21–30 of 64 posts
In general this is pretty awesome. What we now know are: 1) Earth microbes and soil organisms (worms) can live in hydrated martian soil. ( https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/mars-soil-earthw... ) 2) Food plants can grow in martian soil that has had said organisms added to it.( https://www.nasa.gov/feature/farming-in-martian-gardens ) 3) The water to hydrate the soil is already on Mars.(this article) 4) We ca…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might not be quite as bad as you think. I imagine Martian farmers would be doing something like hydroponics. The soil and water might come from mars but the actual plants grow in tiny, isolated compartments within buildings. I doubt the resource scarcity would allow for anything resembling a more traditional farm.
It's relatively easy to keep macroscopic plants from escaping, the real issue is the smaller stuff like bacteria, which will get everywhere no matter what kind of farm you're running.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's relatively easy to keep macroscopic plants from escaping, the real issue is the smaller stuff like bacteria, which will get everywhere no matter what kind of farm you're running.
Even there, though, they’re going to want to have air tight areas.
The problem is that ensuring a sterile barrier so nothing gets out of your habitat-- especially when spacesuited living humans must pass through regularly -- is somewhere between incredibly expensive and just impossible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even there, though, they’re going to want to have air tight areas.
"Even there?" Forget the farm, this has nothing to do with farming per se . It doesn't matter if the crew does nothing but eat pre-sealed sterile goop. The problem is that ensuring a sterile barrier so nothing gets out of your habitat-- especially when spacesuited living humans must pass through regularly -- is somewhere between incredibly expensive and just impossible.
I hope so but this type of finding has been wrong before. See the recent discrediting of liquid "brines" on Mars: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001910351... Until a rover or other probe tests it directly, I'll remain skeptical.
In 2015, there was this:
"NASA confirms the best-ever evidence for water on Mars" https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2...
From your link:
"This implies that RSL are not fed by large, near-subsurface aquifers, but are instead the result of either small ( Keyword there is "granular flows"
Here's another source for similar findings a few months prior.
"Granular flows at recurring slope lineae on Mars indicate a limited role for liquid water"
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-017-0012-5
I too remain skeptical.
The original title is "Steep Slopes on Mars Reveal Structure of Buried Ice". The HN title "Buried Ice Water Discovered on Mars" is misleading - we've known about large midlatitude underground ice deposits for some years now.
> The ice was likely deposited as snow long ago. The deposits are exposed in cross section as relatively pure water ice, capped by a layer one to two yards (or meters) thick of ice-cemented rock and dust.
In general this is pretty awesome. What we now know are: 1) Earth microbes and soil organisms (worms) can live in hydrated martian soil. ( https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/11/mars-soil-earthw... ) 2) Food plants can grow in martian soil that has had said organisms added to it.( https://www.nasa.gov/feature/farming-in-martian-gardens ) 3) The water to hydrate the soil is already on Mars.(this article) 4) We ca…
That is indeed awesome but I would argue that it also means we would need to undertake a much more thorough search to find out of mars is indeed a dead planet. Once we land a large concentration of biological matter there -- we won't have an opportunity to look again without dealing with massive potential for cross-planetary contamination. Of course, it's a trade off and it's great news if we ever had to undertake a…
Furthermore, a mars station would allow science to be done directly on mars, rather than having payloads of material sent to and from earth.
The original title is "Steep Slopes on Mars Reveal Structure of Buried Ice". The HN title "Buried Ice Water Discovered on Mars" is misleading - we've known about large midlatitude underground ice deposits for some years now.
Right. "Ice water" makes no sense. If anything, "water ice': > The ice was likely deposited as snow long ago. The deposits are exposed in cross section as relatively pure water ice, capped by a layer one to two yards (or meters) thick of ice-cemented rock and dust.
"Ice water" would be something that is served in the restaurants on Mars.