Author Topic: Algae for space food  (Read 34130 times)

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #20 on: 10/07/2011 10:06 pm »
Emergency rations (of reduced total calories... 600-1000kcal/day or even lower... must be very low activity levels) with higher proportions of fats could help provide some margin without a lot of extra mass... For instance, if you were relying heavily on some sort of in situ food production (either in a greenhouse, some sort of algae, or some chemical method), then you'd likely want to bring along at least enough emergency rations to survive if that fails.

That could be as low as:
.8*600kcal/(9kcal/gram)+.1*600kcal/(4kcal/gram)+.1*600kcal/(4kcal/gram)+.25*25grams+.25*38grams = 100 grams per day.
Though I seriously doubt that is really feasible for more than, say, two or three months... but if given low levels of activity, I don't think a 1200kcal/day diet is too unreasonable to give a good chance of survival over longer periods of time:
.8*1200kcal/(9kcal/gram)+.1*1200kcal/(4kcal/gram)+.1*1200kcal/(4kcal/gram)+.5*25grams+.5*38grams = ~200 grams

If going on a trip to Mars, and you plan for a Conjunction class mission (i.e. long-stay) with pre-landed supplies but for some reason cannot land (assuming you're in a mission mode where landing can be optional), it's good to know the minimum amount of food needed for survival... It may be feasible, just by going into food margins (assuming 20% margin) and reducing caloric intake in half (from 2500 to 1250) to be able to avoid landing without having to add any extra food.

For a Mars Conjunction-class mission with 224 day inbound, 458 surface, and 237 outbound days (total of 919 days), you'd need (for a mix of 2 male and 2 female crew plus 20% margin) 2.4kg per day of food, so 538kg inbound, 569kg outbound, and 1100kg on the surface (well maybe more because of increased activity)... The outbound food could be rationed in case landing is impossible. Also, a supply of food for the four for emergency rations allowing abort-to-surface scenarios, with enough emergency rations until the next launch opportunity can send more supplies (~1000 days... 250grams per astro per day... for four astros, that's 1kg/day... for 1000 days that's 1000kg of emergency rations, plus whatever they can grow... 2000kg if we allow full caloric intake).
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #21 on: 10/07/2011 10:23 pm »
I agree with the aeroponic potato concept. Very good staple, if you have to pick just one. No fat, though (but fat is the most energy-dense food source, so would be efficient to transport that to Mars from Earth anyways).

But when trading the different options, you have to ask yourself if the equipment needed to grow the plants is going to pay for its own mass budget in food grown over the mission timeline. Roughly 2000kg is enough for concentrated food rations (not counting packaging) for a 1000 day mission of 2 male and 2 female astronauts. Maybe 3000kg, if you count vigorous exercise and EVAs. If there's a problem growing the food, you need at least emergency rations anyways, so you aren't likely to reduce the mission mass for a single mission significantly by planning to grow the food. Unless you're talking about a substantial, permanently-occupied base (which would still need about a ton of emergency rations per astronaut in case you lose your crop...).

What it may help with is crew mental health. But growing most of the calories isn't necessary for that: lettuce or tomatoes and herbs could accomplish that goal.

Another possibility for complete proteins (and perhaps fat) is insects. Insects could break down the inedible portions of aeroponically grown vegetables and efficiently convert that mass into protein.

Of course, the more variety of Earth lifeforms you bring to Mars, the greater the probability of forward-contamination of Mars.
« Last Edit: 10/07/2011 11:19 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #22 on: 10/07/2011 11:21 pm »
In the context of growing potatoes at a permanent (or semi-permanent) Mars outpost/base/settlement, on the plus side, the surface of Mars is a giant, sterile, freeze-drier, so if you have extra spuds, just pile them outside somewhere and they'll keep almost indefinitely... if you're worried about forward-contamination, irradiate them first. If you are worried about some toxic salts in your area of Mars, put them in a dust-tight container first.
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline IsaacKuo

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 435
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #23 on: 10/08/2011 06:35 am »
I agree with the aeroponic potato concept. Very good staple, if you have to pick just one.

If you only have one crop, it shouldn't be something as nutritionally unbalanced as a nearly pure starch.  A complete protein legume like soybeans would make more sense.  Soybeans or peanuts are also highly productive sources for cooking oils--good for making tater tots or potato chips.

Quote
No fat, though (but fat is the most energy-dense food source, so would be efficient to transport that to Mars from Earth anyways).

I would wager that most of us in this forum are interested in a long term manned presence in space, not just some flags-and-footprints Mars mission (with no follow up).  For a long term manned presence in space, growing food will make more sense than importing it.  Whether the break-even point is a few months or a few years or a few decades, there will be a break-even point in favor of sustainable food growth over importing food.

Offline go4mars

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3748
  • Earth
  • Liked: 158
  • Likes Given: 3463
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #24 on: 10/08/2011 12:28 pm »
In my experience, an active field geologist requires 6000-8000 calories per day when hiking around remote areas, collecting, labelling, and lugging rock samples, etc.  People with computer jobs, or relatively sedentary jobs should be fine with about 2500 calories per day though.  But when calculating food budgets, we don't want our Aereologists feeling faint or weak.  Even though it's lower gravity, they have to carry around oxygen tanks, pressure suits, and Well insulated (heavy?) boots in addition to all the rock samples and regular Earth field geologist stuff.  They might even need a small pressurized tent/bivy sack to eat/relieve themselves in.   

2 cents.
Elasmotherium; hurlyburly Doggerlandic Jentilak steeds insouciantly gallop in viridescent taiga, eluding deluginal Burckle's abyssal excavation.

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #25 on: 10/08/2011 02:36 pm »
Aquaculture is a wonderful idea if you can afford the mass budget of all the water.

True, and for an experiment on the ISS, you'd also have to have the mass of the rotating gizmo to hold that water, algae and all.

But on the Moon, water we got.

Like I stated before the problem with lettuce, tomatoes, as well as other more complex forms of life is that they have grow slower, require more minerals, and are more sensitive to their environment, thus they require more resources.

But the problem with this analytic summary is that it is strictly by the numbers, and ignores the greater problem, which is dietary taste and familiarity.  The complex forms of life that you dismiss taste better, are better for you, are easier to manufacture since time is not an issue on an outpost, and are more familiar on top of all that.

Certainly there could be algae nutritional supplements for the outpost diet, but this should not be the main, or only food source.

In fact, the high productivity of aeroponics for a given system mass is the reason why NASA has devoted so much research into aeroponics...

No doubt.  What does the stuff taste like?  Mass is not a problem on the Moon.  It is a solution.

Quote
Note that if you're using tilapia for food rather than directly using the algae for food, you cut your effective productivity by an order of magnitude.

Again, this is a numbers only analysis.  The long term success in a base, assuming all but the food issue has been solved, will depend on the diet and its nutrition, familiarity, and ease of implementation.

As Martijn points out, the "subjective quality" of the food is of considerable importance.  Now I personally am squeamish about eating bugs [it's one of my many character flaws] but there is probably some sort of food processor which could turn bugs into a healthy, yummy food source.  Hmmmm..... tastes like chicken... 

I know it's massive, but there probably ought to be a single one to twenty ton cargo launch of dirt to the outpost, assuming that the area for the garden is available, and the 24 hours sunlight system has been worked out.  Bugs, worms, weeds, and all.  What's missing at the lunar base is a good soil.  I think that soil could be created from regolith if an ecosystem of some sort is jump started, and a deliberate soil/regolith/planting regime is implemented.

I really think that specialized drugs like that are going to be the key to future off-world colonization techniques...

No.  Not to my way of thinking.  Of course, I'd let 'em grow pot up there, familiarity and all, but none of this artificiality.  At least, as little as would be practicable.

Lettuce, herbs, and tomatos ... peanuts ... beans ... potatos, rice, or wheat and you've got the basis for an tasty healthy diet.  Corn is also a good food with a lot of flexibility, but it's a bit less trivial to properly process than the other staple starches.

Absolutely.  But let me point out something that you might have missed.  You can "properly process" corn by eating it on the cob, right off the plant, or steamed in water.  You'd have to ship up the utensils, pots and pans, dishes and so forth.  At first, you'd have to send up olive oil, spices, salt and such as well.  "Processing" the food is more commonly known as "cooking".

Of course, the more variety of Earth lifeforms you bring to Mars the Moon, the greater the probability of forward-contamination of Mars the Moon.

Actually, there would be no such contamination problem.  But in general, you're right in that the more complete agricultural ecosystem that could be created would enable a greater agricultural caloric and varietal output.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline DarkenedOne

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #26 on: 10/08/2011 02:56 pm »
The only filter I know that takes CO2 out of the air is a carbon activated filter. A carbon activated filter is good for taking any impurity out of the air. But these filters wear out and need to be replaced with fresh carbon activated filters. That's not a big problem bring lots of fresh filters- but getting the carbon dioxide captured from the air with these filter to the algae in the water is the part I don't know how one could do.

We could skip the use of any other kind removable CO2 from the air if one could mix crew air with water of algae- just not sure what best way to do this in zero gee. In gravity you simply pump the air into the water- something similar those bubbly things in a fish tank. Perhaps one turn water into a mist- like garden hose. Do in a box and water will clump to together and you pump out the liquid water [enriched with CO2 of crew air]. If this is cold the crew air would not return to crew with much humidity and water will mix well with CO2.

Edit: And/or simply remove humidity from crew air, and put that water in the algae water.

Not that I like this idea at all but, carbon dioxide readily condenses with refrigeration and pressure so extracting it from the cabin air would not be a problem. The CO2, warmed back into a gas could be injected into a column of tank water slowly being pushed through a coil by a pump. The coil is to give it sufficient contact time for the CO2 to dissolve into the water. At the end of the coil the water enters a centrifuge where the water separates from the gases.  That part is easy. Extracting the algae from the water.... that's the hard part. Too much water, too little algae. That way biofuels from algae hasn't gotten anywhere. Too hard to concentrate the algae.

You should understand the algae biofuels process before you make such assertions. 

Watch this.


Extracting the water from the algae is done in the biofuels process simply with a centrifuge.  It is not difficult.  It requires power, but does not use any disposables. 

Secondly it is hard for any other form of chemical energy to compete when there is millions and millions of gallons of relatively pure fuel deep in the ground.  All that is required is that you dig a hole. 

I do not think that biofuels or any other fuels have much of a chance until cheap oil from underground is gone.

Offline DarkenedOne

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 955
  • Liked: 58
  • Likes Given: 9
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #27 on: 10/08/2011 03:17 pm »
Lettuce, herbs, and tomatos have low caloric content.  Various legumes offer good caloric content, in the form of a good balance of carbohydrates and complete proteins.  They offer a wide variety of culinary possibilities, from raw/roasted/boiled peanuts and edamame to refried beans to hummus to various masalas to peanut butter.

Add in aeroponic potatos, rice, or wheat and you've got the basis for an tasty healthy diet.  (Corn is also a good food with a lot of flexibility, but it's a bit less trivial to properly process than the other staple starches.)

As for the culinary possibilities of algae--there is actually a good range of tasty possibilities, at least if you're into Japanese food.  Wakame and nori are pretty good straight, even if they're more typically eaten with other ingredients.

You guys keep seem to forget that we are talking space here.  There is no land, no soil, no nothing other than what you bring with you, and transport is expensive.  What ever food source that is grown must taken into account these realities.

Many of these things you guys are mentioning take months to grow, thus the amount of space need to sustain even a small group of people is very significant.  Algae on the other hand grows in just a few days.   That is why it is useful as a biofuel where it can deliver yields over an order of magnitude per acre than food crops like corn. 


 

Online mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #28 on: 10/08/2011 03:46 pm »
Many of these things you guys are mentioning take months to grow, thus the amount of space need to sustain even a small group of people is very significant. 

Another very important point, but this is true of bioregenerative life support systems in general: they take large amounts of mass and volume and add enormous complexity. They would only make sense for very long missions, or for space stations and surface bases. Studies from proponents of bioregenerative life support systems say current (not yet operational) concepts only break even for missions longer than three years.

For stations and bases I can't see higher plants, and probably fish but at least insects not being part of the mix of crops and critters. It would have to be a pretty varied diet too, to minimise risk and to preserve sanity.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2011 04:24 pm by mmeijeri »
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Offline beb

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 271
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #29 on: 10/08/2011 04:08 pm »

You should understand the algae biofuels process before you make such assertions. 

Watch this.



If I recall correctly, that company went out of business. It's not that algae can't be extracted from water but that the energy costs of doing so are too high, much like ethanol.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #30 on: 10/08/2011 05:06 pm »

You should understand the algae biofuels process before you make such assertions. 

Watch this.



If I recall correctly, that company went out of business. It's not that algae can't be extracted from water but that the energy costs of doing so are too high, much like ethanol.
Tell that to Brazil who get a quarter of their auto fuel (by volume) from ethanol. They aren't an advanced economy like ours who can afford to produce ethanol for fuel whether it produces a net energy gain or not (and by and large, it most certainly DOES produce a net energy gain even here in the US).

The energy costs of producing oil from the tar sands of Canada are high, too, but it still makes sense to do it.

I suppose solar power also makes no sense for power production in space? ;)

Just because a company went out of business doesn't mean the concept can't be made to work. Algae is largely the source for liquid fossil fuels, after all.
« Last Edit: 10/08/2011 05:07 pm by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10974
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1257
  • Likes Given: 724
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #31 on: 10/09/2011 01:54 am »
Tell that to Brazil who get a quarter of their auto fuel (by volume) from ethanol.

Not only are those producers government subsidized to a greater rate than our ethanol producers are, they pay their workers less than we do.  Which does not change the energy equation, but does affect the economic equation.  That's all I know about that in general.

Quote
Just because a company went out of business doesn't mean the concept can't be made to work. Algae is largely the source for liquid fossil fuels, after all.

Neither, of course, does that company's failure mean that the concept can be made to work.  The added energy costs, according to the previous poster are the problem, therefore the economics don't work out per the optimistic projections.  If there is a net energy gain in the production of ethanol, if it is not also accompanied by a healthy profit gain, the business will not be sustained.  Hence chapter 11.

It apparently needs to be re-mentioned that although the chemical energy productivity of algae is high, it is also true that numerical chemical energy is not the only element in the nutrition equation.  We know that fossil fuels are ultimately plant based, but it is also obvious that multi-million year manufacturing times are unacceptable.

However, after allowing sufficient time for the fossils to properly "age", we find that RP-1 is still a viable fuel.
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39270
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 25240
  • Likes Given: 12115
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #32 on: 10/09/2011 05:21 am »
Now the conversation is getting pretty far afield... But the government subsidies can make sense if relying just on the conventional fuels (fossil fuel produced in other, potentially unstable, countries) has such considerable "externalities" that have a cost higher than just paying a subsidy for the alternative.

I mean, how much does it cost the US gov't to protect the Strait of Hormuz? Saudi Arabia, etc? Just a for-instance. US energy companies which refine oil from those places don't pay for that directly (they pay via taxes... hypothetically), so it's called an "externality" (a cost that someone causes but doesn't have to pay except that everyone as a whole ends up paying for it... "tragedy of the commons," etc). If energy companies (and consumers at the pump) were burdened with the full cost of using mostly non-domestic fossil fuels, it might make the subsidies for alternatives look like chump change.

Anyway, trying to bring it back on-topic a little more: Solar power isn't really a very inexpensive source of power on Earth's surface (compared to some alternatives), but at least in the inner solar system (not on a planetary body), solar power is basically by far the cheapest energy source. In the same way, algae production may not compete well with fossil fuels on Earth, but that has very little bearing whether it makes sense in space.
« Last Edit: 10/09/2011 05:21 am by Robotbeat »
Chris  Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.

To the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Government shall plan missions to accommodate the space transportation services capabilities of United States commercial providers. US law http://goo.gl/YZYNt0

Offline mlorrey

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2173
  • International Spaceflight Museum
  • Grantham, NH
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #33 on: 10/09/2011 06:26 am »
Now the conversation is getting pretty far afield... But the government subsidies can make sense if relying just on the conventional fuels (fossil fuel produced in other, potentially unstable, countries) has such considerable "externalities" that have a cost higher than just paying a subsidy for the alternative.

I mean, how much does it cost the US gov't to protect the Strait of Hormuz? Saudi Arabia, etc? Just a for-instance. US energy companies which refine oil from those places don't pay for that directly (they pay via taxes... hypothetically), so it's called an "externality" (a cost that someone causes but doesn't have to pay except that everyone as a whole ends up paying for it... "tragedy of the commons," etc). If energy companies (and consumers at the pump) were burdened with the full cost of using mostly non-domestic fossil fuels, it might make the subsidies for alternatives look like chump change.

Anyway, trying to bring it back on-topic a little more: Solar power isn't really a very inexpensive source of power on Earth's surface (compared to some alternatives), but at least in the inner solar system (not on a planetary body), solar power is basically by far the cheapest energy source. In the same way, algae production may not compete well with fossil fuels on Earth, but that has very little bearing whether it makes sense in space.

Brazil can make ethonanol work because they are on the equator and get more insolation, but at the same time, you can point to the amazonian deforestation as the side effects of the ethanol biz: when their agriculture burns out all the topsoil, they abandon it and clear more jungle. They are burning their topsoil just like we are. Their photosynthesis is better because of higher insolation, and they dont have pesky laws against using human and animal waste for fertilizer like we do, so they dont have to consume oil producing fertilizers like we do. Now, algae biofuel, i agree, is the way to go, provided you dont have to fertilize it. Otherwise, you'd be better off focusing on cellulosic biofuel conversion like Mascoma Corp is doing in some pilot plants, turning wood chips and other cellulose into fuel.
VP of International Spaceflight Museum - http://ismuseum.org
Founder, Lorrey Aerospace, B&T Holdings, ACE Exchange, and Hypersonic Systems. Currently I am a venture recruiter for Family Office Venture Capital.

Offline alexterrell

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1747
  • Germany
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 107
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #34 on: 03/22/2013 03:11 pm »
Aquaculture is a wonderful idea if you can afford the mass budget of all the water.  For example, if your mission requires long term high energy GCR shielding, then you might require 5 tons per square meter of water anyway.

But if you need to conserve mass, aeroponics seem to be a more promising direction.  Besides minimizing water mass, aeroponics also minimizes disease spread.

All the water would be recycled.

That's not the issue.  The issue is that algae require a lot of water to live because they must be immersed in water.  Aeroponic plants do not need to be immersed in water.  Instead, they are immersed in air, which has a far lower density than water.


Note that if you're using tilapia for food rather than directly using the algae for food, you cut your effective productivity by an order of magnitude.  Each layer of a food chain is roughly an order of magnitude cut in efficiency.  In contrast, aeroponic crops can be used directly for the entire diet--including complete proteins from a variety of legumes.

I was following a thread on Mars ISRU
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=29820.0

which basically led me to the conclusion, that algae cultivation would be the way to go for Mars. I was looking for info on algae as food and got pointed to this thread. A knowledgeable forum....

Apparently Tilapia have a feed conversion ratio of 1.5 or so, compared to about 2 for factory farmed chicken (not sure if they can be fed 100% algae - and they're now banned in the EU. Free range chickens are much less efficient as they do running about etc).

Given algae can yield about 20 times better than the best conventional crops (potato?), it means that Tulipa (and maybe chickens) can yield about 10 times normal crops. And the other benefit is that algae lends itself to continuous fluid processing: Waste, CO2, and some nutrients in at one end of the tube, fish food tablets out the other end.

Now if there was some way to convert the algae into a tasty vegetable, which we can eat more than 100g of? I suppose mushrooms can do this without additional energy?

So we have Fish, chicken, mushrooms, and some seaweed to eat. Not in space, but on any surface where water and sunlight is present.
« Last Edit: 03/22/2013 03:13 pm by alexterrell »

Online guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7438
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2332
  • Likes Given: 2891
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #35 on: 03/23/2013 05:03 am »

Now if there was some way to convert the algae into a tasty vegetable, which we can eat more than 100g of? I suppose mushrooms can do this without additional energy?


I think vegetables can and will be grown on Mars. They are quite fast growing, just not a lot of calories. So the space required to grow them and things like onions, garlic and herbs is not that big. So that is not what algae should replace.

Algae will IMO however replace staple foods like wheat, corn, sunflower. That is where we get the bulk of our calories from (aside from meat). It is not state of the art but bioengineering is advancing rapidly. Algae will be processed into protein, oil and starch.

Starch with some variants of proteins will make flour. Grow the required proteins with bioengineered bacteria or funghi, mix them with starch and you have a suitable replacement for flour. That gives you noodles, bread. You may also be able to produce a suitable replacement for instant mashed potatoes and other products.

Oil, proteins will make a substitute for milk. If designed for it that can be the base for milk products like cheese.

Protein directly from algae and from funghi can be processed into meat substitutes.

All of these things will taste differently to the products we are used to. But taste is acquired so people will adjust.

In case of emergencies, algae products can feed humans directly with everything needed to keep healthy. Very efficient but not very desirable I imagine so really only suited for emergencies.

BTW, the oil of algae is very high quality. The health value of fish oil is known. But it is not the fish producing it, they get it from the algae they eat.

Offline Robert Thompson

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1177
  • Liked: 101
  • Likes Given: 658
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #36 on: 03/23/2013 04:12 pm »
1. Have some tilapia, from a supermarket, produced under the lowest input, lowest maintenance conditions that the profit motive can achieve.
2. You are not allowed to use any other additives, ingredients or spices, not even salt.
3. Read up on tilapia.
4. Post again on the topic of tilapia and share your findings.

Online guckyfan

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7438
  • Germany
  • Liked: 2332
  • Likes Given: 2891
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #37 on: 03/23/2013 06:47 pm »
1. Have some tilapia, from a supermarket, produced under the lowest input, lowest maintenance conditions that the profit motive can achieve.
2. You are not allowed to use any other additives, ingredients or spices, not even salt.
3. Read up on tilapia.
4. Post again on the topic of tilapia and share your findings.

Where does that arbitrary and untenable condition 2. come from, especially no salt? It is quite well known that Tilapia tastes of almost nothing. BTW that is why I don't buy them in the shop. But we are talking of Mars, where even Tilapia woul be welcome. Spices and herbs that will be available on Mars will do a lot of good. Also there are other fish than Tilapia that can be considered as well as shrimp. Tilapia is a freshwater fish. There are sea water fish that can take their place.

Offline alexterrell

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1747
  • Germany
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 107
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #38 on: 03/23/2013 08:23 pm »
If chicken can convert algae at 30-40% efficiency compared to 60-70% for Tilapia, it just means chicken will cost double the price of Tilapia. But both will be more efficient (and hence cheaper) then real vegetables.

So, chicken or Tilapia, bread from algae, and tomatoes. Serve with spices of your choice - they weigh nothing and have a long shelf life, so can come from Earth.

Online mmeijeri

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7772
  • Martijn Meijering
  • NL
  • Liked: 397
  • Likes Given: 822
Re: Algae for space food
« Reply #39 on: 03/23/2013 08:45 pm »
1. Have some tilapia, from a supermarket, produced under the lowest input, lowest maintenance conditions that the profit motive can achieve.
2. You are not allowed to use any other additives, ingredients or spices, not even salt.
3. Read up on tilapia.
4. Post again on the topic of tilapia and share your findings.

And then repeat the experiment with just algae.  ;D
Pro-tip: you don't have to be a jerk if someone doesn't agree with your theories

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1