I agree that a low price from Starship and others would open a reality options for Mars, Asteroids, and the Moon, at least.
In terraforming Mars however, the method you mention could very well be accompanied by other tricks, and so the magnitude of the materials to be delivered from Earth could be reduced, and perhaps the cost.
Done.
]]>Especially powerful greenhouse gases, such as sulfur hexafluoride, chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), or perfluorocarbons (PFCs), have been suggested both as a means of initially warming Mars and of maintaining long-term climate stability.[19][20][49][32] These gases are proposed for introduction because they generate a greenhouse effect thousands of times stronger than that of CO2. Fluorine-based compounds such as sulphur hexafluoride and perfluorocarbons are preferable to chlorine-based ones as the latter destroys ozone. It has been estimated that approximately 0.3 microbars of CFCs would need to be introduced into Mars' atmosphere in order to sublimate the south polar CO2 glaciers.[49] This is equivalent to a mass of approximately 39 million tonnes, that is, about three times the amount of CFCs manufactured on Earth from 1972 to 1992 (when CFC production was banned by international treaty).[49] Maintaining the temperature would require continual production of such compounds as they are destroyed due to photolysis. It has been estimated that introducing 170 kilotons of optimal greenhouse compounds (CF3CF2CF3, CF3SCF2CF3, SF6, SF5CF3, SF4(CF3)2) annually would be sufficient to maintain a 70-K greenhouse effect given a terraformed atmosphere with earth-like pressure and composition.
Elon Musk suggests that launch costs using Starship may eventually decline to $20/kg. Let us assume that we manufacture flourocarbons on Earth, launch them into LEO and then transport them to Mars using a tanker on a free return trajectory. The tanker would not slow down upon reaching Mars, but would release its cargo before skimming the upper atmosphere and returning to Earth. We need to drop 150KT of CFCs into the Martian atmosphere every year to achieve a 70K warming. If it were to cost 5x as much to deliver the gas to the Martian atmosphere, then the cost of warming up Mars would be $17bn per year. That is about $2/year for each Earth citizen, or $17/year for each rich world citizen. That sounds like a bargain if the the prize to be had is a new world with human tolerable surface pressure and temperature. Maybe this is something we could begin doing relatively soon. It would turn the entire planet into habitable real estate within a century. Once Musk has perfected Starship, serious planning could begin.
The implications for the habitability of the planet are very significant.
1. If surface pressure could be doubled or trippled to 2KPa, then surface radiation levels will be substantially reduced.
2. A 10KPa pressure would allow some plants to be grown in unpressurised greenhouses. Humans could walk the surface in fairly minimal counter pressure suits, providing an additional 9KPa (1.3psi) skin pressure. These would be relatively easy to make.
3. A 20KPa pressure would allow all plants to be grown in non-pressurised greenhouses. Buildings would not need to be pressurised, just airtight with a slight positive pressure to prevent CO2 from seeping into structures. This would allow buildings to be made from concrete and rammed soil. Cities could be built in much the same way they are on Earth, but streets would need to be covered for pedestrian habitability.
Whilst colonisation could take place without terraforming, a warm surface with a 20KPa pressure would make it much easier for humans to live on the planet. It eases many of the costs around growing food and creating living space. If the population of Mars grows much beyond 1 million, then the benefits of warming the planet begin to justify its $17bn/year cost.
]]>I am happy that some items agree with what I think. I agree also that it has some good but negative points. I appreciate your evaluations also as to how to work with Mars. They are not wrong, just different to some degree from mine.
I am going to approach this by confessing that I am one of those who would primarily consider Mars to be a "Mining World". But of all the worlds that could be mined, it has very good conditions to adapt a agriculture and other human Earth patterns to.
Lesser worlds might be Ceres and Callisto, and others. These all have a chemical distribution, and solar power available.
Mars has better energy and does actually have an atmosphere. Ceres has better gravitation. Callisto? It is in the Jupiter gravity well.
So, then a half full glass.
In my opinion for Elon Musk, Mars is just a point "B" from his point "A". He has said that his job is not to solve Mars itself, but to solve how to get sufficient materials and pattern replications to Mars, but it is for others to solve Mars itself.
If a further shift of perspective, we can "Bezos" or "O'Neil" many worlds in our solar system? For me, if things can be done to "Improve" Mars, (From a human perspective), then that is potential gain.
I do think that using various tricks it may be possible to further inflate the Martian atmosphere. You have indicated this helps for radiation, but possibly inhibits Mass Drivers. I will say though that I expect that Mass Drivers could still work from high altitudes.
I am not in favor of nuclear flash bombs, but maybe they can do something of value even so.
I recall that if we could move the Earth as is to the orbit of Mars to replace Mars, there would still be some open ocean water. Also, this very glacial world would have deep level habitats on the ocean floors, as water piled up to high areas. So, the negative assessment of the article that you linked to.
But it is vastly far away to think that Mars could have an atmosphere like Earth. I feel that that is very far out of reach. Not impossible, but not any time soon, I should think.
My notions of possible methods are very available from "Index» Terraformation» Worlds, and World Engine type terraform stuff.".
I regard them as evolving.
It is rather silly that we should want to Bezos Mars, and Musk the Moon
Real though, I think.
Done.
]]>The resource requirements for terraforming are obscene. The author recommends paraterraforming as a more practical approach. A few things he doesn't pick up on:
1) If paraterraforming happens over a significant portion of Mars, there will be a surface warming effect that will result in substantial degassing, whether intended or wanted or not;
2) A doubling of atmospheric pressure would reduce surface radiation levels substantially, negating the need to build literally everything underground;
3) The present thin atmosphere is actually advantageous in some ways. It allows, for example, electromagnetic launch of ships and materials from Mars surface.
4) Once we have the ability to produce cast iron on Mars, creating pressurised living space will be a simple matter of heaping loose soil and rubble over a repeating cross-braced cast iron frame.
]]>It does seem like fun stuff. I think that we are going to continue to get closer to a possibility of a SSTO for Earth, that may have some economic value. I don't think we are in reach yet, but eventually, perhaps with some "RGClark Tech", it might happen Maybe Nano structured walls of some kind, someday might help.
But a cousin to your 2019 post, in your blog, may be much closer. I would intend to entangle parts of SpaceX technology, and parts of the Rocket Lab Neutron methods, and also "Nesting", in order to get something of potential value. A 2-stage affair, 1st stage based on Starship, 2nd Stage, based on the 2nd stage of Neutron, but sized up.
We can try various things. Reduced or absent heat Sheids where possible. Neutron landing legs for 1st stage, or launch tower catch?
As for the 2nd stage, I would intend that to be lightweight and made much as the Rocket Lab 2nd stage of Neutron. No heat shield, it needs a ride home from orbit inside of an orbital fully decked out Starship.
Really when we are talking rockets, we are talking "Noisy potential bombs". The bigger, the noisier, and the bigger, the bigger explosion, should things go wrong.
I don't know how many places a 6 or 9 engine Starship 1st stage could take off from on land, but there may be some. It may have favor over having to launch to and from seas. And such launch/landing sites might be far enough away from major cities that they might be allowed.
But for the 2nd Stage to be brought back down with a full decked out Starship, then you also would need a sea-based landing place as well, I think???? Nearby, and a barge to take the 2nd stage back to land and so on. Maybe a Helicopter/blimp?
Anyway, the 1st stage Starship, made of Stainless steel, may only need heat shielding like that of Super Heavy.
The reason to want to make the 2nd stage of composites would of course be weight. Rocket Lab claims to have a "Quick Build" for this. Perhaps it can be sized up?
As this "Side System" would likely not be for humans, it is possible that there can be landing/launch sites where the Superheavy/Starship and Starship/Neutron (Pseudo-2nd Stage), method might be allowed as it should be remote from sensitive areas such as major cities.
And then you might indeed consider a 3-stage method, in which case, I am guessing the 3rd stage is likely to be expendable or re-used somewhere other than LEO.
That is what I have for it so far.
Here is a link to the proposed Neutron rocket, for other readers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_La … y%20market.
Done.
]]>This is likely of insterest per Starship as Moon/Mars bases.
Quote:
New update on how SpaceX will use Starships to build Moon and Mars bases.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ne … &FORM=VIRE
And this is sort of an update about the notion of a "Stretch Starship".
Quote:SpaceX's crazy new Starship upgrade will change everything! Seriously, though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YpcrY5gTkM
So, I am liking the drift of things per these articles.
It is probably good to start strong, not wimpy, as long as forward planning for what is likely to be possible to make come is done periodically.
Per the 2nd article, SSTO is mentioned for "Stretch", but I am even more interested in the Starship itself perhaps becoming a 1st stage, and perhaps not needing as much heat shielding. A wish would be to not need tiles at all, but that may likely be unattainable. I am not sure what the heating would be if it were to have a travel profile more like the Superheavy will. In my thinking, a Superheavy/2nd stage
use would allow more launch sites to be used, which may reduce congestion. I am not sure if this would have fairings attached to the Starship that would open up, or just to have a blunter point on the Starship and mount a 2nd stage on that. Maybe none of the above, but I am interested.
Perhaps such a 2-stage device could work for the Moon and Mars as well. Don't know.
Done.
You know I like the SSTO discussion , but on a less controversial issue giving the Starship three more engines, bringing its engines to 9(nice homage to the Falcon 9 that started it all), means it could launch from the ground. This brings up a very important point. By making the Starship ground launchable, then it could also launch its own upper stage. This harkens back to a very obvious point, and I'm surprised that Elon and SpaceX can't see it. Every transport system going back to even the horse-and-buggy days, came in different sizes. This one-size-fits all approach SpaceX had been promoting for SuperHeavy+Starship won't make sense economically.
So producing a third stage, which could also be used as an upper stage for just the Starship, gives you lots of options for your launch systems. Quite key is the 3-stage version could launch a manned lunar mission in just a single launch. The current idea of using 8 to 16 launches just for refueling is simply untenable.
See discussion here:
Starhopper+Starship as a heavy-lift launcher. Triple-cored Starship for super-heavy lift. 2nd UPDATE, 9/2/2019: Starhopper as a lunar lander.
https://exoscientist.blogspot.com/2019/ … -lift.html
Additionally, its possible, I think likely, the Starship could also in itself be SSTO. Coming up with the new third stage, means you might also be able to get an even smaller SSTO. This would be important to opening up the launch market for private owners who could afford the smaller reusable launcher.
Robert Clark
]]>So, this feedback relationship would to a degree buffer the warming/melting of Antarctica.
It's likely a good thing.
Done.
]]>Quote:
Antarctica: 'What happens if the 'doomsday' glacier collapses? Just have a think.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=An … &FORM=VIRE
I actually was going to deal with a video about rupturing glacial lakes. They can be dammed by ice or moraines of stony rubble.
They can easily break and cause floods.
My interest in the lakes as you might suspect would be that on Mars if it is terraformed, then glaciers are pretty much going to be a common thing. Good to know how to handle these things.
But.....Back to the "Just have a think" video.
I have had three things pop up in my mind on these issues this morning:
1) The global loops of currents he mentions are a system that could easily oscillate over time on their own. However, I am not proposing that they are not at this time being affected by current events including human activities.
2) I am aware of feedback for Lake Superior in the seasonal cycle. If the lake freezes over, then there is less evaporation, and the water levels tend to rise. So, I am going to suppose that if more open water develops in Antarctica, then I expect more evaporation from exposed sea water, and so then likely more snow inland, which may tend to balance the sea level out. If warmer water emerges to the top, then there will be even more evaporations and snows.
3) Finally, it has occurred to me that for both Lake Superior, and Antarctica, the more exposed water vs. ice cover over water, the more photosynthesis, so this curiously should suck CO2 out of the atmosphere, and even perhaps Methane, both said to be greenhouse gasses.
I worked on production lines, and so feedback, and instrumentation at times in my life, and I like to be complete, and I am of the opinion that I can usually comprehend complexity in such systems. I don't like to be incomplete.
Done
OK, so I had the wrong link for the "Just have a think" video. I have corrected it now.
Done.
]]>I confess that I get rather puzzled and frustrated these days, as it seems possible to me that not nice people are actually feeding on the populace. I don't like that. To seek to take servants/slaves, to get into their heads and try to extract juices, so to speak like some sort of blood sucking insects??? Well, I think that there is some of that. Patience though is required. It is so easy to think oneself to be the victim, when in reality someone like me has had also fortune of some small value. I will not go tilting towards windmills, with my old eyes going bad.
I was working on some other members efforts, when I got scared, that I had not thought correctly, but then had an insight, which very possibly others had already achieved. In any case, there can be a chance for good. The chance should be taken, I think.
I am thinking about Urea bricks. Here there can be a problem as the shark minds may think that they have a verbal in. Well, they don't.
Urea on Mars is a thing that we may want to manufacture, if the notion of we include the virtual "Me" who will likely be dead by that time.
These people are just weird, even though they pose to be the "Normal". I feel that in time this will be understood, in the viewing of the past.
No big thing though.
The insight I feel I had was that Perchlorates on Mars seem to be reported to have Calcium in them. So, when processed, they might emit Oxygen, perhaps with biology used, not sure.
So, I am not sure that Urea would be the only chemical that the microbes might enjoy, but in the Urea Bricks, Calcium is a need apparently.
I don't feel that the sensational articles have stressed that enough, but we might be lucky as what we might need for Mars may be quite available.
I have thought about putting fiber into 3D molded polygons of bio-bricks. In this case, my interest is that these bricks will not have high heat and so organic fibers may be included into them.
I am currently thinking of some sort of "Roman Arch" where a square outer perimeter, had an arch or a circle "Vold" in it
Perhaps I will make some primitive drawings. Anyway, there certainly could be other forms. But I see these large "Blocks" to be pressed together to form pressurized spaces perhaps.
I will criticize some of the members as I think that they may not well enough understand the economics of production. To find raw materials and turn them into a resource, and to use repetitive formations to solve needs. Perhaps I am too harsh.
Still curse me or not, I hope I have touched on something useful.
Done.
]]>I guess I will put this here, and the moderators can do whatever it is they may want to do.
Quote: "Are We Martians? With Dr. Robert Zubrin"......Event Horizon.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ar … &FORM=VIRE
One thing I really like is the talk about aircraft for Mars.
Helicopters
Rockets that entrain Martian atmosphere to assist in propulsion.
Done.
]]>I will try to build on that, but also veer towards solar cells, anti-solar cells, greenhouses, radiation protection, and I suppose some other things.
To start off I will put some reference materials.
I seem to have been moving towards this at times as can be seen by my posts: #127 & #133.
Quote:
Concentrator photovoltaics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentra … tovoltaics
Here is a possible shape for a "receiver" for a collection of Heliostat "Transmitters".
Quote:
Quonset hut
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quonset_hut
Such a shape is not the only one that might be used, but it is a fair start.
With Starship, and space developments that are suggested by reading, I anticipate that we should not only be thinking of Mars, but of course Luna, Mercury, Ceres, and Callisto, to consider using these techniques at.
I would not rule out the used of an actual modified Quonset Hut but would divert in the direction or Roman Arches with brick-like materials.
Here are some images: https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Ro … BasicHover
Of course, for different worlds and purposes, different profiles would be used.
Let's just start with one that is made of brick, and where it's ends point East and West. As I have said, by no means is this the only option.
If this structure is mostly for energy, then I can suggest the following.
For the Moon, thick brick to hold heat, and "Feather Windows" at each end. See my previous posts #127 and #133.
Solar Cells on the inside surfaces.
Anti-Solar Cells on the outside surface.
Heliostats in abundance to shine light into the windows at each end, during the Lunar Day.
For Mars it could be the same, but perhaps not as thick for the walls, because solar is ~24+ hours a "Day" except for dust storms.
So, then this thing is an electric source, and is its own battery.
Oh, I left out the Earth. Well sure.....Canada, Alaska, (Boris Badin off) , Greenland? and so on.
Lots of other places such as 49 other states, USA and whatever.
Now the windows are at this time described by me as being discrete feathers, or scales, if you like, as I fear thermal shock. But I am guessing that eventually if desired proper windows can be created that can cope with size changes in the glass/Alon, with temperature.
If we were to try to grow plants inside of this structure, for Earth, it might be OK as is, but of course that will limit the energy production.
For high latitudes, maybe as a greenhouse in the warmer months, and energy only during colder months.
For the Moon and Mars, to make those windows pressure retaining, might be quite a task. It might be better to put jars to grow plants in inside the structure. Use a forklift to bring them in and out of a airlock, with people with SpaceX flight suits. That is a possibility.
Or you could have one very big jar. I am not sure how much pressure retention by way of gravitational counter pressure you might get from the brick arch.
It would certainly be nice if people could walk around in "Shirt Sleeves" inside of these.
I think that it should be stated that for the Moon we have almost absolute certainty of when the sun will shine, and how it will shine.
For Mars not so much.
I think this is a good start. I hope I have not left much out.
For U.V. filtering, I suggest that the "Outer Feathers" let as much spectrum in as possible. The inner ones then tinted to block U.V. and convert it to Infrared photons.
Done.
]]>Quote:
New update on how SpaceX will use Starships to build Moon and Mars bases.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Ne … &FORM=VIRE
And this is sort of an update about the notion of a "Stretch Starship".
Quote:
SpaceX's crazy new Starship upgrade will change everything! Seriously, though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YpcrY5gTkM
So, I am liking the drift of things per these articles.
It is probably good to start strong, not wimpy, as long as forward planning for what is likely to be possible to make come is done periodically.
Per the 2nd article, SSTO is mentioned for "Stretch", but I am even more interested in the Starship itself perhaps becoming a 1st stage, and perhaps not needing as much heat shielding. A wish would be to not need tiles at all, but that may likely be unattainable. I am not sure what the heating would be if it were to have a travel profile more like the Superheavy will. In my thinking, a Superheavy/2nd stage
use would allow more launch sites to be used, which may reduce congestion. I am not sure if this would have fairings attached to the Starship that would open up, or just to have a blunter point on the Starship and mount a 2nd stage on that. Maybe none of the above, but I am interested.
Perhaps such a 2-stage device could work for the Moon and Mars as well. Don't know.
Done.
]]>So, the field would be lumpy, and yet could be sculpted in parts, and still compose together a global field.
As per propulsion of tethers, I have sort of suggested attraction and repulsion method against the various discrete fields, but really, if electrodynamic tethers can work for the Earth's magnetic field, then why not for an artificial Lunar field.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrody … spacecraft.
Quote:
Electrodynamic tether
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to searchMedium close-up view, captured with a 70 mm camera, shows tethered satellite system deployment.
Electrodynamic tethers (EDTs) are long conducting wires, such as one deployed from a tether satellite, which can operate on electromagnetic principles as generators, by converting their kinetic energy to electrical energy, or as motors, converting electrical energy to kinetic energy.[1] Electric potential is generated across a conductive tether by its motion through a planet's magnetic field.A number of missions have demonstrated electrodynamic tethers in space, most notably the TSS-1, TSS-1R, and Plasma Motor Generator (PMG) experiments.
So, rather than space elevators, have tethers that can hook loads either on the surface, or propelled to a sub-orbit by some method. But I think that push/pull directly to a surface magnetic field should also be looked into.
Another reason to have multiple magnetic fields, is that you might open a "Door" to let the Solar Wind in on the sun facing side of the Moon, by reducing a field(s), and at the same time strengthen the other fields to trap the wind.
If materials could be propelled long distance to the Moon from Venus or the Outer solar system, then it might be possible to "Open a Door", at appropriate times to trap the sent gasses/plasma.
Done.
------
]]>Rather, my opinion is that they will all be reachable, but that the Moon just might allow for the fastest space industrialization.
I am thinking that the case for synthetic gravity on all these worlds per centrifuges is likely to become better over time. And it is not needed for agriculture on any of these worlds, most likely.
Done.
]]>