Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

C M Edwards · 2002-06-12 11:48:48

Oh dear.

A horrible realization has just occured to me: with the exception of chicory, all major agricultural sources of caffeine are from tropical plants, which will be very hard to grow on Mars (it being at best equivalent to the terrestrial northern/mountain growing regions here on Earth).

The scarcity of this vital nutritional component may well place great hardship on the Martian civilization.

CME

Byron · 2002-06-12 14:18:50

"A horrible realization has just occured to me: with the exception of chicory, all major agricultural sources of caffeine are from tropical plants, which will be very hard to grow on Mars (it being at best equivalent to the terrestrial northern/mountain growing regions here on Earth). "

I don't think you need to panic. If we can build greenhouses to grow 'temperate' crops such as corn, lettuce, etc, on Mars, it wouldn't take much more effort to raise the greenhouse temperature the extra 5 or 10 degrees C to grow tropical crops. Actually, coffee is a 'cool tropical' plant, it'll do quite nicely at 15-20 degrees C or so. The lower ambient light levels may present a bit of a problem, but I think it could be remedied by placing reflectors around the greenhouses, along the sides of a crater, for example.

Byron

Palomar · 2002-06-12 14:55:05

CM Edwards: "Oh dear. A horrible realization has just occured to me: with the exception of chicory, all major agricultural sources of caffeine are from tropical plants, which will be very hard to grow on Mars..."

*Yeah, but at least instant coffee is in granulated form. For that matter, whole coffee beans can be sent to settlers or colonists, along with a grinder or two. I like gourmet coffee. However, I pity soda drinkers. Even if Pepsi, Dr. Pepper, etc., can be turned into a powdered drink and shipped to them, it won't taste good without carbonated water. Of course, keeping soda icy cold on Mars doesn't sound like much of a difficulty!

--Cindy

Phobos · 2002-06-12 15:22:55

However, I pity soda drinkers. Even if Pepsi, Dr. Pepper, etc., can be turned into a powdered drink and shipped to them, it won't taste good without carbonated water. Of course, keeping soda icy cold on Mars doesn't sound like much of a difficulty!

Considering all the co2 in the Martian atmosphere it probably wouldn't be too much of a problem having carbonated drinks. Of course they won't have caffeine which makes me wonder, why do they add caffeine? Is it just to keep people addicted? Does it add some kind of buzz? If I remember right caffeine doesn't have a taste.

What i'm about to suggest next may sound crazy. It probably is. If a large spacecraft is used, one of the most efficient forms of radiation shielding is water. You could possibly have fish swimming around in your radiation shielding. It might be a problem getting them out, though

I wouldn't mind flying to MArs in a giant aquarium.

C M Edwards · 2002-06-12 19:34:28

If we can build greenhouses to grow 'temperate' crops such as corn, lettuce, etc, on Mars, it wouldn't take much more effort to raise the greenhouse temperature the extra 5 or 10 degrees C to grow tropical crops. Actually, coffee is a 'cool tropical' plant, it'll do quite nicely at 15-20 degrees C or so. The lower ambient light levels may present a bit of a problem, but I think it could be remedied by placing reflectors around the greenhouses, along the sides of a crater, for example.

So, it's conceivable we could have native coffee on Mars. (Thank goodness! Freeze dried versions are barely worth drinking, much less importing. For a minute there I was afraid the trip was off! ) We might also look into chicory, too, especially for small, temperate greenhouses at bases where the astronauts have no taste buds.

Most sodas are artificially flavored, and the rest is mostly water. I see little difficulty in making them on Mars, provided a source of sugar is available.

CME

Shaun Barrett · 2002-06-13 02:13:06

One of the things which might cause trouble on Mars, with either tea or coffee, is habitat pressure.
I've always assumed that domes and other living spaces would have air pressure of about 500 millibars. At this pressure, water boils at 81.7 deg.C.
You know what that means?!! Cooking will be a nightmare unless you use pressure cookers routinely. And as for tea and coffee .... I don't like to think about it!!
You were right, C M Edwards, the trip is off!

Phobos · 2002-06-13 02:52:15

I guess if your a coffee addict you could just drink cappuccino. Gonna have to spend a lot of time in the exercise room though. Speaking of calories, will Mars astronauts just subsist on the normal 2000 calorie diet or will they need more because of heavy activity or perhaps less?

Byron · 2002-06-13 06:54:18

Speaking of calories, will Mars astronauts just subsist on the normal 2000 calorie diet or will they need more because of heavy activity or perhaps less?

Now that you've mentioned it, that was something I was thinking about as well...how much food the Mars pioneers would need to consume. Personally, I think it would be significantly lower than caloric needs here on Earth for the simple reason that the lower gravity will result in fewer calories burned for the same level of activity (walking, performing various physical tasks, etc.)

Since food will be at a *premuim*, and it's been proven that people can live on a much lower food intake than what the typical Westerner consumes anyway, I think the Mars astronauts/pioneers will take appetite-controlling drugs to limit their caloric intake, to let's say, a 1000 calories a day or even less. I'm not sure, but I think it's been determined that something like 1500 square meters of greenhouse space (about a quarter acre) would be needed to support each Martian resident on a continuous basis (That's 15 square kilometers for a settlement of just 10,000 people!!) If that figure could be cut in half, that would certainly make things a whole lot easier all around.

Palomar · 2002-06-13 09:54:38

Phobos writes: "Speaking of calories, will Mars astronauts just subsist on the normal 2000 calorie diet...?"

*I suppose that will depend, and not just on levels of activity (or inactivity). Considering that we humans all have our vices, pleasures, etc., it's probably pretty much a "given" that the astronauts won't have liquor or beer with them. Sex? I'm not sure I want to touch (pardon the pun) on that. Masturbation? Possibly more likely than sexual intercourse with another astronaut. My point is that, although they will be very busy while *on* Mars with chores, duties, assignments, scouting, exploring, etc., en-route is a bit different. They'll have the ability to exercise, and will have their books (probably electronic, right?), games, etc...but I think chances are good that they will be eating more both en-route to Mars or Earth, and during the mission itself. Sure, these will be highly trained and specialized people...but when the options for indulgence are minimal, they'll probably opt for food.

As an aside, it may be a good idea to include the option for gambling games for the crew. Humans need a level of indulgence.

--Cindy

MS member since 6/01

Palomar · 2002-06-13 10:14:48

Byron wrote: "I'm not sure, but I think it's been determined that something like 1500 square meters of greenhouse space (about a quarter acre) would be needed to support each Martian resident on a continuous basis (That's 15 square kilometers for a settlement of just 10,000 people!! If that figure could be cut in half, that would certainly make things a whole lot easier all around."

*Oh my god.

However, what if the crop yield for Settlement A is not good in one particular growing season? What if Settlements B and C have just enough to feed their own people?

What plans/preparations will be made or undertaken to have food reserves for times of low-yielding harvests? It might be in their best interest to grow as much as possible, ration it (generously, if abundance permits), and store some of it.

--Cindy

MS member since 6/01.

C M Edwards · 2002-06-13 11:54:08

Regarding the use of appetite suppressants and restricting dietary calories, I would be extremely hesitant to do this because people doing hard physical work need more food than sedate ones. Also, food and the variety thereof can be very important to the morale of isolated outposts.

I still have my worries about tea and coffee, because these are both insect pollinated plants. So is chicory. Tea and chicory may still prove useful at a Mars outpost because the leaves are consumed, giving a much higher return on the effort of hand pollination. Compare this to all the beans required for just a single cup of coffee, every one of which must be hand pollinated by Jose Jiminez.

I am not gravely concerned with the effect of air pressure on food preparation. If you let someone else make the coffee every morning, that?s someone else?s problem.

However, epinasty is a major concern in any Martian greenhouse that gets exposed to outside air. It can be even more drastic at low pressures. Epinasty is caused by exposing the plants to a bad gas mix, such as too much carbon dioxide, too little oxygen, or anything more than traces of oxidizers. Although they get a kick out of a little extra CO2, anything more than 100mbars or so C02 partial pressure is bad for their health. People start suffocating at around 30mbar partial pressure CO2, so the plants really can?t take over about three times more than the crew. Plants can get by happily with less than 1% of that. Their need for oxygen also means that the carbon monoxide in the Martian atmosphere is almost as toxic to plants as it is to us.

You cannot simply compress the native Martian air and feed it to the crops. It must be filtered through a heated platinum catalyst bed (an automobile catalytic converter would do nicely) to reduce the carbon monoxide first, and even so, it?s bound to take a few passes. It would still be very much worth our while to treat the air and use it, since it can be added to air from the habitat to make a good mix for the plants. However, we should grow the plants with hab air to get the most efficient use of the oxygen they produce and just trickle in some extra CO2 at a rate both plants and crew are comfortable with.

And yes, in case you were wondering, IMHO, all those visions of greenhouses with the ?special mix? atmosphere tended by farmers in oxygen masks are a bunch of baloney.

CME

C M Edwards · 2002-06-13 17:14:13

You know, it's been a while since I raised something. I'm going to start a terrarium.

CME

PS: I've got the urge to go edible. Any suggestions for pocket-sized food plants?

Pat Galea · 2002-06-14 00:59:23

Byron wrote: "I'm not sure, but I think it's been determined that something like 1500 square meters of greenhouse space (about a quarter acre) would be needed to support each Martian resident on a continuous basis (That's 15 square kilometers for a settlement of just 10,000 people!! If that figure could be cut in half, that would certainly make things a whole lot easier all around."
*Oh my god.
However, what if the crop yield for Settlement A is not good in one particular growing season? What if Settlements B and C have just enough to feed their own people?
What plans/preparations will be made or undertaken to have food reserves for times of low-yielding harvests? It might be in their best interest to grow as much as possible, ration it (generously, if abundance permits), and store some of it.
--Cindy
MS member since 6/01.

That's where the free-market comes in!

The price of the items is related to the supply and demand for them. In times of abundance, the price will probably be lower, and people will be able to stock-up in preparation for bad times.

In fact, in small communities, it'd probably be worthwhile deliberately employing some speculators (if they haven't set up in business on their own anyway). They'll squirrel away non-perishables when the price is low, and start retailing their supplies when the price goes up (e.g. when there's a bad crop). This has the effect of smoothing the price (and hence, the available supply) over time, and maintaining a more constant supply.

The only thing that could screw with this plan is if a mandate is passed that they must supply the food at a capped price 'for the good of the community'. In that case, there will be no incentive to stock up on food in good times, for they know they won't get any return on it; and the community will suffer with shortages.

Really, no overall plans need to be made. A free market will allow people to make their own individual plans and assessments of the likely future availability of food. It will never be perfect (people will always make bad estimates) but it'll almost certainly be better than any plan that is centrally imposed on all.

Byron · 2002-06-14 06:24:39

That's where the free-market comes in!
The price of the items is related to the supply and demand for them. In times of abundance, the price will probably be lower, and people will be able to stock-up in preparation for bad times.
In fact, in small communities, it'd probably be worthwhile deliberately employing some speculators (if they haven't set up in business on their own anyway). They'll squirrel away non-perishables when the price is low, and start retailing their supplies when the price goes up (e.g. when there's a bad crop). This has the effect of smoothing the price (and hence, the available supply) over time, and maintaining a more constant supply.
The only thing that could screw with this plan is if a mandate is passed that they must supply the food at a capped price 'for the good of the community'. In that case, there will be no incentive to stock up on food in good times, for they know they won't get any return on it; and the community will suffer with shortages.
Really, no overall plans need to be made. A free market will allow people to make their own individual plans and assessments of the likely future availability of food. It will never be perfect (people will always make bad estimates) but it'll almost certainly be better than any plan that is centrally imposed on all.

The free market works so well here on Earth because of the long-established systems of economic interdependence and large, diverse populations we have here. In the early days of Mars settlement, I don't think you'd be able to eschew planning and leave it up to 'speculators' and other free-marketers to maintain a constant supply of food. What works for us here on Earth won't apply on the Martian frontier.

For one thing, imagine if in a domed settlement, of let's say 2500 people, they had 4 years of good crops, and then on the fifth year, a global duststorm greatly reduces crop yields, not just that particular settlement, but all over Mars. The price of food would soar, and unless a LOT of food was put away by the free-marketers, the price of food would likely rise beyond the reach of affordability and most likely cause a revolt. There would be no way the majority of the people in the dome would put up with a few among them taking advantage of the food shortage to get rich, while people are still going hungry because they don't have the money to buy the food that's still available.

A much more sensible plan would be to figure out the long-range production of food, taking into account potential disasters such as power failures, dust storms, etc; like insurance companies do here on Earth, to make sure you have enough of a surplus each year to make up for potential shortfalls. Since this surplus would be maintained by a central, publicly-controlled authority, prices could be kept at affordable levels, although prices would have to rise to a certain extent during time of low yields to keep demand in check (and encourage people to pitch in to grow more food!)

Chances are, the Martian settlement would produce more food than needed, but I think all of us can agree it's best to have too much rather than too little when it comes to food.

I have the feeling that Martian farmers will be among the highest-regarded members of society...after all, your life would be in their hands..lol..this goes for the people that make the air for the domes, etc...

B

Pat Galea · 2002-06-14 08:40:50

You've made some very good points there, and I don't disagree with you on the whole.

Just a few comments:

...a global duststorm greatly reduces crop yields, not just that particular settlement, but all over Mars. The price of food would soar, and unless a LOT of food was put away by the free-marketers, the price of food would likely rise beyond the reach of affordability and most likely cause a revolt.

The free-marketers have the incentive to stock up on food supplies only if the central authority isn't also doing so, and if they are confident that they will be permitted to sell at the market price when the time comes.

There would be no way the majority of the people in the dome would put up with a few among them taking advantage of the food shortage to get rich, while people are still going hungry because they don't have the money to buy the food that's still available.

I agree that we want to avoid trouble . But remember that in times of shortage, the retailers of the emergency supplies are not necessarily getting particularly rich; they also have to buy supplies at inflated prices (even if these supplies come from their own stock; they miss out on the price they could have charged to a customer). Also, they have to recoup the investment they made when they bought up the supplies in the good times, and all the money they spent on storage for all that food.

Again, the only reason they'll be prepared to put in the huge amount of investment required to build up adequate stocks is if they believe that they'll be allowed to recoup the costs (with a good profit, admittedly) later. If they have the suspicion that people will 'demand' access to the supplies at 'reasonable' prices, then they won't stock up.

In fact, the one argument I can make for having a central authority (i.e. government) control the food reserves is to avoid this very problem. Ultimately, the economic cost of storing supplies will be the same (or worse) by having the government do it, but people don't see this cost directly. It's a bit of a deception, but I do understand why it might be considered necessary, even by those who understand that in strict economic terms it is not the optimal solution.

A much more sensible plan would be to figure out the long-range production of food, taking into account potential disasters such as power failures, dust storms, etc; like insurance companies do here on Earth, to make sure you have enough of a surplus each year to make up for potential shortfalls.

You said it: "like insurance companies do". There's no reason why a company can't also figure out these things when deciding how much stock to put by.

prices could be kept at affordable levels, although prices would have to rise to a certain extent during time of low yields to keep demand in check

The price level with speculation will be smoother because of the actions of speculators. By buying up stocks in good times, they reduce the amount of food available to consumers on the market, thus keeping the price a little higher than it otherwise would be. In bad times (when the lack of supply raises the price), they start selling, thus inflating the supply available, and reducing the price closer to its average level.

But on average, the price will be where it has to be. Economics is economics, and there's nothing that the government can do to change the fundamental nature of scarce resources.

Having said all that though, I do take your point about the potential for revolt in bad times. I'm only saying that speculators and the free-market will help resolve many of the problems of coping with food surpluses and shortages. In normal times (i.e. good and bad-but-not-too-bad times) this should be sufficient.

If the government feel the need to squirrel away extra resources for genuine emergencies (i.e. when there's actually not enough food to go round) then that's a different class of problem. That's more akin to a 'defense' or 'security' issue, and leads to a whole new area of debate!

I think all of us can agree it's best to have too much rather than too little when it comes to food.

Mmm... donuts!

Lil_vader · 2002-06-14 10:21:25

"Any suggestions for pocket-sized food plants?"

You might try Corsican Mint, Creeping Thyme, or Purselane. These are just what I can think of while I'm still waking up, I'll try to put together a longer list sometime.

C M Edwards · 2002-06-14 11:17:01

I'll have to put together a list myself, as I'll be sharing the work with someone else.

Ironically, upon reading up on the subject, one of the recommended plants for a terrarium is _Coffea arabica_. :0 I'll check the local coffee companies (There are four in my town, along with ten coffee shops -- God bless Louisiana. ) and see if they can supply me with unroasted viable beans. I'll do more research to see if I can take it to seed inside a terrarium.

I may be premature in my earlier assessment. Arabica might turn out to be the little bean that could.

CME

Lil_vader · 2002-06-15 17:54:07

Try looking in local greenhouses for coffee plants, too. Its a popular houseplant. I got one that's about 6 inches tall for about $5.

Phobos · 2002-06-16 12:29:30

I had no idea you could just go to the store and buy a coffee plant. Anyways, would insects make a good source of protein? Roasted locusts are a popular food in some cultures and I imagine they'd be high in protein. I remember seeing some in Mexico that were rolled up into tortillas. I didn't eat any, but I'm sure after the first bite you'll be back for more.
Then again, you might risk having hordes of locusts destroy your plants. It should be easy to keep the two apart though.

RobS · 2002-06-17 02:24:48

The closed cycle hydroponic systems being designed for spaceships only need 10-20 square meters per person to recycle waste and feed them a simple diet. I think the calculations for the orbiting colonies were about 50 to 100 square meters per person for agriculture. So I suspect a Martian greenhouse could feed people on 100 square meters per person, especially if supplemental lighting were used. Of course, all of this assumes very careful tailoring of water and nutrients for each species.

-- RobS

Byron · 2002-06-17 13:17:54

The closed cycle hydroponic systems being designed for spaceships only need 10-20 square meters per person to recycle waste and feed them a simple diet. I think the calculations for the orbiting colonies were about 50 to 100 square meters per person for agriculture. So I suspect a Martian greenhouse could feed people on 100 square meters per person, especially if supplemental lighting were used. Of course, all of this assumes very careful tailoring of water and nutrients for each species.
-- RobS

100 square meters per person to provide all of the Martian settlers' food needs?? That would be a remarkable achievement...and it would certainly make it MUCH easier to support a Martian community than if you needed over a 1000 sq/m per person of greenhouse space..lol.

Can you tell us where you got this info and how such intensive agriculture might be possible? I imagine a great deal of high technology would be involved. I'd love to know more...

B

Lil_vader · 2002-06-18 11:49:59

Eating bugs?!?!

If we're going to consider that route, then we should look into edible bugs that WON'T destroy crops. Bee larvae are edible, as are grubs and several varieties of butterflies. And, since we're looking into alternative sources of protien, we can't forget snails and earthworms (altough earthworms have to crawl in cornmeal for 24 hours before eating. Don't ask. )

C M Edwards · 2002-06-18 11:56:16

A person requires 1.1kg (2.4lb) food per day, according to an old NASA reference. If a year?s food had to be grown in a single crop, that?s 400kg that must be produced in edible food alone. Even assuming a quarter of everything grown could be eaten without worrying about getting the woody stems caught in one?s teeth, that scheme would still require about 1600kg of plant biomass to do it all in one shot.

Fortunately, crops can be staggered and many plants yield continuously over the course of a growing season. With at least four crops a year, the minimum a contained garden would have to yield is food for 90 days. If that 100kg requires 400kg total biomass, and if one can get an average yield of 4kg biomass per square meter, then 100m^2 will feed one person year round.

That?s a lot of assumptions, but I suspect 100m^2 is about right.

That 100m^2 doesn?t have to be all in one spot, flat on the floor. It can be two 50m^2 racks of shelves on top of each other in one giant greenhouse, twenty-five 4m^2 hotboxes scattered across the landscape, or whatever is most convenient.

CME

PS: Also, remember the most important rule of farming: Animals Have To Eat, Too.

RobS · 2002-06-19 01:23:14

One of the references to the area one needs for a closed life support system is this:

http://members.aol.com/dsfportree/ex84k.htm

That's a paper in Portee's fascinating "Romance to Reality" website that is well worth cruising through.

You can also hit a bunch of references if you do a Google search on "lunar wheat." A strange combination, but it pulls up a series of websites about growing wheat on the moon (which would apply to Mars as well).

-- Rob S

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2002-06-12 11:48:48

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#27 2002-06-12 14:18:50

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#28 2002-06-12 14:55:05

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#29 2002-06-12 15:22:55

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#30 2002-06-12 19:34:28

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#31 2002-06-13 02:13:06

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#32 2002-06-13 02:52:15

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#33 2002-06-13 06:54:18

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#34 2002-06-13 09:54:38

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#35 2002-06-13 10:14:48

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#36 2002-06-13 11:54:08

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#37 2002-06-13 17:14:13

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#38 2002-06-14 00:59:23

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#39 2002-06-14 06:24:39

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#40 2002-06-14 08:40:50

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#41 2002-06-14 10:21:25

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#42 2002-06-14 11:17:01

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#43 2002-06-15 17:54:07

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#44 2002-06-16 12:29:30

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#45 2002-06-17 02:24:48

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#46 2002-06-17 13:17:54

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#47 2002-06-18 11:49:59

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#48 2002-06-18 11:56:16

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

#49 2002-06-19 01:23:14

Re: Food! - Marsians=vegetarians?

Board footer