Author Topic: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem  (Read 19778 times)

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5974
  • Liked: 1312
  • Likes Given: 8
Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« on: 05/18/2015 01:31 am »
If sufficiently large enclosed pressurized spaces can be built on the Moon or Mars, perhaps in underground lava tubes or caverns, then would it be possible to have them contain biospheres with self-sustaining ecosystems?



Within your habitat enclosure, you'd have your vegetation (and perhaps some insects?) in some facsimile of a natural looking environment. You'd also have a power station to provide artificial light and heat, as well as water filtration and air purification. What other inputs do you need as prerequisite for a self-sustaining ecosystem?

The goal is to have a self-sustaining ecosystem/biosphere, perhaps to provide pleasant Earth-like surroundings, and it doesn't necessarily have to be for the purpose of agricultural production.

Offline tchernik

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 274
  • Liked: 315
  • Likes Given: 641
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #1 on: 05/18/2015 01:45 am »
I think we could do a Biosphere 2-like experiment much better now.

Sadly it seems the only potential supporters of such experiment are space agencies.

Sad in the sense they would have to fight for budget with too many other competing teams and projects, and this one in particular seems particularly expensive to repeat. 

Offline scienceguy

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 836
  • Lethbridge, Alberta
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 279
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #2 on: 05/18/2015 02:12 am »
Didn't the Biosphere experiment fail because the plants weren't producing enough oxygen? On Earth, much of the excess oxygen doesn't come from plants (because plants use up oxygen at night). The excess oxygen on Earth comes from phytoplankton in the ocean.
« Last Edit: 05/18/2015 02:12 am by scienceguy »
e^(pi*i) = -1

Offline Darkseraph

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 711
  • Liked: 475
  • Likes Given: 152
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #3 on: 05/18/2015 02:26 am »
I think this is an example of perfect is the enemy of good enough/better than before. Same thing with closed loop life-support. We definitely should try more experiments that enhance the ability of life to survive off Earth, even if it is not totally closed loop or self contained...so that we eventually figure out how to close the loop - which might take a long time, have multiple failed experiments and so on. Biosphere-2 isn't a failure if we take lessons from it to do Biosphere-3 better, and so on. It doesn't have to be perfect or bust!
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." R.P.Feynman

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5974
  • Liked: 1312
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #4 on: 05/18/2015 02:27 am »
The wikipedia entry mentions some of the technical problems experienced by Biosphere 2:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2



Quote
A strategy of "species-packing" was practiced to ensure that food webs and ecological function could be maintained if some species did not survive. The fog desert area became more chaparral due to condensation from the space frame. The savannah was seasonally active; its biomass was cut and stored by the crew as part of their management of carbon dioxide. Rainforest pioneer species grew rapidly, but trees there and in the savannah suffered from etiolation and weakness caused by lack of stress wood, normally created in response to winds in natural conditions. Corals reproduced in the ocean area and crew helped maintain ocean system health by hand-harvesting algae from the corals, manipulating calcium carbonate and pH levels to prevent the ocean becoming too acidic, and by installing an improved protein skimmer to supplement the algae turf scrubber system originally installed to remove excess nutrients.[16] The mangrove area developed rapidly but with less understory than a typical wetland possibly because of reduced light levels.[17]

Biosphere 2 suffered from CO2 levels that "fluctuated wildly" and most of the vertebrate species and all of the pollinating insects died.[18] Insect pests, like cockroaches, boomed. In practice, ants, a companion to one of the tree species (Cecropia) in the Rain Forest, had been introduced. By 1993 the tramp ant species Paratrechina longicornis, local to the area had been unintentionally sealed in and had come to dominate.[19]

Hmm, so maybe insects could be like the "canary in the coalmine" -- if they all suddenly start dropping dead, then you know something's wrong.

I wonder if genetic engineering could help some species cope with the artificial environment? I'd also wonder if animals, insects, fish, etc could adapt to lower gravity conditions on the Moon/Mars, or whether that would be too stressful.

Also consider that maintaining such biospheres outside of planet Earth would create backup repositories for the Earth's biodiversity. In case some part of it was wiped out due to disaster, plague, etc - then you could restore from backup.

Intuitively, one would think that the larger the environment, the more buffered it would be. On the other hand, large open environments create a large exposure risk, since any containment leak could then compromise the whole area. But meanwhile if you built your living space to look like the interior of a submarine, compartments and bulkheads would reduce that exposure risk, but would be more claustrophobic and probably a lot less pleasant than having a large environment. For space tourists especially, I'd think the large open environment would be much more appealing and enjoyable than tight closed spaces. Maybe a combination of both would be best.

What are the challenges of managing the conditions in a larger environment compared to a smaller one? The Biosphere2 article mentioned things like condensation on the enclosing structure. Could such ceiling/wall condensation somehow be turned into rain - maybe even controllable rain-on-demand?
« Last Edit: 05/18/2015 02:56 am by sanman »

Offline Hanelyp

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 368
  • Liked: 65
  • Likes Given: 252
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #5 on: 05/18/2015 03:43 am »
More from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosphere_2:
Quote
The agricultural area of Biosphere 2 was planted a year before closure ...
During the first year the eight inhabitants reported continual hunger. During the second year, the crew produced over a ton more food, average caloric intake increased ...
Looks like the system took longer than expected to approach the desired state.  Such a facility may need outside supplies or mechanical support for several years before it settles in.
Quote
Among the problems and miscalculations encountered in the first mission were overstocked fish dying and clogging filtration systems, ...
Many suspected the drop in oxygen was due to microbes in the soil.... The soils were selected to have enough carbon to provide for the plants of the ecosystems to grow from infancy to maturity, a plant mass increase of perhaps 20 tons (18,000 kg). The release rate of that soil carbon as carbon dioxide by respiration of soil microbes was an unknown that the Biosphere 2 experiment was designed to reveal.
Incorrect initial setup, hopefully to be done better next time.
Quote
Daily fluctuation of carbon dioxide dynamics was typically 600 ppm... there was also a strong seasonal signature to CO2 levels, with wintertime levels as high as 4,000-4,500 ppm and summertime levels near 1,000 ppm.
Not venturing outside reasonable range for human habitation.  Seasonal variation could be reduced with supplemental lighting during winter.

Online guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7438
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2332
  • Likes Given: 2892
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #6 on: 05/18/2015 07:03 am »
It may be possible to build that self contained biosphere. With a population in the range of millions of people the may do that as a heritage site. However as a means of supporting the population it would be hopelessly inefficient.

The biosphere supporting the population will be the opposite of this model. It will be tightly controlled and managed in every aspect.

Offline sanman

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5974
  • Liked: 1312
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #7 on: 05/18/2015 06:40 pm »
Somehow it seems intuitive that the farther we go out into space, we want to take as much of the Earth with us as possible. We'd like to have Earth-like environments, including nature and vegetation to make us feel comfortable and more at home. By contrast, living inside what looks like the interior of a submarine might make us feel more strained over time, and less content with living away from home.

I'd read somewhere that bamboo is one the fastest-growing plants, and so I wonder if it could take the most CO2 out of the air to convert it into biomatter. Here's something from StackExchange, and it does list bamboo as a candidate:

http://sustainability.stackexchange.com/questions/786/which-tree-consumes-most-carbon-dioxide-and-poisonous-gases

So if you had to construct Biosphere 3, which lessons and changes would you focus on most?
Build from a human-centric perspective, like using the most carbon-scrubbing plants possible to ensure oxygen-level requirements are most likely to be met?
Minimize seasonal variation, either by picking plants from the least seasonally variant parts of the world, or use additional environmental equipment to compensate for any variation in vegetation output?

Since the Moon and Mars just have lower gravity as opposed to weightlessness, would plants likely grow in the same way they do on Earth? Maybe just taller?

Offline RanulfC

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4595
  • Heus tu Omnis! Vigilate Hoc!
  • Liked: 900
  • Likes Given: 32
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #8 on: 05/18/2015 07:58 pm »
Living in a submarine; Typhoon/Akula SSBMs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon-class_submarine) actually have a small "garden" room onboard with potted plants and even birds to relieve the crew. As far as I know no other sub tried this though :)

"Taking Earth with us" into the solar system is probably not possible realistically. As noted you need a huge space to get any "biosphere" environment up and running and its not likely to be available (or advisable) to do in space.

On the other hand you can google "Crater Cap Colony" (I called it "Colony in a Hole" myself) and see an idea for topping a crater which would in effect give a huge amount of "room" to work in but the engineering is a question.

Doing something like a "Biosphere-3" I'd immediately start with something smaller and more manageable rather than bigger and "integrated" really. I'd also start with short closures and ramp my way up rather than try it all in one go. While Bamboo had multiple properties that would be advantageous to have in space, I have yet to hear of any experiments with it. I'd worry that without the gravity of Earth that it won't grow "properly" for most uses envisioned such as structural use.

In any case I suspect that actual "life support" bio-systems are going to be required to have high O2/CO2 turn over features like algae bio-reactors to work properly and only "luxury" (high cost) places where you're going to have either the room or support for more "biosphere" like operations.

Randy
From The Amazing Catstronaut on the Black Arrow LV:
British physics, old chap. It's undignified to belch flames and effluvia all over the pad, what. A true gentlemen's orbital conveyance lifts itself into the air unostentatiously, with the minimum of spectacle and a modicum of grace. Not like our American cousins' launch vehicles, eh?

Offline llanitedave

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2286
  • Nevada Desert
  • Liked: 1545
  • Likes Given: 2052
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #9 on: 05/18/2015 09:29 pm »
Living in a submarine; Typhoon/Akula SSBMs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typhoon-class_submarine) actually have a small "garden" room onboard with potted plants and even birds to relieve the crew. As far as I know no other sub tried this though :)

"Taking Earth with us" into the solar system is probably not possible realistically. As noted you need a huge space to get any "biosphere" environment up and running and its not likely to be available (or advisable) to do in space.

On the other hand you can google "Crater Cap Colony" (I called it "Colony in a Hole" myself) and see an idea for topping a crater which would in effect give a huge amount of "room" to work in but the engineering is a question.

Doing something like a "Biosphere-3" I'd immediately start with something smaller and more manageable rather than bigger and "integrated" really. I'd also start with short closures and ramp my way up rather than try it all in one go. While Bamboo had multiple properties that would be advantageous to have in space, I have yet to hear of any experiments with it. I'd worry that without the gravity of Earth that it won't grow "properly" for most uses envisioned such as structural use.

In any case I suspect that actual "life support" bio-systems are going to be required to have high O2/CO2 turn over features like algae bio-reactors to work properly and only "luxury" (high cost) places where you're going to have either the room or support for more "biosphere" like operations.

Randy


I agree that we're not ready for an all-out attempt at anything like a self-sustaining enclosed system yet.  I think we need a whole spectrum of experiments using different approaches and combinations of plant and animal communities, just to be able to construct a comprehensive theory concerning the minimum ecosystem that can be self sustaining, and under what conditions.  I think the biosphere experiments just tried to insert humans into the system too soon.
"I've just abducted an alien -- now what?"

Offline Aussie_Space_Nut

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 280
  • South Australia
  • Liked: 130
  • Likes Given: 430
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #10 on: 05/19/2015 01:21 am »
Perhaps instead of trying to design a biosphere you could copy one?

In other words pick an environment on earth and copy it, all of its animals, insects and plants, soil type, weather, copy everything. See if it is possible to get it stable or determine what inputs are required to maintain stability. Once stable you could add to it selected plants and animals, one at a time, that suit human needs. See what effect that change has on the environment. If change greatly disturbs ecosystem then delete change and try something else.

Slowly move from the copied system to a system where much of the flora and fauna suit human needs.

I suspect that previous biosphere projects tried to engineer too much of what they didn't fully understand. With so many competing "out of their normal environment" biological influences, confusion as to what the real issues were remained undiscovered. Yes there wasn't enough of this or there was too much of that was easily determined but I'm not so sure they got to the bottom of why.

Biospheres work, otherwise we would all be dead :-) I think what is greatly underestimated is the complexity of the biosphere. So start with one that already works, then tweak it. :-)

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #11 on: 05/19/2015 01:29 am »
Perhaps instead of trying to design a biosphere you could copy one?
Seems like the best thing would be to simplify as much as possible, get a few very productive staple crops, optimize waste processing. Minimize the number of interactions to understand.

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9238
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4477
  • Likes Given: 1108
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #12 on: 05/19/2015 01:30 am »
Seems like the best thing would be to simplify as much as possible, get a few very productive staple crops, optimize waste processing. Minimize the number of interactions to understand.

Simple is fragile.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #13 on: 05/19/2015 04:57 am »
Seems like the best thing would be to simplify as much as possible, get a few very productive staple crops, optimize waste processing. Minimize the number of interactions to understand.
Simple is fragile.
Components are fragile. Simple is modular.

Offline scienceguy

  • Regular
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 836
  • Lethbridge, Alberta
  • Liked: 155
  • Likes Given: 279
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #14 on: 05/19/2015 05:04 am »
I think we need to distinguish "biology simple" from "engineering simple". In biology, if you only have one organism in you colony, it is vulnerable to viruses and what-not. In engineering, Keep It Simple Stupid!
e^(pi*i) = -1

Offline IRobot

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1312
  • Portugal & Germany
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 272
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #15 on: 05/19/2015 05:12 am »
I see it under a less romantic light. No greenhouse, no big open space.

Just some individual containers 3x3x10 meters, for example, with artificial light and hydroponics. No cross contamination, optimized for production and not for beauty. No replication of natural habitats.

You can scale up or down as required, just add containers or disable them. No specific open space shape. You can stack them as it fits the colony walls.
« Last Edit: 05/19/2015 05:14 am by IRobot »

Offline ArbitraryConstant

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2014
  • Liked: 628
  • Likes Given: 311
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #16 on: 05/19/2015 07:53 am »
I think we need to distinguish "biology simple" from "engineering simple". In biology, if you only have one organism in you colony, it is vulnerable to viruses and what-not.
It is engineering. If you're growing everything in an artificial medium like hydroponics or similar and one of the labs has a problem, sterilize the place and start from scratch. That's how they get fresh banana plants even though they're extremely vulnerable to pests, they're lab grown.

My only question is whether all that pressurized transparent structure is worth it, might be easier to put solar panels outside and high efficiency LED grow lights inside.

Offline R7

  • Propulsophile
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2725
    • Don't worry.. we can still be fans of OSC and SNC
  • Liked: 992
  • Likes Given: 668
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #17 on: 05/19/2015 10:20 am »
If sufficiently large enclosed pressurized spaces can be built on the Moon or Mars, perhaps in underground lava tubes or caverns, then would it be possible to have them contain biospheres with self-sustaining ecosystems?

What do you mean by 'self-containing' ?
AD·ASTRA·ASTRORVM·GRATIA

Offline redliox

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2537
  • Illinois USA
  • Liked: 683
  • Likes Given: 97
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #18 on: 05/19/2015 10:54 am »
I would say, if you want something viable and human tended (considering neither Luna or Mars will show any benevolence), think less biosphere and more like farms and gardens.  The biggest lesson Biosphere 2 taught us is that humans can't duplicate Gaia, or at the least stick 'her' in a building and expect lifeforms to work just like machines.  We have to think on smaller scales first.

Start with a handful of species; more than likely when we transport dirt we'll be taking hundreds of microbe & fungi species along anyway, so getting some of them in addition to a single tree or flower to grow will be enough of a biological accomplishment as is.  Finding out what specific families, orders, and genus of organisms can thrive in low gravity and artificial systems.  And with animals, focus on non-destructive harmless species, like shrimp or minnows.  Maybe try bees, but avoid the damn pest problems by avoiding insects I say; it's not like sending some endangered termite to Mars just to 'trim the overgrowing redwoods' in a dome is a benefit to mankind.  Btw...for the roach's renowned resilience, they are largely a tropical insect; think about that and the average temperature of Mars being 50 below.
"Let the trails lead where they may, I will follow."
-Tigatron

Offline Paul451

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3553
  • Australia
  • Liked: 2518
  • Likes Given: 2180
Re: Self-Contained Biosphere/Habitat/Ecosystem
« Reply #19 on: 05/19/2015 12:09 pm »
Perhaps instead of trying to design a biosphere you could copy one?

I think that's one of the mistakes Biosphere II made, believing you could just cut'n'paste whole biospheres and they'd Just Work.

But in real biospheres, it's the edges, the joins between systems, that are the most chaotic. Anything we could build will effectively be all edge, no middle. At this scale, you quite literally can't copy biospheres in any reasonable sense, you have to develop an engineered system. So you might as well start with as few elements as possible, then add pieces as you learn the art. Less garden, more factory.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0