Author Topic: Radical Terraforming Methods  (Read 25118 times)

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 763
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #100 on: 03/24/2012 06:50 AM »
Here's a chart on the visible light absorption of nearly pure water.

http://omlc.ogi.edu/spectra/water/data/sogandares97.dat

Abstract: http://omlc.ogi.edu/spectra/water/abs/sogandares97.html

If I'm reading that right; a 10 meter thick layer of high purity water would absorb 10% of the light at 450nm (blue), 50% at 550nm (green), and 97% at 640nm (red).
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline strangequark

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1070
  • Co-Founder, Tesseract Space
  • Mojave, CA
  • Liked: 211
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #101 on: 03/24/2012 08:14 AM »
Here's a chart on the visible light absorption of nearly pure water.

http://omlc.ogi.edu/spectra/water/data/sogandares97.dat

Abstract: http://omlc.ogi.edu/spectra/water/abs/sogandares97.html

If I'm reading that right; a 10 meter thick layer of high purity water would absorb 10% of the light at 450nm (blue), 50% at 550nm (green), and 97% at 640nm (red).

Should be right if the exponent is for base e, and that clicks with reds looking very odd.
Don't flippantly discount the old rules of this industry. Behind each one lies a painful lesson learned from broken, twisted hardware. Learn those lessons, and respect the knowledge gained from them. Only then, see if you can write new rules that will meet those challenges.

Offline RocketmanUS

Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #102 on: 03/24/2012 06:17 PM »
Here's a chart on the visible light absorption of nearly pure water.

http://omlc.ogi.edu/spectra/water/data/sogandares97.dat

Abstract: http://omlc.ogi.edu/spectra/water/abs/sogandares97.html

If I'm reading that right; a 10 meter thick layer of high purity water would absorb 10% of the light at 450nm (blue), 50% at 550nm (green), and 97% at 640nm (red).

Should be right if the exponent is for base e, and that clicks with reds looking very odd.
How would that effect seeing and ready?
Mars and beyond, human exploration
The grass is always greener on the other side. When you stand on top of the hill you see both sides!

Offline Andrew_W

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 763
  • Rotorua, New Zealand
    • Profiles of our future in space
  • Liked: 11
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #103 on: 03/24/2012 06:51 PM »
Sadly I doubt that the clarity through ice I'd been hoping for is achievable, and with that level of red light absorption the Martian landscape would look very dark.

http://iceimpre.accountsupport.com/ice-carving-techniques.htm
I confess that in 1901 I said to my brother Orville that man would not fly for fifty years.
Wilbur Wright

Offline Robotbeat

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26876
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6779
  • Likes Given: 4808
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #104 on: 03/24/2012 06:58 PM »
You don't need a magnetic field to protect living organisms from solar or cosmic radiation.. if the Earth's magnetic field was to disappear we'd have more problems with our electrical grid but plant/animal life wouldn't even notice the difference.  The radiation protection we enjoy here on Earth is a result of the miles and miles of atmosphere we have above our heads.  This is why airline staff experience significantly more radiation than the rest of us.

See http://www.nsbri.org/HumanPhysSpace/introduction/intro-environment-radiation.html

Some radiation, like UV, is blocked by ozone. What about ions? What about gamma rays? I'm asking.
Gamma rays don't care a lick about magnetic fields, by the way. Ozone isn't especially good at stopping ions or gamma rays, either, which have such high energies that they don't particularly care what exact chemical forms the atoms they interact with are (though lighter elements do work better for the same amount of mass for high speed ions, etc). (i.e. carbon dioxide would work just as well as ozone for gamma rays and high speed ions)
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: 26876
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6779
  • Likes Given: 4808
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #105 on: 03/24/2012 07:00 PM »
No defeatism here, just the facts. As far as I know, Mars simply does not have a magnetic field strong enough to protect living organisms from solar and space radiation, let alone protect the atmosphere from solar degradation. If anyone has a source that can refute this position, please post.

You don't need a magnetic field to protect living organisms from solar or cosmic radiation.. if the Earth's magnetic field was to disappear we'd have more problems with our electrical grid but plant/animal life wouldn't even notice the difference.  The radiation protection we enjoy here on Earth is a result of the miles and miles of atmosphere we have above our heads.  This is why airline staff experience significantly more radiation than the rest of us.

See http://www.nsbri.org/HumanPhysSpace/introduction/intro-environment-radiation.html
YES!

(This is also why Hellas Basin on Mars should have radiation levels lower than ISS.)
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: 26876
  • Minnesota
  • Liked: 6779
  • Likes Given: 4808
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #106 on: 03/24/2012 07:15 PM »
I like the ice-doom idea, pretty clever since if you did it right, the internal pressure could equal the pressure exerted by the ice. But I contend that it's probably better to have it be liquid water with salts in it (perhaps with chlorine in it to keep it from forming algae... though that has some benefits! You could harvest the algae). You could have insulation layers on the top and bottom of the water layer. The temperature of the water would be kept just low enough to keep it from boiling on the top (if built in Hellas Basin, you should have just a high enough atmospheric pressure to keep the top from boiling, if it was at the right temperature and had the right additives, thus a small meteorite hit on the top would not be catastrophic).

BTW, the very minimum pressure needed to go without space suits is about .92 psi (a tad over the Armstrong Limit). Hellas Basin already gives you .16psi, so you have just 0.76 psi to go (though you'd also want a safety margin, obviously). Air-supported roofs (like the Metrodome in Minnesota or the Silverdome) can generally operate at up to .1 psi, so that's not too far off, either. Fill the inside with raw Martian atmosphere pumped up to a higher pressure and have large pumps available (possibly large pressure vessels with large reserves of compressed Martian atmosphere) in case of a leak. You could grow plants in such an environment, tilled by people with just oxygen masks on. Since the pressure differential is much smaller compared to a full habitat at Earth pressure, a leak is far less dangerous (and explosive decompression is a lot less of a risk, since you can only decompress by .76 psi at most, compared to about 20 times that at Earth pressure compared to vacuum).
Such a structure would be a good compromise. If there was a leak, people would have enough time to go to a nearby shelter.

Combine it with the water (or ice) roof, and you'd only need about a meter and a half of water. Houses and offices, etc, would still be at higher pressure for health reasons. Relatively near-term medical devices and treatments (synthetic blood) could improve blood oxygenation as well (I know several people who have an insulin pump at all times, which is essentially an artificial organ, and live totally normal lives).

Anyway, interesting ideas.


Andrew: Just use liquid water instead of ice.
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 A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8153
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 248
  • Likes Given: 104
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #107 on: 03/24/2012 10:47 PM »
Andrew: Just use liquid water instead of ice.

And glass.

Offline yawan

  • Member
  • Posts: 4
  • Liked: 1
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Radical Terraforming Methods
« Reply #108 on: 08/02/2017 10:00 PM »
For partial terraforming of Mars.  Increasing the pressure and temperature all we really need to do is increase the temperature of poles by 5 degrees K.  All the calculations I've seen for greenhouse gasses include thousands of factories aiming to cover the whole surface.  This would be totally unnecessary.  You only need to stop CO2 freezing during winter and put a 10T magnet at L1.  This can be done with 6 factories lined up on the outskirts of polar caps creating local CFC partial pressure of 0.012 ubar.  Now correct me if I'm wrong, but Zurbin said 270 T/hour requiring 1.3 GW would cover that.  Covering only 200 km2 would thus require around 200 kg and 900 KW generator.  If you build 3 around each pole so that you can cover the pole whichever way the wind is blowing you can stop CO2 freezing during winter on Mars.  If you stop the freezing during winter and toss dust on ice during summer to lower albedo you'll achieve partial terraforming in a matter of years.  You can pack all that you need inside ITS.  Even if Musk halves the size of the ship it will still be 150 tonnes.  That is plenty of space for a couple of rovers, CFC factory and a 1 MW fission reactor.

Tags: