Register to reply

Survival on Mars?

by GTOM
Tags: mars, survival
Share this thread:
GTOM
#1
Aug10-14, 12:45 PM
P: 118
I'd like to have two main questions about it.

1. Radiation protection : theoretically, were thick leaded glass domes for settlements be enough for it, or you need to build underground anyway?

2. Temperature : I read, that heat conditions on Mars equator is similar to Antarctica. We already can sustain bases on Antarctica, however, due to dust storms and 40% solar power, were a settlement be ultimately dependant of fusion power? Or not entirely necessary?
(Other methods, solar power collection with large surface and orbital mirrors, producing fuel artifically that can be used during the dark times.)
Phys.Org News Partner Astronomy news on Phys.org
Planets with oddball orbits like Mercury could host life
Hubble paints a spattering of blue in irregular galaxy IC 559
The entropy of black holes
phinds
#2
Aug10-14, 01:21 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,487
You might try a forum search. Mars colonization is discussed here every now and then. A good place to start is the links at the bottom of this page.
GTOM
#3
Aug10-14, 02:04 PM
P: 118
I see the links, but it isnt about whether we could possibly reach Mars in the next hunders of years or not?
This is all about survival (engineering questions) under the given conditions.

bahamagreen
#4
Aug10-14, 03:48 PM
P: 556
Survival on Mars?

You're jumping ahead a step...

There are three parts to surviving a visit to Mars.

1] Getting there

2] Being there

3] Getting back

The first is a major issue because the shortest route currently takes many months during which the travelers receive about 80% lifetime maximum radiation exposure. Providing the craft with a meter of so thickness of lead skin is an issue.

The second is made more critical if arriving with a large exposure; the subsequent exposure during the visit needs to be minimized.

The third, coming back, is the same issue as the trip there - exposure on the trip there plus exposure on the trip back exceeds lifetime max exposure by a large margin, no even counting the accumulation while there.
GTOM
#5
Aug10-14, 04:59 PM
P: 118
You're jumping ahead a step...
I thought the whole situation is hypotethical enough for the SF topic, it looks like i was wrong, but the topic assumes the getting there with enough equipment is solved. (Probably with ships mimicking Earth's magnetosphere, i read that it is a possibility to be viable.)

So you say, around one meter lead would be the minimum requirement for radiation protection. Mars offers little more protection than space, and i thinking in a lifetime of stay.
phinds
#6
Aug10-14, 05:29 PM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,487
Quote Quote by GTOM View Post
i thinking in a lifetime of stay.
It would be a really short lifetime.
mfb
#7
Aug10-14, 05:53 PM
Mentor
P: 12,037
Quote Quote by bahamagreen View Post
The first is a major issue because the shortest route currently takes many months during which the travelers receive about 80% lifetime maximum radiation exposure. Providing the craft with a meter of so thickness of lead skin is an issue.
Those limits are always arbitrary, they vary with country and occupation and can be changed.

There are inhabited places on earth with radiation doses of about 100mSv/year. A trip to mars without excessive shielding would exceed that, but just for 2-3 years, for a total dose of something like 1 Sv (number from space.com). That would increase the risk to get cancer, but so does smoking. The other risks of such a trip are probably much more dangerous.

If you want to stay there for a lifetime, you certainly want some shielding.

We already can sustain bases on Antarctica
Well, "sustain" - getting materials there is cheap so the base can be large, you have an infinite, easy accessible supply of oxygen and water ice and everything else comes via airplane. We did not even manage to get a true self-sustaining ecosystem on earth, with unproblematic size limits, with more light from the sun, better environment temperatures and no radiation shielding issues.

Conventional fusion reactors are huge by design and it is unclear if unconventional concepts will ever work. Fission looks like a better power source, or large areas of solar cells.
D H
#8
Aug10-14, 11:11 PM
Mentor
P: 15,201
Quote Quote by GTOM View Post
Mars offers little more protection than space, and i thinking in a lifetime of stay.
You are jumping the gun a tiny bit. Temperature and radiation are the least of concerns, and yet you put those concerns first. Those are rather easily solvable problems. The hard problems:
  • How do you breath?
  • How do you drink?
  • How do you eat?
  • How do you treat medical problems?
  • How do you treat psychological problems?
GTOM
#9
Aug11-14, 01:40 AM
P: 118
Temperature and radiation are the least of concerns, and yet you put those concerns first. Those are rather easily solvable problems.
I thought about using the ice of the polar caps, hydrogen peroxides, CO2 to prduce biogen materials.

Peroxides on Mars

I dont doubt the enermous amount of infrastructure needed to do this, i supposed that some times in the future we could already built a huge space colony on Moon, or at L4 L5. And they can ship lots of equipment.

Recently i read that stuff.

Mercury base

So you disagree with that analysis, that put heat issues first.
Chronos
#10
Aug11-14, 02:07 AM
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Chronos's Avatar
P: 9,485
No air, no water, no food. These issues appear to merit a great deal of consideration in 'colony' planning.
Ryan_m_b
#11
Aug11-14, 06:30 AM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,489
Quote Quote by D H View Post
You are jumping the gun a tiny bit. Temperature and radiation are the least of concerns, and yet you put those concerns first. Those are rather easily solvable problems. The hard problems:
  • How do you breath?
  • How do you drink?
  • How do you eat?
  • How do you treat medical problems?
  • How do you treat psychological problems?
I'd add to that:
  • How do you maintain your base? Build equipment locally or rely on shipments?
  • How do you ensure a sufficient skill set amongst your population?

On the subject of growing food, how good is our current understanding of Martian soil? I've read of studies where they made up what they thought would be Martian soil and tried to grow crops in it but I'm not sure how reliable that is. Seems like having a large and accurate amount of soil to test would be a necessary requirement.
GTOM
#12
Aug11-14, 08:44 AM
P: 118
How do you maintain your base? Build equipment locally or rely on shipments?
Lets suppose, that spare parts can be shipped, they dont have to start with building an entire industry.
But in order to survive, produce food, water, air, habitats, they need to take advantage of the local resources after a time.

Seems like having a large and accurate amount of soil to test would be a necessary requirement.
Yes, i agree that is needed.
D H
#13
Aug11-14, 10:18 AM
Mentor
P: 15,201
Quote Quote by GTOM View Post
But in order to survive, produce food, water, air, habitats, they need to take advantage of the local resources after a time.
Not one of which is something humans can do at this point in time, at least not for any extended duration. The problems that Ryan_m_b and I mentioned are things we don't know how to do. The problems you mentioned, radiation protection and thermal regulation are far easier.

As far as colonizing Mercury goes, that's just plain nuts at this point in time.
phinds
#14
Aug11-14, 11:13 AM
PF Gold
phinds's Avatar
P: 6,487
Quote Quote by D H View Post
As far as colonizing Mercury goes, that's just plain nuts at this point in time.
+1 on that, for sure !
mfb
#15
Aug11-14, 01:09 PM
Mentor
P: 12,037
The Mars Plant Experiment didn't make it on Mars 2020, unfortunately.

The ISS produces oxygen from electrolysis and recycles a significant fraction of the water used there - but it still needs a constant supply of water.

Food is a serious problem, together with the overall station maintenance.
GTOM
#16
Aug11-14, 02:10 PM
P: 118
Quote Quote by mfb View Post
The Mars Plant Experiment didn't make it on Mars 2020, unfortunately.

The ISS produces oxygen from electrolysis and recycles a significant fraction of the water used there - but it still needs a constant supply of water.

Food is a serious problem, together with the overall station maintenance.
Well, that is sure not good, it could have answered at least a few questions, they will remain in the dark for a long time.

What are the problems with recycling on ISS, is there any proposed way to make it more efficient?
mfb
#17
Aug11-14, 02:22 PM
Mentor
P: 12,037
Some waste water is hard to recycle if it contains problematic other substances (biological or not) or if oxygen or hydrogen get bound to other molecules - if it is cheaper to get new water from earth, that is preferred.

Currently, the ISS uses water to generate oxygen, and releases the hydrogen into space - that's not a closed cycle (and the carbon dioxide produced by humans is not used either), but I guess it is possible to make that better for a trip to mars.
Ryan_m_b
#18
Aug11-14, 03:12 PM
Mentor
Ryan_m_b's Avatar
P: 5,489
Quote Quote by mfb View Post
Some waste water is hard to recycle if it contains problematic other substances (biological or not) or if oxygen or hydrogen get bound to other molecules
It's worth bearing in mind that even if a method was developed to break down waste molecules for reuse those methods themselves could generate waste. Albeit less (otherwise it's a useless technology) but a 100% closed system is quite unlikely for the foreseeable future.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Mars-One: People living on Mars in 2023 General Discussion 63
Mars Now - Third Alternative To NASAs Mars Who Knows When Program General Discussion 36
Manned Mars mission to Mars before 2020? Aerospace Engineering 70
The Mathematics Survival Kit Math Learning Materials 2
Survival test General Discussion 22