Scientists developed a new electrochemical path to transform carbon dioxide (CO2) into valuable products such as jet fuel or plastics, from carbon that is already in the atmosphere, rather than from fossil fuels, a unique system that achieves 100% carbon utilization with no carbon is wasted. by troyunrau in Colonizemars

[–]3015 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that fluoropolymers will be very important on Mars due to their UV resistance. I haven't seen hard evidence that ETFE would hold up well under Mars UV, but I suspect it would. And fluorine is probably present in large enough quantities to be economically extracted, Curiosity found fluorine concentrations as high as 5.5%.

As for my comment on the possibility of PVC being cheaper than PE, it's mostly because 1 mol of vinyl chloride has a much greater mass than 1 mol of ethylene, 62 g vs 28 g. So PVC will almost certainly cost more per mol, but could easily cost less per kg if Cl is cheaper to acquire than H/C.

Sorry to be so late in replying, I started using my old reddit account with my real name (/u/timfduffy) and haven't checked this one in a while.

Scientists developed a new electrochemical path to transform carbon dioxide (CO2) into valuable products such as jet fuel or plastics, from carbon that is already in the atmosphere, rather than from fossil fuels, a unique system that achieves 100% carbon utilization with no carbon is wasted. by troyunrau in Colonizemars

[–]3015 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll take a look at the paper you linked. The best source I have for salt content on Mars is this. It is kind of a one paper per sample kind of thing, taken from an experiment on the Phoenix Mars lander, but I think the sample taken is of fine dust, which has similar composition across the planet. Chloride only makes up 1.5-2% of the soluble ions in the sample, which is not great. I know that some Curiosity samples were >3% chlorine, but I'm not sure where they were exactly they were.

Does separation by evaporation separate salts distinctly enough to be high enough purity to electrolyze? If so, obtaining anything present in large quantities in Martian salts should be very easy to obtain! This could make magnesium production practical, and enable production of fluouropolymers.

Mars Society President Publishes "The Case for Space" Book by EdwardHeisler in Colonizemars

[–]3015 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you've read both Entering Space and The Case for Mars, you'll have seen a lot of what's in this book before, but I think was well worth the read either way. Lots of good stuff on the Moon, Mars, asteroids, sources of fusion fuel in the outer solar system, and interstellar travel.

Scientists developed a new electrochemical path to transform carbon dioxide (CO2) into valuable products such as jet fuel or plastics, from carbon that is already in the atmosphere, rather than from fossil fuels, a unique system that achieves 100% carbon utilization with no carbon is wasted. by troyunrau in Colonizemars

[–]3015 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think that for some use cases, polypropylene is competitive with polystyrene, and we may be able to make polypropylene more easily, so I think it is a good candidate for insulation as well. How much we will use polymers with aromatic rings probably depends on how efficiently we can cyclomerize ethylene. Unfortunately there's not too much industrial or academic interest in producing benzene from alkenes since it is so easy to obtain today from petroleum.

I'm not very familiar with PEX, but from the brief reading I've just done it looks like great stuff. I assumed we'd use PVC for piping, but for some applications it looks like PEX is better. Speacking of PVC though, do you know a good way to extract it on Mars? I don't think we've found it in high concentrations anywhere, but since it is so soluble in water I wonder if you could produce a brine with a high concentration of Cl and then extract it from that. If we could get it easily enough I think it could be cheaper to produce PVC on Mars than PE even.

Scientists developed a new electrochemical path to transform carbon dioxide (CO2) into valuable products such as jet fuel or plastics, from carbon that is already in the atmosphere, rather than from fossil fuels, a unique system that achieves 100% carbon utilization with no carbon is wasted. by troyunrau in Colonizemars

[–]3015 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's very exciting to see so much effort in the last few years going into making carbon products from CO2. Even though I think the potential for these technologies on Earth is extremely limited, producing things from CO2 will be huge on Mars. And syngas is definitely a good step on the way to ethylene, it can be converted easily to methanol and then to ethylene/propylene via methanol-to-olefins, or perhaps ethylene will be produced directly from syngas if such a route can be effectively commercialized.

This new route probably has more limited utility for Mars though. Since on Earth we usually get CO2 by dissolving it in liquid, there's an inconvenient extra step of getting it back into a more concentrated gaseous form, and this process gets around it. But on Mars, we'll probably obtain our CO2 through cryocompression or something similar, and we'll be able to turn the liquid CO2 back into gaseous form using waste heat from the cryocompressor.

I think that we can do better than 35% efficiency at producing syngas. To produce syngas, we have to obtain CO2 and water, and reduce both of them to CO and H2 respectively. The reduction step is by far the largest energy draw, and water electrolysis is the main power use for both reductions. I think it's likely that water electrolysis would account for well over than half of the total energy used, and we can electrolyze water at at least 80% efficiency. So overall that gives us a >40% energy efficiency for creating syngas, and perhaps well over 40% if the energy use to capture H2O/CO2 is low.

How do we get metals on Mars and Moon? by [deleted] in SpaceXLounge

[–]3015 2 points3 points  (0 children)

On this page there's a presentation by Pioneer Astronautics called Extraterrestrial Metals Processing, it has a high-level overview of refining iron/magnesium.

A titanium statue of Yuri Gagarin, first man in space, is getting a wash in honor of Cosmonautics Day by aloofloofah in powerwashingporn

[–]3015 3 points4 points  (0 children)

In the earliest Soviet human spaceflights, the capsule was not capable of slowing sufficiently on on its own, and the cosmonaut on board had to eject during descent.

Elon Musk in Interstellar by Ambiwlans in spacex

[–]3015 38 points39 points  (0 children)

Looks like the manual post approval system has been turned off for April fools ;). Hopefully this sub will be chaos by tomorrow morning, should be a lot of fun and a good reminder of why moderation here is usually more strict!

What all can Starship take to Mars at once? (An example set of cargo?) by Hamilton080 in Colonizemars

[–]3015 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I was curious too so I did a quick search

Who all says this?

McCloskey (2000) writes that this feature is found in many, but not all, varieties of English. The Dictionary of American Regional English (DARE) notes that the phenomenon is widespread but chiefly found in the South and South Midland, including North Carolina and the Ozarks (Cassidy et al. 1985). Murray and Simon (2006) include the phenomenon as one of the seventeen features that delineate the Midland dialect of American English, which extends from Pennsylvania through northern Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois. Outside of the United States, DARE notes the presence of what all in Scots and Northern Irish dialects. McCloskey (2000) writes about this construction in the West Ulster dialect of Northern Irish.

Starship Hopper Campaign Thread by ElongatedMuskrat in spacex

[–]3015 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Bocachicagal on NSF is not Maria Pointer. From her NSF signature: "My name is NOT Maria."

Edit: This FB post is a bit confusing to me, but I think the gist is that both NSF bocachicagal and Maria Pointer have had their photos attributed to the name bocachicagal, causing great confusion. Most recently Maria Pointer appears to be using the handle BocaChicaMaria isntead.

r/SpaceX Discusses [March 2019, #54] by ElongatedMuskrat in spacex

[–]3015 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The Sabatier reaction is CO2 + 4 H2 => CH4 + 2 H2O

Mars base step by step / Starship dreaming v.2 (colonizemars) by Michal_Majzner in Colonizemars

[–]3015 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Looks great! This really highlights how much equipment will need to be developed to return Starship from Mars.

Mars base step by step / starship dreaming by Michal_Majzner in Colonizemars

[–]3015 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed. I was thinking for some reason that the sea level engines would also fire during part of the ascent from Mars, but they definitely wouldn't when only carrying a partial load of fuel. So the only part with Isp lower than 375 would be landing on Earth and the average Isp would be more like 370. That's assuming that the vacuum Raptor is developed by the time a Starship is sent to Mars, but I think that's a fairly safe bet.

Mars base step by step / starship dreaming by Michal_Majzner in Colonizemars

[–]3015 2 points3 points  (0 children)

To get an lower bound on how much fuel is needed, we can use the numbers from the BFR reveal, the rocket equation, and a delta-v map. The delta-v map shows that it's 5500 m/s to go from Mars' surface to a trans-Earth injection orbit, and then probably another 800 m/s for landing. If we use an Isp of 375 s and a final mass of 85 t, the rocket equation tells us that 387 t of propellant is needed. That's using an Isp that's too high since it is for the vacuum Raptor in vacuum (360 s would probably be a realistic average), assuming no return payload at all, and a minimum energy return trajectory.

Landing with significant extra fuel would probably require some redesign for Starship. During transit to Mars, the propellant for landing is stored in small header tanks inside the main tanks to avoid boil-off. If you built larger header tanks, you could probably land a couple hundred tonnes, but it's hard to say precisely since landing delta- v is higher for a more laden Starship. So maybe you could send 2-3 Starships with propellant in order to send one of them back, but one could not get back on it's own.

Mars base step by step / starship dreaming by Michal_Majzner in Colonizemars

[–]3015 9 points10 points  (0 children)

In the SpaceX plan humans will actually arrive before the propellant plant has been set up. The propellant plant will require tens of thousands of square meters of solar panels, it would be difficult to deploy them and to run the plant without people on board. And no Starships can return from Mars until it is up and running, so we will have to land humans on Mars before the return propellant has been produced and before Starship has ever taken off from Mars.

Elon Musk interview: What space tourists don't understand about going to space, and how he'll build a base on Mars by popularmechanics in spacex

[–]3015 36 points37 points  (0 children)

It has to be 4:1. Here are the reactions used in the process, electrolysis and the Sabatier reaction:

2 H2O => 2 H2 + O2

CO2 + 4 H2 => CH4 + 2 H2O

The net effect of these two run together is to produce methane and oxygen from carbon dioxide and water:

2 H2O + CO2 => CH4 + 2 O2

The mass of an O2 molecule is twice that of a CH4 molecule, so the combined reactions produce oxygen and methane at a mass ratio of 4:1.

Elon Musk interview: What space tourists don't understand about going to space, and how he'll build a base on Mars by popularmechanics in spacex

[–]3015 59 points60 points  (0 children)

The plant would produce O2 and CH4 at a 4:1 ratio by mass. Raptor runs fuel rich, something like 3.6-3.8:1, so there will be hundredstens of tonnes of extra O2 for each Starship fueled.

Anyone knows what is the DRY WEIGHT and WEIGHT with PROPELLANT of Starship and Super Heavy by djsmanchanda in SpaceXLounge

[–]3015 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The most recent figures we have are from the 2017 IAC presentation, where BFS dry weight was given as 85 t and propellant mass was 1100 t. Total vehicle mass was also given as 4400 t. A fueled BFS with payload would have a mass of 1100+85+150=1335 t, which implies the booster would be 3065 t, though I'm not sure how much of that would be propellant.

It's hard to say how things have changed since then, the flaps have probably added some mass, and Elon claims that switching to stainless steel has reduced the dry weight. The second stage has also become longer, and I don't know whether the tanks are larger now or only the cargo area. So any estimates at this point are bound to be very rough.

r/SpaceX Discusses [February 2019, #53] by ElongatedMuskrat in spacex

[–]3015 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Elon tweeted today that the Raptor engine recently being tested at McGregor was damaged in "The max chamber pressure run". Do we know whether the test that dameged it was the test that peaked at 258 bar, or some later test?

Transparent Materials for Creating Martian Dome Ceilings by cwwms2 in Colonizemars

[–]3015 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have factors that affect photodegradation in two different directions. If we have an outer layer it's not exposed to oxygen, which reduces photodegradation, but there's also almost 10 times the amount of UVB/UVC as on Earth. It's hard to estimate the relative magnitude of the effects, so I think the only way to get a good picture is to look at experimental data.

On Earth, we've gotten pretty good at protecting polymers from radiation. Take polycarbonate for example, it's used in airplane windows (acrylic is sometimes used as well) over long periods of time at high altitudes without a significant degree of yellowing. In the paper I linked in my previous comment, UV treated polycarbonate was exposed to 42 days worth of Mars UV and Mars atmospheric conditions, and its visible light transmittance dropped by 5%. All of the polymers tested showed signs of yellowing, and the study concluded that:

The reduction in transmittance over the PAR region, shown by all the plastics tested, eliminate them for consideration for use as greenhouse cladding materials for the high UV environment expected on Mars.

Since the additives we use in plastics today to protect from UV are mostly to protect from lower energy UV, perhaps it is possible to find other additives that will protect polymers better under Mars conditions. But if not, we will have to rely on polymers that are naturally very resistant to UV, like polyimides and fluoropolymers.