[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 521 KB, 2000x1000, 029FD312-140B-4A37-B3B2-7136A47A36C0.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
9527193 No.9527193 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

How do you make a Martian colony self sustainable?

>> No.9527194

Reduce its population to 0

>> No.9527198

How do you make an Antarctic colony self-sustainable?

>> No.9527205

pay people to fly in c-130's full of supplies twice a year

>> No.9527207
File: 122 KB, 640x713, 1488256430313.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9527230

what part of that is self-sustainable

>> No.9527232

That's the joke, dingus.

>> No.9527255

Arrays of solar panels. Heavily tinted glass domes full of specialized plants. Underground living quarters and mines+refineries that extract water and usable metals from rocks.

>> No.9527258

but what about gut fauna?

>> No.9527261

what part of it was funny

>> No.9527263

throw people and supplies until it becomes self sustainable on it's own.

>> No.9527324

>t. 1960s europeans as they plan to ween off of their African colonies

I swear future Mars will be the gibmedats to end all gibmedats

>> No.9527425

Well it's going to be pretty hard for that to happen if it's privately funded, which if it actually happens, it will be. Governments around the world have simply stopped giving a fuck about space.

>> No.9527753

It's piss easy!
All you need is to build a few factories:
one to make air, another one to make water, then to make food, pressurized shelters, spacesuits and the most important of all: a factory to build other factories!
Brainlets just don't get it.

>> No.9527754

You'd need an insane amount of cheap power.

>> No.9527789

Terraform it.

>> No.9527798
File: 848 KB, 1920x1080, WANDERERS_cape_verde_01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Once it IS self-sustaining, what form of government should it have?

>> No.9527799
File: 66 KB, 425x438, foreignjudges.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The one it deserve

>> No.9527800

one some madman has actually gone and done it (the heavy lifting), governments will get very interested.

>> No.9527803

Straight and total democracy. If you don't like it, get the fuck off the planet and go find your own. We've got the technology now.

>> No.9527808

As with every technologically advanced and secular society - Communism.

>> No.9527827

Minimise nutrients and water needed to grow food ie. use aeroponics.

Send industrial components ie. create a set of fundamental manufacturing tools using all common components. This way lower priority machines could be cannibalised to fix higher priority machines in an emergency.

have at least 160 young adult people on colony. this is the rough minimum to create a viable population going forward.

put habitat underground or covered in a large amount of dirt. Long term radiation exposure sucks. If shielding is cheap and inexpensive maybe use that, but dirt is on location and plentiful, and the machinery used to get it (and thus expand the colony) is useful.

>> No.9527830

radical centrist anarcho bolshevism

>> No.9528417

>not alt-left anacho-fascist

>> No.9528766

3d printing is a thing, if shit breaks, you can print new parts

>> No.9528774

those nazi salutes tho
redpilled as fuck, I like it

>> No.9528787

Monarchy obviously, seperation from earth should get rid of this democracy lunacy.

>> No.9528794
File: 143 KB, 1227x1037, Jello Baby and Blind Colonist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Martian colony

A colony means they have children and it is multi-generational. A base only has people stationed there for x amount of time, but not their entire lives and they don't reproduce there and raise a family there. Without proper gravity, infants won't develop properly if they even make it to term.

>> No.9528800

>crops exposed in a greenhouse

I hope they like mutant plants. If the sun is useful enough to allow plant growth like that then the radiation the inside of those greenhouse get will be enough to give people cancer.

>> No.9528808

Creating a closed biosphere that can provide for several hundred humans in a large underground cave is perfectly possible. Create 20-30 of those biospheres, connect them via hyperloops, and you got a completely self sustaining colony on mars that can grow and slowly but steadily terraform the whole planet.

This is all under the assumption that you can live and reproduce in 0,38g without issues. If this turns out to be problematic, there is really no point to go to Mars.

>> No.9528809
File: 2.12 MB, 882x656, Jello Baby All Grown Up.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9529067

And how do you exactly create them, with the force of your mind?
You need refineries and mines just to have materials, and factories to build the stuff and maintain it.
To be self sufficient means you can do all of that with the people and materials you have.

>> No.9529285

(((orbital habitats))) and extraction sites on the (((surface)))

>> No.9529302

Obviously run by AIs with human figure heads pretending to be democratically chosen.

>> No.9529308

Well, the biospheres and the vacuum tunnels connecting them need to be put in place with help from the outside, but once all that infrastructure is in place the colony should be able to grow and function on its own. It should house ~10.000 people, and should have access to a wide variety of ressources. That should be enough to double its size every generation.

>> No.9529328

Same way you can build the roosevelt dam with 10 people in a few weeks.
By using imaginary productivity.

>> No.9529348

Except its a labour force of ~7000 and we are talking about ~50 years and not a few weeks.

>> No.9529451

>(((orbital habitats))) and extraction sites on the (((surface)))
Anon gets it. That's why asteroids and planetoids like Ceres are superior option

>> No.9529456


>> No.9529460

Grow food that’s capable of turning the atmosphere into oxygen. Eat the food while breathing said oxygen. Its not rocket science.

>> No.9529606


Fully automated luxury liberalism.

>> No.9529612


Living exclusively in a glorified apartment block will erode the soul of man

>> No.9529647

lots of pussy to eat, and you fuck cats to make bugs, science yaknow

>> No.9529657


>> No.9529666

oh yeah like all of those imaginary technologically advanced communist secular societies

>> No.9529672

> imaginary technologically advanced communist secular societies


>> No.9529688
File: 961 KB, 1920x1080, the thing.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>How do you make an Antarctic colony self-sustainable?
The absolute least amount of The Thing's you can get away with.

>> No.9529694
File: 51 KB, 334x372, 1510355074624.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Eat your Poo

Drink your Pee


>> No.9529704

Drill it for resources.

>> No.9529706
File: 315 KB, 1332x1856, 1490979759989.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You can really live anywhere else.

>> No.9529714

Immediatly go full evil overlord.
Massive spiraling towers with the latest technology and because Mars is The God of War, declare war on earth and obliterate Terra from orbit. All while watching your enemies shit themselves with terror on livestream.

>> No.9529757

You can't terraform it. It's too light

>> No.9529781
File: 39 KB, 628x526, How to terraform Mars.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9529800

How much shit do we have to throw at it to reach 1g? Can we give it a magnetic field while we're at it?

>> No.9529824


Christ it's quicker to send a generation ship to some nearby planet.

>> No.9529878

just live in orbit and work on the surface, we can still terraform it a lot quicker if we just want earth life to live there we can reproduce in orbit and teens can start workin on the surface at like 16 or something.

It's much better this way no matter what you can throw 100,000 habitats into space and host more people than mars. Give them solar panels and eventually fusion reactors and you'll end up with more people living in space than on planets in a couple centuries.

>> No.9529880

With diversity.

>> No.9529938

>How do you make a Martian colony self sustainable?
First of all, to bootstrap things you absolutely must have a nuclear reactor. It's the only way to get the necessary power to run the industrial processes you need to process resources. Eventually solar and wind will become major contributions to your power budget, but you can't fabricate solar panels and wind turbines without plastic/chemical/metal industries already up and running. And those industries are going to need fuckloads of electricity.

Sealed reactor units can be made pretty small these days. There should be no issues fitting an entire reactor, turbines, condensers, coolant system, etc in the payload bay of a BFR. Launch an unmanned reactor ahead of the human settlers; if it crashes its not going to contaminate a colony because the colony hasn't been established yet. If it lands safely then when the colonists arrive they can finish the set-up.

With a 20MW or so available, things get a lot easier. You can run large electric (or methane/LOX) earth-moving equipment, which will make digging shelters a lot faster. It'll also allow large scale ice mining. Use said earth moving equipment to dig and transport large volumes of water ice bearing soil to a rotary kiln heated with the reactor's secondary coolant loop. Capture the exhaust gases from the kiln, condense, distill, and purify. As long as the trucks keep feeding the kiln you'll have a steady (if small) stream of new water to for human use, for electrolysis, or for industrial processes.

Next of course is the Sabatier process with cracked water and Mars CO2. You'll want to do fractional distillation of Mars atmosphere to get pure CO2, and also to extract useful stuff like argon and nitrogen which will be required for other key industrial processes. The methane, oxygen, argon, and nitrogen are all going to have to be stored as liquid. Your lander will have some small storage capacity, but you'll want to expand that pretty soon. Doing so will mean starting both a metal and plastic industry.

Hematite is found on Mars in surface deposits, but you basically can't use any terrestrial steel production methods. First of all you don't have coal or coke, so no blast furnaces. Even if you did, oxygen is too precious. Electric arc furnaces need a conductive charge (as far as I know anyway), so plasma torch furnaces are probably the best bet. This is where the argon comes in. Best thing is, is that the furnace should work for just about anything - you're not limited to steel.

>> No.9529962
File: 404 KB, 1400x957, Mars Ancient Impact Made Mars' Moons.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Getting the core to produce a good magnetosphere may not be possible, but the moon bombardment is one the best ways to do it.

>How much shit do we have to throw at it to reach 1g?

•Earth's mass is about 5.972 septillion kg.
•Mars' mass is about 0.639 septillion kg.
•You need 5.333 septillion kg of mass added to Mars to reach 1g, theoretically.

•Total estimated mass of all the asteroids in the solar system: 0.28 septillion kg to 0.32 septillion kg
•Ganymede is the largest moon in the solar system with a mass just over twice the mass of Earth's Moon. It weighs in at 0.148 septillion kg.
•The 10th largest moon in the solar system weighs in at 0.249 septillion kg and weights go down very sharply after that.

There's only 181 known moons as of 2009 I think. Adding all the moons' mass and all the asteroids' mass together would not equal enough mass to raise Mars to 1g. I don't even think you'd reach 1 septillion kg. you would need to throw an entire planet at Mars. In fact, if you slammed both Venus and Mercury (5.1955 septillion kg together) into Mars, with all the asteroids and moons in the solar system (0.151 septillion kg; 'estimated'), you should be pretty damn close to 1g. That's 5.3465 septillion kg, but only 0.6255 septillion from being the same mass as Earth (just under 11.7% from being Earth mass).

But, gravity doesn't work exactly by mass. Mars and Mercury have nearly the same gravity, but Mars has about twice the mass of Mercury.

>Thus, you can probably slam Mercury into Mars for a combined gravity of 0.755g then add the mass of the moons and asteroids to reach a number very close to 1g.

Earth is 1g.
Venus is 0.907g
Mars is 0.377g
Mercury is 0.378g
>Mercury + Mars + all moons + all asteroids = something "close" to 1g.

If you slammed Venus into Mars and nothing else, it'd be 1.284g (100lbs of weight would feel like 122lbs?) Good luck doing either.

>numbers are probably off somewhere due to sources and calculations both being off

>> No.9529964

The metallurgy is going to be a bitch. Again, nothing terrestrial applies. I don't think anyone has attempted to smelt hematite in a CO2 atmosphere before, and who knows how lower gravity is going to affect the end product. And depending on what kind of steel you need you're going to need to locate other ores, like chromium and nickel. Stainless steel is necessary for cryogenic dewars as far as I know, so you'll need lots of chromium. It's found on Mars, but will it be near your colony site? If not, you're going to have to go find it and transport it back. Site-to-site rocket hops might be necessary.

Assuming the martial metallurgy issues can be resolved, you would need to use the older, ingot mold casting method (at least at first), because continuous casting is not going to be viable. First of all the low gravity would make the structure impractically large, and an entirely new method of cooling would have to be developed without relying on water jets or air-cooling. While the Martian atmosphere is much colder than Earth's, the extremely low density is going to mean it's less effective at cooling the steel, which mean the crust-forming process used in continuous casting is not going to work as well. You'll need to develop an entirely new open mold system that uses a closed coolant loop. It can probably be done, but ingot casting is going to be much easier for a fledgling colony. Once you have ingots, a traditional rolling mill setup should work. Just have to replace water jet cooling of the rollers with an internal water cooling loop.

>> No.9529973

Lots of potatoes.

>> No.9529986

I really think it will be better to mine high metal containing asteroids and ship it to where you need it for such things instead of trying to make in on Mars; unless you find actual veins of good ores on Mars of course. All the other problems you listed can be solved easily enough with some engineering. You'd essentially be smelting, melting, and forging in normal atmosphere pressure. With steps that require more gravity, you do them in a centrifuge type setup.

>> No.9530013

I don't know enough about organic chemistry to feel confident about plastics. I know that methane can be used to make ethylene, but I don't know about other essentials like benzene, toluene, etc. We don't really have to think about synthesizing that stuff on Earth because they're elementary petroleum products. There's so much that a self-sustaining Mars colony is going to need that we derive from petroleum on Earth. Not just materials for construction or electronics, but also consumables for water treatment.

Some stuff you could make, like ethanol from ethylene, then butadiene from ethanol, then synthetic rubbers from butadiene. I suppose there could be ways to make just about anything, but I just don't know enough chemistry to be sure. In any case, you'd need lots of energy and probably an exotic catalyst.

>> No.9530018
File: 1.14 MB, 250x250, c5f.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9530021
File: 220 KB, 964x956, article-2535708-1A7A921B00000578-627_964x956[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

There's apparently a lot of iron ores in large surface deposits.

>> No.9530037

Holy shit. I've never a seen that before. Then there's plenty for iron needs it would seem. We need more rovers for scouting stuff like this.

>> No.9530052
File: 258 KB, 1253x600, PIA18387_hires[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Also lots of meteoric iron


>> No.9530063
File: 96 KB, 744x960, 1516773583270.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is Mars, not India

>> No.9530069
File: 17 KB, 275x183, fap folder - deflated balloons - hot n sexy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>if Mars does get colonized and it works there will be an entire generation or 5 making meteorite swords like their favorite jRPG characters use

legit jelly

>> No.9530071
File: 76 KB, 970x545, meteorite sword.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Shit wrong photo.

>> No.9530090
File: 21 KB, 738x140, Screenshot_20180219-214220_01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

nigger what

>> No.9530113
File: 46 KB, 880x496, yui-computer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It won't let me delete the post now.

>> No.9530125


Post more from the fap folder.

>> No.9530133

>Fap folder
>Deflated balloons
>Hot n sexy

>> No.9530141

Now who could argue with that?

>> No.9530144

But then you have to start terraforming THAT.

>> No.9530184

Synthesis of benzene from methane over a nickel(111) catalyst

>> No.9530630
File: 68 KB, 600x760, 4ee.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I came here to jej at u.
And bulli.

>> No.9530727
File: 148 KB, 800x533, bang.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

That is were 90% of humanity is already living in.
Anyway with enough development you can do it spacious has you desire.

>> No.9530832

You'd still need to to have common components. If the machine which produces material for the 3d printer breaks (assuming its plausible to easily make on mars) you're fucked if you don't have spares.

>> No.9531750

>How do you make a Martian colony self sustainable?
You don't. You build an economy that increases and provides outgoing resources that pay for the resources the colony can't produce.

>> No.9531758

Make it big for a greater margin of error

>> No.9531760

D-does that mean my soul has already eroded away?

>> No.9531763

Something totalitarian, because if mandatory maintenance doesn't get done, everyone dies.

>> No.9531775


Nuclear propulsion and a lot of water

>> No.9531863
File: 373 KB, 768x768, 1518735528165.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

how could anyone fall for this obvious bait

>> No.9531887

the part you didn't get, obviously

>> No.9531895
File: 99 KB, 1000x1182, worlds-population-condensed-map.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I always thought pic related was an interesting perspective for the human population question.
And as someone who lived in Taipei, big ass asian cities aren't bad places to live.

>> No.9531899

farm animals

>> No.9532358
File: 183 KB, 1024x509, technocratic_socialism__the_basics_by_valendale-d88fp6p.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9532422

>eva suits for kids

>> No.9532423

National socialist

>> No.9532427

This confuses me. When they say dense, do they mean that people wold be densely packed in one area? In otherwords, paris would have everyone close enough to sniff each others ass and houston has people yards away from each other?

>> No.9532453


We have all of that except the volunteer labor force and the autismbox. In socialist countries they had "voluntary labor" too. It amounts to work you have to volunteer for or be arrested for reactionary activities.

>> No.9532456

I'm pretty sure its as if the global population were to live like the citizens in the city specified.

>> No.9532522

It is using population density from other locations. Like New York city's population density is 27,000 people per square mile. So, they take all the billions of the people in the world and place them in square miles at 27,000 people per square mile. They'd obviously live in tall apartment complexes like in NYC. If you've ever walked through NYC you know how packed it is. The super city made would feel the same as NYC, but take up more land mass. Thus, on the map in >>9531895 all the people in the world could fit into the state of Texas, at the same time, and feel like they were living in NYC as far as how many people are around them and close to them.

For Paris it would use 21,498 people per square mile, so the super city would take up less space than the super city based on New York.

>> No.9532532


>> No.9532555

>Arrays of solar panels.
You should be able to produce solar panels on Mars. Martian soil has silicon dioxide, magnesium oxide, and calcium oxide. With those, plus water, hydrochloric acid (Mars unforunately has excessive perchlorates) and the energy from a nuclear reactor you should be able to produce semiconductor grade silicon, though it might take several extra steps to purify it. The low gravity seems like it would be a real boon to crystal formation.

Getting the chlorine for the acid might be a bitch, as it seems like all the chlorine on Mars is locked up in perchlorates. I guess the viability depends on which is most prevalent. Some perchlorates you can just burn. Some might require bacteria that produce a specific enzyme. I guess if you want to use Martian soil to grow stuff you'd need to get rid of the perchlorates anyway, so industrial scale chlorine production is going to be a byproduct of that.

It seems the common theme with making stuff on Mars is that yes you can do it but it takes a fuckload of energy.

>> No.9532854

Recycling water and plant materials is enought, problem is you need much water...

It would be good if we could get water from Europe if there is no life water there.

>> No.9532919

what part didn't I get

>> No.9533869
File: 33 KB, 399x400, Tech_Priest.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


Mechanicus religion of Tech Priests.

>> No.9533895

Actually you are 100% correct. Send AI robots to extract all the materials we need and to build the underground settlements BEFORE humans arrive,

>> No.9533925
File: 44 KB, 480x300, robots-news_trans.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Yes humans, come to the planet we worked so hard to make it flourish.
A welcome party is ready for you.

>> No.9533938
File: 579 KB, 600x767, storm_warden.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Minor annoyance, let the military crush their rebellion.

>> No.9533961

Terraform the planet.

>> No.9533988

Step 1: build a self-sustaining colony somewhere on Earth

>> No.9533993

Is that an airship on Mars? How does it stay afloat?

>> No.9534137

>You will be able to kick children several meters into the sky.

What a time to be alive.

>> No.9534170

>one of the moons of jupiter/saturn w/e has a gravity low enough for the fastest human runners to fly
>a car crash sends a kid directly into the fucking void

>> No.9534190

There's enough water on Mars you wouldn't need to import it from anywhere.

>> No.9534200

Same way mars colonies are self sufficient.

>> No.9534218

What kind of energy source should the colony have? Fossil fuels are obviously out of the question. Solar is problematic because of dust storms that can block sunlight for weeks or even months, plus all the dust would need to be constantly cleaned from the panels. For wind energy the winds are way too weak there. Nuclear reactors would need a lot of water for cooling (there are also nuclear batteries that don't require cooling, but those produce only very little energy). Plus, you would have the problem of radiation. Is geothermal an option? Seems to be the only energy source without major downsides. Especially considering that the best place to start colonization seems to be lava tubes, this is where most probably you could also build a small geothermal plant the easiest.

>> No.9534223

>have at least 160 young adult people on colony. this is the rough minimum to create a viable population going forward.
It's larger than this dude by quite a bit. 160 people is only going to last you like 15 or 20 generations before you're squirting out tay-sachs ridden jew parasites.

You need about 2-4k for a sustainable population, assuming good reproductive rates and low child mortality. Good luck with that on Mars.

A minimum martian population would probably have to be like 10k or more with women pregnant like life depends on it, WHICH IT DOES.

>> No.9534233


Mars is almost completely cold inside.

>> No.9534261

No, it's not. Also, even if it was, at a certain depth it would still be really hot. Maybe not hot enough to keep a huge iron core liquid, but certainly hot enough to get a geothermal power plant going.

>> No.9534293

It's geologically dead. You'd have to drill pretty deep to get enough heat. Or if there are any radioactive piles nearer to the surface.

>> No.9534331

You wouldn't need to dig deep. You can just use geothermal heat pumps. A couple of metres is deep enough on earth, on Mars it wouldn't be much more. However, you would need quite a lot of them, since everything has to be synthesized on Mars. So the energy consumption would me enormous.

>> No.9534346

Nuclear is the only logical choice for Jello-baby colonies. Cooling problems are only design flaws that haven't been addressed yet.

>> No.9534353

Would a nuclear reactor even require cooling on Mars? Maybe at least for that -180°C could be an advantage.

>> No.9534371

You can cool small reactors with gas. Risk of meltdown, radiation, and nuclear waste are all not really a big concern for the first steps of setting up a colony. Those are literally the smallest problems you are going to have. The big upside is nuclear reactor is basically the only energy source that can deliever lots of energy reliably, and this is the most important thing for a mars colony. If electricity goes out on earth, you dont have internet for a couple of hourse. If electricity goes out on Mars, you die.

>> No.9534384

No. Non-renewable and polluting energy is never an option and even less so in a "pristine" environment.
There is no point in moving people to Mars if we are going to destroy it in the process.

>> No.9534389
File: 57 KB, 600x600, brainlet.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9534401

The planet has no ocean. I say we make one out of radiation.

>> No.9534411

Lets fill valles marineris with old tires and start a fire.

>> No.9534425

The population of 160 comes from research done in to the minimum viable population over 100 years, and does not assume that group remains isolated forever.


What this gives us is confidence that a group of 160 individuals, with balanced gender and genetic makeup, could be genetically stable for 5-10 generations. More than enough time for a new group of 160 colonists from earth to arrive and revitalise the gene pool.

The idea is that this is minimum intake the colony would need going forward.

>> No.9534464

but... all you need is like eight people. Then send sperm and eggs with the colonists from 10,000 different people.

>> No.9534479

Anarcho posadism

>> No.9534490


>> No.9534497

>Destroy Mars

Hate to break it you man but it's already a barren rocky wasteland with no atmosphere.

>> No.9534848

Solar panels can have automatic wipers that run if output drops below a certain threshold. Wind turbines work just fine, and their output would actually increase during dust storms counteracting the losses in solar panel output. Wind turbines would actually be easier to engineer and construct than on Earth, as here you actually have to shut them down when the wind pressure exceeds their engineering limits. On Mars the max wind pressure would be much less than on Earth despite higher wind speeds because the atmospheric pressure is so much lower.

Geothermal may or may not be an option. Geothermal heat on Earth is caused by radioisotope decay. We don't know whether or not Mars is rich enough in such isotopes to have useful levels of heat. If it is, then geothermal and self-sufficient nuclear energy are both options. When it comes to nuclear, obviously a different cooling option would be required however, one which uses closed loops. The good news is, is that Mars is pretty damned cold so there's lots of great uses for low level heat. You'll heat your cities and factories with secondary coolant loop heat, as well as heating water bearing soil for extraction. Whatever's left will have to be dumped into heatsinks. Even if self-sufficient nuclear power is not an option due to paucity of uranium or thorium, a fledgling colony is still going to have to use nuclear power. There's just no other way to produce the massive amounts of energy required to bootstrap a self-sufficient colony (which can then move on to producing solar panels and wind turbines in-situ). The radiation from the reactor and waste is a pretty minor issue; we already know how to handle all this stuff on Earth, and everything on Mars is already going to be heavily shielded from radiation anyway, given the thin atmosphere and lack of magnetosphere.

>> No.9534863

The atmosphere is very thin, which makes heatsinks less efficient. However there are lots of cold things you want to heat up, like ice and soil/ores, and habitats and factories. These things will be good dumps for waste heat and whatever they don't need can get piped out to a heatsink field, or for keeping solar panels and wind turbines at an optimal temperature.

>> No.9534866

Nobody tell him the first step in terraforming Mars. He'll have a stroke.

>> No.9535070
File: 2.20 MB, 1565x987, five acre.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

In a 100 person colony a full 2/3 will be producing food, while the other 1/3 will be mining/manufacturing, primarily solar panels for the farms. That ratio will likely be solid until there is at least a 1000 or more people there and enough automated processes are set up, plus the experience of what works and what doesn't.

Anyone who thinks they are going to go to Mars as a scientist and do all this cool research is deluded. Setting up a Mars colony is going to back breaking work and I see no way around that.

Look at pic related. That is around how much food that is needed for 5 to 6 people, plus you still need to buy stuff you can't produce. Use whatever meme farming method you want: algae, aquaponics, hydroponics, vertical farming. We are still talking acres of food for a Mars colony with 6 people.

I see no way around it, any Mars colony will be entirely dependent on Earth for a very long time. Self sustainability is nigh impossible. Maybe if the people lived on Algae bars and had a horrible existence it would be possible.

>> No.9535098

lets play a game
think and research a way to make a colony self sufficient
don't write it off, use your brain friendo

>> No.9535113

Entirely self sufficient requires mining and farming for everything the colony needs to make.
Then smelting and processing all of those products to create something usable. For example if we grow cotton for clothing, then you need textiles to turn it into clothing.

The number of mines and factories needed would be more than the population for a long time. For example rare earths, the colony needs them to make motors, batteries, etc. They would need to depend on shipments from Earth until they had mines and processing for every rare earth.

>tldr: self sustainable is impossible for a small colony

>> No.9535117

You do realize that Mars colonists will have technology that's better than 1800s England, right? You don't need to grow hay and keep horses to draw your plough. Thinking this picture has any relevance to Mars is asinine.

>> No.9535130

First off although that picture looks old the idea behind it is not. See farm buildings, that is where you store the tractor other heavy equipment for a small farm. That said yes the author suggests rotation of crops and animals. The pigs for example can do the work for you.

All that said, yes this is on Earth, not Mars. I assume you don't want chickens and cows on Mars? Are all Mars colonists vegetarians or are they dependent on Earth meat?

>> No.9535135

>google automated farming
>find 5 businesses with near-fully robotic agriculture systems
We don't have to do absolutely everything by hand anymore, we're a little more advanced than that
as a bonus, we have cultured meats as a possibility, if people would be adverse to bringing goats and chickens along

>> No.9535146

>We don't have to do absolutely everything by hand anymore, we're a little more advanced than that

That wasn't the point of the farm picture. It was to show how much food 6 people need, but I'll respond regardless. Sure modern harvesters run themselves and are guided via gps. They are also designed for Earth and heavy pieces of diesel equipment, none of which will work on Mars. Not saying a battery harvester couldn't work, but they would have to be pretty small. Reality is though people still would monitor, service, use any equipment, which still means lots of personal farming.

>> No.9535466

>I assume you don't want chickens and cows on Mars?

Why not, that would be awesome. Only problem is that chickens would be able to take off and fly all over the place inside the colony pressure dome.

>> No.9535494

we'd have synthetic meat by then ya ignoramus

>> No.9535506


We already have a robust, low tech protein synthesis solution. It's called a chicken.

>> No.9535509

chickens make more chickens
Chickens provide entertainment
Chickens provide fertilizer
chickens are a great choice for mars.
t. have kept backyard chickens for twenty years

>> No.9535520


Ducks >> chickens

Indian runner ducks in particular.

>> No.9535554

Also Chickens provide eggs

>> No.9535557

They have fully automated machines requiring very little maintennance that run up and down a narrow but as long as you want planter box. That would be the tool for the job. Nuke some big caverns open or find a hollow lava tube, stack with row after row and level after level of hydroponics, bonus points for a huge fish pool to grow fish in and aid nutrient cycles in hydroponics. room for 10s of thousands of peoples food supply no problem.

>> No.9535558

>Martian low gravity
>Can selectively breed chickens larger

Sounds good desu.

>> No.9535563

Nuclear Power with reactor rods supply chained until a mining outfit is established on planet.

>> No.9535564

>room for 10s of thousands of peoples food supply no problem.

This made me laugh. So easy! Man, NASA should hire you!

>> No.9535576

Obviously it's not going to be easy, but the basic principle is very sound.

>> No.9535615

Mars actually has some advantages compared to earth. The lower gravity makes building things easier, and due to almost no geologic activity there are basically no natural disasters that can destroy your settlements. There are dust storms, but they don't have the potential to actually destroy anything. So basically, the only ways the settlements are going to be destroyed, is through technological or human malfunction.

The downside is that we still don't know the long term effects of low gravity. Spending hundreds of billions on a mars colony and then finding out after 50 years the gravity makes permanent human settlement impossible would be quite the bummer.

The second disadvantage is the huge amounts of energy that would be needed just to keep life-supporting systems running, and the dependency you would have on those.

To keep the second disadvantage as small as possible, you would need to do a lot of scouting first before you settle anywhere. Having a really good spot to settle would reduce the amount of energy needed by a lot. You would want large water supplies that are as warm as possible (liquid would be jackpot), the temperatures should be as stable and warm as possible, and having as much workin material lying around close by as possible. Caves indeed are probably the best place to start. The caves of the volcano Arsia Mons are probably going to be the best possible starts.

The diet, btw, would be quite different from earth. You wouldn't eat potatoes, because those are not very energy-efficient. The most energy-efficient food that we know of are cyanobacteria, e.g. algae. They both are the most efficient in terms of turning sunlight into calories, as well as turning CO2 into O2, which is also very important, since you are going to have to synthesize a lot of O2. Again, energy efficiency is everything. You can also turn them into plastic and use that to build things. So all in all, cyanobacteria are probably going to be our no.1 ressource.

>> No.9535627

>The downside is that we still don't know the long term effects of low gravity. Spending hundreds of billions on a mars colony and then finding out after 50 years the gravity makes permanent human settlement impossible would be quite the bummer.
There's ways around that, you can build large areas that are rotating at an angle in respect to the surface to increase felt gravity. In the long run, genetic engineering might also make martian pregnancy easier.

>The second disadvantage is the huge amounts of energy that would be needed just to keep life-supporting systems running, and the dependency you would have on those.

Not an insurmountable problem, Mars has vast untapped mineral resources, we can go with producing abundant in situ solar and use excess power to generate surplus methane and split oxygen and hydrogen from water to use as back-up fuel, and in the long run mine uranium or other materials like thorium for building nuclear reactors or even, and this is a big maybe of course, get a fusion reactor going there if that works out in the near future.

>The diet, btw, would be quite different from earth. You wouldn't eat potatoes, because those are not very energy-efficient. The most energy-efficient food that we know of are cyanobacteria, e.g. algae. They both are the most efficient in terms of turning sunlight into calories, as well as turning CO2 into O2, which is also very important, since you are going to have to synthesize a lot of O2. Again, energy efficiency is everything. You can also turn them into plastic and use that to build things. So all in all, cyanobacteria are probably going to be our no.1 ressource.
IN this situation utility is far outmoded by pragmatism in the service of morale. no one wants to eat cyanobacteria every day for their whole life. I have no doubt we will use them for various things, but they'll be just one part of many different food sources for people, along with plants and likely mushrooms

>> No.9535638

You cannot make human colony self-sustainable.

Humans depend on terran biosphere to sustain themselves.

This whole "Lets colony Mars" is one type of mythical narrative for the working (low/middle) class USA.

Sorry to break it to you. This has nothing to do with science or technology. Going to Mars would be a useless enterprise even if it was technologically feasible.

>> No.9535642

Rule by dictatorial senate.

>> No.9535646

Well, energy-efficiency and money you are willing to spend are basically a trade-off. If you send 50 cargo ships first filled with all sorts of ressources, including several hundred tons of earth-soil, you really don't need to be that efficient with anything. However, we are not going to spend that much on Mars. More than 10 missions or so are probably not going to be financed, if those are not showing promising results. For a mars colony to be at least half-self-sustainable in 10 missions, you are going to eat algae bars most probably.

>> No.9535851
File: 164 KB, 270x300, md.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>How do you make a Martian colony self sustainable?

Science the shit out of it!

>> No.9535889

It's about time they put those useless wings to some use, those failure of birds.
And their meat would be good anyway, probably better.

>> No.9536168
File: 979 KB, 500x269, 1505603763376.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9536172

Same way as all cells work on earth.
Power source, intelligence center core, work force, relief.

>> No.9536402 [DELETED] 
File: 47 KB, 832x1199, Monsanto_Shill.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>technology that's better than 1800s England

Better in what regard and for what use? Do you actually know how biodiversity, farming, and permaculture actually works? Let me give you a hint, it isn't how Monsanto wants you to think it does, kid.

>> No.9536404

Black Austrolops specifically. Tons of eggs and good meat.

>> No.9536405

Yes. All my YES.

>> No.9536407


>> No.9536437

What do you think this entire thread is about? A Martian Colony is about as /x/ as it gets on /sci/ aside from blackhole threads.

>> No.9536444

Welp, looks like I've been found out. Guess it's time to give up my technological lifestyle and go live in a yurt in Mongolia. All 7.5 billion of us should do the same. Living in pre-technological nomadic conditions is the only way to support such a massive population.

>> No.9536452
File: 82 KB, 480x480, 1517866816433.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>tries to be snarky and sarcastic
>just ends up showing how deep his ignorance really is

>> No.9536859

27,000>21,498, text says the opposite. I think you confused numbers.

We'd actually need to burn some fuel to increase greenhouse effect and temperature to make life possible. Unlike Earth obviously, we already have life.

Thanks /ck/.

>> No.9536874

>I think you confused numbers.


>> No.9536886

>We'd actually need to burn some fuel
How about make megafactories devoted solely to emitting super greenhouse gasses non-stop for a century or two.

>> No.9537213

This thread is depressing as hell. The food and resource situation makes things just seem so impossible. Humans aren't going to live of algae. They would be even more suicidal.

>> No.9537286

Cheer up lad it's not that grim. Resources are a matter of a manufacturing base, would take a shitload of work to set up for sure, but at the current rate of progress in the automation field, much of the production from there can be automated. Food doesn't have to be algae either, the first few groups sure will have to live off the stuff, but long term hydro/aeroponics for real food is very doable and can be set up so the yield/m2 of space is fucking huge. Carving a big hole for a huge fish tank is one of the easier options for meat production. Pretty much everything that is needed for self suatainability is on Mars, it is a matter of setting up the infrastructure to mine and refine it as well as bringing the correct species of Fish and plants from Earth, all of which can be stored for the several month trip as seeds or eggs.

>> No.9537291

and as a bonus, because of the new demand for such technologies, they'll be improved at a dramatic pace to make use of that demand

>> No.9537314

About 100 threads ago I made the mistake of mentioning using humanure as part of your recycling program to maintain a biomass cycle for fertilizer and growing food. Like 6 people flipped their shit over it stating it wouldn't need to be done and it was gross to even think to do it. That alone tells you how little they know about this entire topic.

>> No.9537324

I'm having trouble with the idea that Singapore is less dense than New York or Paris. Are they counting the the outlying islands and the big chunk in the middle of the main island that's mostly unusable rainforest as part of the city? Because that's really dumb.

>> No.9537328

Mega City One was distinctly underpopulated. for the amount of urban architecture it had.

>> No.9537347

why not just turn mars into a forge world and enjoy the gasses as a useful byproduct

>> No.9537353

>forge world
thats pretty much the best use for mars. we can make the entire planet dedicated to highly toxic industrial processes because it doesn't fucking matter if you pollute the shit out of a lifeless rock.

>> No.9537360

Kek that is some luddite tier thinking. Do these same people eat mushrooms? I hope not because they are essentially grown in piles of shit. Using human waste for it's assorted nutrients is absolutely no difference so long as it is processed correctly. Shit, my neighbour has a composting toilet and just dumps it on his flower bed, plants fucking love it.

>> No.9537369

I frequent /diy/ and Homegrowmen on /out/ and you're the only other person since those board's creation and Homegrowmen creation on /ck/ to ever make those statements. Evidently the ick factor is too well in grained in western society to even talk about it properly on 4chan of all places.

>> No.9538135

that we cant even have a self-sustainable arctic station, let alone in the arizona desert

>> No.9538144

Because no one tried, no one wants non habitable place on planet which is full of muslims and nukes.

>> No.9538244

All the technology to make this happen ALREADY EXISTS, it's just the matter of transport and convincing leftist morons to let us put a nuclear reactor on Mars.

>> No.9538273

Funny considering western peasants would use human shit to fertilize their crops.

>> No.9538383

or just construction crews if you don't have the robots, and staff the colony with robots to make it even more self sustainable

>> No.9538437
File: 129 KB, 864x523, 2397dcff4a2163663b2bd2e129b3700d.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The industrial fertilizer companies have done their best to get people to buy their products and have been extremely successful. Meanwhile, most of the world is starting to make power plants fueled by crap. They are giant biomethane plants that make biomethane and high nitrogen fertilizer. Of course, even those can have contamination problems if the out-going fertilizer isn't pasteurized before leaving. Such plants can exist on micro-scale up to massive MW power plants anywhere people, farm refuse, and/or biowaste exist. It just depends on the bio-inputs as to how large it can be.


India of course has a huge amount of small village scale biogas production plants and individual house versions. There's a few turn key companies that sell complete systems for individual homes.


Regardless, the refuse is a viable resource that is super easy to process and utilize. The microbes do the main part of the work. The amount of heat and electric needed to run the system comes from the refuse and microbes, thus, you don't actually need to add heat or electric to it that it can't already generate for itself and then some.

>> No.9538664


We're on mars now, boy

>> No.9538676

Send seeds, and tools that can make all other tools from local materials.

>> No.9538680

Biodome experiments alwayts get scrubbed instead of forcing the test subjects to find a solution.

>> No.9538878

>volunteer labor
>rewards for volunteering
>have to set up rules for these things
>end up with capitalism again

>> No.9538897

I saw this blade when I was in Japan last year. That whole museum was rather nice.

>> No.9538933

And for good reason. A 6 person Mars colony should also have a rocket there and ready to take them home if things go bad.

>> No.9540611

And what exactly do you intend to do with your seeds? Bury them in a soil that doesn't contain nutriments necessary to life, under lethal radiation, in the driest environment ever, way bellow freezing temperature, and without enough air?

>> No.9541288

Hydroponics and aquaponics are both a thing. You can also create your own soil. It isn't difficult.

>> No.9541386

Nobody here is retarded enough to suggest that we just plant seeds in bare untreated Martian surface soil. You are strawmanning. Mars has the resources necessary to manufacture perfectly usable and reusable soil, given a sufficient source of power. More comprehensive soil chemistry tests would be necessary to determine precisely how difficult it would be, but we do know that all the building blocks are there. Radiation and air isn't going to be a problem, because we're mostly going to be living underground, using LEDs for light. Water from ice-bearing soil, oxygen from electrolysis, CO2 from the atmosphere, nitrogen from nitrates already present in the soil, heat and power from a nuclear reactor. Perchlorates can be removed using water. There aren't any readily apparent show-stoppers preventing growing food on Mars.

>> No.9541404

Fucking horrifying

>> No.9541494

but that's not funny

>> No.9541690

what was funny were the C-130 full of supplies imho

>> No.9541715

The image is fine for something interesting to imagine, but I hate what people do with it when it gets tossed around to talk about how humans are wasteful and need too much space. There is no fucking way to bring in enough resources, dispose of enough waste, and maintain an infrastructure to support all 6.9 billion people at that density. The sprawl is too much for water and waste alone and the area would just be a big shit dump within a week.

>> No.9541790

>let us put a nuclear reactor on Mars.
And this is where the plan will crash. Panels is all that will be available. Unless the greens ban those due to environmental issues related to their production...

>> No.9541807

No, it wouldn't be that difficult. A great deal would be taken care of internally and everything else is just logistics. It'd actually be easier and more efficient than anything going on now.

>> No.9542001

>muh ebul nuclear
good thing their whining will be immediately disregarded

>> No.9542333

It is completely infeasible to move the number of solar panels necessary to bootstrap a self-sustaining colony. There are a great deal of extremely energy intensive processes that need to be set up before solar panels can be manufactured in-situ. And if the only way to power those processes is solar, you would need dozens or hundreds of BFRs just full of solar panels and batteries and nothing else. Plus you're missing out on a massive benefit of a nuclear reaction: waste heat. Mars is fucking cold, and the low grade heat that comes off a secondary coolant loop is going to be important for heating basically everything man-made to the point where it can function reliably.

>> No.9542418
File: 4 KB, 208x206, varg-stop.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

How do you make living a simpler life self sustainable?

>> No.9542423

solar panels will offer better power to weight ratios than nuclear idiot

>> No.9542429

To grow food via hydroponics for a Mars colony requires lots of nutrition solution. Are we supposed to send tons of it from Earth? Small home versions use many gallons of the stuff. Even a small colony would require thousands of liters.

>> No.9542432
File: 469 KB, 504x499, mount_and_blade_varg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Hereditary Danelaw

>> No.9542433

and 99% of it is water or salt or some other easily produced mineral/element

>> No.9542434

Nothing is easy to produce on Mars. Besides like all farming stuff on earth is a petroleum product.

>> No.9542443

All you need to produce anything on Mars is energy. If you have a nuke reactor there should be no insurmountable barriers.

>> No.9542464

literal poo delivery every 6 months on the BFR

>> No.9542488

they could bring animals along to produce it
would solve the meat problem

>> No.9542517

Attention pop-sci queers:

the martian atmosphere is far too thin to push wind turbines to any useful speed. The worst martian wind speeds are estimated to be at around 60 mph, which is about half what you see in a serious hurricane. And that's the extreme high end. Added to which the atmosphere is very thin, so even the meager wind you're getting is doing a very, very poor job of pushing anything.

as an addendum: martian dust storms are going to be nothing like what you see in movies. It would probably be more akin to being in a persistent red fog. It's not going to be like a khamsin.

>> No.9542528

Here's a hint: >>9538437

>Besides like all farming stuff on earth is a petroleum product.

I'm a farmer. Everything I use comes from the land itself, the crops, the animals, and me. There's no outside input, other than rain.

>> No.9542536
File: 2.16 MB, 480x258, Crookes Radiometer.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>the martian atmosphere is far too thin to push wind turbines to any useful speed

If you can see dust blowing around, you can design wind turbines for the wind. It isn't difficult. Just make the blades cover more area.


>> No.9542578

You're wrong. The Martian atmosphere is too thin to make wind a serious hazard for almost any activity or structure, but wind turbines, designed to interact as much as possible, with the wind would still work well.

The Martian atmosphere is about 1% as dense as Earth's, but the wind blows up to five times faster, which means it has 25 times as much energy per unit mass, and also means five times as much mass passes through the turbine per unit time, bringing the power available up to 125 times for the same density. In other words, wind power on Mars is roughly comparable to Earth.

There are various difficulties, and as on Earth, not all locations are suitable for wind power, but it's basically feasible.

Read up on it if you like:

>> No.9543116

>Just make the blades cover more area.
The blades are already over 35m long on Earth, that doesn't fit in a BFR (or a regular truck). And you want to make them bigger?

I'm not sure about the foundations either, it's a gigantic block of concrete on Earth. It'll ba a pain in the ass if we have to ship tons of concrete bags even if we use local water and gravel.
Making concrete uses a fuck ton of energy iirc, with steel making it's among the biggest energy user worldwide.

>> No.9543692

could just manufacture the blades on site
They'd have mining operations already going for all the metals and ice the colony needs for other shit

>> No.9543703

>he doesn't know about the law of diminishing returns

>> No.9543720

You establish equipment to produce air, food and use of martian minerals for raw materials. So figure out how to mine martian rock in a way that the small population colony could do it in Mars's limited atmosphere.

We take a lot of things for granted on Earth, one is our industrial processes where we do things in large batches and economies of scale that don't have a cottage industry analogue.

>> No.9543777
File: 964 KB, 2727x1462, Mars_duststorm.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

solar panels are fucking pointless with these many months up to year long global dust storms happening which are essentially nuclear winters on mars, blocking all the sunlight, the batteries required to survive that outweight simple portable thermoelectric nuclear isotope power generators by tons, plus you can use their waste heat when it gets "winter" on mars. which happens more often than you would like with your silly sand covered solar panels

>> No.9543793

Bring reactors from https://boards.4chan.org/sci/thread/9540015#bottom

>> No.9543881

Build domed habitats in Antarctica first before even attempting colonies on Mars. If we cannot create colonies in the most hostile areas of our planet then we should give up outside of Earth.

>> No.9543908

still needs to be built and tested
paper results are not always guaranteed
someone needs to find them investors

>> No.9543921

Please, stop mouth breathing in this thread.

>> No.9543926

You do realize that solar panels already exist on Mars and have been working beyond all expectations for over 13 years.

>> No.9543933


Failing nuclear reactor could destroy possible local life. Failing solar panel will not.

That's enough.

>> No.9543942
File: 1.96 MB, 3274x3070, Opportunity on meth.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Possibly the worse meme image I have that is on topic.

RNGs are used on satellites all the time and they crash in to Earth on a regular basis. I really don't think a ecological disaster will ever be humanity's concern.

>> No.9543945

Fusion reactors are clean, tritium and deuterium could possibly be find in martian ice.

>> No.9544081

they are not reactors, they are a slab of fast-decaying isotope, which creates heat, which gets turned into electrical power by thermoelectric elements. these things are walk away safe. this thing cant even blow up if you want it to.

>> No.9544087

for low power applications, and that equipment is sometimes down for days to months until a fortunate wind gust removes enough dust from its solar cells to power it up again. they use solar cells because they do not have to keep people alive with them. heck, with the curiosity rover they did it right, they put a nuclear generator on that thing so it can operate at any time of the day, even in a dust storm if needed.

>> No.9544110

>I'm a farmer. Everything I use comes from the land itself, the crops, the animals, and me. There's no outside input, other than rain.

I am a modern farmer. I use Monsanto/Bayer genetically modified seeds and I am so highly dependent on petroleum products that the price of food can generally be calculated based on the price of a barrel of oil. I have so many outside inputs I've lost count, but my farm is highly dependent on GPS, power, municipal water, tractor trailer shipments galore and oh yeah animals that are basically made in a factory with artificial insemination.

>> No.9544112

>You establish equipment to produce air, food and use of martian minerals for raw materials
I don't understand what you are saying. Earth resources are located all across the planet. I'm sure it is the same on Mars. It will take centuries for Mars to produce everything they need.

>> No.9544316

The only thing I have trouble believing is the first sentence.

>> No.9544675

They mean dense, as in you are fucking dense.

>> No.9544743

It's not like we're going to be prospecting on foot. A lot of the actual search for minerals can be done from space. It's mostly a matter of transporting them, and thankfully we'll have giant god damned rocket ships to transport them with.

Site your colony as close as possible to ice-bearing soil, and with the methane and oxygen produced from the Sabatier process and electrolysis you can do site-to-site hops in a lander for mining rare ores. Ideally you'd want to set up your mines for more common ores close enough for overland travel, but stuff you don't need assloads of can be transported from halfway around the planet. Thankfully it seems like Mars has large surface deposits of iron ores. Copper ores might prove to be an issue as they don't appear to have been located in quantity just yet.

>> No.9544753
File: 357 KB, 1024x645, wooooooooooooooo.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Fuck domes. Dig tunnels.

>> No.9544883

Tunnels are for rats, we are humans and should live on the surface. There has been some good work done on ice domes, they are great because they are radiation resistant, easy to make, strong, insulating and easy to source the material for.

>> No.9544916

Too much engineering mumble jumble could collapse any moment, build domed habitats.

>> No.9544918
File: 34 KB, 598x615, 1495828916955.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

why not both?

>> No.9545157

You want to transport ores across the planet with rockets?

I can't tell if you people are serious or not anymore.

>> No.9545316
File: 81 KB, 616x384, RS37576_venus-balloon-colony.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The real question is how do we make a Venus colony self staining.

>> No.9545910

40% Earth's gravity and 1% Earth's atmospheric pressure. Site-to-site hops on Mars are relatively easy and safe compared to those on Earth, which I remind you SpaceX intends to commercialize.

>> No.9546085

You can't
You'd have to import particular things, but you could pay for them with exports

>> No.9546092

thanks doc

>> No.9546113

Simplified naval hierarchy like we're on the Enterprise. Have a different hierarchy for each division of work and people (Agriculture, mining, maintenance, etc)

>> No.9546121

>40% Earth's gravity

0.377g is 37.7% of 1g. Not 40%.

>1% Earth's atmospheric pressure

0.62% actually. Earth is 101.325 kPa while Mars is 0.636 kPa

Also, Mars solar radiance is 590 W/m^2 compared to Earth's 1000 W/m^2. Mars having 59% of Earth's solar radiance.

>> No.9546209

The level of pedantry in this thread was sorely lacking. Thanks.

>> No.9546230

are you honestly suggesting that norway and sweden are communist countries?

>> No.9546255


This had nothing to do with pedantism until now.

>> No.9546336

Matter replicators.

>> No.9546339

is 3d printing close enough?

>> No.9546347

That replicates structures, not matter.

>> No.9546352

You mean molecular assembler.

>> No.9546475

How do airplanes work on or do they?

>> No.9546560

>How do you make a Martian colony self sustainable?

WE, do not... let the robots with a small group of people pre-build everything, THEN have the colonist move in.
A small group of people with robots, create the factories that make MORE robots that then mine the ground for raw materials and water. When enough has been stored, the robots build VAST underground cities and farms from seeds sent from earth. The "colonist" then move into a pre-built paradise.

>> No.9546738

Bombard planet to eject sections of its posionous/acidic atmosphere - hope it will reduce green house gases/temp then seed GM bacteria to produce oxygen

>> No.9546755

Fuck that. Rub' al Khali is a smarter place to do demos for mars colonization. Its a much more similiar setting then Antarctica plus the colonies can more easily be observed by researchers.

>> No.9546805

Make it produce something that will pay for supply and spare part shipments.

>> No.9546831

>37.7% of 1g. Not 40%.
>1% Earth's atmospheric pressure
>0.62% actually
Does your autism interfere with your daily activities much?

>> No.9546878

Does yours?

>> No.9546925
File: 12 KB, 384x384, images.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.9547157

Direct democracy, every citizen can vote for a law proposition coming from any citizen via the local Internet.

>> No.9547377

Apparently airplanes do work on Mars. Not sure about helicopters. Of course they would have to be electric or use oxides.

>> No.9547442

A biodome, fusion reactor, collecting and recycling water from the ice caps, and a whole lot of plants.

>> No.9547977

There is plan on sending helicopter in 2020 NASA rover.

>> No.9548073

They are not communist. With every new regulation they are becoming more and more communist and are getting weaker economically and socially every day.

Not alt right, but the refugees put to much stress on the social system which will collapse someday.

t. German

>> No.9548100

Well, if we had infinite energy, we could try to push earth out of its orbit, and replace it with Mars

Otherwise giving up seems easier

>> No.9548120


Not by taking kids with you to a colony in state as is in picture

>> No.9548190

>Without proper gravity, infants won't develop properly if they even make it to term.
Is there any proof of this? The fetus is after all enveloped in liquid in the womb, and thus the gravity affecting it is not of large consequence. At least that is how it would seem to me. Explain if I'm wrong.

>> No.9548197

Build it on earth

>> No.9548468

step one, kill the commies

>> No.9548469

amazon prime account

>> No.9548537

matt damon sex dolls with working fecal output
fuck him and smear the shit all over the planet
import irish retards until the planet is teeming with potatoes
did i miss anything?
lol matt damon is a retard

>> No.9548540

t. Ben Affleck

>> No.9548563

Are you implying that Antarctic research stations couldn't be made self-sustainable? Because the reality is that they simply don't have to. However with increasing intent to send humans to Mars we will inevitably see self-sustainability experiments in the Antarctic.

>> No.9548571

you can't sustain life without water, i suggest you re-take science class

>> No.9548589
File: 84 KB, 640x480, 1519681097383.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>of course we should go to a place with 37.6% of Earth's gravity despite not knowing the effects on human physiology, instead of a place with 90.4% of Earth's gravity

>> No.9548641

Except that place is so fucked no lander functioned for more than hour while we have martian rovers operating for decades.

>> No.9548657

The first colonist are human guinea pigs, what happens to them will determine if we send more to die.

>> No.9548661

>Are you implying that Antarctic research stations couldn't be made self-sustainable?
They could, at enormous expense of time and effort. In case of Mars, that effort would be an order of magnitude higher with not much to show for it (no, "keeping all eggs in one basket" arguments are not based on any serious risk-benefit analysis).

>> No.9548664

>human guinea pigs
CRISPR isn't there yet unfortunately

>> No.9548695
File: 109 KB, 1329x601, stratospheric_colony_by_phade01-d7uvz6m.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Balloons, my man! 50 to 55 kilometers up in Venus' atmosphere are some of the most Earth-like conditions in the Solar System. Earth-like gravity, Earth-like temperature, Earth-like pressure, Earth-like radiation shielding, the only difference being you'll float among clouds not made of water, but made of sulfuric acid. And due to the higher density of the atmosphere breathable air-filled balloons would float in the same way that helium balloons float on Earth. Short of having to produce your own water from atmospheric elements, and having to design all your environments to be non-corrosive, it's nearly ideal.

>> No.9548704

Venus has too much gas on it thats why we prefer Mars.

>> No.9548715
File: 104 KB, 640x480, Sulphuric_acid_on_a_piece_of_towel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You can't gather materials from surface, everything has to be gathered from Solar System.

>> No.9548807

You are quite right, it is very possible and the conditions are good, but I think being stuck inside the habitats would be a real psychological fuck you. On Mars, Ganymede, Titan, Europa, wherever, you can go outside, take a rover and go explore. On Venus you don't have that option and I think it will fuck up a lot of people who live there.

>> No.9549390

there is a shit ton of water ice on the poles. and you can find ice crystals below the top soil layers when its cold enough. the phoenix lander even observed falling frost crystals, way tinier than our snow flakes in the winter mornings, and thin fog collecting in canyons and craters. you could try to collect that, you just need a way to pressurize that moisture so it wont just evaporate again when it warms up from the low atmospheric pressure

>> No.9549398

i meant the water evaporates from the low atmospheric pressure when the ice melts.

>> No.9549400

People can't exactly step out of the ISS for a breather, and they seem to be doing rather well. The psychological long-term effects of great distance from the Earth are unexplored for obvious reasons. I'm not sure if coping is as easy as taking your rover for a spin around the block like you do with your car.

>> No.9549426

>Is there any proof of this? The fetus is after all enveloped in liquid in the womb, and thus the gravity affecting it is not of large consequence.

Decreased gravity will affect the buoyancy of amniotic fluid in the womb.

Basically there won't be enough resistance for the baby to develop strong enough cardiovascular and musculatory systems after the 26th week of fetal to survive life outside the womb.

>> No.9549430

*fetal growth

>> No.9549434

Could you put rotating banked rings on Mars to simulate Earth gravity from the resulting vector of Mars gravity and the centripetal force?

>> No.9549439

Well technically, unless the UN starts dividing it up or something, it's free land for the taking isn't it? Pretty much ancapistan

>> No.9549453

As of now, but it would be delusional to assume that arrangements wouldn't be made before the point in time when they're needed.

>> No.9549458

Do you actually have any sources to back that up or are you just pulling shit out of your ass? Because as far as I am aware the amount of studies on pregnancy is different gravities are exactly zero.

>> No.9549546


>> No.9549580

*Balloon bursts*
*Fall into eternal abyss of heat and death*

>> No.9549993

Read up on NASA's papers about astronaut health and animal experiments. Pay close attention to them and don't just breeze through. Pretty much every system is fucked up in micro gravity. Mars is 37.7% Earth gravity and we simply do not know where the curve ends for proper health in regards to how much gravity we need.

If Musk has his way, we will find out, for better or worse. We may have a really nasty wakeup call ahead of, "us."

Yes. Which is why off-world, spinning, space colonies are currently more viable. Just install an assload of shielding, spin it up, and have at it.

>> No.9550010

Can you imagine the religions that would crop up after a few generations of living over that?

>> No.9550092

>People can't exactly step out of the ISS for a breather, and they seem to be doing rather well.

The record was Kelly at like just under a year.

Compare that to a 6 month trip to Mars just to live your life in a tin can.
Also Kelly was given constant care and part of a study for long term space travel.

Then factor in the massive amount of work that anyone going to Mars is going to be doing.
Mars people are going to be suicidal.

>> No.9550094

>If Musk has his way
Musk is going to die in a New York City high rise with cocaine in his system and surrounded by whores.

>> No.9550111

>Yes. Which is why off-world, spinning, space colonies are currently more viable. Just install an assload of shielding, spin it up, and have at it.
But Mars rings could be smaller, and you'd have access to mineral resources. Not sure how you'd keep a rotating space habitat self-sustainable. Asteroid mining?

>> No.9550276

Having habitat near Mars is better in any case, could mine both Mars. Phobos and Deimos.

>> No.9550391

I think only the very first people going will live in tin cans, that will fucking suck for them 100%. But I'm also sure one of thier first prorities would be to build something a little bigger, like those ice domes they have proposed. Pretty hard to attract people to youe colony if they can't live in a decent size space.

>> No.9550422

What about liver cells? What about hair?

>> No.9550424

>I read the Manifesto once in 9th grade and now I'm a communist

>> No.9550519

Not really, unlike capitalism there wouldn't be a way to earn the rewards passively.

>> No.9550558

Why would prenatal development in 40% Earth gravity prevent a child from surviving in 40% Earth gravity outside the womb? The heart/skeleton/etc doesn't need to be able to withstand Earth gravity because it's not in Earth gravity.

>> No.9550562

>40% Earth gravity

Mars has 37.7% gravity of Earth, not 40%. Floating in water does not negate gravity.

>> No.9550567

The heart doesn't need to be strong enough for 1g.

>> No.9550573

ACKCHYUALLY Mars has 0.379411929659975628782509827515% of Earth's gravity.

>> No.9550580

It isn't.

If you think that is the only thing that is going to be a problem then you really should read up on the subject. There's a laundry list of health problems with micro gravity that humans have, many of which will most likely occur on Mars.

>> No.9550625
File: 22 KB, 233x325, blocks your rocket.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Hold it right there, shitlord.

>Lisa Pratt, an astrobiologist who had been a professor in Indiana University’s Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, was named the agency’s new planetary protection officer in January, and formally started on the job in early February.

>“No matter what we do, the minute we’ve got humans in the area we’ve got a less pristine” environment on Mars, she said. “Let’s hope we know, before the humans get there, one way or the other, if there is an ecosystem at or near the surface.”

>“We have to figure out how to work closely, how to move forward in a collaborative posture so we don’t have another red Roadster up there in orbit.”

>> No.9550668

Go away with your knee-jerk Marxist bullshit, fake /pol/.

>> No.9550682


Planetary Protection is vital and there will be no exceptions for anyone.

Back to /Pol/.

>> No.9550690

We have ZERO understanding of how mammal pregnancies in low gravity. It MAY be that it has almost NO effect on the fetus. there may be a cut off gravitational level , say below 50% earth norm is bad but anything above is good to go. We have no idea.

>> No.9550699

>planetary protection officer

What an absolute bullshjit position. Human have the god given right to modify ALL planets to aid in our survival on them. If there is Martian life then we should preserve a bit of it, but then begin Terra-forming Mars.

>> No.9551074

>Child sized EVA suits
What kind of insane motherfucker would allow a kid to do an EVA?

>> No.9551192

NEW THREAD: >>9550858
NEW THREAD: >>9550858
NEW THREAD: >>9550858

>> No.9551286

Absolutely kill yourself faggots. There is nothing on Mars, it is a dead inert rock and I'll be fucked if some SJW cunt is standing in the way of our future as a species. Is everyone who hates SJWs /pol/ now?


>> No.9551289

It's to improve the gene pool via natural selection.

>> No.9551306

Anything at all mentioning them is /pol/ now, thanks to the fake /pol/ raiders that have been spamming 4chan with their tripe since 2016. I agree with not letting morons like that stop the space manifest destiny.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.