Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Urine Passes NASA Taste Test

Posted by kdawson on Mon Nov 17, 2008 08:35 PM
from the not-mine dept.
Ponca City, We love you writes "Astronauts flying aboard space shuttle Endeavour are delivering a device to the International Space Station that may leave you wondering if NASA is taking recycling too far. Among the ship's cargo is a water regeneration system that distills, filters, ionizes, and oxidizes wastewater — including urine — into fresh water for drinking or, as one astronaut puts it, 'will make yesterday's coffee into today's coffee.' The US space agency spent $250M for the water recycling equipment but with the space shuttles due to retire in two years, NASA needed to make sure the station crew would have a good supply of fresh water. The Environmental Control and Life Support Systems uses a purification process called vapor compression distillation: urine is boiled until the water in it turns to steam. In space, there's an additional challenge: steam doesn't rise, so the entire distillation system is spun to create artificial gravity to separate the steam from the brine. The water has been thoroughly tested on Earth, including blind taste tests that pitted recycled urine with similarly treated tap water. 'Some people may think it's downright disgusting, but if it's done correctly, you process water that's purer than what you drink here on Earth,' said Endeavour astronaut Heidemarie Stefanyshyn-Piper."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Drinking Coffee From a Cup In Space 176 comments
muggs was one of several readers to note a fluffy piece making the rounds about an astronaut inventing a zero-g coffee cup. Of course, since the space station inhabitants drink recycled urine, I'm still not totally convinced that I would want to try that cup.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Neat (Score:5, Funny)

    However, I don't think anybody wants to drink this warm, so better make that piss frosty.
    • Re:Neat (Score:5, Funny)

      by narcberry (1328009) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:53PM (#25796081) Journal

      Some of us can't throw away $250M on something like this, we're forced to drink ours le naturale.

      • Re:Neat (Score:5, Funny)

        by Scutter (18425) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:57PM (#25796129) Journal

        Some of us can't throw away $250M on something like this, we're forced to drink ours le naturale.

        Yeah, but here you pay a buck per can and call it "Budweiser".

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          Funny you mention that. In a news segment on Canadian TV last year, there was a major deal between breweries being worked on.

          So, a few reporters decided to ask local beer drinkers in pubs if the beer of either company was worthwhile. The answer 100% of the time: "I don't drink either - it upsets my stomach. Only imports!"

          So maybe this association to the NAStronauts waste recycling program has some truth.

    • Tell that to the guy in this movie [imdb.com]. The only time I watched it I was thinking that couldn't possibly work.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        The dupes here on Slashdot don't get it that the entire planet is a closed system too. Let them have their Xboxes; when the time comes we'll use them for soylent green. Mmmmm, soylent green...

      • Re:Neat (Score:5, Informative)

        by lysergic.acid (845423) on Monday November 17 2008, @09:13PM (#25796307) Homepage

        it's not just this site. the maturity level implied by the summary/article bodes poorly for the human race.

        it's called the water cycle [wikipedia.org]. any water you consume, no matter where it's from, has been recycled through natural ecological/biochemical processes. in fact every molecule that makes up your body has been "recycled" in countless ways.

        there's nothing gross or unsanitary about recycling the waster from urine through proper distillation. there is absolutely no difference between drinking water distilled from urine and water distilled from rain water or river water. that kind of irrational thinking is the reason why people will spend 10x the money to buy name brand drugs rather than the chemically & pharmacologically identical generics.

        you should be more grossed out by keeping your toothbrush within 20 ft of your toilet (as most people seem to do) since studies have shown that fecal bacteria can be sprayed up to 20 ft from the toilet each time the toilet is flushed.

        • Re:Neat (Score:5, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 17 2008, @09:21PM (#25796385)
          Yeah, pretty disgusting. That's why I never flush my toilet.
          • Re:Neat (Score:5, Informative)

            by Ethanol-fueled (1125189) * on Monday November 17 2008, @10:54PM (#25797185) Homepage
            You jest, but in some countries like China or Mexico, the excrement-ridden toilet paper isn't flushed. It's simply tossed into the wastebasket. It's one of those foreign things that's hard to take at first sight, much like public sale of dogs for human-food.

            I was introduced to the T.P. phenomenon after a Mexican buddy visited my home. I'd been to Mexico many times but I didn't know not to flush because I never took shits there and I was usually so drunk that I never bothered to look in the trash bins. Seeing that ugly brown clump in my wastebasket was enough to ban him from my apartment for a good 2 months before I learned the truth from a few more buddies at home and abroad. Ahh, Western ignorance! :D
            • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

              by Anonymous Coward

              Seeing that ugly brown clump in my wastebasket was enough to ban him from my apartment for a good 2 months before I learned the truth from a few more buddies at home and abroad.

              Holy fricken' easter egg surprise batman!... You're very forgiving to only ban him for 2 months.
              What's this "truth" you're talking about? Foreigners not following local customs and doing grotesque things, is okay?
              When in Rome, do as the Romans do - unless they do it in a basket, then all bets are off.

        • Re:Neat (Score:5, Informative)

          by complete loony (663508) <Jeremy.Lakeman@NoSPam.gmail.com> on Monday November 17 2008, @10:29PM (#25796935)
          Mythbusters looked at the toothbrush / fecal bacteria thing and found bacteria on a toothbrush kept in the kitchen. That stuff gets everywhere.
          • Re:Neat (Score:5, Funny)

            by cyn1c77 (928549) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @01:05AM (#25798163)

            Mythbusters looked at the toothbrush / fecal bacteria thing and found bacteria on a toothbrush kept in the kitchen. That stuff gets everywhere.

            That's not from the toilet flushing, that's because you left me alone with your toothbrush for 5 minutes.

            I can't help it, when I have an itch, I HAVE to scratch it!

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          I used to have sewage reclamation plants in California as one of my clients. They take fresh sewage, separate it, clean it, and turn it back around as drinking water. It happens all the time.

          However, the toothbrush myth was debunked on Mythbusters. Toothbrushes kept closer to the toilet did not contain more bacteria. However, they did show that toothbrushes all over the place, even kept outside the bathroom (in the middle of the lab) had bacteria. They pretty much all had the same levels of bacteria.

  • HOWEVER (Score:4, Insightful)

    by FunkyRider (1128099) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:40PM (#25795905)
    you process water that's purer than what you drink here on Earth. - It might be the case physically/chemically, but not psychologically.... "Look, I'm drinking purified pee and it's tasty!" God...
      • Re:HOWEVER (Score:5, Insightful)

        by chill (34294) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:55PM (#25796113) Homepage Journal

        From your high userid I can identify you as a noob. For future reference, these types of comments are best posted ANONYMOUSLY. God help you if anyone knows your real name. I foresee a future employer doing a google search on your various aliases and THAT comment turning up.

        • Re:HOWEVER (Score:5, Funny)

          by weber (36246) on Tuesday November 18 2008, @06:18AM (#25799747)

          "Wow, what a dedicated employee! No bathroom breaks, just sitting working endlessly at his computer with at tube from his pants to this mouth."

  • by RobertB-DC (622190) * on Monday November 17 2008, @08:42PM (#25795931) Homepage Journal

    Oh yeah, funny, astronaut pee. But for crying out loud (and losing valuable water in the process), what is so hard to understand about a closed system?

    "Going too far" is spending millions of dollars to send precious DHMO [dhmo.org] to the space station, when there are perfectly good pre-assembled dihydrogen monoxide molecules being blown out into the vacuum.

  • Childish (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Dan East (318230) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:42PM (#25795937) Homepage

    It's bad enough that the mainstream media has been acting like a bunch of prepubescent children over the urine recycling, but now Slashdot has to get into the game as well?

    "that may leave you wondering if NASA is taking recycling too far"

    Uh, nope, it doesn't leave me wondering that at all. In fact, when I first read about it I was rather surprised that the ISS wasn't recycling urine already. Any manned moon-base, or long-duration trip to reach Mars, would absolutely require the recycling of urine.

    • Re:Childish (Score:5, Informative)

      by maxume (22995) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:53PM (#25796077)

      People are too far from their food. If people are upset over urine, what would they think of all of the solid waste that ends up as fertilizer?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      In fact, when I first read about it I was rather surprised that the ISS wasn't recycling urine already.

      Same here.

      Isn't it pretty much the safest source of drinking water? You only need something that can handle things that are already in the bodies of the astronauts. We can safely assume none of them have any nasty viruses in them, and I'm pretty sure we don't have bacteria in our own urine, so you're down to getting the sodium and urea out of it I guess.

      • Re:Childish (Score:5, Informative)

        by MichaelSmith (789609) on Monday November 17 2008, @09:55PM (#25796663) Homepage Journal

        In fact, when I first read about it I was rather surprised that the ISS wasn't recycling urine already.

        Same here.

        Isn't it pretty much the safest source of drinking water? You only need something that can handle things that are already in the bodies of the astronauts. We can safely assume none of them have any nasty viruses in them, and I'm pretty sure we don't have bacteria in our own urine, so you're down to getting the sodium and urea out of it I guess.

        This has been debated here in Australia in places where water is very scarce. One issue is with hormones and drugs which get into the urine and can find their way back into the food supply via a recycling system.

        Outside inputs to the food chain are heavily regulated on the ISS so I assume this aspect is taken care of.

        • by Migraineman (632203) on Monday November 17 2008, @11:39PM (#25797557)
          Yeah, I know it sounds like the rant ... but here's a link to a NASA page from November 2000. [nasa.gov] The device in question is the Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS). And I quote:

          The ECLSS Water Recycling System (WRS), developed at the MSFC (Marshall Space Flight Center), will reclaim waste waters from the Space Shuttle's fuel cells, from urine, from oral hygiene and hand washing, and by condensing humidity from the air. Without such careful recycling 40,000 pounds per year of water from Earth would be required to resupply a minimum of four crewmembers for the life of the station.

          Honestly, I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but this was pretty damned blatant. Sorry for the lack of supporting linkage. I couldn't remember the system's acronym, and I was feeling a bit lazy.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 17 2008, @08:42PM (#25795939)

    turn today's brownies into tomorrow's brownies

  • disgusting? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pescadero (1074454) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:43PM (#25795955)
    Why is that so disgusting? All the water you drink was probably pee at some point anyway.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        If life has had enough time to fill the air with oxygen, it's had enough time to fill the oceans with pee.
  • by Titoxd (1116095) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:47PM (#25795997) Homepage
    Although it makes for a nice Beeb quip, no, it is not too far. Sending water into low-Earth orbit is not cheap (a launch delta-V of ~ 9 km/s) , and sending it to other places like the Moon and Mars is even more expensive. That's why it is necessary to begin testing and using this technology, where it is possible to actually send replenishment water in case something doesn't work properly.
    • by ArcSecond (534786) on Monday November 17 2008, @09:12PM (#25796289)
      Your rational response is too much for the morons in the mainstream media and (unsurprisingly) Slashdot submitters/editors to parse.
      Try to keep your analysis to something a little more apropriate for a grade 3 class, please. I mean in a story that is about conserving resources, ensuring safety, and pushing humans-in-space technology forward, how are you going to draw attention to your story if you don't pander to bathroom humour and sexual innuendo?
      We don't need your kind around here, elitist.
  • by KenMcM (1293074) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:48PM (#25796009)
    I'd be worried if they were attempting this and they didn't take the recycling far enough.
  • closed eco-systems (Score:5, Interesting)

    by irtza (893217) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:50PM (#25796035) Homepage

    Earth is also a closed ecosystem where we breath in the burnt remains of food ingested by our neighbors, where tap water is derived from the same lakes and streams that animals use as public toilets. Just because the filtration occurs further away and uses some natural bedrock, doesn't make it any different.

    Once you have just steam, it can no longer be considered urine, so drinking water is made from condensed steam

    I for one plan on no longer partaking in this twisted backwards environment. Long ago I employed the oil companies to convince the ignorant masses to emit large quantities of CO2 - in an elaborate plot to raise global temperatures and melt the pristine icecaps which I will then route into my drinking water. Furthermore, I will destroy this insane ecosystem that exists in this evil urine drinking manner. You may wonder why I am willing to so freely say this, but what can you do about it? What can you do! mu-hahaha.

    anyone know what we were talking about?

  • by n76lima (455808) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:55PM (#25796105)

    The waste water treatment industry has 3 levels of treatment here on Earth. Primary was what was done in the 60's and before (if any treatment). Solids were ground and held to allow bacteria to digest it (the septic tank method) and it was dumped in the river to dilute it for downstream, with a shot of Chlorine. Then secondary treatment came online in the 70's and later, which is what most municipalities do today, where the solids are filtered out by vacuum or pressure filters and burned or buried, but you'd still be able to tell that the chlorine treated effluent was far from potable.

    Finally there is tertiary treatment, which yields water so pure you could drink it (disgusting as it might seem), and this is what is implemented at locations such as Lake Tahoe CA. The water flowing out of the waste water treatment is cleaner than that in the lake itself, after the calcium filtration, etc. There are also de-nitrogenation and de-phosphoration processes to "scrub" the effluent of excess Nitrogen and Phosphorus.

    How did you think the Mission to Mars was going to supply water to the crew? Certainly could not tanker enough fresh water to make the multi-year trip to Mars AND BACK.

  • by JimboFBX (1097277) on Monday November 17 2008, @08:59PM (#25796153)
    "Here I'll put a blind fold on you and.. there you go, ok now drink this delicious fluid." "Hmmm its water, but it doesnt taste like tap water, it tastes filtered. Aquafina?" "No, pee" *PHHHttt*
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 17 2008, @09:09PM (#25796257)

    "This is our advanced technology unit" she said, lifting up a small backpack. "We've developed a miniaturized package for field parties; twenty pounds of equipment contains everything a man needs for two weeks:food, water, clothing, everything."

    "Even water?" Elliot asked. Water was heavy: seven-tenths of human body weight was water, and most of the weight of food was water; that was why dehydrated food was so light.
    But water was far more critical to human life than food. Men could survive for weeks without food, but they would die in a matter of hours without water. And water was heavy.

    Ross smiled. "The average man consumes four to six liters a day, which is eight to thirteen pounds of weight. On a two-week expedition to a desert region, we'd have to provide two hundred pounds of water for each man. But we have a NASA water-recycling unit which purifies all excretions, including urine. It weighs six ounces. That's how we do it."

    Seeing his expression, she said: "It's not bad at all. Our purified water is cleaner than what you get from the tap."

    "I'll take your word for it."

  • by sdaemon (25357) on Monday November 17 2008, @09:10PM (#25796277)

    If we're to survive as a species, in the long run, we have to get off this rock. Permanently. And unless we perfect some form of cryo-sleep or faster than light travel (possibly even if we DO perfect those), we're going to need some means of recycling our own waste products into usable substances.

    I've been in situations where the only water available for drinking also happened to be the local wild animals' mudhole. Animal urine and fecal matter were most certainly present, but there was no other water for miles in any direction. So it was scooped up, run through a rag to skim off any solids, run through an activated charcoal filter to purify it, pumped full of iodine to kill any microbes that might have survived the charcoal filtration, then turned into koolaid to mask the taste. Survival situations will do wonders for changing what you are and are not willing to drink. I was fortunate that I had all that equipment for purification. Those living in third world nations don't have the option of stocking up at the local REI.

    And I imagine space travelers heading for outer worlds, asteroid belts, or other star systems will have their options pretty limited as well :)