Builders Wanted!

Photo from "The Martian"

Space is a perfect industry for a rebirth of old ideals. Today software is king. Computer scientists, programmers, and entrepreneurs work to find the next silicon based solution to any problem. In space, information technology is important but not the end-all-be-all. Space is going to require people with practical knowledge who are willing to get their hands dirty. Mechanical engineers, mechanics, technicians, farmers, laborers, etc are going to be the careers in demand as space travel, and particularly, colonization begin to take off.

The reason software careers are so prevalent today on earth is because much of the infrastructure has already been created. The fiber has been laid, the computer production has been automated, the software engineers' houses have been built. Space does not have this physical infrastructure that allows information systems to operate. There is no way to created a more efficient habitat using an app on Mars if there is not an existing habitat.

Students who are in high school today, or even professional engineers currently, need to wrap their
head around the opportunity coming their way. People who build things are going to be needed. From the launch to the landing. Schools can also encourage this slightly by realizing that being a farmer or builder will have a future.

All this stuff that has to be created also is going to be entirely new. It will require new techniques of manufacturing, new design methodologies, new materials. When outfitting a lunar home you can't simply go to Ikea and grab a few coffee tables, though this may happen if a crunch arises.

Now, software will still be needed. Space will be highly robotics based. Unmanned system may prepare sites and build structures. This will require a huge amount of information technology and the programmers that go with it. But robots have their limits. And when it comes to creating things they are highly limited. (Yes the Singularity will likely change that but lets not go down that rabbit hole at the moment.) And there is still the issue of building the bodies of the robots that must perform these tasks.

Space is a frontier. In order to conquer a frontier "ideas" and "apps" are not enough, something must be built. And since this frontier is entirely new entirely new things must be built. Students and professionals might consider preparing just a little for the onslaught that will arrive in about a decade when space travel will be gaining speed. A smartphone cannot plow a field and a robot, currently, can't design furniture for a space station. In order to be a big part of space you will have to build something tangible.

Nuclear Devices in Space

Here is an essay that was written by one of the authors for a college course several months ago. We thought you might enjoy it though it might be better to just skim it. This paper was meant for an uninitiated audience.

Mars has long been a target of space colonization. This little planet is actually quite similar to Earth in many different ways. But in order for Mars to be a planet that is truly amenable to humans, that is, a place where people can go and walk in the Martian sun as one would on Earth, the planet has to be terraformed. Terraformation is the global engineering of a planet’s environment (Moss). In Mars’ case terraformation refers to the heating of the planet. Several methods for terraforming

Elon Musk with Stephen Colbert

Mars have been put forward. These ideas have included pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere or dropping asteroids on the planet. But the concept which is now receiving the most attention is one referenced by Elon Musk on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert. When Colbert asked what it would take to make Mars livable, Musk replied that “There are two ways, the fast way and the slow way.”(Colbert) The slow way was to use greenhouse gases to hasten global warming on Mars. The fast way was to drop thermonuclear weapons on the poles. It was the fast way which has received the attention.

In order for Mars to be the planet which humans leave Earth for, it will have to be terraformed. The use of nuclear weapons is one of the most practical methods of accomplishing the task. While technological challenges exist even with this approach, it will be the geopolitical and interplanetary ethics which will pose the greatest challenge to any type of Mars transformation.

Why is it that Musk believes that thermonuclear weapons would be ideal for terraforming Mars? The goal behind the plan is to create a runaway greenhouse effect on Mars. Mars is full of carbon dioxide. The tenuous atmosphere that exists there already is primarily carbon dioxide, and the poles are composed of frozen carbon dioxide, or dry ice. Detonation of nuclear weapons over the poles is expected to heat them enough to release huge amounts more CO2 into the atmosphere. Ideally, this initial release of CO2 would heat the planet enough that more CO2 would be melted, and from that warming more still, continuously until all the dry ice has been melted and ejected into the atmosphere. From there plants can be introduced to convert the CO2 into oxygen. Nuclear weapons are ideal to start this process because they are understood, powerful and compact. Other options for starting the process of CO2 release require huge infrastructures and technologies which have not yet been developed.

However, even though the plan is feasible technologically it is almost insurmountable politically. The current Outer Space Treaty which is signed by most nuclear powers of the world, and all space powers, states that no weapons of mass destruction will be placed in space (United Nations). Basically, the global UN treaty prohibits nuclear weapons in space. There is a possibility that the treaty can be amended to allow thermonuclear devices to be deployed for the peaceful purposes of terraforming Mars. After all, peaceful applications of thermonuclear devices in space have never been a large consideration. Also, conveniently the treaty does not apply to individuals or companies, and may become even less of a factor.

A bill up for vote in the U.S. senate is set to give companies control of extracted materials from asteroids, (Fecht) even though the UN treaty states that no country may control any resources in space. The U.S. bill will set a precedent for private organizations to make decisions about space utilization outside of international treaties. The bill will also allow for the United States to develop local legislation to allow private organizations to decide the fate of Mars. So essentially, the U.S. may not be internationally allowed to unilaterally claim parts of space or Mars, but it can provide the resources to a private company, not bound by the treaty to terraform Mars. This all operates under the assumption that the Space Act of 2015 is ratified by Congress. But it does present the possibility that Elon Musk could obtain the means to terraform Mars with nuclear devices as a peaceful utilization of the devices without forcing the U.S. to break its treaty.

If the humanitarian effort to terraform Mars with nukes was ratified by the UN, or enabled by U.S. legislation, there would be multiple primary objections to the possibility, both are based on safety. In order to get to space one must take a rocket. Rockets, the world over, only have a success rate of, at best, 96 percent (Lafleur). What would occur if a rocket carrying a nuclear device exploded upon launch (Jauregui)? Also what should occur if terrorists or hackers hijack the device and point it back towards Earth. These are the concerns of a nuclear device being launched.

The latter argument is inconceivable. Such a device would have higher than normal military security. It would not be as if it is a basic laptop to be hacked. If the nuclear arsenal of the US has not been breached then neither will a rocket to Mars be compromised.

So, regarding the issue of a failure. This is a legitimate concern. But what few people realize is that there have already been multiple nuclear payloads sent into space. The Curiosity rover uses a radioactive device to power itself which would have disintegrated should it have exploded at launch. There have also been multiple SNAP-10A fission reactors launched since the 60’s (Bennett). Thus far there have been no accidents. But the reality is that even if one of these nuclear devices were to explode in the rocket the danger of radioactive fallout would be minimal. A nuclear blast creates dangerous fallout because it is able to eject decaying plutonium in all directions very energetically and evenly. A rocket exploding is a firecracker in comparison. The reactor and its contents would fall out of the sky and into the ocean, not spread like a plume across a continent. Overall, the dangers of safety are arguments similar to saying that we might get hit by a car if we cross the street, so one should never cross a street. It would not be negligent to attempt to launch a nuclear cargo to Mars.

So, assuming that nuclear devices have been approved to go to Mars and detonate, the next argument for the opposition would be that of the ecological impacts such an act would have on Mars itself (Jauregui). These objections stem from the idea that humans do not fully understand Mars yet. Mars has been considered one of the prime locations in the solar system to find life or remnants of life. Mars is theorized to have once been very earthlike, warm and wet. These theories lend credence to the idea that there are either fossilized or living organisms to find on Mars (Johnson). But should humans go and start nuking the planet, they could obliterate evidence of that past Martian life, or possibly even that life itself if it still exists. This issue can be likened to endangerment and human caused extinction of animals on Earth. The trouble is on Earth there are other resources, other solutions to deforestation, on Mars those options are limited because terraformation is required to even open the door to those other possibilities. Mars must be terraformed in order to provide a human presence that is capable of fully understanding and studying the planet. This cannot be achieved with rovers, but it can with humans.

There exists the possibility that small colonies will be established before the planet is terraformed. The stations would conduct the science to prepare the planet for the terraformation and design the process. While performing these studies scientists would be able to conduct the final surveys for life. If found, the organisms can be protected from the terraformation process so that they can be fully studied. In this way the transformation of the planet will not eliminate any potential existing residents, and the scientific value of those organisms can be viably and organically retained.

Mars is generally touted as a second planet for humans, to ensure that if a life ending event occurs
on one planet the other will preserve the human race. Should initial preparation and study of the planet not be performed the terraformation should continue. It is not appropriate to put the protection of a hypothetical organism or fossil ahead of the actual dangers posed to the fully conscious and creating organisms that are human. Some would say that the dangers to Earth are of the same probability of getting hit by a car while crossing a street, which I presented previously, therefore why should Mars be colonized out of fear. To this let us be clear, if human protection was the only reason then there would be no interest in Mars. Humans can’t fight the urge of a donut even though it could kill them. The idea of a multi-planetary society extends far beyond survival as a benefit. These include solving problems such as population density, political oppression, and economic growth. A new planet allows humans to develop in ways that we have never seen since Europeans started coming over to the Americas. Mars is bare ground for people to create a new start. The colonization must occur for human progress to continue. That is indeed more valuable than a scientific curiosity which may or may not exist, and would still be able to be studied even after the terraformation. The development of the human race is also a hypothetical which is justified through the data of history and how expansion has improved quality of life but also scientific and economic ability to protect and understand environmental issues.

Elon Musk is a marketing genius. He often drops hints and ideas in order to improve visibility of projects he is working on. But he is also a proven achiever of lofty goals. He already operates several technology companies, one of which provides orbital rockets to service the International Space Station. When Elon Musk states that nuclear weapons are a viable method for preparing Mars for human colonization, it is generally a well substantiated belief and even future plan he is working on (Masunaga). Terraforming a planet with nuclear devices is a possibility (AOL.com), and though there are hypothetically-based concerns about it, none of them are legitimate enough to prohibit the plan. The primary issue with actually implementing it will be the fears of what may occur on Earth, either due to potential political backlash or a failure of the vehicle carrying the devices failing. It is possible that the political hurdles can be overcome and the other is a concern based on hyperbole. Nuclear devices can and should be used to prepare another planet for human development.


Bibliography
 Bennett, Gary. "Space Nuclear Power: Opening the Final Frontier." 4th International Energy Conversion Engineering Conference and Exhibit (IECEC) (2006). Print.

"Citation Machine Automatically Generates Citations in MLA, APA, Chicago, Turabian, and Harvard." Citation Machine: Format & Generate Citations – APA, MLA, & Chicago. Imagine Easy Solutions. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

Colbert, Stephen. "Elon Musk Might Be A Super Villain." YouTube. YouTube, 10 Sept. 2015. Web. 17 Sept. 2015.

 Fecht, Sarah. "Is Space Mining Legal?" Popular Science. Popular Science, 23 Sept. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

 Jauregui, Andres. "Sorry, Elon Musk: One Does Not Simply Nuke Mars Into Habitability." Huffington Post. Huffington Post, 11 Sept. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

Johnson, Carolyn. "Ancient Lake on Mars Could Be a Prime Target in Search for Life - The Boston Globe." BostonGlobe.com. Boston Globe, 27 Mar. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

 Lafleur, Claude. "Spacecraft Stats and Insights." The Space Review:. The Space Review, 5 Apr. 2010. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

 Masunaga, Samantha. "What Scientists Say about Elon Musk's Idea to Nuke Mars." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 11 Sept. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

Moss, Shaun. "Terraforming Mars." Mars Papers (2006). Print.

"SNAP-10A." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

"United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs." Outer Space Treaty. United Nations Office of Space Affairs, 19 Dec. 1966. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

 "Why Elon Musk's 'nuking Mars' Idea Isn't All That Far-fetched." AOL.com. 10 Sept. 2015. Web. 25 Sept. 2015.

Orbital Data Centers

Cloud computing is the idea of storing data on a server or having that server perform tasks so there is less load on your computer. But these servers are located in warehouses on Earth. They require large amounts of energy, they have a large footprint, and they have to transmit data over a distance to your computer.  What if server farms were placed into orbit? What if cloud computing occurred above the clouds?

Orbital server farms would have several benefits to their terrestrial counterparts. The first is power. In orbit there is an abundant supply of solar energy, twice as much as what enters our atmosphere and hits the ground. It is also possible to be in continuous sunlight. This provides a clean and inexhaustible power supply for the farm.

Next, there is an abundant amount of space in space. A server farm may grow as large or larger than any building on Earth with.

Last, concerning transmission time, space really is halfway to anywhere. Today and in the future satellite transmission will be common. The trip up and then back down takes only millionths of a second but that is very slow for a computer which works with billions of operations per second. Halving the distance of transmission by just sending information down, instead of up then down, would increase internet speeds.

But that is a far rosier picture than reality. While endless solar power is available in orbit it would still require huge arrays to power a server farm. The ISS solar array is the size of a football field and provides 110 kilowatts of energy, enough to power 55 houses. But a 55,000 square foot server farm on Earth uses 5 megawatts or enough to power 5000 homes. Clearly a development in space power systems will need to be built. But computing is becoming more efficient all the time so such power requirements may not remain standard.

Next, indeed a server farm may grow as large as it wishes in orbit. But with increased size comes increased weight and therefore higher launch costs. The cost of space launches would have to become a thousand times cheaper than the cheapest SpaceX launcher existing today in order to compete with terrestrial installment. However initial launch costs may be offset if lifetime power costs were lower due to orbital solar plants.

Last, while internet and communication speeds may be twice as fast by placing the servers in orbit this may not be a significant enough trade-off for the risks of creating such a facility. But Google and others are working on using satellites to provide internet connectivity to the world, adding a few servers to the satellites is not a great leap.

But perhaps the biggest problem of all to such facilities may be cooling. Servers become very hot and require constant removal of heat. But in space there are few options for heat removal. Heat can only leave by radiation. But a satellite using solar power is also constantly absorbing heat as thermal radiation. If a satellite also has a hot server farm at its center then a substantial thermal management problem arises.

Despite those challenges here is why such data centers will exist. Just as Google and Facebook are trying to provide internet connectivity to places where there is none, so to do they need to provide data storage and computation. Second, having large power hogging facilities in orbit will reduce the load on Earth power plants and not be in danger of blackouts while using the Sun's energy. Last, if humans go to Mars they will need computing power. But it makes no sense to attempt to land servers on Mars when they can perform just as well in orbit and perhaps provide services to multiple settlements. The same goes for the Moon. The effort of landing a sever farm on another body is to great when it can just be parked in orbit.

The latter scenarios may be where orbital computing systems begin. Providing computing resources to future Mars missions. Small server farms requiring nothing on the scale of terrestrial data centers could be created and then launched to support space missions. This is something that already has many engineering precedents in places like the ISS. It a project which is well within current technologies to achieve and could actually be built by a small firm or just a few people in a garage. From there such orbital data centers could follow a modular growth plan where new, self-contained modules are continuously combined to create ever large server farms which are able to finally provide meaningful quantities of computation to the world or other colonies.

Data centers in space are something which have potential and are currently feasible. However in order to scale them to compete with existing data centers in a substantial way requires growth and construction of other space resources. However, small scale orbital server farms can be created to support missions to other planets which will be coming in the next decades. Whether they will ever replace their cousins on the ground on Earth is unknowable until the industry develops more.

Space Bioengineering

Space is a new environment. A clean slate. As far as we know devoid of even simple life. A new environment where living creatures have never prospered requires new creatures that have never existed. While machines are being developed to take people and other machines into space, organisms need to be developed to allow us to stay there and build an economy and society.

DARPA has already begun exploring the possibilities of genetically modified  or synthetically created organisms with which to terraform Mars. However the creation of of genetically modified animals has any number of other applications. Plants with increased oxygen producing ability. Bacteria for breaking down asteroids. Modified food producing organisms for colonies. Organisms that can convert human waste into bioluminescent light instead of using electricity. And even bacteria which could solve health hazards to humans caused by radiation or low gravity.

The reason genetic engineering has not been widely accepted and experiences great resistance on Earth is the fact that genetic engineering is considered unnatural. To introduce a man-made plant or organism into the Earth ecosystem is generally considered dangerous due to the side-effects that may arise. An example could be that weeds can adopt a genetically engineered resistance to common herbicides. Or that genetically modified food has detrimental health affects.

These potential problems with genetically engineered organisms is due to their foreignness to the normal ecosystem. Something which evolves 200 years in one or two affects its competition and consumers in ways not anticipated. It is the reaction of the environment which causes opposition to genetic modification not the modified species themselves.

Another argument to genetic modification has been the ethical question of if humans should exercise such powers. This is a question that cannot be answered in this essay. Though, as a guess, this question is still based on the protection of the natural environment.

In space there is no natural environment. It is a microwaved wasteland with no biology. For this reason many of the arguments for using biologically or synthetically engineered organisms fall apart. There is not an ecosystem to ruin with the introduction of a designed-for-space organism.

However, there will still be resistance to the use of such organisms. This something which space bio-engineering firms will have to be prepared for. Just as deserts and forests are preserved from irrigation or clearing to preserve their natural beauty, so to may barren planets be defended from terraformation. This is a legal question which will have to be addressed in future as such applications as terraformation go from theory to fact.

Also, while at the moment introduction of genetically modified organisms may be acceptable in space the industry must be careful in future to ensure that created ecosystems are kept clear of dangerous or invasive species.

From a business perspective bioengineering could be comparable to any other human space product in market size, perhaps even larger as terraformation becomes a possibility. But on the smaller scale humans, being natural creatures, require natural solutions to space survival. A typical technological carbon scrubber on a space station in not as effective or efficient as a common plant. But rare is the plant that collects high volumes of CO2 and can flourish in the low temperatures of Mars.

Not only are new organisms needed for space, they are required. The new environments are so foreign to anything that exists on Earth that finding an existing species to perform some task may be nearly impossible. (excluding bacteria that can survive in space while in hibernation) Selective breeding and cross breeding would be far to slow. Just as one has to leap a hundred miles straight up to reach space so must organic life "leap" in survival skills and production to survive in space. Genetic engineering is the only method available to make that leap.

Space to Earth Delivery

Currently most of the effort in the space industry is toward getting things into space. However, there will come a time when we will be trying to bring more stuff down from space. Materials mined from asteroids, completed manufactured goods, finished experiments, and other products that were mined, grown, or made in space will require a means to bring them back down.

Intuitive Machines' TRV (Terrestrial Return Vehicle)

NASA has already begun addressing this problem. Intuitive Machines' Terrestrial Return Vehicle is being created and is intended to begin testing on the ISS in 2016. The purpose of the vehicle will be to provide a quick means to deliver time sensitive experiments safely back to Earth where further analysis can take place which can't occur on the space station. The design is expected to be launched from the station and then maneuver to and land at the nearest spaceport.

Delivery from space is a very viable business opportunity. Especially since commercial space stations, primarily from Bigelow Aerospace, are only a maximum of 5-10 years away. While NASA is taking the approach of creating a special vehicle for the task that is not the only method or business model.

A delivery company from space could begin as simply an organizer. Buying space on returning capsules for materials from other space stations. This would actually change the business dynamic of commercial launches, who's operation generally relies on only one ticket, round-trip or one way, to one customer. As traffic increases one organization can purchase the trip up but then someone else can reserve the trip down.

The reason NASA and Intuitive Machines are creating a single miniature craft for the task of delivery from orbit is schedule flexibility. Renting space on a capsule is fettered with the schedule of the capsule launch. But cargo, particularly experiments, may have expiration dates. The TRV ensures rapid delivery whenever needed. Just like Amazon, same-day delivery is the holy grail.

So what is required for a technology that drops things from orbit on command and lands them safely? This is dependent on the cargo. The TRV is a smal craft for deliverying small experiments. The small size allows for multiple craft to be delivered to the ISS in a single launch. The TRV is also outfitted with a maneuvering system. It is basically a complete small spaceship.

TRV being launched from the ISS

The complete spaceship design for the TRV is acceptable for the current state of the art and the amount of cargo transported. But as time passes completely disposable spaceships may be too expensive. An alternate method could be something along the lines of a space gun which launches small capsules of goods which are delivered from locations in orbit. This would eliminate the need for internal propulsion of the capsules and may simplify capsule design from lifting body to the more common tear-drop shape. Though such a system would not be required for several decades. Until inter-orbit transportation and exchange is common. Basically the "space gun" would be the post office and there would be mailmen going around orbit picking up "packages" and delivering them to the "space gun."

Concept for blanket used in asteroid retrieval in space

Going even a step further and considering asteroid mining. At some point the materials within those rocks will have to be delivered to Earth if they are to have any value. The trouble is that most asteroids burn up as they enter our atmosphere. A method will have to be devised for delivering these rocks safely to the surface so their contents can be collected and sold. Something along the lines of an ablative blanket could be created which protects the asteroids from the heat of reentry. (similar to how asteroid miners plan to protect water rocks from the sun's heat) Or perhaps large skeletal landers could be created which have a heat shield and a parachute. These landers could be filled with mined material or raw asteroids and landed, then, perhaps, even reused.

While all the focus as been on getting into space the need to send stuff back is growing everyday. The ISS needs to return experiments. Planetary Resources may need to land rocks. Private space stations may need to return manufactured goods. There may even be a need to send parts down to earth to be repaired and returned at the next launch of a capsule.

In order to develop an economy in space a two-way exchange between Earth and space must be set-up. Getting up there is great, but it matters little to the world unless something comes back.

Invasive Species in Space

Tardigrades or "water bears" can survive the extremes of space

From time to time one will hear of something called “invasive species.” Invasive species are organisms which are introduced to an area where they have no competition and thus begin to roust the native species and wreak havoc with the ecosystem. Such species include numerous noxious weeds, fish such as carp, and animals like pet pythons.

Nearly all of these invasive species were introduced by human interaction. A seed stuck to a boat, a pet released into a swamp, etc. All of these species which began as only one or two loose seeds have become major problems on our planet and within many countries as they can destroy what makes a river, lake, land desirable in a particular area.

It is too late now to point this out as all the harm has been and is being done now. However there is no reason to allow it to continue, at least for some time.

It has been said many times that humans are on the cusp of an exodus to space. The price of launches is expected to decrease dramatically in the coming decades so that a trip into the void could be within the range of vacation expenses. There are also plans to begin colonizing Mars. But will the mistakes of old be overlooked? Will we carry invasive or undesirable species with us as we move into space?

The Curiosity Rover being assembled in a clean room

NASA and other space agencies have long worked to ensure that biocontamination does not occur between its craft and the heavenly bodies they explore. And yet even with all the scrubbing, baking and sanitizing that is performed on craft such as rovers, they have  been found to still harbor microbes which could colonize the Red Planet before humans. If highly polished equipment is still carrying bacteria what is expected to occur when people are throwing suitcases into the cargo hold of a spaceship for a vacation? Mosquitoes might be released into what could have been an Eden.
The private space industry is moving quickly to develop technologies for transportation. But as the transit becomes more viable the industry must remember to perform the annoying housecleaning tasks and consider them before history is simply repeated. Invasive species are a large problem on Earth where they have little competition, but they could be devastating to a space mission if resilient bacteria  were introduced to a colony’s single water supply where there is no competition. Not to mention the potential extraterrestrial conservation issues such an outbreak might incur.

While a cleaning bureaucracy does not need to be created to hinder the industry it is something that should be developed before it is needed. Because when a biological invasion occurs it will appear as gross negligence on the part of the industry. From that will spawn a truly hindering organization.
The industry must work on problems such as invasive species and others which are all preventable. This will show responsibility and due diligence which will give the industry leeway when other unforeseeable problems occur.

As always, this potential cleaning problem opens an opportunity for space entrepreneurs. Currently space rovers are not being cleaned completely. But they are being cleaned as well as they can be. This means that new methods of scrubbing spacecraft need to be developed as well as means of containing microbes and large potential invasive species during manned flights.

Such a business could begin life performing basic cleaning on spacecraft going into orbit. Basically a prepper for low risk launches. Then as more rovers are deployed and more people move into space launch companies could solicit the services of such a company to screen passengers and cargo for potential biohazards and invasive species. Some launch companies may elect to do this themselves but until launch reliability is the same as an airplane launch companies will likely not wish to hold the liability for a potential infestation of a space station. A company dedicated to the screening and cleaning of cargo and people could develop the methods and the technologies to keep invasive and dangerous species out of pure areas.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Weeds, reptiles, germs, fish and many other kinds of creatures have repeatedly been carried into areas where they can wreak havoc and destroy something that was devoid of such organisms. In space, humans have a completely clean slate. We can have any kind of flora or fauna we want. But there must be means of keeping what shouldn’t go to space from going to space. A few mosquitoes would completely ruin a trip to a space station.

Space Robots as Heroes

The space programs of the past and the space industry of the future is subject to public opinion and support. This was true of the moon shots and it is true of each of Apple’s unveilings. If people don’t care then success is substantially more difficult.

Space Robot Justin

Robots are a great way to explore space. They are cheaper, safer, and faster than humans.  And, as artificial intelligence increases they are becoming as capable as a person. So why risk a life if the job can be done by a machine?

Public relations. A machine does not elicit a response from people that makes them stand and root for it. Curiosity landed and continues to provide amazing images and great information but no one outside of the space community cares. Voyager is now in interstellar space, no one cares. Opportunity  has survived on the red planet for 11 years , no one cares. Sending people to Mars? Great press, though potentially a fraud.

Now certainly humans do need to be in space. Space is there for us, not the machines. But machines are able to blaze trails and provide information in far more effective ways than an astronaut with a wind gauge can. But as entrepreneurs in the space robot business get started how do they work to gain the public support for a Mars rover that is remotely similar to an astronaut?

Star Wars R-Series Robots

For this to occur engineers must become showmen. Think of R2-D2, this space robot is loved by millions even over its anthropomorphic partner because R2 is lovable and has a personality. He is just a can that beeps but everyone connects with him. Space robots must become “hims” instead of “its.”

So when conducting a scientific or exploratory mission how does one make a “him?” Let’s look at another automated space machine that has broken the mold and won the hearts of even average folk, the Hubble Space Telescope. Hubble has gained value as much more than a scientific instrument. This is because it acts as an eye to the universe. It has given the world images of the universe in amazing color. It has a name that people can remember. And it has a story which people relate to. It started broken, was fixed, was almost scrapped, but is still going. Hubble is the little engine that could, and it has survived partially through public support.

Robots and probes must become celebrities in order to have a level of public praise similar to an astronaut. The robot needs to have life on display. It needs to have a story that people can tell. The hurtles that that little circuit board overcame. The more that the machine can be personified the better.

Companies in the space robot industry which are just starting out and need to get through a crowdfunding campaign or have investors hear about them before they walk in the door, need to make their robot a person. Give it a twitter account, and Instagram Maybe spend some weight on a couple of eyeballs. Have the people building take a personable selfie with it.

A Space robots shouldn’t be scientific instruments but a friend or adventurer. The humans around the robot can give the robot the life and personality that it needs, but that has to be something that is considered when building it and sending it on its way.

For More information about the reaction of humans to some robots see below:
An Ethological and Emotional Basis for Human-Robot Interaction

Necessity for Modularity

The cost to enter the space economy is high. It it is time, capital, and labor intensive. And yet large corporations and billionaires will not be able to develop the space industry to a point where it is a part of our culture.

With only a few large players in the game there's a limit to how many goals can be scored until everyone is crippled. Even innovative companies like SpaceX will reach a critical mass where they perform only particular duties in the industry. The industry will stagnate unless smaller players can become a part of it.

So what is a strategy that smaller companies and individuals could take in order to make a mark in the space economy.

Let's use a theoretical example, Space-Based Solar Power. This concept for powering the world has been around for decades. The concept of using an unobstructed view of the largest fusion reactor in existence (the sun) is very enticing. If space solar power could be implemented then it would solve many of the world's energy problems.

Here is the problem. Space based solar power requires huge initial investment. Basically the lifetime cost of a nuclear power plant is what it would take to build a comparable orbital solar array. This is not a feasible business plan. No matter how great the design or promising the impact 16-20 billion dollars up front is not something people rush to.

So how does one take something hugely expensive and reduce the cost. Break it up into little pieces. Small companies and individuals need to lay out strategies where what they invest in today will still be useful 10 years from now. In this way the cost of something huge can be spread over years and incrementally built. For orbital solar a specific direction might be to develop something similar to the orbital power plant where te company creates smaller modules to be attached to ships and stations to serve as a temporary power source. When a significant number of cells have been placed in orbit, years from the first, then the modules could be combined with transmitter to beam the power to earth instead.

Modularity has to be the foundation of any small company wishing to build big things. The giant one hit wonder is not feasible. They must find a way to break it down. A mars colony into single identical modules. A telescope mirror into hundreds of smaller mirrors.

Modularity, building small identical things that can become larger individual things is very scalable and adaptable. If a small company is making habitats for Mars and has simply created a small-tent-like module that connects to others, then the product is as available to a single fanatic as it is to a giant corporation. And the producing company is able to make money from selling one as easily as selling a hundred.

Breaking larger structures down into multiple pieces also decreases the complexity of the design and increases its adaptability. Imagine the difference between having to redo the plumbing of an entire space station or just of the new modules.

Every new private space company is adopting this idea of breaking down the grand dream into individual components that can pay for themselves on a small scale while remaining relevant on the large scale. Bigelow Aerospace is creating, not space stations, but space station modules. Planetary resources is not creating a single advanced asteroid hunting satellite but a swarm of small satellites.

Modularity reduces cost and ensures that a viable product is created more quickly. If anyone is considering creating a space company and they are not a billionaire, they must design the product to be modular and relevant for years. This ensures scalability, adaptability, redundancy, and early returns.

The dreams of launching an entire space station or colony in few shots can't be done by the entrepreneur in a garage. But sneaking into orbit bit by bit is very feasible. And as launches become ever more common the left over space will be more available and inexpensive. Space start-up have to do more with less until it can all be combined into a single system.

Space Movie

How often have great designers, engineers, and scientists been interviewed, and when asked about their original inspiration they reference some movie or show.

Star Wars, Star Trek,  2001: A Space Odyssey, Buck Rogers, The Jetsons. These movies and TV shows have literally inspired thousands of people to make the fiction fact.

Now, within the last ten years, point to a movie or TV show which could be the definitive media trigger to inspire new technologists. Many will respond with Interstellar, Avatar, Star Wars, and Star Trek. But the trouble is, of those answers, only Interstellar and Avatar were really new concepts. But across the board, none of these movies had at their core the wonder of discovery or space travel itself. Interstellar was not about exploration but about a man separated from his family. Avatar was not about exploration but the dangers and warnings to consider in it.

In the last decade there has been no single movie which has defined the glory and wonder of space exploration and expansion. In the movies where this has been a possibility, Space has simply been a backdrop, not the focus.

How can an industry which requires a level of public opinion and knowledge to survive, by driving tourism ambitions and potentially tax dollars, survive without becoming a part of  culture.

Movies and media really define the state of American society at any given time. Space exploration used to be lived and breathed by everyone, when the moon landings were happening. Today, the attempt to land a rocket on a barge to reduce spaceflight costs by factors of 10, barely makes it onto Google News.

A movie needs to be made about space travel and exploration. A movie which actually captures the imagination and hope of the world. A movie which makes people "starry-eyed" about space travel again.

The date of the launch of the Jupiter II of "Lost in Space"

While we at "The Space Economy" are not fictional writers, what story could be more endearing than one set ten years from now when the space industry is fully active. Every space movie in recent years, or ever, has begun 50-100 years in the future. People will be amazed and excited by a date at the beginning of a movie of just 5-10 years in the future.

Space Burial

One of the more interesting space businesses, which is really as old as spaceflight itself, is the idea of space burials.

As a means of disposing of the deceased space burials are actually quite practical and even more emotional. Leaving someone in a place where they will perpetually drift and travel and perhaps even seed life into arid worlds, is a very romantic way to send them on to the next life.

Space burials have been going on since the very first moon landers. Ashes of people have been sent up ever since. Celestis, Inc is a company that has formed around the idea of space burial. Celestis purchases empty space on launches and fills them with samples of cremated remains. The people that have been buried in space include Gene Roddenberry, the creator of Star Trek, as well as several hundred other people.

However, at this point a typical space burial includes less than an ounce of ashes in a sample tube which take the ride, but then typically come back down as the orbit decays or the mission ends. Very few people have had remains placed permanently into space. And certainly, there have been no full bodies sent, only cremated remains.

Space burials as a business, are actually very simple. A basic set of vials are made and ashes inserted. Then they are placed in an empty corner of the next possible launch. Low weight, low effort, but a very moving way to be buried.

In future space burials will no doubt become much more commonplace. While they are currently reserved for rich and famous, as launches become ever more frequent so will the space to place the small caskets. Someday entire bodies may be buried in space. Though there will no doubt be restrictions on this practice to ensure that tourists in orbit are not surprised by a cadaver outside of the station.

Space burials will also grow to be much more than a typical burial. They may come to epitomize the ideals of space travel. Imagine an astronaut or scientist dedicating their entire life to space but dying before their dream was realized. Perhaps they wanted to reach an asteroid or set foot on Mars. Placing to sending their remains to those places fulfills and legitimizes their life's work and can inspire others to follow.

Space burials are likely one of the oldest commercial space businesses and will likely remain after many others die.  While at this moment they may seem a bit sterile compared to a casket and flowers, they are far more meaningful and beautiful. Space is an eternity, why not place a person's remains in eternity after they have entered it.

Space Toys

A company for the creation of toys uniquely suited for the environment of space.

While the beauty of space is awe inspiring, when you live there for long periods of time it starts to lose its charm. Diversions for space travelers will have to become an industry. Toys and games will need to be created which tourists and explorers can enjoy while locked inside of a can or bubble.

So what would a space toy look like? Well, the simplest is a ball. Astronauts in the ISS have used balls as entertainment in the zero-g environment for years. While entertaining space-ball will lose its novelty, especially to people who are watching it. And in an industry where pubic opinion will have huge sway, it is important to create a "Space Experience" that can't be replicated. Catch in space is still just catch.

So any kind of space toy must be able to exist only in space, otherwise the romance and desire is gone from those who are not a part of it.

So, what can occur in a weightless environment that can't anywhere else. The first thing is structures. Gossamer creations can exist in space that would collapse on earth. A building set made of straws could be an option. Or perhaps a strategy game, such at dominoes, where players attempt to limit the movies of other players. Perhaps a dynamic game where players set certain pieces in motion without disrupting others. Or maybe instead of using a board, each space is a separate piece that floats in midair. Anything that utilizes the 3-D, floating experience of space.

Astronauts insert a GoPro into a bubble of water for fun

Now, in the current space environment of high launch costs and no-frills design, a toy may not be high on the shopping list. This is founded. Given the choice between a toy or a tool many will choose the tool when going to space. The weight of even a few pounds of toys or games costs thousands of dollars to launch.

Fortunately, it is no longer necessary to launch toys. They can be beamed to orbit. Made-In-Space recently sent a 3-D printer to the ISS that has been making plastic tools and spare parts for several months. It would be so simple to just e-mail a set of space Legos.

3-D printing will allow crews of space missions to not only create necessary parts and tools but also a little entertainment with no launch cost. And when the toy becomes boring it can be melted down and turned into something else.

Because of technologies like 3-D printing space toys are something that can be created today. A high school kid with Google Sketch-up could create something that could be sold to the astronauts on the ISS tomorrow.

Space toys will be a low-cost-of-entry business. And, at this point, there is no competition because no one has really considered it. But it will be an industry as tourism heats up in coming years. Plus explorers on long missions to Mars will love to have an inventory of "made for space" entertainment that they can download when they want it, play with it, and then turn into a spare part.

Anyone with some time and creativity can create a business that would never have to have inventory, but would help to support the psychological wellness of many space missions in the future. Maybe by just creating a 3-D printable space chess set.

Below Astronaut Chris Hadfield demonstrates a dart game the astronauts created, and tries a game designed by the Mythbusters, Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman.

Asteroid Mining

Asteroid mining concerns the finding and then mining of any of the rocks which float around in the void.

In order to be successful, a mining company in space has to do just what a mining company on earth does. They have to prospect for potential mother loads. Then figure out how to extract the materials they want. And finally transport all of that material to some one who will buy it to build a space station or a cellphone.

Several companies are already working toward the goal of exploiting the resources which are available in space. Planetary Resources in near to launching their first asteroid tracking satellites and Deep Space Industries is developing technologies which will allow humans to refine and use the materials mined from the asteroids.

Mining has always been one of the main reasons for going to space. The vacuum above our atmosphere is not as empty as many believe. An abundance of raw materials float aimlessly in space. Approximately 37,000-89,000 tons of these rocks fall to Earth each year. The value of asteroids comes from the fact that many many of them are expected to contain quantities of rare earth metals, such as platinum, as well as basic elements like iron and sources of water.

Planetary Resources is currently focusing on the rare earth metals that asteroids could supply to earth markets.

However, many critic mining companies who are going for the rare materials which appear to be abundant in asteroids. The traditional argument is that as soon as a company creates as steady supply of the materials to the earth then the market will become saturated, prices will drop, and the ability to finance the expensive space missions will disappear.

While this argument is legitimate to a point (if gold were common it would not be valuable) it is short-sighted.

First rare earth materials like platinum will be in high demand for sometime no matter how large the supply is. Materials like platinum have untold untapped potential. The demand would grow if it were possible to work with pounds, instead of grams, of the metal and its cousins.

Secondly, companies like PR are nowhere near to creating a supply that will saturate the market. Within ten years they might be able to retrieve an asteroid the size of a basketball.

When space mining companies do grow they will quickly grow out of the need to rely on earth-based markets to pay the bills. Once the infrastructure is set up, these companies will be the ones to provide the water and raw materials to build space stations and colonies. The prime technology behind DSI is their zero-gravity 3-D printing technology which will allow them to turn rock and raw iron from an asteroid into a beam or plate or someday a rocket nozzle.

And concerning the inability to pay for expensive missions with the profits from mineral returns, that assumes that space launches and missions will remain expensive. This is clearly not the case seeing that space launch companies like SpaceX have already dramatically reduced the cost of launch and are continuing to do so.

In reality asteroid mining has far fewer market obstacles than many of the other space ventures being pursued.

Unlike the space launch industry, there is currently more than enough demand for the materials space mining companies intend to deliver. And that demand is not within the space industry but across many ranging from battery manufacturing to catalytic converters.

Mining companies also have an unlimited growth potential, however far into the future you look. No matter how technology changes the raw materials will always need to be collected to build the stuff.

Space mining is a great industry to be on the ground floor of right now because the demand is there and the possibilities are many. The only problem a fresh entrepreneur may have getting into the race is the cost of creating the technology to deliver the goods. Even though PR and DSI are using off the shelf components and micro vehicles they are still not cheap companies.

But, if someone in a garage would like to contribute to space mining there are some technologies which could be pursued quite easily.

Currently there is no definitive way to securely land a craft on small space body. The lack of gravity makes it almost impossible to just set down on the surface. Stemming from this problem is the problem of grabbing a rock and putting it in tow. And then once the asteroid is secured tools and techniques for actually mining it in space are still on the drawing board. Any of these problems are hardware and even software problems which can be pursued and solved on a shoelace budget and a little clever design.

Asteroid mining is happening. True, it is only in its early stages but there always has to be the first prospector to go to California and find the first nugget. Asteroid mining will be one of the foundations of the future space economy. The infrastructure it creates, information it gathers, and the materials it refines will support nearly every other aspect of space travel, colonization, and commercialization.

Here is a great presentation on the quantitative aspects of asteroid mining

Space Arena

Space Stations are one of the most expensive propositions in the private space industry. The only one in operation today is the ISS and it is estimated to have cost $150 billion in construction and occupation expenses. Certainly, the construction of the ISS is a poor example, especially when comparing to some technologies in the private sector. SpaceX is reducing cost of launching stations and Bigelow Aerospace is making stations simpler to build and deploy. But even so, constructing a "building" in orbit is not a cheap or easy proposition no matter how you look at it today.

The cost of a space stations is not all that surprising. After all it is something which has to provide all of the comforts of home (i.e. food, air, water) with none of the resources. It has to keep humans alive in one of the most inhospitable places for life that we know.

But does a space station really need to provide all of these resources in order to have value? What is a space station really for in the private space industry, as far as money-generating options?

A space station can be a place to rent space to companies to perform experiments in zero-g. It can become a space hotel to paying tourists. It can be a stop-over to someplace else.


These are all very viable industries once people gain a greater presence in space. But again, all of these "products" for a station to act as are incredibly expensive. Because they are meant to separate a person from the outside.

But if someone is going to go to space for the experience, they probably will not want to be separated from the outside by a cramped station or capsule. They will want to get the full benefit of the absence of gravity and the views of the planet and stars.

So why not build a station that doesn't protect anyone from the elements but instead just keeps them from getting lost. Build a station that is basically a giant cage.

Such a structure would basically be a Space Arena. A huge playing field where spacefarers can get the EVA experience without the safety hazards.

From a design standpoint it could be a huge geodetic structure which deploys to create a faceted sphere which is covered in a soft mesh that keeps things and people from floating away. Easy to build, deploy, and maintain. All of which decrease the cost of the station.

Instead of having to launch it in sections it could be launched in a single unit, perhaps on a Falcon Heavy, and then literally just sit there. Since it wouldn't require any complex life support systems those would not have to be maintained and since space has no other stresses than changes in temperature there is nothing to wear out the station structurally. And other resources such as the development of orbital tugboats become available, it wouldn't even be necessary to have much of an attitude control system.

With this kind of station all the travelers need is a spacesuit to keep them protected for the elements and a capsule to go sleep in. Both of which are already necessary for the trip. So why have a station which is a repeat of both of the other two just on another scale.

Since the permeable station is easier to construct and maintain is is easier to to make large. The size of such permeable stations allows them to be used by industries that have yet to consider space. The station could be used as a playing field for a space sport, creating a viable return and interest to people on Earth. It also gives a complete "space experience" to any tourists, much more effectively that a standard station. Just imagine the difference between seeing the curvature of the earth through a porthole and being able to have a panoramic view as you fly, un-tethered in the ether.

The experience and the low cost that such a "Space Arena" provides makes it a viable entry into the industry by many companies other than the standard aerospace and research firms. It is something that could be pursued by the entertainment or sports industry.

The business model for the company which owns the station could take any number of forms. If the station was built for space tourism it could be like a low cost motel. Travelers pay to use the space during the trip. If it is created to host space sporting events then it may pay for itself through the interest and entertainment value of the sport.

If you consider the Space Arena something akin to a stadium in orbit for sporting events it is actually much cheaper than earth-bound stadiums which run anywhere from $500 million into the billions. Whereas the cost to build and launch the Space arena would likely be only $150-200 million dollars. Still a huge gamble but it also has more utility and range of markets than a basketball stadium does.

The creation of a "Space Area" is something which really has very few technical hurdles. It is really a matter of "just doing it." The only things for a company or entrepreneur to consider with such a station is that it can increase the risk of a standard space excursion. Imagine someone in a space suit pushing off of one side of the sphere and then colliding hard with a structural member on the other side and perhaps over-straining their spacesuit causing it to rupture. Safety will be a huge concern for such a venture but materials and designs do exist which can help to mitigate most of these risks.

As far as space stations go the concept of a "Space Arena" or permeable space station are concepts which are relatively unexplored and potentially underestimated. They are a structure which can be easily and cheaply constructed and can be used to create a fantastic space experience both for those utilizing the station and to those on Earth, if it is used for televised sporting events.

Space Food

A company for the manufacture and distribution of space foodstuffs.

Within the next ten years a permanent commercial human population will be established in orbit and beyond. But how will these people be supported. An entire industry based upon the needs of these space residents and tourists will need to be created.

Food will be the most difficult consumable to supply to these space communities. People can live with stale air and recycled water but food has to be an experience filled with flavor  as well as nutrition. But creating something that meets those two criteria while, ideally, having a shelf life of months, without refrigeration, is a tall order. In the old days salted pork with an occasional orange was considered a complete meal, our more civilized society must create something better for our explorers.

Food in space has been a challenge that even NASA has not  met yet. While they have learned to freeze, vacuum seal, irradiate, and store food so that much of it will not spoil on a long trip, and even still have some flavor, there are some foods which we take for granted on earth that are considered  delicacies in orbit because they simply can’t be prepared or obtained in space. Baking bread is a supreme challenge which isn't completely solved.

All the deficiencies in the cuisine of the Void are opportunities. Food is something that is easily redesigned and adapted while also having infinite possibilities and potential. And the best part is the products are needed today and not only in space but right here at home.

Many facets of the space food industry exist. The potential for space gardens and specific tools for accomplishing the kind of culinary feats that are possible on Earth are all applicable, but for the purposes of this post we will focus on the opportunity for providing prepackaged food that is meant to be a meal “practically” ready to eat in orbit.

Here in the early days of the space industry which is heavily focused on tourism and government contracts the food will have to be of a special kind of hybrid. It will have to provide a pleasurable experience that is unique to space but also contain the nutrition to allow someone to live off of it. This will require that a space food manufacturer create an initial product that is almost nostalgic, the kind of freeze dried and in a toothpaste tube that tourists would expect on a trip so that they can feel like their image of astronauts. But this paste would still be something that someone who isn't  just in space to visit can live off of.

In order to cut on costs it would likely be something along the lines of a paste or solid bar that can be shaped and formed into whatever the customer needs. So just like ice cream, where you can use vanilla as a base for chocolate or strawberry, this Space Paste would contain all the nutrition a person needs but could be flavored and shaped into whatever the customer wants. Soylent is a current product that very nearly meets this criteria.

Such a product would also need to deal with yet another problem brought on by space food, boredom. How many people can say that they love to eat oatmeal morning noon and night. Food is something that adds excitement and interest to our lives. A space food that can be practical, in that is can be packed stored and provide nutrition, but also fills the human need for change and diversity in flavor, is exactly what is needed today. 

Fortunately, unlike so much of the space industry, the technology and products developed for space food will not trickle down to be used in the earth food industry as so many space developments are claimed to do. It would, instead, be immediately and directly marketable without having to redesign any part of it. Imagine extremely dense nutritional supplements that are able to be packed and stored for years while remaining light weight. Such products could be loaded into disaster relief trucks or into hiking backpacks. Any company that produces such wears would not have to depend solely upon the space industry to sustain itself.

The competition in space food will be fierce. While food designed for space is applicable on Earth, the reverse is also true to some extent. After all it would not take a great deal of effort for brand name protein bars and supplements to be customized for space.  And the infinite variation of food doesn't allow for much protection through intellectual property. But a small start-up can certainly gain ground by moving now and gaining contracts with the rising private launch companies , with paying customers who want their space peanuts during the flight.

A company dedicated to space food would be something that would certainly be able to diversify. While an initial product would want to be a catch-all design, all further developments could  range from old style toothpaste tubes of peanut butter to the creation of the most advanced recipes and cooking equipment anyone has ever seen. Really, the creation of food in space is one of the most difficult pieces of chemistry that anyone has ever had to undertake.

The market for space food has existed for some time. Space museums and other tourist traps have long provided freeze dried cuisine just like the astronaut used to make. In the actual industry the government space agencies have been the only providers of TV dinners fit for the space station. This won’t continue to be sufficient. Human traffic is only going to increase and NASA is continuing to lose their budget and is not prepared for food production in large quantities. Just as new launch vehicle providers need someone to make spacesuits they need someone to cook meals. It can and needs to be done today, and even if it means freeze drying your favorite smoothie blend, it would better than what the industry has available now.