Iron and Steel on Mars

Void · 2024-02-08 11:04:32

I will be brief, as I like what you guys are doing here. My little thought is that it may be possible to review ancient iron and steel work, to perhaps size an early steel making industry, to the limited means that will be available at first. This one is about the Roman era, but also we could look all over the world for how these things might have been done on the small scale: https://dtrinkle.matse.illinois.edu/Mat … ce_an.html
Quote:

Steel in Ancient Greece and Rome

What interested me is how they could do the process with a lower heat level.
Quote:

Smelting
The melting point of pure iron is 1540°C. Landels points that even by Roman times European furnaces were not producing heat much over 1100°C[9]. Smelting of iron, unlike the smelting of the lower melting point metals, copper, zinc and tin, did not involve the iron turning to the liquid state. Instead, it was a solid state conversion requiring chemical reduction of the ore. Ore was placed in a pit and mixed in a hot charcoal fire. Air was forced into the dome covered structure via bellows through a fireproof clay nozzle called a tuyere. After a sustained temperature of 1100°-1200°C, slag (oxidised non-metallics) fell to the bottom leaving the spongy mass containing the iron. Holes forming the sponge texture were a result of the removal of the non-metallics when the slag melted out. The spongy mass is called a bloom by some[10, 11]. This spongy mass was then pounded, usually while still hot, and more slag dropped out as the metal was concentrated into a denser mass. The pounded metal was called wrought iron.
Aitchison gives a mean composition of a typical bloom but this could vary widely, depending especially on the origin of the ore;
Carbon 0.097%
Silicon 0.046%
Manganese 0.040%
Sulphur 0.025%
Phosphorous 0.044%
Arsenic 0.049%
Copper 0.010%
Iron remainder

My thinking is that unlike present day Earth on Mars, there will be much less industrial support, at first, so small batches may have a place.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-02-08 11:07:26)

kbd512 · 2024-02-08 11:33:38

Calliban,

Mangalloy is going to be a pain to work with, but we already do work with it here on Earth, so obviously it can be done. People make swords and knives with the stuff in their home workshops. My understanding, which may be incorrect, is that the work-hardening mostly occurs to the surface of the material when subjected to impact or other high-stress mechanical loads, and that it responds the opposite of how you'd expect normal steels to behave. Quenching, which is normally associated with hardening of Carbon steel alloys, actually softens Mangalloy. That means dunking the work piece in a cryogen tank, or simply filling a cylindrical Mangalloy pressure vessel tank with cryogenic liquid, will make a previously work-hardened piece softer again. Grinding is not impossible, but you need very hard grinding wheels. You can cut through this stuff with a hacksaw, but it will take a lot of time and lubricant. I've seen numerous videos of high-Manganese steel being cut with lasers or plasma cutters or torches. There are other videos of people CNC machining it.

The real issue is whether or not the material survives the cold acceptably well so we don't absolutely require specialized stainless steels that will be even more difficult to source ores for and more energy-intensive to produce. If Mars was loaded with Nickel and Chromium, then I'd advocate for using stainless. I figure we're going to hot roll plates of this stuff, as is apparently done here on Earth, cut them to length with a plasma torch, roll them into cylindrical pressure vessels while they're still warm, and then weld them together. We must have deep-cold / radiation-protected living spaces, "tiny homes" which closely resemble large Propane tanks, that we can then bury just below the surface of the regolith, or heap regolith on top of. If we can do that, and source the water, then we have long-term guaranteed environmental protection for the colonists.

I agree that casting every bit of metal we make is not very practical, and likely impossible. I never suggested we try to substitute castings where only sheet or plate steel will do, merely that making 20 different thicknesses of plate or sheet for some specialty use case is equally impractical with limited machinery and energy input. I meant to suggest that if we need pipe fittings or valve bodies, as I think we will, then we require decent castings that can survive the nights on Mars.

Void · 2024-02-08 13:04:48

This sounds interesting but I will want more details: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/s … r-BB1hUzeK Quote:

Scientists just turned toxic red mud into CO2-free iron — here's how
Story by Can Emir •
1d

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-02-08 13:05:57)

Calliban · 2024-02-08 14:57:25

According to the wiki article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mangalloy

'Alloys with manganese contents ranging from 12 to 30% are able to resist the brittle effects of cold, sometimes to temperatures in the range of −196 °F (−127 °C).'

Also from wiki: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Mars

'Differing in situ values have been reported for the average temperature on Mars,[23] with a common value being −63 °C (210 K; −81 °F).[24][25] Surface temperatures may reach a high of about 20 °C (293 K; 68 °F) at noon, at the equator, and a low of about −153 °C (120 K; −243 °F) at the poles.[26] Actual temperature measurements at the Viking landers' site range from −17.2 °C (256.0 K; 1.0 °F) to −107 °C (166 K; −161 °F). The warmest soil temperature estimated by the Viking Orbiter was 27 °C (300 K; 81 °F).[27] The Spirit rover recorded a maximum daytime air temperature in the shade of 35 °C (308 K; 95 °F), and regularly recorded temperatures well above 0 °C (273 K; 32 °F), except in winter.[28]'

So I think manganese steels can be made that retain ductile properties in most locations on Mars except the poles. In the polar regions in winter, exposed structures and vehicles may need to be aluminium framed. Everywhere else, manganese steels will remain ductile.

Last edited by Calliban (2024-02-08 15:05:54)

RobertDyck · 2024-02-08 15:55:20

Looking to the past is definitely worthwhile. Ulfberht swords were made by Vikings in the 9th to 11th centuries (800s to 1000s). Vikings had a trade route along the Volga and Dnieper rivers to Constantinople, Jerusalem, Baghdad, and the Caspian Sea, and the end of the Silk Road. (Wikipedia) They traded with Arabs. Vikings acquired a block of crucible steel. That was made by placing bloomery iron (a bloom) in a ceramic crucible with cullet (scrap glass) on top. The crucible was placed in a single-use furnace made of clay brick, and the bricks sealed with wet clay. Inside the furnace was charcoal. A pair of bellows provided constant forced air flow through the burning charcoal. The wet clay would quickly dry and harden. Temperature had to reach a sufficient temperature to completely melt the bloom, and had to be maintained for a certain number of hours. Workers would take turns operating the bellows. One modern recreating showed bellows operated by foot, with one bellows pushed down while the other is opening up. The cullet would bind with impurities of the bloom, which would settle out of the steel. After maintaining high temperature for a specific number of hours, the brick furnace was dismantled. The crucible was removed with tongs, still glowing red hot. A hammer would smash the ceramic crucible off the block of steel. The cullet would form a layer of glass on top of the steel, which would be smashed off as well. The final result is a block of very pure steel. Modern recreations have been analyzed, compared to steel from a modern steel mill. The steel mill operator was very impressed, it was almost as pure as modern steel.

This block of steel will have a very tight grain, with steel grains intertwined to create a hard block that is not ductile. A smith must heat the block of steel red hot, then carefully hammer it to break the grain, cause the steel to move. This can result in cracking the block, which would ruin it. There are many steps in creating an Ulfberht sword where a single mistake will ruin the whole thing. But after carefully breaking the grain without cracking the block, the block can be formed like any other steel.

An Ulfberht sword is pattern welded. In period it was made with 50% crucible steel, 50% bloom. A modern sword would use mild steel instead of bloom. Forge weld a rod of crucible steel with an equal size rod of bloom. Then twist it. Make 3 rods this way, the centre rod twisted in the opposite direction. The twisted rods are hammered to have flat sides so they can be forge welded together, side-by-side. The centre rod is longer because it forms the tang and sword tip. Then a strip of crucible steel was forge welded along each side, with the two strips meeting at the point of the sword. The smith then hammers this into shape, forming a cutting edge of the side strips and tip. A "blood groove" was also hammered down the centre on both sides. This isn't for blood, it's to reduce weight. After the shape is complete, it's heated and quenched to harden. Then the sword edges are ground razor sharp. Apply quillon (cross guard), handle and pommel before sharpening.

Before hardening, an Ulfberht sword had the name "+VLFBERHT+" or "+VLFBERH+T" carved into the blade near the quillion, and steel inlay placed, hammered in, then ground flat with the blade of the sword. Obviously the process of inlay could ruin the sword, but the name greatly increased the sword's price.

Pattern welding of high purity high carbon steel with iron resulting in a tough blade. The hardness of the high carbon steel held a cutting edge well, but could be brittle. The bloomery iron was soft but tough, so it wouldn't break. When the blade is polished and acid etched, the twisted metal forms a herringbone pattern. And the acid etching makes the inlay name visible.

I mention this because it's a small scale way to make high purity, high carbon steel. But modern methods should work even better. We should be able to adapt a modern steel smelter to small scale.

Reference on YouTube: PBS NOVA 2017 Secrets of the Viking Sword (1 hour long)

another YouTube video. This one doesn't use cullet, but seals the crucible with clay, using soft clay to form an air-tight seal between crucible and clay cap. The reason for sealing the crucible is to ensure CO2 and CO from burning charcoal of the furnace doesn't not absorb into the steel. This could add too much carbon, making the steel brittle. But a measured quantity of charcoal is added to the crucible before sealing it. To make high carbon steel, but with just the right amount of carbon. Ulfberht Viking Sword - MAN AT ARMS:REFORGED (19 minutes 14 seconds long)

Void · 2024-02-18 22:06:34

This may be of interest for methods for Mars for Steel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwtQS146tak
Quote:

Green Hydrogen making Green Steel. Is 2024 the breakthrough year?
Just Have a Think

So, maybe useful.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-02-18 22:07:44)

Calliban · 2024-02-23 05:24:18

A useful technology for pig iron production is the rotating kiln.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_kiln

This device is a steady flow process. Iron oxide enters at one end of the kiln. It is reduced to a mixture of molten pig iron and silicate slag. This allows a relatively compact device to convert iron ore into crude iron for casting. On Mars, there is abundant iron rich sand which could be used as feedstock for this type of kiln without need for milling. Carbon would be added to the ore to reduce the melting point of the iron to 1200°C. Hydrogen or CO could be used as reducing gas. The pig iron emerging from the kiln could be directly cast into products, like the iron struts needed for geodesic domes. The crude pig iron will be relatively brittle due to impurities. But this is less problematic if it is used for compressive structural elements.

Later in the colonisation programme, high carbon pig iron could be drained into an electric arc or induction furnace, where impurities will be removed and steel can be produced.

Last edited by Calliban (2024-02-23 05:25:51)

Calliban · 2024-02-23 18:32:04

An interesting article on the assessment of historical structures made from cast iron, wrought iron and steel.
https://www.buildingconservation.com/ar … onwork.htm

Wiki article here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_iron

Cast irons have superior compressive strength to low alloy steels and wrought iron. In theory, a perfect specimen would have greater tensile strength as well. But grey iron is brittle and graphite flakes can propagate cracks, so allowable tensile stresses are lower. Grey cast iron can be used in tensile members and for structures constructed before about 1870, this was common. But the need for additional design factors makes it an inefficient solution. As wrought iron became more widely available, it displaced cast iron in tensile structures. Wrought iron members can be lighter and stresses can be higher, due to its ductility. Wrought iron has similar strength and ductility to mild steel, but tends to be more fibrous.

Gray cast irons remain in use in some old structures in the UK. Grey cast irons do have some structural advantages over steels within their limitations. In structures where stresses are predominantly compressive, cast iron is still used. One advantage that grey iron has is low melting point compared to mild steel. Cast iron can melt at temperatures as low as 1150°C. This allows use of sand castings, which would be plausible for mild steel because the melting point of pure iron is too high. It also makes cast irons easily weldable. As the forces acting on the structural members of geodesic domes are mainly compressive, grey cast iron is definitely something we can use.

tahanson43206 · 2024-02-23 20:43:17

For Calliban re recent contributions to this topic ...

While we wait for an Industry index level, this topic seems to be working as a place for you to develop your ideas for a cast iron geodesic dome business concept. I'm hoping you are on a roll here, and that a few words of encouragement will be helpful to keep your ideas flowing.

You could approach this as a vertically integrated industry, and then spin off divisions as they become large enough.

It seems to me (as a first pass at trying to envision this industry) that you will need divisions for Architecture, Mining, Refining, Forming, Storage, Distribution, Assembly, Marketing and the all-important Sales.

(th)

Void · 2024-03-10 10:54:40

I think the members could be interested, I think Martian dune materials might be processed this way: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/artic … ne.0249962
Quote:

Iron can be microbially extracted from Lunar and Martian regolith simulants and 3D printed into tough structural materials
Sofie M. Castelein ,Tom F. Aarts ,Juergen Schleppi,Ruud Hendrikx,Amarante J. Böttger,Dominik Benz,Maude Marechal,Advenit Makaya,Stan J. J. Brouns,Martin Schwentenwein,Anne S. Meyer ,Benjamin A. E. Lehner
Published: April 28, 2021

And the 3D printing is of interest also for making parts.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-03-10 10:56:38)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2024-03-30 10:54:37

Don’t believe the spin: coal is no longer essential to produce steel

https://ieefa.org/resources/dont-believ … duce-steel

tahanson43206 · 2024-07-07 16:27:54

The article at the link below seems to follow up nicely on the post by Mars_B4_Moon #86

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compani … c9353&ei=6

Boston Metal is promoting what could be a revolutionary steelmaking process that would provide the industry with independence from pollution-heavy blast furnaces.
In fact, the company's molten oxide electrolysis innovation has won Fast Company's World Changing Ideas Award in the climate category.
"We're developing a solution that could fully replace the blast furnace," Adam Rauwerdink, Boston Metal's senior vice president of business development, said in a Fast Company story.
Making steel has been a dirty process since iron started being smelted centuries ago, now contributing upward of 10% to global, planet-warming air pollution. The process includes separating ore into its core parts of iron and oxygen. The pure iron can be turned into steel. Coal-fired furnaces and cleaner electric arc furnaces dominate production, all per Fast Company, ScienceDirect, and other reports.
Boston Metal's process is fossil-free, using renewable electricity to power electrolysis to convert ore into a steelmaking-quality metal. The simplified technique includes temperatures of around 2,912 degrees Fahrenheit and expert chemistry. A rendering of the mechanics involved shows what looks like a battery. There's an anode, a cathode, and an electrolyte. When juiced up, the oxygen bubbles out and the high-quality iron can be harvested.
But it's what's not involved that's key to the breakthrough. There's no air pollution or "other harmful byproducts" created. The method doesn't need "process water" or chemicals, either. The technique can purify ore of any grade, making it a viable option to scale. Company officials plan to commercialize the innovation by 2026, all per the startup's website.
"The one-step process is far simpler than typical smelting, and it doesn't produce any carbon by-products. When the electricity comes from renewable sources, there are no carbon emissions at all," Fast Company's Jessica Hullinger wrote.
Global steel demand is forecast by the World Economic Forum to jump 30% by 2050. To capitalize on the market, Boston Metal has secured $282 million in funding, as well as a $50 million government grant. The latter investment will help to pay for a plant in West Virginia being built to make chromium and other metals. The facility is expected to require hundreds of jobs, all per Fast Company.
"They're losing jobs in the steel industry, so it's important to bring jobs back to that region," Rauwerdink said in the report.
Creating a cleaner steelmaking process is drawing attention from even Bill Gates, who is invested in a Colorado project that refines ore with much lower temperatures, similar to what is needed to heat coffee.
If one of the methods can be scaled, reducing or eliminating 7% to 10% of the world's air pollution production, the results could be huge for the planet and its air-breathers. Government health experts call air pollution a "familiar" health hazard, particularly for lungs. Air pollution of all forms is responsible for 6.5 million deaths each year worldwide, per the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
For its part, Boston Metal is also earning revenue by using its tech to turn mine waste into useful metals at a Brazilian facility. But the goal is to create cleaner steel, according to Fast Company.
"Steel is the big prize," Rauwerdink said.

I sure hope one or more of our members will investigate this announcement and add a post or two.

(th)

JoshNH4H · 2024-07-09 12:09:05

On Earth, of course, we are trying to move away from coal because of the CO2 emissions. On my blog, I have highlighted the way the shift to emissions-free Iron will likely advantage Aluminium over Iron. On Mars where we would if anything want the emissions, we have no coal (nor the Oxygen to make the Carbon Monoxide intermediary). So however we do this it pretty much has to be an electrolytic process (thermal dissociation, though technically possible, is not practical).

That electrolytic process can either be direct or indirect. The indirect process is to produce Hydrogen from water via electrolysis then use that Hydrogen, in place of carbon monoxide produced from coal, for smelting. The direct process is as above, electrolyzing a liquid bath of Iron oxides (possibly dissolved in other salts such as fluorides in a process analogous to the hall-heroult process used on aluminium). Here are the relative advantages of each as I see it:

Indirect

Hydrogen electrolysis is easy and well-understood
Hydrogen electrolysis will be a basic chemical process used on Mars for a variety of things (one example: That's where the hydrogen used to produce rocket fuel will come from)
Smelting Iron with hydrogen permits you to use very low grade ore, then separate the iron metal/rocky slag first magnetically then by melting (or alternatively with a carbonyl process)
Hydrogen smelting doesn't require as high temperatures as the direct process or the coal process
Both processes are well-understood

Direct

More energy efficient
Only requires a single process where indirect requires two

In sum: The direct process requires more up front R&D engineering (this is happening now so should be quite far along by the time we need it) and probably a more expensive machine, but will likely be cheaper overall as long as the ore is of decent quality (Mars, being enriched in surface Iron relative to Earth, likely does have good reserves of Iron ore). The indirect process may be chosen early on for its simplicity but I don't expect it to persist, on Mars or on Earth.

JoshNH4H · 2024-07-09 13:31:48

In a funny turn of events I have come out against the opinion I started this thread with 12 years ago. Well, that's life. I'm 12 years older now and at least 5 years wiser

JoshNH4H wrote:

Now, I would suggest that the primary reason why Carbon is used in smelting on Earth is because it is "free energy" so to speak, in that all you have to do is dig it up from the ground. Doing the reaction with hydrogen with hydrogen will simplify things significantly, as I will argue later, but the lure of this (mostly) free energy makes it more than worth it.
On Mars, Carbon will be produced from Hydrogen. Therefore, it makes more sense to simply use Hydrogen as an energy storage mechanism unless there is a good reason to do otherwise, which I don't think there is. Delta-G calculations show that the reaction of Fe2O3 and Hydrogen to form water and Iron becomes thermodynamically favorable above 910 C. However. I know that with Carbon the reaction actually proceeds in several steps, all of which happen inside the reaction vessel, and this lowers the temperature significantly from its theoretical maximum. I would presume the temperature inside the smelter would not be significantly different.
This will produce little carbon-free Iron particles in the mixture. I would suggest that the best way to separate this would be the mond process: Iron in a Carbon Monoxide atmosphere under pressure and mildly elevated temperatures forms Iron Pentacarbonyl. This is a volatile compound (bp 103 C) which can be decomposed at a slightly elevated temperature, leading to near pure Iron. This could be melted and mixed with alloying agents to produce the desired alloys.
The energy input is 6 g of Hydrogen per 112 g of Fe. Assuming that your electrolysis machine is 75% efficient, that is an energy input of 8.5 MJ (electric) per kilo of Iron.

Last edited by JoshNH4H (2024-07-09 13:48:55)

Terraformer · 2024-07-09 14:24:00

What if Mars imported iron... from Luna...

A leftover product of Lunar nickel mining.

Calliban · 2024-07-09 15:56:09

On Earth, steel production is a two stage process. The smelting process produces pig iron ingots. These are then melted within an induction furnace and oxygen is used to burn out impurities like sulphur, carbon, hydrogen and phosphorus (Basic Oxygen Process). This produces a low alloy carbon steel or can be blended with other alloying elements as desired. The production of pig iron and its conversion to steel, often take place on different continents.

If we start using hydrogen to make steel, I think it likely that we would stick with a two stage process. Finely ground iron ore would be mixed with reduced iron powder and sand and put into an induction furnace. The induction furnace would be heated to about 800°C and hydrogen gas would be injected. Beads of reduced iron would form on the surface of the iron oxide grains. When most of the iron oxide is reduced, we would shut the furnace down. The mixture of reduced iron, iron oxide and sand would then be removed. The sand would be placed in layers to prevent the Fe and FeO from forming a monolithic lump. Upon removal, the material would be milled to a fine powder and Fe metal removed by electromagnet. A portion of the Fe powder would be mixed back in with the Fe2O3 input to the reduction furnace for the next batch. The remainder would go to the steel making induction furnace.

The energy requirements of producing crude iron using hydrogen are greater than the energy cost of producing the hydrogen. Some 6kg of H2 produce 112kg of Fe. But the reduction reaction is endothermic (98KJ/mol) and the iron ore and sand must be heated to bring it up to 800°C. My back of the envelope calcs give an energy requirement of 12.5MJ per kg of crude iron powder. Some 9.5MJ is required to produce the hydrogen in an 80% efficient electrolysis stack. The remaining 3MJ are direct heat cost.

I have not attempted to calculate the energy needed to run the basic oxygen furnace yet. It will be less than that required for the iron ore reduction because we are not driving chemical change. But heating iron to 1600°C will still be energy hungry. I would expect the minimum energy required to produce finished steel from iron ore to be no less than 20MJ/kg (5.6kWh). All of this is electrical energy. Aluminium requires 3x as much electrical energy input per kg, but has one third the density of steel. Aluminium alloys can have comparable strength to low alloy steels. So it turns out that a load supporting member made from aluminium, would have about the same energy cost as a low alloy steel member is electricity is used to make both. This supports Josh's premis that Al may be a more efficient solution than steel for structural members, if we can no longer make steel using fossil fuels.

I think there is still a case for using steel in static structures, even if aluminium is lighter and has comparable energy cost. Steel is far more forgiving of cyclic loads and far less prone to fatigue. It also doesn't experience creep. Those are important considerations for metals than are used in long term structures. The case for steel becomes much stronger if we find deposits of fossil hydrogen or methane on Mars. If we find either of those things, then we no longer need to make the hydrogen reducing agent using electricity. That cuts the effective energy cost of steel by about two thirds. But we don't know if there is methane or hydrogen waiting for us beneath the Martian crust. We will need to go there to find out.

Last edited by Calliban (2024-07-09 16:39:44)

Void · 2024-07-11 11:08:58

Maybe this could have some merit in iron making: https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/topst … 74a3&ei=27
Quote:

The Cool Down
103.7K Followers
Energy startup discovers new benefit while developing innovative iron-air battery — and it could revolutionize an entire industry
Story by Rick Kazmer • 1w • 3 min read

And of course the battery tech could be important as well.

Getting Oxygen from rocks at the same time could have value on Mars and other worlds as well.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-07-11 11:13:39)

Calliban · 2024-07-17 03:06:51

Mars subsurface may contain large quantities of methane hydrates at shallow depths of just a few hundred metres.
https://presentations.copernicus.org/EG … tation.pdf

If large deposits could be found and accessed by drilling, they would be immensely valuable to future colonisation programmes. Methane could be used to produce reduced iron for steel making, a reduced starting material for petrochemical production, as well as providing rocket fuel. Note that we don't need free oxygen to be available for fossil methane to be valuable in these applications. If these deposits can be located, it would definitely have implications for where future Martian bases and settlements are located.

For iron making in the absence of fossil methane or hydrogen, large amounts of electric power will be needed. About 80% of this power is needed to synthesise the hydrogen, which is then blown through an electrically heated layer of iron oxide. If we can avoid having to synthesise hydrogen and use fossil methane instead, we cut the energy requirement of producing iron by 80%. We still need to melt the metallic iron powder in an electric furnace to convert it into steel. But even accounting for this step, the use of fossil methane would cut the required electrical energy inputs by two-thirds. Methane can also be reduced to solid carbon, which can be added to the iron melt. This allows carbon steels and cast iron to be produced. Cast iron in particular, has melting point as low as 1200°C, making it substantially cheaper and easier to make than low alloy steels. We could use grey cast iron in compressive structures and ductile iron in tensile members. The production of iron allows much more expansion habitats to be constructed on Mars.

In Svalbard, permafrost acts as a cap rock to methane released by hydrocarbons beneath.
https://phys.org/news/2023-12-natural-g … ethane.pdf

The Martian surface is more geologically stable than any place on Earth. Traps could persist for geological timescales. Any methane released by biological or geological activity, could accumulate over long timescales.

Last edited by Calliban (2024-07-17 04:29:26)

Void · 2024-07-17 10:06:15

Methane if commercial in nature would be a way to pipe water to locations on Mars. Unlike water it would not be so likely to freeze, I think, and then at its destination it could be reacted with Oxygen to get water.

Last edited by Void (2024-07-17 10:07:06)

Void · 2024-07-17 13:38:20

ISE was not letting me complete my previous post.

I think it is reasonable to suppose that Natural Hydrogen could have occurred on Mars and might still occur.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_hydrogen
Conversion of Natural Hydrogen to Methane on Mars could have occurred if there are microbes deep down, and the Methane produced may have capped it off. The Methanogens just need to get Carbon out of the rocks or perhaps water percolating down may have had CO2 in it.

https://www.amazon.com/Deep-Hot-Biosphe … 0387985468
Quote:

The Deep Hot Biosphere: The Myth of Fossil Fuels 1st Edition
by Thomas Gold (Author)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_bios … sphere.%22
Quote:

Deep biosphere

The thing is if both Earth and Mars have or have had Natural Hydrogen, then, a method to "Swap Spit", would be by exchange of rocks, and in this case, it would not be necessary for the surface of Mars to be survivable. All that would be needed would be for such a rock with dormant organisms to be buried. Early on it is possible that some parts of Mars had a climate like Iceland or Labrador, so this seems possible for instance dropping onto a lake, even if it had ice on it, eventually the rock would fall into though the ice.

And of course, it would have been easier for life to travel from Mars to Earth in such a way.

And apparently there were lots of dwarf planets and larger asteroids that could have had a water table so life might have traveled from those.

Such life once established below the permafrost of Mars, would be very difficult to make go extinct.

So, it could be that Mars does have Natural Hydrogen, Methane, and maybe even Oil.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-07-17 13:57:48)

JoshNH4H · 2024-07-18 07:44:26

This strikes me as highly unlikely and not supported by available evidence

Void · 2024-07-18 07:51:08

I don't know if you are referencing Calliban or me, or Methane or Natural Hydrogen.

In all cases more test information is needed. The potential for a possibility may suggest what testing to try to achieve.

Done

Last edited by Void (2024-07-18 07:53:19)

Calliban · 2024-07-18 08:35:25

If there are iron rich silicates in the Martian crust in contact with ground water, hydrogen and methane may be generated through serpentinization.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serpentinization

This is the most likely source of the methane detected. Otherwise, any water or ice in contact with basalts in the crust will slowly dissociate due to radiolysis. Both processes are gradual, but are responsible for deep hydrogen and methane deposits on Earth. We know that in some parts of Mars there are buried glaciers, with ice layers tens or hundreds of metres thick. This could serve as a cap rock, trapping methane and hydrogen beneath it. Mars is far more geologically stable than Earth, so there is the possibility that gas may have accumulated over longer periods. If methane is in contact with a permafrost cap rock, it may be in the form of methane hydrate.
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com … 02JE001901

Last edited by Calliban (2024-07-18 09:04:30)

Void · 2024-09-14 17:27:36

I am considering Mars sand dunes again.

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

Ore resources on Mars

Quote:

Dark sand dunes are common on the surface of Mars. Their dark tone is due to the volcanic rock called basalt. The basalt dunes are believed to contain the minerals chromite, magnetite, and ilmenite.[54] Since the wind has gathered them together, they do not even have to be mined, merely scooped up.[55] These minerals could supply future colonists with chromium, iron, and titanium.

Magnetite is somewhat Oxidized, but even so magnetic.

But I am wondering about using microbes to extract the specific materials.

https://newspaceeconomy.ca/2024/03/06/t … and%20soil. Quote:

The Future of Space Mining: Biomining with Microbes

Quote:

On Mars, the basaltic crust is rich in oxidized iron and magnesium silicates like olivine and pyroxene. Some regions also contain sulfates and clay deposits. The Moon’s anorthositic crust is dominated by aluminum silicates like plagioclase with less abundant minerals like ilmenite. Asteroids display a wider range from stony chondrites containing carbon, nitrogen, and sulphur to metallic compositions.

My hope is to dump regolith like Martian sand dune materials into an anerobic wet environment, and hope that a microbe will use the dune materials as an Oxidizer.

There is mention of such a process here: https://news.wisc.edu/in-these-microbes … ke-oxygen/
Quote:

A pair of papers from a UW–Madison geoscience lab shed light on a curious group of bacteria that use iron in much the same way that animals use oxygen: to soak up electrons during biochemical reactions. When organisms — whether bacteria or animal — oxidize carbohydrates, electrons must go somewhere.

Quote:

These bacteria “eat organic matter like we do,” says Roden. “We pass electrons from organic matter to oxygen. Some of these bacteria use iron oxide as their electron acceptor. On the flip side, some other microbes receive electrons donated by other iron compounds. In both cases, the electron transfer is essential to their energy cycles.”
Photo: Eric Roden
Eric Roden
Whether the reaction is oxidation or reduction, the ability to move an electron is essential for the bacteria to process energy to power its lifestyle.

I am about to suggest a simulated bog environment based on organic waste as a method to perhaps process dune materials.

We might want to look at "Bog Iron".

There may be some things to learn about in this. I am not sure that the process is entirely what would be wanted.

Here again I may be thinking of an ice-covered lake where you might include both dune materials and organic matter into the bottom sediments to perhaps simulate a bog.

For the moment I do not want free Oxygen in this lake. It may have some salt in the water to allow the bottom waters to be of a temperate temperature.

So, then the dune materials including the Iron itself might be the Oxidizer, and then organic waste a fuel, but you could add Hydrogen, CO, and perhaps Acetate, as fuel for the microbes.

It may be that we would not want to condense iron into "Bog Iron" rather we might want to create soluble iron in an anoxic water.

So we may want to simulate iron rich waters in the early Anoxic Earth environment: https://www.earth.com/news/iron-was-lif … evolution/
Quote:

Iron was life’s first essential metal and shaped early evolution
09-11-2024
Iron was life’s first essential metal and shaped early evolution
Rodielon Putol
ByRodielon Putol
Earth.com staff writer
Iron has played a fundamental role in life on Earth since the earliest days of single-celled organisms navigating the planet’s primitive seas.

Employed in minute amounts, metals like iron support crucial biological processes, including respiration, DNA transcription, and metabolism.
Nearly half of all enzymes – proteins that drive cellular chemical reactions – depend on metals, particularly transition metals, named for their position on the periodic table.
New research from a multidisciplinary team at the University of Michigan, California Institute of Technology, and UCLA suggests that iron was the inaugural and exclusive transition metal of early life forms.
Iron: Life’s only transition metal
“We make a radical proposal: Iron was life’s original and only transition metal,” said Jena Johnson, assistant professor in the U-M Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences.
The researchers argue that early life relied on metals that it could interact with in the iron-rich early ocean, leaving other transition metals practically invisible.
To explore this idea further, Johnson collaborated with UCLA bioinorganic chemist Joan Valentine, whose curiosity about early life’s evolution and metal usage sparked the study.
“When these guys told me that iron wasn’t a trace element, that blew my mind,” said Valentine, highlighting how surprising the iron-rich ancient oceans were in the context of biochemistry.

Ted Present from Caltech contributed to the study by designing a model to estimate metal concentrations in early Earth’s oceans, which revealed the stark decrease in dissolved iron levels following the Great Oxygenation Event.
Navigating oceans of iron
This radical proposition arose from the intersection of diverse research interests.
Valentine, intrigued by how early life evolved, wondered what metals were incorporated into enzymes during primitive times to support essential life functions. She repeatedly encountered evidence suggesting the oceans were full of iron for the first half of Earth’s history.

So, we may want a biological compatible process that simulates early anoxic Earth.

Then with the iron from the dune materials being converted to being of a form that disolves in water, then a second process might extract the iron.

To simulate bog iron, then an Oxidation process would be applied. But it may be that a non-organic process might work but I don't know what that could be, I just suspect that there could be such.

If you distilled the water, could you then extract useful water, and then have a low oxidation remnant of Iron. But if it is salty water then that Iron would be mixed with a salt remnant. But salts can be precepted from water at certain temperatures. It may be that some form of electrolysis could extract the dissolved iron directly from the water. Not sure.

Still, I think this may work out. To create covered lakes on Mars might not be that difficult. Generally, I have favored Oxidized waters, but to get dissolved iron then you need anoxic water.

Keep in mind that such lakes are an opportunity to have pressurized space, pressurized primarily by hydrostatic pressure.

We can find lakes in Antarctica that have warm anoxic waters on the bottom and cold Oxidized water on the top under the ice.

We also have Blood Falls in Antarctica: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_Falls
Image Quote:

This is a process where anoxic water with dissolved Iron emerges and reacts with Oxygen to turn red.

I think this might be something.

You could have a created lake on Mars with anoxic warm waters below where you would add iron bearing particles of sand dune mixed with organic matter. Then you could have Oxidized cold water above.

The "Bog" below would perhaps evolve Methane and also dissolved Iron. You might be able to run fuel cells off of the Methane in the lower layers and the Oxygen in the higher layers.

And we hope to have another product of Iron.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2024-09-14 18:23:26)

Void · 2024-09-18 11:00:13

This is an interesting read that may give some support to my previous posing here: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo … b6eb&ei=46
Quote:

Iron was life's 'primeval' metal, say scientists
Story by Science X staff • 1w • 4 min read

I wonder if Enceladus and Europa have icon iron in their sea waters? Or do they have Oxygen some how, perhaps a "Dark Oxygen"?

I still don't know how Dark Oxygen works, where the electricity comes from.

Ending Pending

Last edited by Void (2024-09-18 20:46:51)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2024-02-08 11:04:32

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#77 2024-02-08 11:33:38

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#78 2024-02-08 13:04:48

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#79 2024-02-08 14:57:25

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#80 2024-02-08 15:55:20

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#81 2024-02-18 22:06:34

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#82 2024-02-23 05:24:18

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#83 2024-02-23 18:32:04

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#84 2024-02-23 20:43:17

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#85 2024-03-10 10:54:40

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#86 2024-03-30 10:54:37

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#87 2024-07-07 16:27:54

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#88 2024-07-09 12:09:05

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#89 2024-07-09 13:31:48

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#90 2024-07-09 14:24:00

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#91 2024-07-09 15:56:09

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#92 2024-07-11 11:08:58

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#93 2024-07-17 03:06:51

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#94 2024-07-17 10:06:15

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#95 2024-07-17 13:38:20

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#96 2024-07-18 07:44:26

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#97 2024-07-18 07:51:08

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#98 2024-07-18 08:35:25

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#99 2024-09-14 17:27:36

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

#100 2024-09-18 11:00:13

Re: Iron and Steel on Mars

Board footer