[Mars] production plant - was - Re: Post conference

[Mars related topics]

Hi Roy/Terry

Sorry it has taken me so long to respond.

To start I will list all the papers I have found that talk about Zubrin's plans for going to Mars and in situ resource utilization.
Scientific America, March 2000, 4 articles.
Scientific America, June 2001.
Acta Astronautica, Vol 26 No 12, pg 899-912, 1992.
Acta Astronautica, Vol 32 No 9, pg 617-628, 1994.
Aerospace America (AIAA), Vol 28 No 18, pg 30-32, 1990.
MIT Technology Review, Vol 99 No 8, Nov/Dec 1996.
Chemical Engineering Progress, pg 45-54, Feb 1999. (has the most info for our discussion)

His book, The Case for Mars has some details.

All the published work I have seen is 5-15 years old, the next step should be to find the latest info, so we don't re-invent the wheel.  Zubrin may help with this.  I will take the action to contact him to discuss our interest in building a prototype to test at MDRS.

I guess the next step is to define what our initial project will be, which broadly is Martian In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU).  This can be broken into 2 categories, 1) pull CO2 from the atmosphere and break it down into O2 and C, if there is a source of H2, the C can be converted to H2O and CH4 or 2) break the Martian soil to the atomic level and recombine into O2, CH4 and H2O.  There are many other elements in the soil, but it is probably better to keep a narrow focus initially.  The technology to do the first idea is probably available, it just needs to be packaged for Mars and the main task is providing an energy source, also a source of H2 is needed, Zubrin suggests bringing the H2 from Earth since it is so light.  The second idea is not as developed, but since there is some H2 based compounds in the soil, it is attractive.  I propose we try the second idea, what do you think?

Is our goal to design and build a small prototype that we can test at MDRS.  If this is successful, I think the Mars Society will help find sponsorship to pursue the concept and ultimately send it to Mars.

Comments?

Scott


On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, Mars related topics wrote:

> Hi all
>
> Yes I'm back, don't pay the ransom as I escaped!
> (Aliens took me to New Jersey...)
>
> Mars related topics wrote:
>> Thanks!
>>
>> It's been a busy week.
>
> Very busy several weeks.
>
>> The propellant production plant sounds cool..  I'm not familiar with
>> Zurbin's design.  Do you have a reference I might look up?
>
> I'm not aware of any design details being available, but we can ask him.
>  Also as it is mostly old technology it should not be too hard to
> figure out... ya right.
>
>> I'm working on lots of stuff right now, but if there's anything that
>> I might be able to help with I'm most willing.
>
> Same here, once there is a design I can make parts (I'm a machinist).
>
>> What kind of environment were you looking for to operate the system?
>> I'm guessing cold, low atmosphere eventually?
>>
>> one thing to consider --
>
> Could one use a membrane that mostly only passes CO2 and thus have a
> more realistic operating environment?  It seems I've heard of such
> membranes.
>
> Or as a quick and dirty simulation environment just feed it from a
> bottle of CO2 regulated down to mars atmospheric pressure.
>
>>  to design/build where people, machines and resources are readily available,
>>  then move the device to a place replicating martian environment
>
> Seems reasonable, as the first ones on mars will almost certainly be
> built here.
>
>>   -or-
>>  to design/build in the closest thing we can get to a similar environment
>
> No need at this point, just to build it at all will be a big enough
> challenge.
>
>> Do you think making the instrument(s)/system is likely to have a semi-parallel
>> use on Earth?  Maybe to help with current energy problems, or come up with
>> viable alternative energy possibilities here on earth?  If there is, even
>> in a minor way - we might be able to find some people willing to fund the
>> effort?  maybe NSF, NASA, DOE, or maybe even some private industry?
>
> Yes it could be very useful here.
> Seeking funding from government/industry is exceedingly time/resource
> consuming.  And as a simple demo unit should not be overly expensive to
> build, we can probably do ourselves, no?
>
>> If we can get something working 100% on earth (and useful to earthlings) that's
>> 90+% of the way to working on mars...
>>
>> 1) we can get earth people/monies to fund (earth) prototypes...
>>
>> 2) we can get earth people/monies to fund (earth) manufacturing and production...
>>
>> 3) we can get profit from earth people/monies based on these products..
>>
>>    TO FUND THE NEXT 10% to make it work on MARS...
>
> Agreed, but first a small demo unit is needed.
>
>> I have some ideas, but I'm in the process of wading through a significant amount of
>> red tape to implement my own ideas.
>>
>> At this point I could volunteer time and knowledge,  on projects not my own, but
>> resources and money I'm lacking...
>>
>> Scott, do you have my email address?
>>
>> Thank you for your patience,
>> -Roy Nielsen
>> (amrobot at mindspring.com)
>
> Make it a great day.
> --
> Terry Mackintosh <terry at mackintoshweb.com>
> http://www.mackintoshweb.com/mars/ Mars Society, FL chapter.
> Proudly powered by ROCKLinux, Apache, PHP, PostgreSQL, etc.
> "If you don't know where you are going, how can you get there?"
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mars mailing list
> Mars at mackintoshweb.com
> http://mackintoshweb.com/mailman/listinfo/mars
>