Elon Musk's Mars Colony Would Have a Horde of Mining Robots (engadget.com) 222
An anonymous reader shares an Engadget report: If it wasn't already clear that Elon Musk has considered virtually every aspect of what it would take to colonize Mars, it is now. As part of his Reddit AMA session, the SpaceX founder has revealed that his vision of a permanent colony would entail a huge number of "miner/tunneling droids." The robots would build large volumes of underground pressurized space for industrial activity, leaving geodesic domes (made of carbon fiber and glass) for everyday living. As a resident, you might never see the 'ugly' side of settling the Red Planet. Musk also explained how his colony would get to the point where it can reliably refuel spacecraft all by itself. Dragon capsules would serve as scouts, helping find the "best way" to extract water for fuel reactions. An unmanned Heart of Gold spaceship would then deliver the basics for a propellant plant, while the first crewed mission would finish that plant. After that, SpaceX would double the number of flights between each ideal Earth-Mars rendezvous (every 26 months) until the colony can reliably produce fuel by itself. Oh, and don't worry about today's Falcon 9 rockets being consigned to the history books. Although the main booster for interplanetary travel will "have an easier time of things," Musk believes that the final iteration of Falcon 9 (Block 5) could be used "almost indefinitely" if properly maintained. Production on Block 5 should fly in the next 6 to 8 months.
A Horde of mining robots? (Score:5, Funny)
The big gap in the plans (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you have said robots build a city ahead of time. We have the technology to grow plants inside, Mars has enough gravity that most plants should grow just fine, we just need soil (and all the bacteria that contains, which yes, would require us starting with some earth soil) worms and seeds.
Exo-Farming (Score:4, Insightful)
We have the technology to grow plants inside,
We do but that doesn't mean we can do so with 100% reliability. Plus we have a lot to learn before we start exo-farming. It's not clear how reliably we can grow crops on Mars even in a well controlled greenhouse. There is reason for optimism but there is a lot we don't know yet.
Mars has enough gravity that most plants should grow just fine,
Perhaps but currently that is an unproven assertion. Frankly the gravity is likely to be among the least of the challenges to growing food on Mars. When you have a small self contained garden you run the risk of any number of problems hugely disrupting the entire crop. And the crop for early explorers will necessarily be small with minimal excess most likely. On Earth we have enough agriculture that we only tend to experience localized famines due to distribution problems because other areas can make up for a shortage. Early Mars explorers could very easily have their entire crop wiped out and the only back up option is to ship food from Earth. I'm not saying it's impossible but it probably will be quite a challenge.
Have to go to learn (Score:3)
Which is exactly why we should go there. Were not going to find out or learn anything without going to Mars to test these things.
Agreed. This is actually one of the most compelling arguments against the "only send robots" crowd. You cannot learn much of anything about topics like exo-farming by just sending robots. Same with every other topic relating to human physiology and space. I strongly expect that anything we learn would have immediate and useful applications on terrestrial farming.
Re: (Score:2)
On the opposite, the most compelling reason to only send robots is that you can sanitize people or plants (you might be able to sanitize seeds, I'm not sure though), without killing them, we cant' even fully sanitize the outside of a spacesuit really, especially if it has to arrive in a craft inhabited by people for months. We haven't yet started really digging into martian soil and examining it closely to find out if there was ever life there. The minute we send people there, we have contaminated Mars. Yes
Re: (Score:2)
We continue to find evidence of ancient life on Earth, and we haven't sanitized Earth. Should we stop and exterminate all current life on Earth first just to be on the safe side though?
If there's current life on Mars, odds are it's not going to be out-competed by mal-adapted Earth microbes either. And there'll be differences to tell them apart.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's also not forget the in-between possibility of sending robots to Mars and humans to Phobos, where they could control the robots in almost real time.
Re: (Score:2)
And artificial lighting, either by concentrating suns rays onto greenhouses, or LEDs powered by solar power farms. The sunlight otherwise might not be powerful enough to grow crops.
The other problem is that there are compounds in the Martian substrate that are toxic to life. We have to make sure that the plants aren't killed by them, and that they don't absorb the toxins and kill humans.
Re: (Score:3)
We have the technology to grow plants inside...we just need soil...and seeds.
Hydroponic systems make importing soil and soil amendments (like bacteria and worms) unnecessary. If (a BIG if) we follow Musk's assumptions that robots are sophisticated enough to tunnel through Martian soil/rock, mine and process fuel, water, and oxygen, and build pressurized human habitats, then it's not unreasonable to believe robots could also build hydroponic farms in advance of humans arriving. You really have to drink the kool-aid to believe all that is possible in any reasonable time frame, though.
Re: (Score:3)
More seriously, Mars has all the nutrients plants need, sunlight, and dirt. Whatever you can already grow in a greenhouse on Earth, you can grow in a Martian greenhouse as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Heinlein already described how to make dirt in "Farmer in the Sky"
Plant plants (Score:3, Informative)
Mars doesn't have dirt- it has regolith, an abiotic rock dust that can't support most plant life, even if it weren't full of volatile poisons
Other than nitrogen, plants don't derive their nutrients from the soil; it's not relevant that the soil is "abiotic". You will have to either supply nitrogen, or else grow plants that incorporate nitrogen-fixing bacteria (e.g., legumes, alfalfa).
By "volatile poisons" I assume you are referring to perchlorates (which aren't actually all that volatile). These can be washed out of the soil. (You'd probably want to do this to reduce the level of salts in the soil anyway).
Growing plants is a technology that is
Re: (Score:2)
And to keep the plants powered. Mars is at 1.5AU, which gives less than half the sunlight intensity of earth - your crop would grow very slowly and very small.
Mars insolation [Re:Plant plants] (Score:2)
And to keep the plants powered. Mars is at 1.5AU, which gives less than half the sunlight intensity of earth - your crop would grow very slowly and very small.
Plants grow fine in places that are cloudy. Mars will get on the order of ~250 to 300 w/m2 averaged over a day. Here's a map of the incident solar radiation ("insolation") on Earth:
geosun.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/GHI-Solar-map-World.png [geosun.co.za]
Mars insolation levels correspond to the light green color. It's no worse the Europe in terms of sunlight, and plants grow in Europe
Re: (Score:2)
Plants do survive in San Francisco, and other places that don't get full sunlight.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not that much lower. Here on Earth we have things called "clouds" that reduce our usable sunlight; Mars doesn't have those, nor much of an atmosphere to speak of. We also grow food just fine in cooler months (when there's less sunlight per day), especially when we use greenhouses. This isn't like trying to grow food on Pluto.
At the worst, we could build big greenhouses which have sunlight concentrators on the roof, like giant Fresnel lenses. They wouldn't need to concentrate the light that much,
Re: (Score:2)
We don't know what we'd have to "wash out" of the regolith.
But we do know that washing will work.
it really is nearly delusional to think that what we've learned on Earth (and orbital experiments) will be *all* we need to know
Sorry, the laws of physics haven't changed. It's the same chemistry on Mars as it is on Earth.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you expect? Some people don't even have the slightest idea of chemistry on Earth or elsewhere and still think just because they have an opinion they must be heard and individually refuted.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, no, it's "boarders" now. The English language is defined by popular usage, and roughly half the American population believes that "boarder" means "a dividing line" (what you think of as "border"). This is seen in every online message board where the topics of "enforcing the boarder", illegal immigration, etc. comes up. When a large enough fraction of the population makes the same mistake, it become the correct usage.
Maybe if we had some decent public education in this country, this wouldn't hav
Re: (Score:2)
Mars doesn't have dirt- it has regolith, an abiotic rock dust that can't support most plant life, even if it weren't full of volatile poisons
Those "volatile poisons" happen to be a valuable oxygen source among other things. So a considerable quantity of viable Martian soil would come out of any oxygen extraction process.
And abiotic is so easy to change, it's not funny. Just handling it with human hands would add a fair portion of the necessary bacteria. Bringing a little soil from Earth and some earthworms from Earth as a starter. Compost food, human waste, and any biodegradable plastics, for example, with that Earth-based soil, mix it in wit
Re: (Score:3)
There has been a lot of work done on the food issue from NASA and individuals. there is a place called the Mars Desert Research Station which researches growing in mars simulated environments and soil, except for gravity. Reports from the ISS have shown gravity is not really that much of a matter for some plants.
The one thing that is needed is lots
Re: (Score:2)
You will not have steaks and meat
Shrimp and fish are a lot easier to transport than cattle.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless its growable in a vat, space people aren't going to be getting their protein from 4-legged mammals. Maybe crickets...
Or other space people...
Re: (Score:2)
The mining robots are going to be made of organic material incase times get tough.
Big challenges (Score:4, Informative)
If we send 1000 people to Mars how exactly are we going to feed them?
It will be a substantial challenge but hardly the only one. Early explorers will be supplied from Earth but they'll have to develop some self sustaining exo-farming technology. This is not a trivial problem. And manufacturing will have even bigger problems. You basically have to develop an entire self contained supply chain from scratch which except for life support issues is probably the biggest show stopper problem with colonizing another planet. Need some tungsten? You have to either ship it from Earth at tremendous cost or you have to figure out how to mine it and refine it locally on Mars. Either way it's a tough challenge.
Has anybody done some thinking on the steaks and the veggies?
Yes though such research has a looooong way to go.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
One person can feed ten people for 25 days, so after 25 days there will only be 900 people to feed....etc, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, a lot of people are thinking about this right now instead of posting on Slashdot. Slashdot is so 20th century anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
These are details, and will be solved with more CGI of 3D printers and press releases.
i fixed your post for you.
Improbability Drive? (Score:2)
Naming this supply ship for disaster, I guess. At least it's unmanned.
Re: (Score:2)
Betty or Betty? (Score:2)
* yes, I'm aware Quark was the captain's name, not the ship.
What are we forgetting... (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, so we've got the mining robots, the auto-fuelling spaceship dock, the autonomous telephone sanitizers... I can't help feeling there's something we're forgetting...
Oh! Right - people.
Hang on. Why are we sending people again?
Re:What are we forgetting... (Score:5, Funny)
Because we (tech billionaires) cant stand the crowds. Plus we can offshore to Mars. People on Mars work even cheaper than those in India. You only have to provide food,water and oxygen. Not like they can go on strike and wait out MuskCorp. Mars the ultimate Companytown.
Re: (Score:3)
You load sixteen tons, and what do you get?
Re: (Score:2)
Hm, I seem to recall some very interesting enforcement possible on Mars-- totally!
Re: (Score:2)
Jerry Pournelle Birth of Fire
People ARE what we are sending (Score:4, Insightful)
Hang on. Why are we sending people again?
I think this comic [thedevilspanties.com] sums it up rather well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
NASA pays SpaceX primarily to put NASA satellites into orbit, or to send NASA cargo to NASA astronauts on a space station partially built by NASA. They provided some funding to help SpaceX develop that capability. They are continuing to fund SpaceX's development of Dragon v2 (because NASA also wants the ability to send NASA astronauts to the space station) and Falcon 9 Heavy (because NASA wants to improve what NASA satellites SpaceX can put into orbit). NASA is *not* directly funding BFR/BFS development, be
Re: (Score:2)
Engage your brain (Score:2)
So the only reason to go to Mars would be tourism? That's not a compelling case.
Holy missing the point Batman! Of course there are more reasons to go to Mars than tourism. Science research, preservation of our species, joy of exploration, financial gain, engineering, military dominance, and the list goes on and on. Use your brain and think of a few more. It's not hard. The point is that relatively little of this is possible by just sending robots just like there is a difference between knowing that it is 85F and sunny in Hawaii and actually being there yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Science research: going just fine with robots. In fact, we coul
Re: (Score:2)
A reason to go to Mars would be to leave the idiots behind and go to somewhere where productivity isn't a curse but a blessing. You certainly don't need people there who can't even live in a comparable paradise without wrecking it for fun.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really.
Hawaii is a really nice place for humans to live: the weather is perfect, it's lush and beautiful, there's all kinds of fun things to do like swimming, surfing, scuba diving, exploring rain forests, etc.
If you found yourself magically transported to Hawaii in prehistoric times, perhaps with a small group of intelligent people, you could pretty easily survive there by living off the land. There's wood for making huts and burning, there's extremely fertile land for farming, there's vegetation that
Analogies and missing the point (Score:2)
Hawaii is a really nice place for humans to live: the weather is perfect, it's lush and beautiful, there's all kinds of fun things to do like swimming, surfing, scuba diving, exploring rain forests, etc.
Way to miss the point. We explore Antarctica too for lots of very good reasons and it is anything but hospitable. Mars is very similar but with the degree of difficulty turned up to 11. There are plenty of good reasons to go there in person. Learn to understand what an analogy is and stop thinking so literally and being so short sighted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It'd be a lot easier to just stop messing up this planet so much.
How do you propose we convince 7 billion people and thousands of individual countries and corporations to agree with your vision of "not messing up the planet so much". No, I'm pretty sure it's far easier to colonize Mars.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, so we've got the mining robots, the auto-fuelling spaceship dock, the autonomous telephone sanitizers... I can't help feeling there's something we're forgetting... Oh! Right - people. Hang on. Why are we sending people again?
Because we're not smart enough to make a robot that could and would do what we'd do and telepresence would be hopeless with the delay. Take the stupidest person you know that can drive a car. Ask him to write the software for a self-driving car, might as well ask him to jump to the Moon. Not even many man-years of the best and brightest has managed to get their car a driver's license that millions of teenagers manage every year. If there's a real base there will be plenty that goes wrong or becomes defectiv
Re:What are we forgetting... (Score:4, Insightful)
First step in ensuring we can survive when this planet is no longer habitable, is establishing a presence on another planet.
And when the time comes, another solar system.
And because we can. Or at least one guy in charge of a lot of related tech can. Electric cars, batteries, mass transport, rockets... Elon has most of what he needs in house.
Eventually, we won't have a choice. So I'd vote for ASAP rather than wait for public interest to die out. The mars one reality show never was viable, but got lots of volunteers. This guy seems to have a chance.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The only scenario I can come up with is when the sun expands and swallows the Earth in a few billion years. At that point, Mars will clearly be more inhabitable (though also very hard to live on because of the heat).
Re: (Score:2)
The Earth will be uninhabitable within a billion years almost certainly -- but at that time, it will still be more habitable than Mars because it will have a thick atmosphere (even if not necessarily a breathable one) and a good amount of resources left. It should be relatively easy to "colonize" the Earth with climate-controlled domes or underground structures at that time.
Re: (Score:2)
You forget one thing: Hell is other people.
Re: (Score:2)
Big asteroids are a valid concern, and very long-term I do believe humans should work at establishing a human presence on other worlds (starting with the Moon), however asteroid bombardment should *not* be a factor in driving humans to inhabit other worlds.
It would be far, far easier for us to improve our capabilities for detecting large asteroids, and then deflecting them, than to figure out how to live on Mars. Dealing with asteroids is not that hard: first we have to actually invest some resources into
Re: (Score:2)
Well, to take a cynical view, consider this plan:
1. Establish rocket company that can send stuff to Mars
2. Send 100 or so humans to Mars
3. OMG they're going to die, but we don't have any more money to send them supplies!
4. Profit!!
Though I admit, if you wanted to force the hand of society into creating an interplanetary civilization, you would use basically the same strategy if you had the ability to do step 1. I think this is one of the ideas explored in "The Martian" -- society appears to be much
Re: What are we forgetting... (Score:2)
It sounds more attractive with every detail (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the options though.
Option one: Enjoy a long, healthy life on earth. Raise a family if you can. Grow old. Spent the last decade of your life in a care home as your mind decays before dying of natural causes. Your immediate family will mourn you for a few years, but in the end you will leave no legacy but a headstone.
Option two: Volunteer for the mars colony mission in thirty years and head off. Spend your life advancing mankind, breaking new ground, and solving exciting problems on the frontier. Enjo
SpaceX = Spacers (Score:2)
SpaceX = Spacers
Bacterial Vats (Score:4, Interesting)
Bacterial vats, or single cell algae are probably the future of space food. Add crap and energy into vats and either bacteria or algae converts the crap into food.
(more too it than that, but that forms the bulk)
Realism at last (Score:2)
Elon Musk's Mars Colony Would Have a Horde of Mining Robots
Good, because it sure as hell won't have any humans.
Charles Sheffield "Cold as Ice seriies" (Score:2)
He describes such robots. He called them Von Neumans.
I'm sure other writers thought of them too.
Re: (Score:3)
Fred Saberhagen ALSO described such robots. Except HE called them "Berserkers [infogalactic.com]". . .
So the question to ask is. . .are you Goodlife ???
The ship (Score:3)
One thing to keep in mind is that they will go out on a ship where they will live for a year.
That ship will have to handle the same problems of food and air. So once you get past the ship, the colonization should be easy.
Just transfer the facilities from the ship.
News for nerds? (Score:3, Insightful)
This is a news site for nerds?
Reading the comments on this thread I don't think so.
Best attempted on Earth first! (Score:4, Insightful)
I am 100% for robotic automation of labor but it seems like this is a task they should master on Earth before they try it out on Mars. So the question is, will SpaceX dominate Earth's mining industry?
Re: (Score:2)
Hint: Replace the words "mining robot" with "mining RPV".
Realistically, we're not talking autonomous mining robot, we're talking remote controlled mining equipment. Sort of like what we use on Earth, but with a longer delay between command and response.
What I'm curious about is whether they've established requirements for CNC milling machines that can make the parts for the mining robots, to include the parts to make another CNC milling machine.
Excluding IC's, of course. They're light enough that you
Re: (Score:2)
Realistically, we're not talking autonomous mining robot, we're talking remote controlled mining equipment. Sort of like what we use on Earth, but with a longer delay between command and response.
I hope you are joking or I've misunderstood something because there is a 15 minute delay between Earth and Mars.
Re: (Score:2)
Terrastrial mining incorporates humans to optimize the energy / yield ratio. Since the target materials are not very valuable, energy efficiency is critical to the equation- earth mining operations can't afford to process a million cubic yards of material to extract a couple pounds of gold.
In a space / Mars mining operation, the input energy will have to be solar. The target materials will be as valuable as the cost of sending them fr
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking the same thing "here we go again, Elon is planning on including yet another thing we don't know how to do as a central part of his architecture".
Musk has wrong job (Score:2, Troll)
Elon Muisk is an intellectual midget and a fraud (Score:2)
This is just another example of how detached from reality the industrialist class has become.
These billionaires - with no actual training in science - are so disconnected from what is possible and what is not possible.
A fool who made his money off of paypal and government subsidies envisions Mars mining with robots while actual mining today on Earth cannot be accomplished with robots. Has this moron ever even been in a working mine today, in the real world? I have worked for over 2 decades now in an actual
Re: (Score:2)
Musk is just delusional. (Score:3)
High energy radiation. (Score:2)
"leaving geodesic domes (made of carbon fiber and glass) for everyday living"
An endless stream of pie-in-the-sky colonization porn.... However shouldn't each article on this topic deal with the problem of shielding vulnerable biological creatures such as humans from the harsh reality of high energy particles zipping around to and fro?
You needn't go yourself. (Score:2)
Every time this subject comes up on Slashdot there is an overwhelming amount of negativity. âoeWe canâ(TM)t go.â âoeWe shouldnâ(TM)t go.â âoeItâ(TM)s impossible!â âoeYou would die there.â âoeIt will never happen.â âoeItâ(TM)s all smoke and mirrors.â âoeSolve Earth problems first.â âoeItâ(TM)s too expensive!â On and on and on you go, whining all the way. And your objections are silly. âoeWell, has an
Re: (Score:2)
from Dennis Wingo, thoughts on Elon's Mars plan (Score:2)
Whatever else people may think of the architecture or Elon personally, that is admirable, and it is hopeful, especially for the younger generation that hears no end to the doom and gloom and have to put up with a couple of idiots running for president this year further depressing them.
https://denniswingo.wordpress.... [wordpress.com]
Re:Horde or Hurd? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Disney Evil.
Re:Horde or Hurd? (Score:5, Interesting)
Would it really have a horde of mining robots? Or should it be more accurately described as a Hurd?
Looking at this usage and this list of Animal Group Names [thealmightyguru.com] I suggest - and I am not making this up:
Animal: Gnus
Group: Implausibility
Re: (Score:2)
It's human nature that we will make any journey that is enabled by the technology of its time. It's always been that way, and it always will.
Re:Sure, just add more magic (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
You would think some who read slashdot would know about Bertha in Seattle.
The rest is just AI similar to self driving software.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bertha is not "magic and videos.' Though not exactly on schedule, it is moving faster than normal at the moment and is over half way to its destination. Since it is working so well, not many news stories talk about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Sure, just add more magic (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
It was in that Arnold Schwarzenegger documentary Total Recall.
Re: (Score:2)
Until you'd start prospecting for resources in the asteroid belt from Mars of course.
Anyway, "freedom is accepting the inevitable". On Mars you'd depend on others for the very air you breath, but others would depend on your work too. It would be both total servitude and total freedom. But yes, if your flavour of freedom is "doing what you want without any consequences" you wouldn't be free there. So better stay on Earth then, they won't be taking everyone anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
"It would be both total servitude and total freedom."
Paraphrasing Orwell is not a good sign
Drill, drill, drill... (Score:2)
No Von Neuman Machines yet (Score:4, Insightful)
They could be self replicating.
We don't yet have the slightest notion how to make self-replicating robots. Probably the best we could do is to send up the sophisticated parts, but make some of the physical chassis components from available resources, to reduce somewhat the mass required from Earth.
Or they could send humans, which are less efficient, but self replicate already.
Raising babies takes a tremendous amount of infrastructure. An adult human is mostly self-sufficient; babies are not. As somebody said, it really does "take a village" to raise a child.
Re: (Score:2)
Raising babies takes a tremendous amount of infrastructure. An adult human is mostly self-sufficient; babies are not. As somebody said, it really does "take a village" to raise a child.
Reality check: Children have grown up all over the planet for all of history with no infrastructure with poorer parents often raising half a dozen of them. The way we raise western 21st century kids means most parents have enough with a few, but unless they quite literally die they grow up every other way too. The "takes a village" saying is about society's influence, everybody wants to fit in with their peers and prevailing norms, even if that is at odds with your parents.
Re: (Score:2)
Reality check: what you consider to be "no infrastructure" is an entire planet worth of infrastructure.
Re: (Score:2)
What available resources? Mars has no petrochemicals. It's very rich in iron, which is certainly nice, and I'm sure there are other metals you can find and mine - but doing so needs industrial machines, and smelting/refining equipment, and a lot of power.
I do think that eventual colonisation is a worthwhile goal to pursue. In the spirit of exploration, and advancement, and as insurance against a possible planet-wide disaster. But I also know that realistically, it's probably going to be the single most expe
Re: (Score:2)
We don't yet have the slightest notion how to make self-replicating robots. Probably the best we could do is to send up the sophisticated parts, but make some of the physical chassis components from available resources, to reduce somewhat the mass required from Earth.
What available resources? Mars has no petrochemicals. It's very rich in iron, which is certainly nice, and I'm sure there are other metals you can find and mine
That's more or less that I was thinking of when I said you'd bring the sophisticated parts from Earth, but might be able to make the physical chassis and the structural components from available materials. Steel, in particular, is easily available on Mars: www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009457650800266X [sciencedirect.com]
If you needed petrochemicals, you can make hydrocarbons from carbon dioxide. But I'm not sure that this would be my first choice for a resource for making things (although it will, of course, be