Hi, everyone. I’ve been totally flat chat this week. In the mean time, here is an old post that I hope you find interesting.

Chemical Engineering in Spaaaaaaaace. . .

So much of what we come into contact with is made of four elements – carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen – the main elements of living systems. Add phosphorous and sulphur and you have what comprises 98% of all living systems.

The chemistry for juggling these four atoms – C, H, O, N – has been around for a long time.

Engineers and scientists have been confident enough in the chemistry and the various ways of manipulating them to propose various sets of reactions for use in gathering resources out in the vast reaches of space, as part of human exploration. This is part of a wider field of study called In Situ Resource Utilisation (ISRU), which has formed a key part of plans to explore other part of the solar system, particularly Mars, for the better part of two decades.

In the Mars Direct concept Robert Zubrin proposed using the well known Sabatier reaction:

CO2 + 4H2 => CH4 + 2 H2O

To react hydrogen with the Martian atmosphere to produce methane and water – very useful things to have on the red planet. The methane would be stored and kept for use as rocket fuel.

Methane and oxygen are a handy combination. In terms of chemical rocket propellant candidates, the Specific Impulse (Isp) of Methane and Oxygen at 3700 m/s is second only to Hydrogen and Oxygen at 4500 m/s (to convert to seconds of impulse multiply by 0.102).

Meanwhile the water from the Sabatier reaction would be split via very familiar electrolysis reaction:

2 H2O => 2H2 + O2

The idea was that only the hydrogen would need to be transported to the Red Plant. H2 weighs a lot less than CH4, freeing up space and payload for the 6 months transit to Mars.

Various test rigs were constructed on Earth, using analogues of the Martian atmosphere, which has been well characteristed since Viking. Mars has a lot of CO2 – more than 95% of the atmosphere – and a nice analogue of the Martion atmosphere right down to the low pressure could be similated for the rig. The CO2 is initially absorbed onto zeolite (an ever popular sorbent) under conditions simulating the Martian night. During the Martian ‘day’ the CO2 desorbs and passes into the Sabatier reaction vessel with the H2, which is heated to 300C. Reaction then occurs in the presence of the right catalyst (in this case pebbles of ruthenium on alumina). The water from the reaction is condensed out and passed to the electrolysis unit.

Still awake?

OK. Not surprisingly scientists and engineers planning Mars missions were concerned about overly complex systems forming such major part of a critical path.

Current plans for ISRU on Mars revolve around direct dissociation of the Martian atmosphere i.e.

2 CO2 => 2 CO + O2

[BTW if you could pull off this reaction at room temperature on Earth you would be an instant billionaire]

The current Mars Design Reference Mission proposes the production of oxygen on Mars through direct dissociation. Methane will be transported directly from Earth, with the ascent vehicle still using the tasty combination of methane and oxygen in its rocket engines.

So how is the CO2 pulled apart? There are many contenders, all of which uses a lot of energy. On Mars that energy is currently planned to be delivered by a 30 kW fission power system.

The front-runner for CO2 dissociation is thermal decomposition, followed by isolation of the O2 using a zirconia electrolytic membrane at high temperatures.

This system was developed for its first flight demonstration as the Oxygen Generator Subsystem (OGS) on the defunct Mars Surveyor Lander, which would have been launched in 2001 (but was cancelled following a string of Mars mission failures – Mars Climate Orbiter (1999), Mars Polar Lander (1999), Deep Space 2 Probes 2 (1999). That was a bad year. ).

The OGS was to demonstrate the production of oxygen from the Martian atmosphere using the zirconia solid-oxide oxygen generator hardware. This unit was designed to electrolyze CO2 at 750C (1382 F). The Yttria Stabilized zirconia material – once a voltage is applied across it – acts as a oxygen pump allowing the O2 to pass through it and be collected. The plan was to run the unit about ten times on the surface.

As I mentioned there were various contenders for the process. Such as molten carbonate cells, which operate around 550C with platinum electrodes immersed in a bulk reservoir of molten carbonate. Personally, the engineer in me shudders at the thought of trying to manage any sort of molten system that remotely.

The final system for CO2 decomposition used on Mars is probably still a work in progress. It will be interesting to see what develops there.

The fact is the initially proposed Sabatier reactions did not produce enough O2 to react with the methane, so some form of CO2 splitting process was still required.

So there are some things we can do to juggle molecules when we get to Mars.

Is everyone out there looking forward to getting to the Red Planet and grappling with what we find there? Who thinks we should not go? And why not?

10 responses to “Juggling Molecules in Space”

  1. The only reason to _not_ go is to avoid contaminating the environment with earth derived microbes. I’d like to see some deep permafrost drilling and examination before we start having to eliminate earth microbes from anything else that might be there.

    But once we go, we need to set up a sustainable habitat. I’d much rather depend on photosynthesis for oxygen, with tech as the back up, than trust in the tech. But then, I’d be thinking of a one way trip. Colonization, or at least very long term stays.

    1. The biggest thing that worries me about Mars is the effect of the low gravity environment on colonists. If only it was close to 1g! Venus is so frustrating – it’s closer to an Earth analogue in size and gravity, but is so damn in hospitable, with intense pressures and high temperatures.

      You make an intereting point about local biota. If there are Martian microbes, there would be a whole can of worms about how careful we need to be to preserve them. BTW my story Memories of Mars in the Anywhere but Earth anthology is pretty much right up this alley.

  2. I once heard an astrobiologist say that some organisms (microbes?) have been shown to survive vacuum. I wonder if the rovers haven’t already brought something with them, even though they were thoroughly scrubbed before they left Earth.

    1. I wouldn’t be surprised. But just having a group of people there . . . “Look, look! It’s a real actual . . . Oh, never mind. Another E-coli . . . “

      1. Lol. But, one thing we’ve got to figure: it’s a planet. It’s big. If people go and build something to live in, the people who want to study Mars untrammeled should go around to the other side.

        1. I remember reading about microbes that survived on equipment left in the Moon’s vacuum for an extended period. Quite scary really – makes you think about the interstellar life-origin theory.

          Those rovers might be seeding Mars as we speak. . .

          1. This isn’t to argue that we ought not go there, or colonize. But I’d like to think we could use this window of minimal contamination to determine whether or not there is any native Martian biota. The chemical regime on the surface is definitely hostile to earth organisms. We just need a good check on the deep subsurface and even the shallow subsurface where we’ve seen seasonal wet conditions.

            I’m beginning to think all we’ll find is microfossils. But then, extremophiles on Earth show that life can adapt to nearly anything.

            Long term, I think the colonization of Mars will depend on how fast interstellar colonization gets underway. Why colonize a dead, undersized planet, if we’ve found a beauty around alpha Centauri A, and sent a robotic proof of concept bussard ramjet driven satellite that direction?

            1. Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard Avatar
              Paul (Drak Bibliophile) Howard

              Well Pam, I’d like to see more of your Martian lizards. [Smile]

              1. Naked Reader Press will be, hopefully, publishing two volumes of them–of course, I need to finish writing the second one.

  3. Coincidentally I was just re-reading Boundary by Ryk Spoor and Eric Flint where they have a brief section talking about the Sabatier reaction and half a dozen others.

Trending