Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA's Next Frontier: Growing Plants On the Moon

Posted by samzenpus on from the to-boldly-grow dept.

An anonymous reader writes in with news about a NASA project that aims to grow plants on the moon in specially made containers. "In 2015, NASA will attempt to make history by growing plants on the Moon. If they are successful, it will be the first time humans have ever brought life to another planetary body. The Lunar Plant Growth Habitat team, a group of NASA scientists, contractors, students and volunteers, is finally bringing to life an idea that has been discussed and debated for decades. They will try to grow arabidopsis, basil, sunflowers, and turnips in coffee-can-sized aluminum cylinders that will serve as plant habitats. But these are no ordinary containers – they’re packed to the brim with cameras, sensors, and electronics that will allow the team to receive image broadcasts of the plants as they grow. These habitats will have to be able to successfully regulate their own temperature, water intake, and power supply in order to brave the harsh lunar climate."

12 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. As exciting as... by Schrockwell · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...watching grass grow.

    1. Re:As exciting as... by d3m0nCr4t · · Score: 4, Funny

      Reminds me of the R.E.M. song: If you believe, they put a plant on the moon, plant on the moon...

  2. Awesome by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ok this is awesome.

    Its been on my wishlist for unmanned travel that we'd try packaging up Earth plants and sending them to grow on alien worlds in some way. The Moon is a good starting point - Elon Musk got into SpaceX because he wanted to do it on Mars with a Greenhouse.

    Personally I wish we'd just man up and shoot the appropriate organisms into Venus' atmosphere to start the terraforming process.

    1. Re:Awesome by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

      Personally I wish we'd just man up and shoot the appropriate organisms into Venus' atmosphere to start the terraforming process.

      I agree.

      And as appropriate organisms, my vote goes for: Lawyers, politicians and lobbyists, in that order.

    2. Re:Awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I suggest that we put lobbyists before politicians on that list, otherwise we will end up with a brief period where we have lobbyists with no natural target, that could be ugly.

    3. Re:Awesome by Jade_Wayfarer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Egads, man, just think what they'll do to poor Venus! It won't be terraforming, it would be terracide!

      --
      Absence of proof != proof of absence.
    4. Re:Awesome by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Informative

      We don't have any such organisms, Venus suffered a major runaway greenhouse, it has virtually no hydrogen, it's oceans boiled and radiation blew the hydrogen into space over time. It's now deader than Mars, and we don't have the technology to resurrect it.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  3. I knew it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...it will be the first time humans have ever brought life to another planetary body.

    So NASA is finally admitting that it never sent life [Astronauts] to another planetary body. Am guessing they may have sent dead ones in order to be able truthfully say yes we sent astronauts to the moon.

  4. Non SI units by mikewilsonuk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The "coffee can" is a US unit unknown to the rest of the world. We buy our coffee in packets or jars (of differing sizes). How big is a coffee can?

    1. Re:Non SI units by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      American baristas' cans average around 34DD.

    2. Re:Non SI units by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I just looked this up - to me "coffee can" meant a 180ml can of liquid coffee (around half the size of a can of coke) that's ready to drink, but apparently this isn't popular outside East Asia. According to Wikipedia, a standard coffee can, also known as a #10 can, has a volume of 13 cups and holds 3 lb of coffee. A cup is a US unit, distinct from the imperial unit of the same name, measuring 16 US tablespoons (again different from imperial tablespoons) or around 237 ml. So a coffee can is not quite 3.1 litres - slightly more than Thanshin's reply of 169.56 cubic inches (which is around 2.8 litres) but slightly less than ksemlerK's reply which comes out as 3.45 litres (unless that's the exterior dimensions?). It also seems kind of weird that the can is so big as it's also called a 3 lb coffee can, which is less than 1.5 kg and coffee is denser than water; perhaps when you open the can it's more than half empty?

    3. Re:Non SI units by Sockatume · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not liquid coffee, it's ground coffee beans. They're about one third of the density of water.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?