her post as proselytizing, but merely bringing a religious sentiment into an on-thread comment.

Freedom of speech and expression for everyone.

GOM wrote: "Since God created the whole universe I see no reason to leave Him out of a Mars discussion. However, since you claim to be offended I will drop it in this thread.

Peace."

*It's your right to choose to drop a reference, but don't let anyone guilt-induce you into censoring yourself.

Now back to THE topic...

--Cindy

GOM · 2003-10-07 10:06:30

A fission reactor seams pretty simple to me.

hmmm

Okay. Do you also claim space travel is easy?

clark · 2003-10-07 10:30:57

*It's your right to choose to drop a reference, but don't let anyone guilt-induce you into censoring yourself.

Amen.

And Robert, a nuclear reactor is much more complex than the way you make it sound. Kettle indeed. Last time I checked, my tea never had a china syndrome. :laugh:

Maintaining the critical mass/heat/et al. is extradoniarily difficult, and then couple this with a hostile environment that degrades any man made machinery, you have a serious technical problem to contend with.

Not to mention that you have to figure out how to dispose of the radioactive water... in space, or on Mars. And keep production of water (which needs energy to be produced in the first place) going at a level that you can keep your reactors safe.

GOM · 2003-10-07 10:38:27

Tourists and explorers could provide another avenue of income. It's probably safe to assume there will be plenty of people who will want to visit Mars or test their mettle out in the Martian badlands.

I like this idea very much, but we need to develop faster transportation to Mars and back before this is feasible.

And, of course, the cost really needs to come down.

Then you have the health risks, although faster trips to Mars and back would reduce that problem somewhat. We need to start moving on getting some artificial gravity on a trip of that distance.

Josh Cryer · 2003-10-07 12:13:20

A fission reactor seams pretty simple to me.

An engine is simple to me. A coal burning power plant, likewise. The difference between these things is that neither require materials that are hazardous to the overall environment, and require lots of containment to keep these hazards from coming into the environment.

Creating gasoline from crude oil is probably more complex than creating fissable materials from ore (the processes so complicated and proprietary, that you only read about them in obscure texts, and even then they're not very detailed). But, creating gasoline (bio deasil) from biomass is extremely simple, and could quite literally be done in a backyard converter, without the requirement of outside chemicals. Where is our metric?

In any case, if the first ships are powered by nuclear technologies (be it He3, fission, or fusion, or whatever), there would absolutely be an import/export situation; much like how energy is still the biggest industry on the planet now, it would continue to be.

But I'm skeptical people (especially guys like me) won't find ways to avert having to depend upon some Nuclear Fuel Conglomerate. The sun gives us the energy we need. It gives us a whole lot.

RobertDyck · 2003-10-07 13:01:34

Do you also claim space travel is easy?

Space travel isn't easy, but can be done. I tried to calculate an interplanetary trajectory, then I got Christopher Hirata to do it for me. This is when we were seriously trying to create a Mars Society probe to be sent to Mars. I still have the hope that my company will produce a spacecraft bus to carry unmanned probes to inner solar system destinations. Chris was a Physics student at CalTech at the time, he hasn't had time to work on it since he graduated and started his Ph.D. at Princeton. I'm bugging the local universities for math or physics students to help calculate trajectories. I could do it myself, but I need a calculus tutor and a lot of time. I have other aspects of the project to work on, and other projects.

Have you ever tried to track the exact chemical reactions that go on in a chloroplast? That is where photosynthesis happens. Have you ever tried to trace the exact chemical reactions that build a chloroplast from a strand of DNA? I have, and I think a nuclear reactor is simpler.

By the way, nuclear waste should not be disposed by burrying it. You need to reprocess it. Low level radioactive waste is more difficult than spent fuel rods. Low level waste is the dishes, tools, clothing, etc. that have been contaminated. How do you separate the radioactive elements from the ceramic, plastic, fibers, etc? If you could separate the radioactivity you would have a very small quantity of high level radioactive waste, and that could be reprocessed.

GOM · 2003-10-08 10:44:17

1. Have you ever tried to track the exact chemical reactions that go on in a chloroplast? That is where photosynthesis happens.
2. Have you ever tried to trace the exact chemical reactions that build a chloroplast from a strand of DNA? I have, and I think a nuclear reactor is simpler.

1. No, but you might enjoy this thread:

http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php?u … 3;t=000952

In fact, you might enjoy that whole board. It has some very interesting threads about the highly intelligent design of life. Here's another link about the machines of life:

http://www.doegenomestolife.org/program/goal1.html

And one on IBM's attempt to reverse engineer life:

http://www.research.ibm.com/FunGen/

2. Okay. You're most likely correct in your comparison. God's incredible design, assembly and programming of life is far beyond human capability. However I only mentioned nuclear power as an example of human technology.

alokmohan · 2003-10-09 07:15:05

There is no dobt we are going mars.But what to export?

alokmohan · 2003-10-12 04:56:17

Cindy may add a post please.

Hazer · 2003-10-26 16:01:51

Creating gasoline from crude oil is probably more complex than creating fissable materials from ore (the processes so complicated and proprietary, that you only read about them in obscure texts, and even then they're not very detailed).

Yay, this is my first post here. But anyhow, I disagree with your suggestion that creating gasoline from crude is more complex then refining ore for fissile use.
I've read that gasoline is extracted from crude oil by a method known as fractional distillation. Fractional distillation is a rather simple process and uses superheated steam to heat the components of crude oil. Since each individual part of the crude oil has a different boiling point, they can be separated quite easily.

On another thought, Mars may have it easier then we do when it comes to disposing of nuclear waste. Just strap it into a rocket and fire it into the sun. With the lower exit velocities required, you wouldn't need to tarnish Mars with harmful waste.

:laugh:

alokmohan · 2003-10-27 05:02:23

When may that happen?

Alt2War · 2003-10-27 17:31:45

The primary Export from Mars will be Entertainment and Media.

alokmohan · 2003-11-01 04:56:01

Why not martian soil?

Josh Cryer · 2003-11-01 08:21:38

Shipping mass tends to be 'expensive' energy-wise. You have to be sure there aren't cheaper alternatives. Asteroids offer a lot of what Martian soil could offer.

Anyway, Hazer, cracking crude oil processes are designed to retrieve several different chemicals, each of these processes requires a one-way-catalyst (it's not recycable, as far as I know). These catalysts are kept secret for obvious reasons (though I'm sure a chemistry scientist could figure out what they are), and they have to be tuned to each different crude deposit (not all oil fields are the same).

So yeah... I don't know how hard it is to retrieve and process uranium, but I feel like it's easier. Just my opinion.

Palomar · 2003-12-01 20:32:27

*What with 89 posts already in this thread, I don't have time to skim them all, so apologies if it's already been suggested:

How about TOBACCO?

I don't know much about growing it here on Earth, and yes it's a nasty habit...but there will always be a market for it, and imagine lighting up a genuine Marsian cigarette. As much as some people get into Turkish cigarettes and other exotic blends...I see real Ka-CHING! potential here. It doesn't weigh much either; I imagine it'd be cheap to transport to Earth. Of course, there's the details of processing it...heck, they could even bundle up the dried leaves and send them to Earth for processing, if need be.

I thought about this yesterday, during my about-once-yearly wicked menthol cigarette craving.

--Cindy

sethmckiness · 2003-12-03 19:16:02

I will do the same thing as Cindy, I am not going to read all the posts, and many seem to have drifted from the original topic anyways.

The Problems lies in making a cost effective export from Mars that will be able to be sold to consumers at a price that is worth buying in quantity and yields an attractive profit to the entity(company/country/organization etc) that is providing said commodity.

To get to the just of the point. The biggest problem is transportation. The cost per pound of transport from Mars to Earth is very high and somewhat risky, given the track record of probes succesfully navigating between Earth and Mars. This suggestion has been brought up in other posts a while ago.

Media might be the best bang for the buck export from Mars.

Pictures, movies, etc.. would be the best bang for the buck. Between one and three satellites orbiting mars that would have a high bandwidth capability(thinking at least T2 Range 6-7 Mbps constant rate). News reports, TV shows (Discovery Channel Series exploring MARS) Super Hi res pictures and hyper accurate maps for students and enthusiasts as well as for Hollywood for Movies to increase their Realism and Accuracy. Coffee Table Books and Lithographs, I could go on forever. But this would be biggest bang for the buck probably for the next 20-30 years. Then start doing a piece of Mars type concepts, a vial with Martian dust, a martian rock in a block of scrylic as a paperwieght.

Until Minerals become very scarce on Earth such to the point that Supply and Demand raised cost to match the cost of transportation(which will continue to fall in a gently curve I imagine), it is just too cost prohibitive. With the availbily of NEOs it's not feasible. Once Settlement and Exploitation of Asteriods exist Mars will serve an important function as a base of operations and logistical support being millions of miles closer. Of course there is certain space logistical issues that are in developement that could change all of this (a la Space Elevator) The feasibility of these projects is up in the air, but like many things, time will tell. I firmly believe that with the right vision and right people their will be some sort of solution to this issue which would be a massive gain for Us for cheap access to Space.

Gennaro · 2003-12-06 13:19:22

Prime Martian exports will be deuterium, presently selling at $10,000/kg, and platinum group metals, demand of both which I can only see will increase in the future.
Deuterium demand will presumably rise due to a breakthrough in D-T fusion, which I honestly believe will happen in about 20 years - we are that close - and PGM's, particularly platinum and palladium, as a general consequence of increasing high tech applications/product demand. Present day platinum prices typically range $10,000-25,000/kg.
Deuterium, a hydrogen isotope six times as common on Mars as on Earth, will already be had as a by-product of H2O electrolysis, inherent in the Mars Direct settlement plan, provided a deuterium/hydrogen seperation stage is added to the process.

I see a lot of doom and gloom in this thread concerning mineral exports etc, but how hard can it be filling up an unmanned Earth Return Veichle with 11.5 metric tons mixed worth of platinum, palladium and deuterium? That's 115 million dollars on the present market, guys.
Unmanned, resource dedicated Saturn V type boosters would of course provide a lot more payload for return cargo.

As for prohibitive launch costs, according to Dr Zubrin, the actual price of present day chemical propellant is about $0.20/kg. 0.20 x 90 (for the fuel used for every kilogram of payload) equals something like a propellant cost of $18/kg of payload to LEO. Zubrin suggests multiplying this by 5 in order to get the total launch cost per kilogram (which is about 2 more than the aero transport industry), landing somewhere in the range of $100/kg to LEO. A lot less than the $10,000/kg often quoted for present day chemical systems, which in that case would to a major extent be attributable to little else than the extreme inefficiency of the United States space establishment.
Have no idea how to calculate surface to escape costs, but I can't imagine that it has to be that much more and certainly not several magnitudes higher.

This does not imply that we have to go to Mars in order to get resources that are readily available on Earth, but for a small and hopefully growing Martian settlement on the open market, it could go a long way to pay for needed imports. Maybe we could insert an economical section dedicated to resource extraction, within the architecture of Mars Direct launches, beginning small, with four prospectors and basic hardware? They'll bring back whatever they find and as the operation expands, the profits would go right back into the Martian settlement budget.

Just my basic and uninformed thoughts, heavily dependant on reading "Entering Space".

Gennaro,
Resource Industrialist

Mars_B4_Moon · 2023-12-01 13:32:12

This thread is very old but maybe worth a bump, much has changed and a Proton does not exist because of sanctions after Russia's invasion of Ukraine, also when this thread existed Space-X and Commercialization was not a thing.

A series of villages, town and city might develop on Mars.

For people arriving perhaps Tourism like on Earth is one of the largest industries in remote places like Nepal
https://kathmandupost.com/money/2023/11 … g-airports

Space Elevator
https://marspedia.org/Space_elevator
The transport from Mars' surface to Mars' orbit and vice versa can be achieved by a Space Elevator. The idea is to install a high-tensile rope from the surface to the synchronous orbit and a certain length beyond, connected to a counter weight.
Since the gravity of Mars is lower than the gravity of Earth the requirements to the tensile strength of the rope is less, making this construction easier

the internal economy?

What I Do In Antarctica - South Pole Edition!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEvH-Ve7n8I

from a discussion on resources and transport

Calliban wrote:

Meridiani Planum appears to be rich in hematite spherules, which present one of the best iron ore resources on Mars.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meridiani_Planum
Interestingly, the high phosphorus content of rocks also suggests that this region will be rich in uranium and thorium. These two will be important energy resources on Mars. But Meridiani Planum is a long way from Cerberus Fossae, which is the region of Mars where geothermal energy is most abundant and where we may find the vital resource of liquid water. This would be the best place to establish an early base, which will eventually grow into a colony. The two regions are on opposite sides of the planet. As Martian population grows, there will be increasing interest in linking these two areas by roads.
On Earth, large igneous inclusions are associated with deposits of nickel, copper, titanium, iron, platinum, palladium, and chromium.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ore_resources_on_Mars
The closest LII to Cerberus Fossae is Elysium.
As the Martian colony grows, the raw material requirements from these areas will grow. All are within the northern hemisphere and all border the northern plain. The plain itself is the easiest location for roads, as its topography is relatively flat and the plains are dominated by deep, fine regolith deposits suitable for road construction. I can forsee the Martian colonies constructing a ring road around the edge northern basin early in the colony development. This road will have numerous spurs leading to important sites.
The south will probably remain undeveloped for a long time. Topography makes in difficult to access and the northern plain is richer overall in water. The main target for human colonisation will be the northern hemisphere, in areas bordering the northern plain. These are the most valuable lands to begin scouting.

I'm not sure I agree with the South remaining undeveloped because Hellas Basin or Hellas Planitia seem to be too interesting and if humans land I expect someone to go there even if just for scientific reasons.

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2023-12-01 13:40:05)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2003-10-04 13:01:56

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#77 2003-10-04 13:19:30

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#78 2003-10-07 10:06:30

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#79 2003-10-07 10:30:57

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#80 2003-10-07 10:38:27

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#81 2003-10-07 12:13:20

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#82 2003-10-07 13:01:34

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#83 2003-10-08 10:44:17

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#84 2003-10-09 07:15:05

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#85 2003-10-12 04:56:17

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#86 2003-10-26 16:01:51

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#87 2003-10-27 05:02:23

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#88 2003-10-27 17:31:45

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#89 2003-11-01 04:56:01

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#90 2003-11-01 08:21:38

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#91 2003-12-01 20:32:27

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#92 2003-12-03 19:16:02

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#93 2003-12-06 13:19:22

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

#94 2023-12-01 13:32:12

Re: Martian Exports - What can martians sell?

Board footer