Subject: Space-tech Digest #75 Contents: Ray Collins ISECCo update: greenhouse/biosphere Keith Henson Re: space farm Dominic Herity Re: space farm Henry Spencer Re: space farm Keith Henson Re: space farm Phil Fraering Re: space farm Tom Neff Re: space farm John Roberts Re: space farm Keith Henson Re: space farm Rich Schroeppel Re: space farm Phil Fraering Re: space farm John Roberts Re: space farm Henry Spencer Re: space farm Tom Neff Re: space farm Phil Fraering Re: space farm ------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Nov 90 14:43:01 -0900 From: "ACAD3A::FSRRC" <@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:FSRRC@ALASKA.BITNET> Sender: "ACAD3A::FSRRC" <@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:FSRRC@ALASKA.BITNET> To: SPACE-TECH@CS.CMU.EDU ISECCo Update: Summer of '90: A supremely successful summer. November 21, 1990 We got a jump on our summer projects, staring work in early May, getting 2 greenhouses, 2 gardens and a significant amount of work done at the hanger site, not to mention getting the hole excavated for the biosphere structure. June, July and August saw us pushed for time due to outside projects, but we still managed to get raise chickens, expand the aquaculture (fish) system, and keep up with the garden. Our primary volunteer workers were Ray Collins, Terry Fike, and R. Scott Guse. The ISECCo Vice President, Joe Beckenbach, visited from California for a couple of weeks in June (as a part of winning the ISECCo Most Donations Award Joe got a 5 day sailing trip on Prince William Sound) and assisted. Other people who were instrumental in our summer success are Chandra Schaffer, Elisa Corning and Kelly Wilkinson. A few others, like Robert Hale and Pat Wilkinson, helped out as needed. All in all we totaled nearly 800 man-hours of labor over the summer. The Greenhouses While it may not appear that growing gardens is a function of a space group our gardens serve two purposes: they allow us to experiment with various means of growing things which will ultimately be used in the biosphere, and second they provide food for our volunteer workers. Our greenhouses are especially important for developing techniques for biosphere crops. ... The Aquaculture System We upgraded our fish system to a capacity near what will be in the biosphere. We have a 15 gallon aquarium, a 20 gallon aquarium, a 70 gallon bath tub, a 4'x6'x2' tank (360 gallons), and a 2'x4'x2' tank (120 gallons). These latter two aren't operational yet; we have been trouble with the liner outgassing (we think!) Our fish population started with 20 Tilapia a year ago and since then we've breed them twice; the first time we got around 80 and the second time around 60. We have lost 30-40 to various causes, so we now have a population of about 125. The largest of these is 8" long and weighs 1/4 pound, close to the optimum size for harvest. It appears that it will take a year to grow them to this size, so for a harvest of 2 every other day we would need a population of 365 fish, or about 3 times our current population. The Chickens While it has not yet been determined that we shall have chickens in the First CELSS we did want to experiment with them. Elisa Corning was instrumental in getting our poultry system established. She raised several varieties of birds in a cage behind her house. While it is too early to determine whether they will fit into the ecosystem or not, we have been gaining valuable experience in their habits and requirements. ON OTHER MATTERS: In June the Directors of ISECCo held a meeting, and at that meeting we voted to begin preliminary investigations on what is required to build a live model of a aerospace plane. The purpose of this model would be to have a device which would be capable of hypersonic velocities for critical component testing. Unfortunately this will be limited (at this point) to an intellectual exercise since all of our funds are being put into the First CELSS. This fall/winter we are in the process of upgrading the systems that we have developed thus far in an attempt to begin some preliminary cycling. We plan to tie the dehumidifiers to the fish and chickens; the fish and chickens to the hydroponics system (which is a part of the plant system) and the plant system will provide water (vapor) for the dehumidifiers. While none of these 'ties' will be closed, it will give us a working idea of how things will work. We will also gain experience in rates of nutrient flow, determine potential limits and discover the some of the problems (and cures?). Those of you who wish to know more can write me at FSRRC@ALASKA, or via the postal system at the address below. Please include a postal mailing address for all initial BITNET correspondence--we occasionally have letters whose computer return address fails for one reason or another. --Ray R. Collins:: President, ISECCo :::The International Space Exploration and Colonization Company::: :::P.O. Box 60885::Fairbanks::Alaska::99706::: Researching and Developing space oriented technology for the betterment of mankind. ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!hkhenson@Sun.COM To: SPACE-TECH@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: re space farm Date: Wed, 21 Nov 90 23:20:55 PST Re this topic, you might look for the article I wrote long ago for the first Space Manufacturing Conference run by O'Neill. One of the conclusions we came to was that rabits make a fine meat source and their food requirements are not in direct competition with humans (chickens need a diet close to that of humans.) If you can't find a copy somewhere (most large university type libraries have the complete AIAA set) send me email. Keith Henson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Nov 90 09:14:59 GMT From: dherity <@BITNET.CC.CMU.EDU:dherity@cs.tcd.ie> Subject: re space farm To: SPACE-TECH@CS.CMU.EDU Does anybody out there have any idea of the vital statistics of a closed ecosystem, e.g. mass of system per person supported, volume/area of system, minimum stable size of system? It would be interesting to compare these with the cost of supplying consumables to a space station. ------------------------------ From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu Date: Mon, 26 Nov 90 11:44:57 EST Subject: re space farm To: SPACE-TECH@CS.CMU.EDU > Does anybody out there have any idea of the vital statistics of a closed > ecosystem, e.g. mass of system per person supported, volume/area of > system, minimum stable size of system? Actually, the major problem is that *nobody* has a particularly good idea about any of these numbers... The problem also isn't terribly well-defined. *How* closed an ecosystem? You can work very hard trying to close the last 1%. "Work very hard" in both metaphorical and literal senses; the folks in the Biosphere project are aiming for 100% closure, and part of the result is that they all get to spend a large fraction of the working day doing chores associated with food production. Realistically, any near-future space station of modest size is going to import much of its food, for the sake of variety and nutritional balance if nothing else. Trying to close the cycle for air and water is much more cost-effective than trying to do it for food. Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!hkhenson@Sun.COM To: SPACE-TECH@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: re space farm Date: Mon, 26 Nov 90 10:20:08 PST Re this topic, it is not very often I disagree with Henry on anything, but there is considerable known about the topic of feeding people by growing things. The problems with Biosphere II are much more "political" in nature than they are related to the problem of simply growing enough to eat. An early reference to the topic is the paper I co-authored in 1975 published in the first vol of the Space Manufacturing Facilites Conference run by Dr. O'Neill and Co. It contains estimates on the area, light flux, labor, growing methods, and (very important!) getting rid of waste heat. Keith Henson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Nov 90 16:35:04 -0600 From: Fraering Philip To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: re space farm Re: hkhenson's message immediately preceeding this one: I've heard that the people doing Biosphere II do have some 'political' beliefs that they have brought into the biosphere with them: there will be no pesticides of any sort. While this may be a good idea for a space colony, you can keep down the insects there by not letting them in in the first place. In biosphere II they're so intent on 'naturalness' that they've let loose some cockroaches into the place. Definately not the sort of thing you'll want running around in your fusion drive after docking your personal shuttle to this thing. Also, they've gone so far towards simulating different regions their system is too large per person to ever show practical use in a space station. Lug that much structure around to feed eight people, _if_ they work on it continually? How much larger must some CELSS of that nature be before you get to send a geologist along on the mission? Confused in Lafayette, Philip Fraering dlbres10@pc.usl.edu ------------------------------ From: Tom Neff Date: Mon, 26 Nov 1990 18:34:09 EST X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: SPACE-TECH Mailing List Subject: Re: re space farm On Nov 26, 4:35pm, Fraering Philip wrote: > I've heard that the people doing Biosphere II do have some > 'political' beliefs that they have brought into the biosphere > with them: there will be no pesticides of any sort. This is not a political decision. All water is recycled; they do not have the means to remove pesticide residue, and don't want to drink it. > While this may be a good idea for a space colony, you can keep down > the insects there by not letting them in in the first place. > > In biosphere II they're so intent on 'naturalness' that they've let > loose some cockroaches into the place. Definately not the sort of thing > you'll want running around in your fusion drive after docking your > personal shuttle to this thing. There is nothing special about cockroaches in that regard. Pick your favorite cuddly creature or flower petal; none of them belong in the fusion area. Presumably standard cleanliness measures will apply. > Also, they've gone so far towards simulating different regions their system > is too large per person to ever show practical use in a space station. > > Lug that much structure around to feed eight people, _if_ they work on > it continually? How much larger must some CELSS of that nature be before > you get to send a geologist along on the mission? > > Confused in Lafayette, Yes, apparently so. The purpose of Biosphere II is RESEARCH. They are not trying to build a working space station out there, they are trying to create a test environment where we can learn the practical lessons and try out the improvisations that will some day lead to an INFORMED attempt at a spaceworthy ecology. Criticizing B2 for having things a space station won't need is like attacking the NASA EVA simulator because space isn't really full of water. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Nov 90 19:21:09 EST From: John Roberts Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement. To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: space farm >From: Tom Neff >This is not a political decision. All water is recycled; they do not >have the means to remove pesticide residue, and don't want to drink it. I get the impression that some agricultural poisons are designed to be highly toxic for a short period of time, then break down or otherwise become harmless. The herbicide Paraquat comes to mind, though I'm not completely sure of the mechanism by which it is rendered inert. Other substances should be highly species-specific - for instance insect juvenile hormones should not affect people. I agree that they shouldn't use DDT. >There is nothing special about cockroaches in that regard. Pick your >favorite cuddly creature or flower petal; none of them belong in the >fusion area. Presumably standard cleanliness measures will apply. Well yes, though koalas and daisies are perhaps less likely than cockroaches to get into the control circuitry and eat the insulation off the wires. I suppose it might be a good test based on the argument that space stations, etc. are likely to have cockroaches whether they plan for them or not. Have the Soviets reported any insects, mice, mold, or other biological pests? John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!hkhenson@Sun.COM To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: re space farm Date: Mon, 26 Nov 90 20:09:41 PST This discussion started on the concept of a space *farm.* While I agree that something is likely to be learned from B2, and the things they learn might be usefull to establising a psudo "wild" environment in a vast space colony, what they are doing has little relevance to the problem of growing food to feed workers in space. The discussion almost temps me to type in a 15 year old article, update it slightly and post it to this group. Keith Henson PS, I wonder if they are all getting their Hg filling replaced. They are not likely to be taking mercury out of the recycled water either. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 26 Nov 90 22:29:18 PST From: Richard Schroeppel To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: space farm & gravity To what extent do higher plants need gravity to grow in? Presumably algae & yogurt don't much care which way is up, or whether there is an up; but fresh vegetables may need (some) gravity. Keith, you mentioned rabbits as a source of meat: Same question-- What do we know about embryonic development of small animals in 0G? Chickens? Fish? (And why not dust off your article, since it addresses the trigger question for this discussion.) Rich Schroeppel rcs@la.tis.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Nov 90 11:59:06 -0600 From: Fraering Philip To: tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM Cc: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: re space farm Tom Neff writes: >Yes, apparently so. The purpose of Biosphere II is RESEARCH. They are >not trying to build a working space station out there, they are trying >to create a test environment where we can learn the practical lessons >and try out the improvisations that will some day lead to an INFORMED >attempt at a spaceworthy ecology. Ah so. I was mistaken. (oops, I've heard that mail or news with those words in the text are deleted by special daemons; it explains why I've never seen them :-) Every mention of B2 I've seen in the news says it's a prototype for keeping people alive off-planet. That's also the plug they seem to use when asking for funding. The point is, if I were going to buy a couple dozen external tanks, spin them, and build a CELSS for a space station, most of the B2 research wouldn't even be relevant (as it is, I'll have to find something else to blow that 50 billion on :-). It might be helpful when, as Keith Henson said, we wanted to build a wildlife preserve in a space colony... Phil ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Nov 90 13:33:36 EST From: John Roberts Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are those of the sender and do not reflect NIST policy or agreement. To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: space farm & gravity >From: Richard Schroeppel >To what extent do higher plants need gravity to grow in? >Presumably algae & yogurt don't much care which way is >up, or whether there is an up; but fresh vegetables may >need (some) gravity. Higher plants use gravity and growth hormones (as well as phototropism, etc.) to determine direction of growth. If necessary, perhaps wind (as from a fan) could be used as a partial substitute. >Keith, you mentioned rabbits as a source of meat: Same >question-- What do we know about embryonic development >of small animals in 0G? Chickens? Fish? >(And why not dust off your article, since it addresses >the trigger question for this discussion.) >Rich Schroeppel >rcs@la.tis.com There was a Shuttle experiment some time ago, in which (as I recall) two sets of chicken eggs were launched and kept under weightless conditions for some time, then returned to earth to see whether they would hatch, and to check subsequent health of any live chicks. One group of eggs was freshly fertilized, while the other set had been fertilized some days earlier. The older eggs had a fairly good count of healthy chicks hatched, but the younger eggs *all* died, much to the surprise of the researchers. While it was pointed out that the experiment was a little too sketchy to draw many solid conclusions from it, it did show that very probably some important factor has not been sufficiently regarded, and further experiments should be performed if humans hope someday to live in space. Does anyone remember the details of the experiment? John Roberts roberts@cmr.ncsl.nist.gov ------------------------------ From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu Date: Tue, 27 Nov 90 13:50:12 EST To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: re space farm > I've heard that the people doing Biosphere II do have some > 'political' beliefs that they have brought into the biosphere > with them: there will be no pesticides of any sort. Another somewhat "political" belief is their intentness on a 100.0% closed system. For many practical purposes, that is silly. The last 0.1% is very expensive in money and hassle. (As a friend of mine has pointed out, North America has never been 100.0% self-sufficient and there is no interest in making it so.) Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry ------------------------------ From: Tom Neff Date: Tue, 27 Nov 1990 16:25:18 EST X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.1.1 5/02/90) To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU Subject: Re: re space farm On Nov 27, 1:50pm, henry@zoo.toronto.edu wrote: > Another somewhat "political" belief is their intentness on a 100.0% closed > system. For many practical purposes, that is silly. The last 0.1% is very > expensive in money and hassle. Boy, it's no more mystifyingly 'political' than some of the criticisms I've been reading lately! Biosphere II is a facility for running 2-year fast cycle closed ecology experiments. The results are intended to teach us new things about what works and what doesn't in an isolated environment. It doesn't matter if some of the architects are ecotopian dreamers; what matters is the work. That "last 0.1%" is the POINT. Bio2 exchanges light and heat with the outside and it also draws electric power for air conditioning; otherwise the system is sealed during experiment runs. This is very much what, for instance, a Moon colony would do. Of course a Moon colony would be amenable to resupply via cargo craft, but the POINT OF STUDY here is what happens in the intervals *between*. Remember that Bio2 is hardly self sufficient in terms of things like pencils, Band-Aids, pocket calculators, windowpanes, sunglasses, dictionaries, birth control pills, uniform patches, agricultural tools and so forth, although the crew is prepared to improvise as needed rather than sacrifice a cycle. They start out with a supply of these things intended to last the coming two years -- just as an off-Earth outpost would. The object is to run integrated ecologies, not reinvent all civilization in a bottle. Another point of which I think some readers may be unaware is that the exaggerated species diversity is a deliberate strategy: the Bio2 designers do not expect all species to survive, but look for 30-40% attrition in the first cycle. New species will be added to the surviving remnant for the second run, more at the third, and so on. The intent is that after a decade or so, a fairly stable and resilient "palette" of species will have been arrived at by natural selection, without a "world war" from throwing everything together at once. Perhaps it will turn out, in the long run, that running small off-Earth ecologies is prohibitively difficult without regular, essential inputs into the system from Earth's larger ecology. If we do learn this (or the opposite) someday, it will be experiments like Bio2 that taught us -- not armchair nay-sayers. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Nov 90 17:22:32 -0600 From: Fraering Philip To: space-tech@CS.CMU.EDU, tneff@bfmny0.BFM.COM Subject: Re: re space farm I did not mean to be a 'nay-sayer', I just would like to point out that something simple and _small_ enough to be launched on the bantamweight boosters of today (like Energia) would also be useful. Some nice short-term projects and goals, like the Soviets have been running on and off for the past twenty or so years, would be nice. Phil ------------------------------ End of Space-tech Digest #75 *******************