Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Calliban · 2023-03-07 05:45:20

A volume of 600 billion kg isn't very much. That is only 0.6 cubic km. Enough to sustain a good sized base, but not enough for a large population of people. If we start making rocket fuel out of this, we will burn through it very fast.

This seems to reinforce the position that the moon is best suited as a source of bulk raw materials for manufacturing stuff in high Earth orbit. It is too depleted in too many things to be any sort of future home for humanity. But as a source of titanium, iron, aluminium and silicates, it outweighs the asteroid belt by almost two orders of magnitude. We could build rotating space colonies with as much land as Earth up at L5 and we would barely take a scratch out of the moon's total mass.

Void · 2023-03-07 10:28:45

That then suggests mass drivers and skyhooks, and space elevators.

I would like to have a chemical method that would push loads into low lunar orbit, as the above methods are rather futuristic. Not impossible but it would be nice to do a progression.

1) Hydro Lox.
2) Some native chemical method not including Hydrogen.
3) Futuristic methods such as line #1, and perhaps the delivery of Carbon dust for a CO and O2 burn method.

In trying for #2, I considered Thermite, but did not get much encouragement on the web for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

It has too little gas component to expand a plume out with and is very destructive.
However, someone gave it a try, at least as thought. They considered dry ice and Thermite.
https://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Thermit … e_20rocket

Raptor Engines deal with a hot Oxidized method.

Perhaps Thermite and Liquid Oxygen. These could all come from Lunar regolith and should not involve much Hydrogen..

But it would need to involve people on an engineer level to have a chance. Of course, we have a few here.

Maybe there is a chance. I guess it would be a Hybrid rocket most likely, perhaps with disposable cartridges of Thermite.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-07 10:34:02)

Void · 2023-03-07 17:08:17

This video does not mention the Moon, but I choose to suggest that the Moon could be involved as it may have Argon to use.

I have only partial understanding, so a arrive at it as a student and not an expert.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Sp … &FORM=VIRE
Quote:

SpaceX New Argon Based Ion Propulsion Technology!
YouTube705 views7 hours ago
View page
Terran Space Academy
Terran Space Academy
211
Posts
19K
Followers

The video does not mention Ballistic Capture, but I think that it could be very suitable for that.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti … e%20planet.
Quote:

The premise of a ballistic capture: Instead of shooting for the location Mars will be in its orbit where the spacecraft will meet it, as is conventionally done with Hohmann transfers, a spacecraft is casually lobbed into a Mars-like orbit so that it flies ahead of the planet.

Of course you may know that I favor a Semi-Cycler, if that is possible.

I learned that on Earth, Argon is $1/kg, Krypton is $290/kg, Zenon is $1,800/kg.

Argon is 1% of Earth Atmosphere. 1.6% of Mars Atmosphere and is present in the Lunar environment.

The video claims the suggested method only needs 60 Tons of Argon. (And other propellants as well). A little confused on that. I will rewatch the video again later.

Hall Thrusters may be moving towards better performance: https://www.futurity.org/hall-thrusters-2864142-2/
Quote:

SOUPED UP HALL THRUSTERS MIGHT GET PEOPLE TO MARS
JANUARY 26TH, 2023
POSTED BY KATE MCALPINE-MICHIGAN

Lets hope!

Argon from the Moon: https://lunarpedia.org/index.php?title= … 20fissures.
Quote:

Argon-40
The concentration of Argon in lunar soil is much higher than found in the solar wind, so must come from a different source. Especially, the isotope Argon-40. It is presently believed that the Argon-40 comes from radioactive decay of Potassium-40 deep within the lunar mantle or core, and that the Argon-40 seeps out to the surface via fissures.
Atomic mass: 39.948
Atomic number: 18
group: 18
normal phase: Gas

Argon is not mentioned as ice in the shadowed craters, but it may be there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent … wed_crater
Curiously they mention Mercury and Ceres as also having shadowed craters.

This then discusses Ceres: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/ … -on-ceres/
Image Quote: PIA20696_hires.jpg?disposition=attachment

Argon maybe?

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-07 17:34:07)

Void · 2023-03-07 17:37:19

On the Queston of Carbon for the Moon if not sufficiently available, I can wonder if a electric rocket could deliver it from LEO(Earth)> Lithobraking to the Moon.

That might then be OK if it works to provide CO/O2 chemical lift to a very low Moon orbit, and then using efficient propulsion an electric rocket could bring the rocket up further using Argon. Maybe.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-07 17:37:53)

Void · 2023-03-08 10:15:13

A modification of such a plan would perhaps be a ship that would not land on the Moon.

It might come down to a level where Carbon dust could be delivered is usable fashion.

Is that a fraction of a kilometer? The Carbon impacting may heat up, and to heat it to a vapor would probably not be good. Also, upon impacting it may bounce. An individual bounce may be different than a dust cloud of Carbon hitting the surface of the Moon. To begin with the Carbon and the Propellants for the drop ship may come from Earth. The ship does not land as we don't want to have to incorporate the inertia of landing gear.

The ship likely being chemically propelled, would perhaps be carried by an Argon Electric ship. Perhaps even Nuclear Fission power.

If it was desired to deliver plastics then perhaps a "Chain" of ping pong balls?

Or the delivery could be in a bag that would burst on impact.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-08 10:28:04)

Void · 2023-03-08 10:33:13

I want Iron in orbits and might like Oxygen as well:

Iron:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron
Quote:

Melting point 1811 K (1538 °C, 2800 °F)

Iron Oxide:
https://www.vedantu.com/chemistry/iron-oxide
Quote:

Melting Point 1,565 0C

OK, this is a very long shot, and I risk being the fool, but it wants a try.

Can a iron structure be created that could be heated almost to the melting point, with inductive heating?

Can that then be used as a fuel with liquid Oxygen to propel a payload off of the Moon? Very tough I am going to imagine.

I already have a variation.

Can we make an iron sponge with an aluminum liquid in it? Can we then push Oxygen though it and burn the Aluminum?

Aluminum Melting point:
https://www.kloecknermetals.com/blog/wh … -aluminum/
Quote:

WHAT IS THE MELTING POINT OF ALUMINUM?
07.12.2021
Melting point is a crucial physical property. The temperature at which a substance changes from a solid to a liquid state directly impacts how that substance is handled and applied. Aluminum has a melting point of approximately 1220°F. Relative to other metals, this is about double the melting point of zinc, and half the melting temperature of stainless steel. Notably, the melting point of aluminum changes depending on the alloy composition. This is a vital piece of information when it comes to manufacturing aluminum.

Sodium:
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Sodium+in … 720faf1586
Melting point of Sodium: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Sodium+in … 720faf1586
Quote:

The melting (98 °C) and boiling (883 °C) points of sodium are lower than those of lithium but higher than those of the heavier alkali metals potassium, rubidium, and caesium, following periodic trends down the group.

Calcium: Did not get a percentage yet but it is supposed to be more than for Sodium.
Melting point of Calcium: Melting point: 1115 K (842 °C, 1548 °F) Boiling point: 1757 K (1484 °C, 2703 °F) Density (near r.t.) 1.55 g/cm 3: when liquid (at m.p.) 1.378 g/cm 3 : Heat of fusion: 8.54 kJ/mol : Heat of vaporisation: 154.7 kJ/mol : Molar heat capacity: 25.929

How do sponges work? Well, capillary action helps, but of course gravity will remove a lot of the water if you hold a wet sponge, but it takes time.

Lunar Gravity is 1/6th of that of Earth.

So, where I am at now, I am thinking to make an Iron Sponge, maybe a bit like steel wool. Impregnating it with a reactive metal, and somehow burning that metal by passing Oxygen though it at pressure.

The idea of Aluminum fuel is not out of the question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALICE_%28propellant%29
Quote:

ALICE is a rocket propellant which consists of nano-aluminum powder and water. After mixing, the material is frozen to keep it stable. Hence, the name ALICE, for ALuminum ICE rocket propellant. Aluminum has a stronger affinity for oxygen than most elements, which is most visible in aluminothermic reactions … See more

This would likely be good for the Moon, if a larger water supply existed there.

So, lets make iron wire, and coat it with a reactive metal(s).

Aluminum the more abundant and the higher melt and vapor point.

Calcium less available and a rather higher melting and vapor point.

Sodium, the least available. A rather low melt and vapor point(s).

Iron then as a wire substrate and somehow to coat it with Aluminum.

Then to weave a porous structure to push pressurized Oxygen though.

While a fear may exist that the iron will also Oxidize and Melt, (And it might), the Aluminum may serve as both a fuel and a coolant, as it would draw off the heat by melting and vaporizing.

It may still be possible to heat the wire prior to launch by using inductive heating.

So, I offer it as a Maybe. It would be all Resources. If iron does Oxidize and melt, it may be possible to catch some of it from exhausting.

The objective would be to achieve a low Lunar orbit, and to have a ship that is propelled with Argon fetch it to a higher orbit.

The hope would be to be left with the shell of the device and perhaps inside of it some iron, maybe even some Aluminum, and perhaps some Oxygen as Oxides generated, and perhaps some left over Oxygen in the Liquid Oxygen tank.

Done.

We know why we might want Lunar Oxygen, and of course Iron and Aluminum have their uses, and of course magnetic dust might be used in a Mass Driver propulsion system. Could such a device bring Oxygen and Argon as cargo to a low Lunar Orbit? I do not know, but it would be nice if it could.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-08 11:24:20)

Void · 2023-03-08 11:37:15

OK, so I can see how it will not perform as well as an Alice Rocket as no Hydrogen expansion is available.

The expansion gas then has to be Oxygen with Aluminum Oxide particles, and perhaps also Iron Oxide particles.

So, an extremely oxidizing burn. So, major questions on that. But still, it might propel, or go boom. The rocket does not have to perform that well. 1/6th gravity, no atmosphere, and a orbit of 50 miles or less. The rocket equations will be less cruel in those circumstances.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-08 11:39:27)

Void · 2023-03-08 13:26:40

So, possibly the performance of it could be improved with just a pinch of water to yield Hydrogen as an active molecule and maybe Carbon.
This might then conserve the water reserves on the Moon.

And of course, at some point mass drivers might start to assist the launch, not all magnetic materials need be heated above the Curie point.

I am just looking for chances. In this sort of situation, the chances for failure are larger than the chances for success, but there are chances for success.

One thing I don't like about Mass Drivers, is they either have to launch to L5 or L4, all the way to slow down and be caught by some device, or they have to have an on-board propulsion to circularize a low energy orbit. So, I am suggesting such.

I think that such a level of Mass Driver might be in reasonable reach as to assist a 50 mile or lower orbit, one just enough that an Argon Electric Rocket could fetch it.

It would be very high g, so that it would not have to be overly long. I guess that the high g's would be limited by the ability of the rocket to not deform beyond use.

I am guessing that the rocket rounds would be constructed in a factory largely by robots, perhaps tesla robots.

It may be that if you can produce magnetic dust from the Moon to orbit to shoot out of a spacecraft using that as propulsion, then you may fetch Carbon and Hydrogen compounds from NEO objects, to deliver to the Moon.

So, then your pinch of Hydrogen and Carbon could come from there.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-08 13:29:58)

Void · 2023-03-08 20:28:20

Well, I was considering the Moon and then Anton Petrov came up with a video which is linked in this post: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 22#p207222
Quote:

Anton Petrov, Blue Origin, Solar Panels from the Moon: (Applogies to Bing)
OK, I think I have it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AGNmKR_SpA
His material in this video is about the Moon and perhaps a "Moon Colony". Blue Origin is featured. Made from Lunar Materials we hope and a process that is not said to be toxic. It has been proven with Lunar simulants on Earth. Of course, I do not know how efficient they are, but on the Moon, it is perhaps not that important.
So, a Melt/Electrolysis method is apparently used. The byproduct is Oxygen.
Extremely purified Silicon without toxic and explosive chemicals. A type of cover glass is also made as a byproduct that can protect the solar cells to a large extent. And I am guessing that it can be recycled, by simply melting the panels, and electrolysis again.
I do not know what photo saturation is for these of course. The glass should block the UVC and maybe some of the UVB.
I might wonder if mirrors could be acceptable to add more photons. On the Moon, no wind, unless from a rocket action or a comet crash nearby. So, can mirrors be of a rather thin nature?
I like the direction this is going.
Done.

This post talks about SpaceX and the beginnings of their involvement with Argon propulsion: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 51#p207151

I have for some time considered that it would be useful to be able to preposition depots using robotic electric propulsion.
For now the Argon would almost certainly come from Earth, and be lifted by Starship, I would think.

Such a depot deployed to an association with Moon access would certainly benefit from cooling methods. Shading from the sun could be a first step, and then as needed, active cooling.

This would allow a Starship to fill before landing on the Moon, (Perhaps), and to refill after rising to a low orbit of the Moon, or similar, a location like an "L" location.

More complex but perhaps even true, you could have a "Half-Way" filling station perhaps, maybe Geosynchronous?

Each station stop may reduce the tyranny of the rocket equation.

Also, an Argon electric drive could carry a drop vehicle, with no landing gear, that might drop things like Carbon, or even very cold ice to the surface of the Moon. It would have to get down close enough to the surface that the dropped materials would not vaporize and scatter excessively. I suppose if there is some materials also hard to get from the Moon those might be candidates for dropping. Tha Argon drive would have to move the drop ship to a very low orbit, and then the drop ship would have to move in a manner similar to landing, but not actually land, but drop the cargo and then thrust back up to be intercepted by the Argon Drive ship.

This would be a more guided Lithobraking. Carbon has a very high vaporization temperature, so you might get away with it. A article I read a long time ago suggested that impacting a ice body with the dark side of the Moon perhaps 40 to 60% of the ice would survive as ice to be collected before the Lunar sunrise. So, it might not have to be dropped in a shadowed crater, just dropped in the late nighttime of the Moon. It is possible that future souped up Argon thrusters might power the drop ship, but more likely at early stages it might be propellants from a depot, for combustion engines.

This post may apply: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 98#p207198

Air filled ping pong balls? Maybe not so bad. Plastics, and perhaps rocket fuel.

This then may facilitate extraction methods to get raw materials into orbit from the Moon. I have attempted to conceive of some things in recent posts but do not consider that I have prevailed yet.

Here and in the following posts I attempted to think of a propulsion system to lift stuff off of the Moon: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 00#p207200

If a "Drop Ship" could deliver things like Carbon, Water Ice, and Plastic Ping Pong Balls to the surface in recoverable order, then more liberty would be available. For instance, an Alice Rocket benefits from the Hydrogen which is liberated from ice when the Aluminum takes the Oxygen. The Hydrogen has a nice expansion characteristic, and the produced Oxides of Metals are something for it to push.

So, then I don't know what the necessary or ideal amount of Hydrogen is to provide the process, to optimize it. But maybe even a small amount would make a big difference.

My attempt to embed Aluminum into a sponge of Iron may not work well, but maybe someone will segway to something that could.
Ideally, we would have Aluminum Particles entrained in a web of Iron wires/steel wool. Ideally you could even heat the Iron hotter than the melting point of the Aluminum and it would not move too much. The idea would be to push pure Oxygen though this and to add a pinch of water vapor, maybe some Carbon included as well. The objective would be to get the casing at least to orbit for a Argon propulsion device to snatch. Ideally not all of the metals or Oxygen would have been consumed. Ideally it might carry a payload of some kind, perhaps makings for solar panels, or Argon from the Moon.

I would hope that Mass Drivers could be included to assist by giving a partial boost. That way the Mass Drivers can be of a humble sort, so that we can learn how to work with them and then perhaps get even more energetic ones.

Desires at this point. A possible direction to point to.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-08 20:59:43)

Void · 2023-03-08 21:16:14

I might mention that with care, on the Moon, Aluminum may not get a protective Oxide coating, and so may possibly combust similar to Sodium and Magnesium. So, maybe the Aluminum grains do not have to be as fine as for the Alice Rocket.

But it seems that my iron mesh would not likely survive. https://melscience.com/US-en/articles/c … de%20smoke.

Quote:

Discovery of aluminum combustion
The combustion of aluminum powder in a mixture with oxygen gas was first applied in 1930 by chemists Becker and Strong in an oxygen-aluminum blowtorch they invented. The scientists used fine aluminum powder as fuel. To stabilize combustion, a device formed and constantly supplied a homogenous suspension of aluminum powder in oxygen. The mixture was lit with a Bunsen burner. It burned with a blinding white flame, releasing a large quantity of aluminum oxide smoke. These particles were so small that the smoke did not settle for 24 hours. Becker and Strong established that the combustion products contained around 2% free aluminum. By testing the effect of the blowtorch’s flame on various materials, the scientists approximately determined the temperature of the flame. Molybdenum melted, but a tungsten thread with a thickness of 1 mm did not. The scientists thus established that the combustion temperature of aluminum in the mixture with oxygen was between 2535 °C (the melting point of molybdenum) and 3400 °C (the melting point of tungsten). To observe the combustion reaction of aluminum, and admire the impressive sparks that appear as a result, you can conduct the following experiment: sprinkle aluminum powder into the flame of a burning spirit burner, using a porcelain spoon or spatula to add it in very small doses. You can also perform this same experiment with zirconium, titanium, or magnesium powder. When the metal powders burn, the oxides Al₂O₃, ZrO₂, TiO₂, and MgO form. You shouldn’t use extremely fine powders of these metals, as they may explode in the flame.

So, back to the drawing board, or put it on the shelf for now, I guess.

It does suggest that the "Blow Torch" of very fine Aluminum powder might be a better route. Even in pure Oxygen it may not ignite, unless it rises to a good heat.

Maybe

Later

It is possible that Iron wire coated with Aluminum (If that is possible) and preheated might breathe well enough. But you might likely lose the Iron. It would likely Oxidize and then it would be hard to retain it. But the shell and the payload might matter.

Done

Last edited by Void (2023-03-08 21:28:22)

Void · 2023-03-08 22:20:16

How efficient is an Ion rocket?

A European article gave 10 times as efficient. Of course, that has to be considered an approximation. I would not know about Argon use or "Souped Up" versions.

NASA has something to say: https://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/tech … %20percent
Quote:

The ion propulsion system's efficient use of fuel and electrical power enable modern spacecraft to travel farther, faster and cheaper than any other propulsion technology currently available. Chemical rockets have demonstrated fuel efficiencies up to 35 percent, but ion thrusters have demonstrated fuel efficiencies over 90 percent.

So, yeah, I would like to see cheats on the Rocket Equation. It might also be possible that Magnetic Bubbles could help move Filling Stations, without expending Argon. If you get beyond the Earth's magnetic field the Solar wind could help. Both the Electric Rocket and a Magnetic Bubble propulsion need electrical power. So, I think that possibly a combination of them might work in some situations.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-08 22:25:28)

Void · 2023-03-09 10:17:03

I did this materials in this other topic, which I feel can be here as well: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 52#p207252

Quote:

Looking again at the Video by Anton Petrov again, they mention that the Silicon produced is of a high quality, suitable for high efficiency solar panels. It does not confirm that these panels will be high efficiency though. I am supposing that they would be.
So then can solar panels on the Moon produce enough energy to make more solar panels? And what is the rate of deterioration of the solar panels.
https://solvoltaics.com/energy-make-sol … each%20day.
Quote:
We can tell you if you wonder how much energy it takes to manufacture a single solar panel. Though the answer is highly variable, in general terms, it takes about 200kWh to create a 100-watt solar panel.
In this article, we discuss:
The energy needed to make solar panels
The reason why it is a variable answer as to how much energy it takes to make solar panels
The carbon footprint of solar panels
How solar energy benefits the environment
But, as mentioned, the number is not as straightforward as it seems. Keep reading, though, and we go into just what that means.

How Much Energy Does It Take To Make A Solar Panel?
It takes about 200kWh of energy to make a single 100-watt solar panel.
How much energy does it take to make a solar panel? How you answer that question depends on the solar panel. Since there are different types of solar panels, there will be different answers.
In addition, those answers will change as technology continues to improve the process we manufacture solar panels. If you are concerned that solar panels use more energy than they create, you can simmer down, as that myth is 100 percent false.
We are talking about the energy needed to make the panel physically. However, that may seem like a lot of energy, and one solar panel will produce a lot of energy in its life. Here’s a look at that:
One hundred watts x 10 hours of direct sunlight per day = 1000 watts of energy per day. 1000 × 365 days per year = 365kWh of energy per year.
Because most solar panels have a warranty of 25 years, you are looking at 9,125kWh of energy over its lifespan. To paint this picture a little brighter, let’s assume it costs $0.10 for a kWh of energy. So:
$.10 x 200kWh = $20 = About $20 in costs to make the panel.
$.10×365 = $36.50 worth of energy per year
$36.50 × 25 years = 912.50 in energy production per lifecycle (25-years.)
X 20 panels = $18,250 in energy production for a 20 panel array over 25 years.
See also Dual Battery for Solar (Goal Zero Power Systems)
You can change the cost of energy to fit your location as energy costs change. For example, if you thought the cost of producing a single collar panel was high, you might have a different opinion now.
About a $20 investment in energy results in creating a single 100-watt solar panel, bringing in a return of $912.50 – $20 = $892.50 per year.
Solar Energy Power Farm. Aerial View Of Solar Panels. - Solar Panel Installation, Mounting, Settings, And Repair.
Solar Energy Power Farm. Aerial View Of Solar Panels.
How Much Energy Does It Take To Produce A Solar Panel?
There are a lot of varying factors involved in answering this question. We have a “loose” answer: it would cost about 200kWh of energy to produce a 100-watt panel.
However, the reality is a little different as energy costs are at different prices in different areas. You also have to define what “the solar panel” is before you can answer that question.
A better way to look at this might be to ask how much energy a solar panel produces in its lifetime and how that green energy helps the environment.
For example, making 1 kWh of electricity using traditional methods produces about .92 pounds of CO2 (Carbon dioxide.)
That fact is one of the reasons that solar energy is so valuable to the environment. Aside from the energy needed to produce the panels, which now can be solar, solar energy does not produce CO2.
To determine how much energy a solar panel can produce in its lifetime, you need the following information:
The wattage of the panel
The average number of hours of direct sunlight per day
Average hours of sunny days per year
To determine how much energy a solar panel produces in a day, multiply the watts times the number of average direct sunlight the panel receives.
For example, a 300-watt solar panel receiving five hours of direct sunlight will produce 300 watts of energy per hour or 1,500 watts per day.
Convert that to kWh, and divide the total amount of watts produced by 1000. In the example, you come up with 1.5kWh per day.
Solar Energy Plant. - Solar Panel Installation, Mounting, Settings, And Repair.
Solar Energy Plant.
Annual Production Of A Solar Panel
To figure out the annual energy production, take the daily production and multiply it by 365 days. So in the example, we had 1.5kWh per day, making an annual energy production of 547.50kWh per year.
See also Ecoflow Solar Panels (Compatability + Efficiency)
So if 1kWh of energy is produced using traditional electricity and one pound of CO2, then a solar panel producing 547.5kWh keeps 547.50 pounds of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere annually.
Suppose you consider that the average home has a solar array of 20 panels. In that case, you are looking at a hugely positive impact on reducing greenhouse gasses before they are even created.
What Is The Carbon Footprint Of Making A Solar Panel?
Sources listed below suggest that the carbon footprint of a solar array is roughly 20 times smaller than that of a power plant producing the same amount of energy.
The solar array has a first-year carbon emission rating of about 50g. That is due to the way solar panel manufacturing occurs.
As the solar panel ages, it earns back the carbon emissions produced during its manufacturing. In 3-4 years of operation, the solar array enters net zero, producing enough clean energy to erase the energy and greenhouse gasses used to create the array.
It is possible now that a solar panel manufacturing plant could use solar energy rather than traditional energy created by burning fossil fuels. If that were to occur, the carbon footprint of the panels from that plant would leave the plant at a net-zero status.
Do Solar Photovoltaic Panels Produce More Energy Than It Takes To Make Them?
Theoretically, solar photovoltaic panels can produce more energy than it takes to create them. However, in reality, how you answer that question depends on:
The number of direct sunlight hours the panel receives each day. A solar panel that receives shade in the afternoon will produce far less energy than the same solar panel in a desert that receives full sun for 8-10 hours daily.

The size of the panel is essential.
Subscribe to Sol Voltaics!
Get updates on the latest posts and more from Sol Voltaics straight to your inbox.

How much carbon dioxide is produced per kilowatt-hour of U.S. …
Solar Energy in the United States
Benefits of Residential Solar Electricity | Department of Energy
Solar explained Solar energy and the environment – EIA
Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Solar Photovoltaics

General Solar Panel FAQ
What Problems Do Solar Panels Solve?
In environmental terms, solar panels can potentially solve a handful of problems, including;
1. Air pollution
2. Water pollution
3. Greenhouse gases
4. Reduction in fossil fuel use
For individuals, solar energy allows you to become completely self-sufficient when it comes to your electricity needs and can save you a lot of money in the long run.
What Are 3 Important Uses Of Solar Panels?
The three most important uses of solar panels are;
1. Solar electricity. This can be used to power almost any appliance in your home, including TVs, computers, and fridges.
2. Lighting. In addition to the use of low-power, LED lightbulbs, solar panels can provide an efficient, low-cost, and environmentally friendly way to provide lighting to homes.
3. Portable solar. In our modern, always-connected lives, our phones, tablets, and computers are almost always with us, and all run on batteries. Portable PV chargers can help keep our batteries topped up no matter where we are, as long as there is some sun to charge them.
Do Solar Panels Give You Free Electricity?
Once the cost of the array is paid in full, the energy it produces is free. There are ongoing maintenance costs, too, such as annual panel cleaning, etc.
How Much Will My Electric Bill Be With Solar Panels?
Suppose your solar array includes a solar battery backup system, and it is large enough to fully cover your energy usage per day. In that case, your monthly electric bill will be next to zero dollars, even with a grid-tied system.
If your solar array does not include a solar battery backup system, then at night, your house or business will use grid electricity. That cost will vary but expect to pay from 1/3-2/3 of your average electric bill, and that cost will fluctuate seasonally.
Do You Save Money With Solar Panels?
The simple answer is, Yes, you save money with solar panels. There is an initial upfront cost, but since solar panels are warrantied for 25 years, you will save money over time. You will also begin to see monthly savings in energy bills, but there are other ways that solar panels pay you back. Those include:
1. Adding value to your home or commercial building
2. Monthly decreases in energy costs
3. The ability to add more energy appliances without increased monthly costs
4. The potential for tax credits for going solar
Can Solar Panels Power A House 24-7?
Most definitely! Solar panels can certainly power a house 24-7, with the addition of a high-quality inverter and a suitable battery bank, of course. To power, a house under normal usage will require a massive solar array, though, and there will be a very expensive initial financial outlay.
Do I Need To Tell My Energy Supplier I Have Solar Panels?
This depends on where you live, but in most cases, it’s not necessary to inform your energy supplier that you have solar panels. That said, you may be producing excess power with your solar system, in which case you may be able to sell that excess power back to energy companies.
In this case, you’ll naturally need to be in contact with them.
What Are Solar Cells Known As And Why?
Solar cells are also called photovoltaic (PV) cells. They are called so because the term ‘photovoltaic’ literally means light i.e. photo and electricity i.e. voltaic.
These cells generate electricity through the photovoltaic effect. This effect basically causes the generation of free electrons from the semiconducting silicon material of the solar panel when sunlight hits its surface.
What Type Of Solar Panels Are Most Efficient And Why?
There are currently three types of solar panels available in the market that are:
1. Monocrystalline
2. Polycrystalline
3. Thin-filmed
Among these, monocrystalline solar panels are known to be the most efficient among all others.
Does Heat Enter Your Home Through The Roof?
Absolutely. Heat enters your home through your roof, and on a hot day your attic can get up to 150 degrees Fahrenheit or more. Through conduction, heat from the sun warms your roof which then warms your attic and the rest of your home.
Sol Voltaics is an affiliate and an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases - at no extra cost to you.
Subparts from the above quote:
How Much Energy Does It Take To Make A Solar Panel?
It takes about 200kWh of energy to make a single 100-watt solar panel.
In addition, those answers will change as technology continues to improve the process we manufacture solar panels. If you are concerned that solar panels use more energy than they create, you can simmer down, as that myth is 100 percent false.
One hundred watts x 10 hours of direct sunlight per day = 1000 watts of energy per day. 1000 × 365 days per year = 365kWh of energy per year.
So, if the above is true, then the first year may pay back 1.825 times the creation energy, captured in the first year. And maybe 20-30 years of life, but on the Moon that is not at all certain. They may decay at a faster rate on the Moon.
I am going to suppose that on the Moon a similar proportion of the day will be available. But no clouds, and also maybe a little more sunlight as no atmosphere.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/23/americas … index.html
Claim:
The panel is designed to make best use of the light in space, which doesn’t pass through the atmosphere, and so retains the energy of blue waves, making it more powerful than the sunlight that reaches Earth. Blue light diffuses on entry into the atmosphere, which is why the sky appears blue.
“We’re getting a ton of extra sunlight in space just because of that,” said Paul Jaffe, a co-developer of the project.
Of course, we don't have the details of what the Blue Origin "Moon Panels" can do. We also don't know if thin mirrors can help. And we don't know the deterioration rate of the panels. They will have some added protections, I believe.
But this looks Rather Good.
Done

Not that it will happen, but what if 40% of the Moon were covered with these solar panels? Let's say, all on the far side of the Moon, just to be weird.

Would the value of that installations power production justify bringing in Organic Chemicals? From the Earth, or NEO's, maybe even Mercury and Venus, Mars/Phobos/Deimos, Asteroid belt.

I am not going to rule out Mercury as it has lots of Carbon it appears and ice sheets at it's poles perhaps. The environment is a bit of a cross between the Moon, Earth, and Mars, but with a scorching sun.

https://earthsky.org/space/mercury-wate … University.
Quote:

Bottom line: A new study by scientists at Brown University identifies three large ice sheets at Mercury’s poles.

Solving for the Moon may offer solutions for Mercury, there are similarities. To get humans to Mercury, I would suppose is an enormous effort, probably requiring a potent type of Nuclear Fission, I would suppose.

Mercury would be a big step, but both the solar flux and the solar wind would favor the movement of cargo from Mercury to our Moon.

But I suppose that at first the Moon would provide the water, and maybe some CO2/CO. Then also from the Earth, maybe economical, and then NEO's, and then perhaps on to Mercury.

I do wonder about artificial gravity on the Moon.

It is a pity that we did not find harmony with Japan sooner: https://learningenglish.voanews.com/a/j … 0on%20Mars.
Quote:

This planned system would create artificial gravity within an enclosed space on the moon’s surface.
The project is a partnership between researchers at Japan’s Kyoto University and engineers at Japanese building company Kajima. The researchers said a centrifugal system could also work on Mars.

I can hardly comprehend some of it, but that is the value of dealing with a different culture, different solutions to learn.

So, perhaps such installations on the Moon would be practical, as technology advances. Really if the Moon had a lot of Carbon and Water, and I suppose some Nitrogen, it would be a no-brainer that you should build on the Moon, rather than lift huge quantities of Mass into orbits. (Although I also favor that).

I have had further though about a "Lithobraking Drop Ship Method". At first it looks as though the objects dropped would accelerate to an infinite speed. But acceleration is time limited. The more you speed up though falling though the passage of time the sooner you lithobrake. So, there can be an acceptable height to drop materials in a gravity well, that will not render them Useless.

This might be seen as a bit like a "Sky-Crane" method, but not particularly that gentle.

For Carbon, to you drop dust to fall in a plume? Or do you want it to have chunks of structure which may shatter to absorb some of the energy of the fall? Should you just drop a bag of some type of Carbon?

Similar question for Water ice.

CO2 Ice seems like a harder case.

In the Early days of accessing the Moon, can you also consider dropping powders of chemicals, maybe metals, and would that be as a dropping plume or a bag of stuff?

Pseudo Ping-Pong Balls are amusing. Plume or bag? How warm are they, what are they made of? What is inside of them?
They are after all their own shock absorbers. Do you put a bit of magnetic materials in them so that a robot can collect them with magnetism?

For a drop, a drop ship may not spin, and in that case, it would probably have a distribution of engines not at the center. If one engine fails, you may lose the whole ship. But if your drop ship spins You may have the "Drop Ports on the sides of the bottom and so then may have engines at the center bottom of the drop ship, and a collection of engines may more easily compensate for a single engine failure. You deploy the plume or bag using the Moons gravity and the ship's spin.

It seems to me that a Pseudo Ping-Pong ball could have powders or beads of some materials inside of it partially filling them. And so that may have some interesting lithobraking characteristics. Obviously, height of drop, gravitational field, and qualities of the materials will matter. Do you care if the balls shatter?

Do you have a gases in your balls? What kind, what is the temperature of the balls? This would be a factor for bounce. If so, most likely on average, you don't want the balls to shatter. I suppose I am tilting toward Schoolchild humor, but really if I say balls at this point you can understand I do mean special spheres that might be dropped in a gravity well, to provide some materials for a habitation effort.

For Mars we might actually have an air drop with some limitation on velocity by drag and not so much time limited in a gravity well.

And of course, how big are the balls? Beach Balls? Tiny Balls? Giant Balls, like an Air Bag?

Compartmentalized Balls? A lower compartment of a "Ball" might pop or crush to protect another compartment in the "Ball".
Ballis inside Balls might be easier to deploy appropriately to the Moon, perhaps the outer ball pops to protect the inner "Ball".

In such a "Ball" if the pop gas is water vapor, then if you drop into a shadowed crater, the exhaust may spew towards the regolith, and you might capture some of it as frost. Possibly this could work to a degree even in the Lunar nights elsewhere.

Actually your "Pop-Spew" gas could be a Hydrocarbon with an appropriate vapor pressure to be capture into cold regolith. That way it is mostly Carbon and Hydrogen, maybe a bit of Nitrogen. So, the temperature of the "Balls" will matter. In that case you may not care if your balls pop/shatter. The materials may be highly recoverable.

So, then the question of how to get the drop ships and their materials to the drop locations, is perhaps tied to how to get materials off of the Moon that may assist in that.

I don't feel that I have come up with a sufficient answer for chemical propulsion from Lunar Materials. I am sure others can do better.
So, if we are going to have so much solar panel activity on the Moon, I would then suppose a Mass Drive that can at least push a payload to a low Sub-Orbit of the Moon. For the final circularization, I am thinking of explosive firecrackers. I have not had much luck seeing how to make explosives from Lunar materials, but then again, I suppose others can do it. I don't want a singular explosion that has the potential to damage the Mass Driver seriously.

I am thinking of Shells of metal filled with some magnetic materials, and also some Oxides of the Elements from the Moon. This then allows a distribution of materials including Oxygen, and magnetic dust. These would be fired from the Mass Driver, and then the Fire Craker circulation would allow a pursuit ship to go get them. It is hard to say what the propulsion of the pursuit ship would be. It could the Argon Electric or perhaps Mass Driver expelling magnetic dust or Oxygen.

If magnetic dust, it could end up dropping to the Moons surface, or if fired at a very high speed might be dispensed to a different orbital plane than the Earth/Moon. And if fine enough, then the Solar Wind should sweep it away into the outer solar system.

So, then you have three electric driven propulsion systems. Mass Drivers, Magnetic Bubble, and Argon Electric. The reader can consider solar or nuclear power. Of course, the later has international and national restrictions as it should.

So, perhaps you can go out and fetch stuff from the Earth or NEO's or Mercury, whatever, and bring back materials to deploy to the Moon with Dropships.

Done.

.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-09 12:12:10)

Void · 2023-03-10 10:08:51

Some interesting speculation about rocket plumes on the Moon.

I have come to wonder how fast a Hydro Lox rocket plume would cool off as it expands. Very fast, I am thinking.

Being so hot and expanding, and being in a vacuum, the heat must radiate off of the ejected molecules very quickly.

So, if you land in a shadowed crater, may some of the rocket plume having cooled significantly then impacting the very cold regolith, would it condense and stick to the crater floor regolith? I suspect yet, and I suspect that could be optimized.

The brightness of the thruster flame might heat up the crater floor to some degree, so maybe this should be done where the fossil ice has already been mined out.

But then what may exist is a method to recover some of the water created in order to land or drop payloads.

It might even be that your only payload would be a great part of your tanks of Hydrogen and Oxygen. You might hover a ship, and let it drift sideways, basically spray painting the cold regolith. Perhaps you could even shoot electron beams at the regolith and your plume being (+) it may help in the sticking of the "Paint".

You would want to prohibit the launching of rocks into orbit so you would need to know what you were doing.

But we might fluff the Moons particles in the regolith with "Rebound Exhaust". And this might make a fluffier impact for objects dropped with a Lithobraking method used. Probably not parachutes used, but I think you can get the idea.

The drop ships might not even obit the Moon but go "Moon Direct", and delay firing engines as long as is safe, and then do a very high g slowdown and reversal into a dark crater, dropping their plume and their cargo drop materials.

I feel this is valid to this topic as it is for the assistance of Para Terra Forming the Moon.

As for Mars, can we "Fluff" a sand dune and drop stuff? We would not likely care to capture and harvest the rocket plume, but it may work and be helpful. I might be a preferred method for Lithobraking stuff to the surface.

----

I want to deal with Fire Fountain Remnants in this same post, as they might be assistive in getting rare Moon materials as well.

https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/fire-f … 20diameter.
Image Quote;
Quote:

A ‘fire fountain’ at Hawaii’s Volcano National Park gives an idea of what the Moon’s fire fountains looked like in its wild youth. – Liysa /Getty Images

So, if you dug into the rock of the above fire fountain on Earth, supposing it would be cooled off later, would there be elevated amounts of Carbon and Hydrogen in the residual rock? When a fire fountain dies out, does it plug up and then form a pipe of materials that may be enriched? Can you dig that pipe and get that as a resource?

This seems pretty good about the formation of the Moon: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ho … &FORM=VIRE

The argument that the top layers of the Moon could have outgassed it volatiles seems reasonable. But if you had enough Carbon retained in the lower layers to have "Fire Fountains", it suggests that the lower layers retained some, and I would bet that the expulsion process was not 100% efficient.

I believe an impact of Earth ejecting such a mass would be one of heavy compression and acceleration, and then of decompression and free-fall. Neither of those should eject all of the Volatiles out of the rocks. The rock may be partially or completely molten.

So, yes, a hot Moon surface should outgas a lot of stuff, but if you get under the compression of a kilometer of surface rock it is much easier to keep stuff dissolved in the rock. Same thing for the Mare which appeared later, I believe.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2012/0 … e%20result.

[Soviet Moon Lander Discovered Water on the Moon in 1976
The last Soviet mission to the moon, Luna-24, returned to Earth with water-rich rocks from beneath the lunar surface. But the West ignored the result.
By Emerging Technology from the arXivarchive page
May 30, 2012/b]

I am not at all anti-American, nor so much pro Soviet. I do agree that there were aspects of their existence that were worthy. It seems possible that at least in some places under the surface of the Moon, the rocks may retain more volatiles than the surface does.

I was around when the American space program was undermined by politics. It is understandable why. The leadership was desperate to survive the cold war world, and felt that enough had been done. Some have said that Nixon was jealous of Kenedy, and so hated the space program as well. I recall a preacher saying that he did not believe that God would allow humans to land on the Moon.

Many of them felt that the Moon was a waste of money, which is curious as the Moon project was the child of the WWII generation.

So, I think that the rejection of water on the Moon by the West was a geopolitical move, not American stupidity, or scientific error. It was deliberate, I am betting. America survived, and the Soviet Union did not, so who am I to regret what that gave to me?

But it has been a long crawl to claw back towards what should have been.

Quote from the above linked article about Soviet water findings: A Soviet team analysed the sample and found unambiguous signs of water in the rock–they reported that water made up 0.1 per cent of the sample’s mass. In 1978, they published the result in the Russian journal Geokhimiia. This journal also has an in English language version but it was not widely read in the West.

Some say that this is a small amount, but the Blue Origin solar panel making method might release that water while producing solar panels, I am guessing.

Query: Moon is emitting Carbon
And again Japan has good things to offer: https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 … 0highlands.
Quote:

Using data collected by Japan’s Kaguya lunar orbiter over a year and a half, Shoichiro Yokota at Osaka University in Japan and his colleagues have discovered that the moon emits carbon ions across almost its entire surface. Some areas, such as the moon’s large basaltic plains, emit more carbon ions than other regions, such as the highlands.

I would speculate that there could be residuals of plumes which may be "Mother Loads" for Carbon. Maybe. We should at least look into the possibility.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-10 11:21:31)

Void · 2023-03-10 11:28:34

The just previous post is very important, I think.

Most people tend to put the Moon down, but it is after all in the Habitable Zone. It does not have all the qualities of Earth but that is a good thing. Earth is almost too big to lift materials off from with current technologies.

The importance of the Blue Origins solar panels is huge. I know that others have contemplated the like, but Blue Origin has demonstrated a simulation of it.

An important thing might now be to see if there are any fossil plumes of materials the emerged from below that can be accessed. The to put solar power plants in place. And indeed, from my point of view study if drop ships can indeed drop materials and also "Paint" the cold surfaces of the Moon with materials like water ice and perhaps other things. Can the surface of the Moon also be temporarily "Fluffed" by rocket plumes to better facilitate Lithobraking?

This does not take away from Mars, rather it will in my opinion speed the path to Mars and the many asteroids.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-10 11:32:01)

Void · 2023-03-10 12:04:14

I am sure that there are many people who would enjoy a Chocolate Spaceship that you could land on the Moon. Of course! I don't have one though. But I do have a notion of a onetime ship that could land or even crash, and still be a good use.

So, reuse is often an objective. But the time spans to bring a ship back to a source of water for instance is rather long, and the energy and other resources required to do that are large. If you could mass produce a ship at the source of water, then fly it to the Moon, you could paint the Moon with water-ice, in a dark cold place on the Moon, and then crash it.

So, if it were Hydra lox, then you might fly it directly to the spot to paint, or as directly as physics will allow, per gravity wells, and then try to get the best freeze capture posture as is possible without ejecting major materials into orbit. So, the disposable ship would break into a cold spot, probably a crater, and hover at a certain altitude, until it had exhausted its propellants. Then it would crash and be salvage. Having exhausted its propellants, a major explosion may be avoided, and so less chances of ejecting things to orbit, and an easier job of salvage. So, the ship might not be made of too much Chocolate , but perhaps plastics where possible.

The origination could be from Earth perhaps. In that case I would hope that somehow Lunar materials might be involved such as Oxygen. The path for that might be a Mass Driver method, with some propulsive possibilities for the ejected loads. Not easy, if I understand Dr. Johnson's counsel.

Relativity Space and others (SpaceX also) are moving in the direction of 3D printed space hardware.

Relativity Space hopes that they can build spaceships on Mars.

Tesla Bot is emerging as well, and that could be helpful.

So, if there could be shipyards to build such things, possibly Mars/Phobos/Deimos may be good ones.

If we suppose Mass Drivers for the Moon, can we think of the same for Mars orbits? I would say yes.

I prefer the notion of Semi-Cyclers to go to Mars and attain orbit by Ballistic Capture. That alone, however, will not maintain an orbit of Mars indefinitely. Eventually the ship would wander out of orbit, I believe. But if the ship has propulsion of some kind, it can lock itself in. Electric Argon seems sensible.

Now as for Orbital Mass Drivers, perhaps they can have both Argon Electric and Mass Driver propulsion methods.

Because of microgravity, perhaps long Mass Drivers may be possible. If drop ships could be in part propelled to the Moon by shooting them off of such a platform, then the platform could modify its orbit while assisting launches of Drop Ships to the Moon. Reading Dr. Johnsons counsel, then these would have to be relatively low g or you cannot use liquid fuels. Perhaps we could consider tethers instead.

So if we have spin gravity habs, can we spin launch Drop Ships from Mars Orbits? It is not expected to provide all the energy to reach the Moon, only some of it. But is also intended to move the launch device from one orbit of Mars to another.

Maybe after all Spin Launch is our Mass Driver device. They already have some of the process tested.

https://www.spinlaunch.com/

This way you do not store electricity and then release propulsion with magnetic fields, you store centrifugal force and then release the Drop Ship. Very strenuous, but we don't need to go to the extremes required to fight the Earth's gravity. We just want to propel a main ship in Martian orbits by using Drop Ships as propellant. This then catapults the Drop Ships on their way, but they must also provide further propulsion, in order to go and paint the Moon with water and drop "Drop Spheres" onto the Lunar surface and then Drop Crash with a minimal explosion.

So, then you would need a mass production line to produce Drop Ships.

The Drop Ship ejector ship in Mars orbit may then move to different orbits while doing this and may also transfer mass to arrive Ballistic Captured Semi-Cyclers.

Shooting Spaceships out of a Spaceship to move mass.

That is rather goofy and good. Goofy-Good.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-10 14:45:35)

Void · 2023-03-10 14:46:50

I am bringing this here as it partially relates to the Moon: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 37#p207337

Using Oxygen as a heat pump fluid, involving solar panels and a gravel heat storage method.

Done

Void · 2023-03-11 10:07:30

The idea of propelling a space platform by ejecting small spaceships is an amusing puzzle. We certainly are not ready to put that onto the "Main Burner".

But is a chance for entertainment. Method could be mass driver, spin launch, or just simply spin tethers.

Spin tethers might be the deal for Mars.

A solar wind powered flywheel, could build up spin energy, and also a position of orbit which would contain a sort of energy as well.

Unlike spin launch and mass driver methods this is perhaps to be least prone to mishaps. That is a a guess of mine. Don't take it too seriously.

I am not very much inventing this, it has been discussed over time before.

Query: "Interplanetary travel with tethers"

General Response: https://www.bing.com/search?q=Interplan … a4c21dbe3c

Here is something: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … 6522001230

Here is something: https://radlab.engin.umich.edu/stories/ … tary-space

Currently at Earth out to geosynchronous and a bit beyond, space is dominated by the Earth's magnetic field. And pointing away from the sun is the tail of that field that even reaches the Moon and beyond at times. Other than that, the solar wind dominates.

For Mars, mostly it is the Solar wind that dominates. Imagine a pinwheel sailing on the solar wind. It is an easier vision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinwheel_(toy)
Image Quote:
I suppose I would call this a wind facing pinwheel. It may be able to sail on the solar wind or photon wind if we would call it that. In fact for this one I would suggest the photon wind might work better, and it might work inside the Earth's magnetic field.

I might also like an end over end tumbler magnetic sail. resembling a Q-Tip, a magnetic field at each end that alternately wink on and off, to catch the solar wind as it might be an advantage. This might be worthwhile for solar wind propulsion.

So, you may be winding up a flywheel, and with tethers you might harvest the energy to launch an object using a tether method.

Accumulation of spin is likely to be accompanied by changes in orbit. Both can be utilized as energy sources to launch an object. The launching by this method would then alter both spin and orbit of the flywheel.

It is also true that for tether systems that rotate in the needed direction a snatch event can be hoped to catch things, if it is done correctly.

So, with this perhaps little ships could be shot from Mars/Phobos/Deimos to intercept the Moon.

These might be drop-ships, and may include liquid propellants. Boil of might be managed by insulation of a vacuum bottle sort, similar to the proposed methods for Starships landing tanks. Active cooling might be involved.

So, not totally hopeless, but beyond our current means, and not to be among our current primary interests.

But an interesting puzzle.

Done.

Oh, I thought I might point out that unlike normal methods to use "Photon Winds" inertia, or "Solar Winds" inertia, storing in a flywheel, allows an almost instantaneous usage of stored energy. And the "Motor" is available for repairs and upgrades in the orbit of a world.

And this leads to a question about Argon Electric Ion Rockets. Can we spin up a flywheel that way? If it is for departure from the Earth/Moon, then it has a relatively constant solar flux, unlike if it is solar and travels to Mars. For travel to Mars, as you go further out solar flux diminishes.

Maybe my head is messed up, let me know, but I think that in the Argon Electric Flywheel, we are not so much fighting inertia as storing it.
If you have to push your Argon up to speed by shooting Argon out your back end, then that is the rocket equation thing again isn't it?

Interestingly can we have such a device in a bit about LEO, and one in proximity of the Moon? We think that we can get Argon from both objects.

Isn't that something. You have a platform including solar panels. The whole thing can spin but needs to not fly apart. That would be a terrible space junk problem if it did??? If it breaks it should break into big chunks not a mass of tiny objects. So, maybe it should be a bit further so as to not mess up LEO. You could have spin gravity devices on it as well. Hmmmm......Spinning within a flywheel.

This again: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a … 6522001230
Quote:

He describes a further refinement in which a steerable, curved ramp is added to give control over the spacecraft's direction of travel. In that way, we could launch daily, directly and at high speed to any solar system destination or even beyond. The minimum time to Mars is reduced to just 60 days. Table 1 shows the travel times to five of the planets; these times are much shorter than can be achieved with rockets today. Manned spacecraft would probably be launched at a time that allows for a shorter journey.

So, that sounds better than being swung on a tether end. You could start in the center of the flywheel, and then speed out to the perimeter, and perhaps somewhat beyond on extension ramps. Challenge again is for the platform to not spin apart and to not block the space-ways.

For Mars, we have lots of mass from Phobos and Deimos available.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-11 10:56:22)

Void · 2023-03-11 11:34:59

Well, so much for that. I am going to switch to a Martian topic, and here is a place for this orphan to dwell for a time, so that it does not get depowered by another "Mission to Earth" diversion: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 40#p207340
Quote:

Maybe what you want is this, for Hydrogen and CO especially.
If there is an enzyme that works for Hydrogen and then there should be one that works for CO and Oxygen, and Mars has those in its atmosphere, already made, and perhaps renewable.
https://phys.org/news/2020-02-green-tec … 0Geobacter.
There are microbes that Eat Hydrogen and CO from the Earth's air.
I have been searching for a long time for a method to utilize that resource on Mars.
https://newatlas.com/biology/air-eating … ica-artic/
Quote:
In 2017, the UNSW researchers discovered bacteria in Antarctica that gained their energy from a new source – the air itself. In low-nutrient soil, these bugs instead pull hydrogen, carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide out of the air around them, allowing them to thrive in environments where there’s very little other life. This phenomenon is known as atmospheric chemosynthesis.
And now in a follow-up study, the team has found that this ability may not be limited to Antarctica. The researchers found that the two genes previously linked to atmospheric chemosynthesis are abundant in soil in two other similar environments – the Arctic and the Tibetan Plateau.
They don't seem to say it, but these microbes also eat Hydrogen and that is how they get water in cold dry deserts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Mars
Quote:
General information[2]
Average surface pressure 610 Pa (0.088 psi; 4.6 mmHg; 0.0060 atm)
Mass 2.5x1016 kg[1]
Composition[3][4]
Carbon dioxide 95%
Nitrogen 2.8%
Argon 2%
Oxygen 0.174%
Carbon monoxide 0.0747%
Water vapor 0.03% (variable)
That amount of CO in Earth's atmosphere would be deadly, I think. So, it is more than is here, as likely microbes eat it here. This may suggest that microbes of that type do not live on Mars in abundance. There is more Oxygen on Mars than CO, but there is both.
Mars almost certainly has Hydrogen in its atmosphere as well.
But if we were to inject water vapor up to high altitudes on Mars, then we might bump up the amount of Hydrogen and Oxygen in the Martian atmosphere.
So, if we could tap into that energy supply, Mars would be a giant solar collector, powered by hard radiation and UV light.
It would be available at all times.
Done.

I think the above is too valuable to allow it to be ignored.

For a moment we could consider it to be a device for many places, including Earth as well.

This query then: "Generating Hydrogen with Sunlight"
General Response:
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Generatin … cc=0&ghpl=
So, there are any number of methods contemplated.

The thing about the discovery of the Enzyme from the microbe, is that it can work from small concentrations, and you do not have to separate the fuel and Oxygen from the damper gas. On Mars, the damper gasses might be CO2, Nitrogen, Argon. So you may have concentrations of Fuel and Oxygen below the Lower Explosive Limits, and below the Lower Flammable Limits, and a method may be developed to generate electricity from that, saving a lot of trouble.

Catalysts and solar concentrators can be involved.

It is almost certain that there is an enzyme that would work with CO or CH4, contrasted with O2.

It is conceivable that a bioreactor could be created where you may compress the Martian atmosphere a bit, and add a pinch of moisture, and you will get out and this would work 24/7 even in dust storms.

So, not a done deal but a place which may merit a drill down.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-11 11:51:19)

Void · 2023-03-11 11:56:19

Alright here is another orphan, Geothermal and Geostorage banking. I have not completely come to understand what this might be. It reminds me a bit of banking and a bit of electronics. Often it is good to visualize a thing, but sometimes as well it might help to verbalize it, and not just in speaking, but in written/keyboarded words. After all text is both verbal and visual. I need to see if I can retrieve a visual item. Here is the orphan: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 94#p206394
Quote:

It is good to temper the exuberance with caution and truth.
Maybe I could speculate on something.
First of all, some chances that solar cells will continue to improve: https://newatlas.com/energy/perovskite- … cy-boosted
Also, I am late to the party about Heat Pumps, but here is an interesting article: https://english.worldmagazine.it/301304/
Here is an attempt to describe something that might pay at high latitudes with sunny summers:
At higher latitudes you have more solar hours in the warmer half of the year than the cooler half.
Perhaps in the warm season, the Red Reservoir could be pushed to a high heat. This would be about equivalent to making fuel to burn in the winter.
In warm summer air you could preheat with air and then draw hard on the pink reservoir causing heat conduction from rock to increase.
Then you might push a high heat into the Red Reservoir, perhaps a high enough heat to generate electricity from it.
Size would then determine if it would be year around power.
I notice that the Heat Pumps can draw on some very cold temperatures. That is impressive, but they are doing it with much less sunlight and much less heat in the air.
And if you did use solar cells, you could use the heat pump to draw hot air off of the solar panels perhaps increasing the efficiency of them.
I will grant that I don't know if a heat pump can output a high enough temperature to the Red Reservoir.
Obviously, this could be used to heat, but I am hoping that somehow it can reach into electric production from the Red Reservoir as if it were a thermal battery.
I would not mind some feedback.
Done.

The purpose of this conversation is not to sooth my ego. I am not sure the value of it or if my head is working right on this item. The purpose is to develop a better understanding.

The pink reservoir is one from which you might borrow get thermal energy, with the expectation that the loan will be paid back by the geothermal reservoir heat of the Earth over time. My expectation is that a heat pump will be used to "Take the Loan", forcibly at a time when an excess of electrical energy is available. As far as banking goes maybe this is a bank robbery, but it is a Magic bank as it refills its vaults over time.

So, with Eavor geothermal wells we wait for the energy to charge the well, during times when other sources of energy are available. So, it is like a savings account, and we may make a withdrawal. The more we withdraw, the less valuable the remnant energy is. But if you size it right, that can work.

Now with a loan or robbery well, you have also altered the differential vibration of the rock, but you can really pull on it, as you have a heat pump and some excess electrical energy. The differential vibration then is like voltage. This should accelerate the flow of vibration from high to low levels of vibration and that is like current. The rocks will have a naturel resistance to the flow of vibration. So, E*I = P.

So, that is the similarity I see for this, to electrical. behaviors.

P = The rate at which the well recharges, and the harder you pull on it the faster the average rate of recharge.

The red reservoir is a savings account. It can store heat from the heat pump. At the present time, I think a temp of 180 degrees C is the hottest output from a heat pump available. Granted, that is not as good as might be wanted, and I do not know if better can be accomplished. I feel it should be possible but does not yet exist.

There is this: https://techxplore.com/news/2021-04-wor … %20degrees.

And this: https://ammonia21.com/norwegian-researc … %C2%B0F%29.
Quote:

Researchers from Sintef Energy Research in Norway, the Norwegian University of Science & Technology (NTNU), and industrial partner ToCircle, have developed a new high-temperature water-based heat pump suitable for many industrial processes, and capable of producing temperatures of up to 180°C (356°F).

So, actually the red reservoir could store useful levels of heat, and so neither the Pink nor Red reservoir have to be drilled as deep as might be otherwise needed for geothermal.

But I really think that if you had a steam of some kind of vapor from the pink reservoir, and it was already of a warmth, then compression might allow you to get above 180 degrees C.

The heat leakage rate out of the Red reservoir will be elevated if the heat level is increased but if it is a reasonable distance down, then the leakage rate to the surface will not be that much P.

So, I made a text out of it which is both verbal and visual, and so over time, perhaps truth will emerge.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-12 11:00:32)

Void · 2023-03-11 13:27:01

Just for more fun diverting back to #917: http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 57#p207357

Not that it might exactly be done, but in dreams, what if we converted at least part or all of Phobos to a giant flywheel? Of course, we would need molecular forces employed to hold it together.

There is definitely a place for dreams, and songs: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Swqw5a8I4b4

So, then we have a giant flywheel, and a method to spin and propel it in orbits. It may be a platform to launch spacecraft from.

Now, can it dip into the Martian atmosphere? Then Argon to maintain its spin and orbit. Then CO2 to become propellants, then Nitrogen to hill spin habitats with. The amusing thing might be that the Argon in part may be shot back into the atmosphere. And the Europeans have an ion drive that can run with Earth air. While normally we might think that a problem of drag exists, maybe not, if that which gathers spins.

Here is their engine: https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech … 0to%20Mars.
Quote:

The European Space Agency (ESA) has successfully tested a prototype ion engine powered by air that could provide propulsion for orbiting satellites almost indefinitely, and could even help power future missions to Mars.

Now a mind puzzle is, can you grab the Martian atmosphere and thrust for spin and orbit, and yet return most of the atmosphere back to Mars?

Puzzles can be time consuming, and I suppose entertaining.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-11 13:41:04)

Void · 2023-03-12 11:44:27

For continuation of the last post, maybe Isaac Arthur could give a review of tethers.

This one: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Is … &FORM=VIRE

Maybe this one: It is oriented to mega structures: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Is … &FORM=VIRE

I just revisited the second video, and now understand more how the ring is supposed to "Hang from Earth". To me it is like a kite in the wind.
The centrifugal ring is a substitution for the wind pulling the sail of the kite. And I holding the kite string am the anchor to the ground.

From the aspect of Murphy's law and my experience with maintenance, I do not feel very secure about it. I am old and perhaps slow to adapt.

So, I would like to return to the first video and think, perhaps to go a bit further with that.

If any of these geometric figures remind you of a religion or ethnic group, please get over it. They are geometric shapes. Tesla has a Star of David in their motors. The shape may be useful.

So, a possible nature of these shapes is that they would have a core platform and tethers depending from them that can reach into the upper Martian atmosphere. The plasmas encountered may be magnetic in such a way that electromagnetism at points on the platforms and tethers may attract to the plasma or repulse from it.

For Mars we have the plasma in the ionosphere which may be magnetic and the plasma of the solar wind that will blow a magnetic bubble around. Such a magnetic bubble on the end of a tether would then be blown by the solar wind, which may induce spin for such a device and may also displace the whole object in orbit.

So, these objects then are sorts of rotors for motors that involve Mars itself and the solar wind.

We have electrical systems on board which may provide the power for the magnetics of the rotors.

We may have skyhooks depending from these rotors: https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Is … &FORM=VIRE

Pick your flavor. So then the idea is to scoop up Martian atmosphere. This is yet another way to motivate the rotors as you might use the collected mass as propellants in the propulsion devices which may work with them.

Can it hook sub-orbital rockets? Well some might try. Can it boost ships up through the Martian gravity well? Well maybe.
Can if refill spaceships with propellants? Well if it can grab atmosphere, then it should be possible.

So, this is working from the concept of tethers and towards mega-structures, but in a somewhat more humble and perhaps attainable manner.

Mars/Phobos/Deimos may have the materials to build these, or maybe there is a better type or way?

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-12 12:54:28)

Void · 2023-03-14 20:23:21

I stumbled into a terraforming technique in these two posts.
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 41#p207541
http://newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php … 43#p207543
Quote:

And for Mars, in the polar areas, vertical might allow the panels to survive winter frost. And you might use the panels to change the albedo of the poles that way, so then a terraforming technique.

While they may be vertical, they may not really face a formal East and West.

Some more development might be interesting.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-14 20:26:28)

Void · 2023-03-15 11:06:11

I am still interested in orbital spin launch systems. This notion of superconductor is in dispute, but big magnets might be interesting for spin platforms.

https://www.futurity.org/superconductin … 20pressure.

This post is not all that much about that above article. I am thinking of spin platforms of different types.

A Argon Electric could work in Earth's magnetic field.

However, some place beyond Earth's magnetic field, then perhaps magnetic bubble propulsion might work.

A magnetic sail used that way would not be so much to move the platform from it's orbit, as to store energy in a flywheel.

So, the field(s) either wink on and off, or travel in a circle on a platform to stay off center from the center of spin, and to present themselves to pick up momentum from the magnetic bubble sail.

Similar might be done with photons.

The load to be spun off either would hang on a tether end prior to release or might slide down a ramp from the center of spin to an eccentric exit. (Someone else already has a patent for the slide thing).

The thing is, for this the motor of the propulsion system, the platform is more likely to remain in reach of human and robotic services and can receive more mass at its center.

It also has a continual amount of sunlight.

It is interesting.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-15 11:15:20)

Void · 2023-03-15 15:40:40

The notion of launching things with tethers and spin is not new at all.

Still, I am attracted to the phrase "Spin Engine".

At the very least these could be built to a similar purpose to the use of Rocket Boosters to get out of the Atmosphere.

So, a "Spin Engine Booster" could be associated with spin-gravity as well.

For certain purposes, g force rehab or habitation may not require a steady gravity simulation. Maybe 1/6 to 1 g.

So you may turn a orbital habitat into a flywheel. A energy storage device and so then send payloads off with it.

We can get Argon from Earth and Mars, maybe the Moon?

So, although I like the idea of harvesting spin from the solar wind or the solar photon flux, Argon electric spin would be more understandable for a start.

I spin can be harvested to boost loads going somewhere, then to some degree "The Rocket Equation" can be cheated a bit.

The engines and propellant are sort of not going anywhere. So, you are not really pushing them anywhere.
And of course, the same is true for the power supply.

Granted to launch a payload with spin, some complications have to be worked with.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-15 15:58:48)

Void · 2023-03-15 19:53:08

I found a good video about some thrusters that might be suitable for spin platforms.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgsJ94mkz2M

I will attempt to justify having this in the terraform section as I believe that the platforms will also support spin habitats, which I consider to be equivalent to para terraforming. Para terraforming could be a dome on the Moon or Mars, but here I am considering a pressurize enclosure in orbit of a world.

The describe methods of propulsion which I think might work very well on a spin platform. I think some of these are not as good for interplanetary travel. But on a Spin Platform excess weight of the equipment, is simply flywheel mass, as long as the spin does not explode the platform.

It is a pretty good article. They seem favor Lithium as a propellant. Possibly 25 times as good as chemical propulsion?

But they also give some nice conversation about Argon as well.

My reasoning is that the more of the good features that are included, the more bang for the amount of propellant mass.

I believe that, as I have said, where the features wanted for interworld transport may well be too heavy, or otherwise impractical, but for a Spin Platform, you may not care.

I will admit that spinning a load to launch to another orbit will have its special problems as well, but it is something which might be looked into.

Done.

I hadn't watched the whole video. The Magnetic Heat shield and magnetic parachute are interesting, but not a feature for a spin platform.

Hopefully, I have not gone too far away from something approaching value.

Done.

If you add this to the prior video, I believe that we can indeed have air breathing spin platforms with tethers that dip down into the atmosphere, and pluck air to the spin platform, and also thrust with that air.

It's amazing, if it is true and it looks like it is true.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Te … &FORM=VIRE

Done.

Yes! We do want to give the Moon an atmosphere. Even if very very thin. So, I suppose also needing a protective magnetic field.

Fantastic! But we might need Nitrogen for the Moon

The European device uses it. Maybe an Argon atmosphere thickened by adding a magnetic field might work. But the Argon might freeze at the poles.

Anyway, I am glad the Earth's atmosphere will work.

Done.

Last edited by Void (2023-03-15 20:51:13)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#901 2023-03-07 05:45:20

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#902 2023-03-07 10:28:45

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#903 2023-03-07 17:08:17

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#904 2023-03-07 17:37:19

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#905 2023-03-08 10:15:13

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#906 2023-03-08 10:33:13

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#907 2023-03-08 11:37:15

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#908 2023-03-08 13:26:40

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#909 2023-03-08 20:28:20

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#910 2023-03-08 21:16:14

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#911 2023-03-08 22:20:16

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#912 2023-03-09 10:17:03

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#913 2023-03-10 10:08:51

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#914 2023-03-10 11:28:34

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#915 2023-03-10 12:04:14

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#916 2023-03-10 14:46:50

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#917 2023-03-11 10:07:30

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#918 2023-03-11 11:34:59

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#919 2023-03-11 11:56:19

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#920 2023-03-11 13:27:01

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#921 2023-03-12 11:44:27

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#922 2023-03-14 20:23:21

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#923 2023-03-15 11:06:11

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#924 2023-03-15 15:40:40

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

#925 2023-03-15 19:53:08

Re: Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.

Board footer