Slashdot Mirror
Dutch Researchers Grow Crops In Simulated Lunar and Martian Soil (blastingnews.com)
MarkWhittington writes: When people start living on the moon and Mars on a permanent basis, they are going to need to grow their own crops to produce food to eat. Indeed, in the recent hit movie, "The Martian," Matt Damon's character grew potatoes to survive long enough to be rescued. With that in mind, researchers at Wageningen University in the Netherlands have been trying to grow crops in simulated lunar and Martian soil. The first attempt was not successful. The second, however, proved to have promising results.
They forgot to add a bunch of crap!!!
This time, however, fresh-cut grass was added to the growing medium.
Yes, we Dutch people have lot's of experience in adding grass into the mix...
---
Ok, it's just an experiment using simulated soils, but if it were tried for real then getting fresh cut grass to either the Moon or Mars might prove problematical.
Thank you for ruining the end of the movie for me!
"Action without philosophy is a lethal weapon; philosophy without action is worthless."
Huh? What kind of lousy "simulants" are those? Is Hawaiian volcano soil rich in perchlorates? Martian regolith is oxidizing enough that if you were playing around in it with your bare skin you'd get burns; it's similar to handling undiluted lye or bleach, highly destructive to organic matter.
It's also very corrosive just from abrasion, although lunar regolith is worse. Trivia for people here: how many vacuum-sealed samples of lunar regolith do you think we have left over from the Apollo days? Answer: none. The regolith abraded the seals over time, creating pinpoint leaks; every last sample is now partially oxidized by Earth air.
Additionally, both are believed to be very hazardous in terms of silicosis risk, akin to breathing what comes off of a rock crusher (Mars's is finer, but both are in the hazardous range). Martian regolith has some other nasty chemical surprises though (beyond the perchlorates)... among the contaminants that have been identified is what appears to be significant amounts of hexavalent chromium. That's the type of chromium almost never found in nature on Earth (because we live in an oxidizing environment) that's extremely toxic to people (think Erin Brockovich).
This isn't just Earth soil; it's a totally different beast.
Anyway, I'm not that big of a Mars fan... I'll take a colony on Venus any day over one on Mars. ;)
You can't change that... by gettin' all... bendy.
Potatoes! Potatoes! Potatoes!
Now we know how to grow food on Mars!
Step 1: Be on Earth, with Earth Gravity.
Step 2: Grow your food in an oxygenated, normal earth atmosphere.
Step 3: Build a big warehouse, climate controlled, not subjected to martian weather or extremes.
Step 4: Use desert soil.
Step 5: When all of that fails, add fresh compost and grass, with plenty of water.
I'm not sure how any of this works as "simulated" lunar and martian soil. If they had taken inert soil, or diatomaceous earth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatomaceous_earth)....that would have been a start.
The book, The Martian, is better than the movie. Human poop was used as a supplement to the Martian soil to grow the potatoes and depending on the size of the colony there may or may not be enough for an extended period. The advantage the single Martian had was he had all the poop from those who had left Mars, not just his own. I'm also wondering if the quality of the poop produced will degrade over time particularly if the colonists' food supply is only potatoes. Poopologists should comment.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
It worked for Mark Watney.
So they literally scienced the shit out of it?
We won't be growing crops for long term human consumption on Mars within the next 100 years. Nobody is going to want to live on Mars other than scientists. It all sounds exciting, but Mars does not really any significant use as habitable planet.
Even 1000 years from now it's not going to be economically viable for people to live on Mars vs Earth. Scientists will stay and come back and they can easily ship food form Earth via automated drops. It makes little sense to ask scientists to spend their time growing food and humans haven't even barely scrapped the surface of maxing out Earth population based on space or food production. Our limiting factors are fuel and pollution, not space or food production.
Mars is just a place to study, food can be launched and delivered to Mars entirely automated. Trying to grow food on Mars is a waste of time unless you have a large community and there is little reason to think that would happen anytime soon other than a tourist attraction for rich people and again they would probably have a very limited need to grow inferior crops on Mars considering the planet is quite hostile and you have to spend a lot of energy to create the conditions to grow the food.
It might be more efficient power wise, but it make more sense to ship them food because their time studying the planet is the whole point of spending billions of dollars to get to Mars, it's not to live on Mars or turn it into Earth 2.0. Mars will never be anything live Earth and it's place a human colony is very limited and will stay that way for at least the next 300 years or so. It's mostly curiosity that draws us there, not a practical need. That being the case, eventually we'll get the info we want and there will be limited need for any expansion of human colonization.
The point of Mars is to study life and planetary development and contrast with Earth and the Moon, not to move there. There is a shit ton of space and resources here on Earth if you just think 3 dimensionally.
Perhaps they needed a canal expert?
Agreed. Kill yourself to accelerate the solution.
I am not not going to go it WHAT they have been growing, but people have been using volcanic pumice for decades.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Technically, you don't need soil to grow something. It's called hydroponics. In an emergency situation (The Martian), yes, it's easier to use soil, as you don't need as much water, no pumps, timers, etc. But if you are planning for it, why not go for pure hydroponics?
Well it is just a matter of time...
Why not just hit Mars with a Genesis torpedo or send a G.E.C.K. there on a rover?
There is always a reason to go!
Even if the reason is just to get there.
As in:
Question "Why climb that mountain? It gives no benefit and is just a waste of resources."
Answer "Reaching the top is benefit enough."
There is no such thing as soil on Mars or the Moon, soil contains humic acids (and their salts) plus glomalin and the numerous fungi that produce it. Not only do these clowns not know what soil is, they don't even seem to realise that you don't need to use soil to grow plants. What they need is the ability to inoculate a substrate with an ecosystem and keep it in balance, then the rest just happens naturally. What they should be looking at is how to use a solar furnace to convert extraterran regoliths into the equivalent of expanded clay beads or vermiculite etc. which can then be inoculated with an aquaponics ecosystem.
Naw, what you're describing is Dirt. Soil is what we build buildings on and it had defined engineering properties such as internal friction angles, various moduli of elasticity and compression, and other useful things. (aka, each discipline has it's own definition of what "soil" is - and to CEs it has nothing to do with biology ;-)
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Informative, okay, Maybe TMI actually.
Projects that require billions of dollars and are generally unpopular need more reasons than that.
We should just fire all the corrupt people out a massive cannon at mars, do that for 50 years and there'll be plenty of biomass there to get a colony started.
Did you actually read your references? Do you know how to evaluate claims against other evidence?
The first reference completely fails to support your claim. The second (when you follow the footnote) fails to mention that the samples are stored in nitrogen and thus it's claims are highly suspect.
Try again when you have an actual reference that supports your claim, and in the meantime learn basic reading comprehension and analysis skills.
Indeed, in the recent hit movie, "The Martian," Matt Damon's character grew potatoes to survive long enough to be rescued.
So, umm, I guess that means that we have already proved it can be done????
The operative words here are MAY BE , where you pronounced the definitely are.
Yes, it does matter - because nitrogen isn't air, it's inert. It can't contaminate the sample.
Because NASA presumes that you've read the rest of the document and know relevant the storage and handling environment.
A single unsupported statement at odds with other statements - something to be viewed with suspicion.
Understanding a subject takes far more effort than a simple web search. And pronouncing the truth (that you're a clueless moron whose made no effort to research the situation or grasp the relevance and reliability of your quotes) is not an attack.