How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
Could be wrong, but isn't the Supreme Court decision due today? Or is the 3rd? (I have the notion it's the day before a political event, but I'm not sure if that's the by-election of the Austrian and Italian shenanigans).
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, I've found May to be underwhelming (and occasionally inexplicably daft) so far, but Starmer's off his head. May was spot on not guaranteeing rights to foreigners that may not be extended to British citizens.
Could be wrong, but isn't the Supreme Court decision due today? Or is the 3rd? (I have the notion it's the day before a political event, but I'm not sure if that's the by-election of the Austrian and Italian shenanigans).
Thought it sits next week and decision due in January
Could be wrong, but isn't the Supreme Court decision due today? Or is the 3rd? (I have the notion it's the day before a political event, but I'm not sure if that's the by-election of the Austrian and Italian shenanigans).
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, I've found May to be underwhelming (and occasionally inexplicably daft) so far, but Starmer's off his head. May was spot on not guaranteeing rights to foreigners that may not be extended to British citizens.
The appeal starts on Monday, but we're likely to get a decision from them in January
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
I simply don't see it as ethical. What arrogance makes our species believe that other planets are there for our entertainment?
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Mr. NorthWales, we know that from when Ed Miliband's nickname was the ambassador from Planet **** [to Miliband's credit, this was because he was seen as a civilised human being who was in the Brown camp].
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
I simply don't see it as ethical. What arrogance makes our species believe that other planets are there for our entertainment?
It's a rock with a thin atmosphere. Do you think we should have not landed on the comet either ? Plants, animals and other multi-celled organisms (And ourselves I guess) are why we need to 'protect' Earth, not the rocks themselves.
Could be wrong, but isn't the Supreme Court decision due today? Or is the 3rd? (I have the notion it's the day before a political event, but I'm not sure if that's the by-election of the Austrian and Italian shenanigans).
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, I've found May to be underwhelming (and occasionally inexplicably daft) so far, but Starmer's off his head. May was spot on not guaranteeing rights to foreigners that may not be extended to British citizens.
I think Farage's 100k march of the people against the enemies of the people was scheduled for the 5th.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
I simply don't see it as ethical. What arrogance makes our species believe that other planets are there for our entertainment?
It's a genuine public good that people like you almost never end up in power.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ...
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Don't think so.
You think all the "Leave" voters are going to show up for the by-election ?
Could be wrong, but isn't the Supreme Court decision due today? Or is the 3rd? (I have the notion it's the day before a political event, but I'm not sure if that's the by-election of the Austrian and Italian shenanigans).
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, I've found May to be underwhelming (and occasionally inexplicably daft) so far, but Starmer's off his head. May was spot on not guaranteeing rights to foreigners that may not be extended to British citizens.
I think Farage's 100k march of the people against the enemies of the people was scheduled for the 5th.
Ah yes, the 100k march of the people, now abandoned because of a fear of hard right infiltration.
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Don't think so.
You think all the "Leave" voters are going to show up for the by-election ?
75% turnout/UKIP walking it by a country mile ?!
I think it'll be a Tory hold because the Tory candidate is talking the language of the Leavers.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
My eldest son did just that 45 years ago and we now have the most wonderful oak tree in our garden, and no, it is not being chopped down
You've been in the same house for 45+ years? That must be quite unusual in this day and age ...
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Don't think so.
One old dear said she really liked Farage.
I'm still reeling from the old dear Guardian reader in Sleaford who voted Leave.
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Don't think so.
You think all the "Leave" voters are going to show up for the by-election ?
75% turnout/UKIP walking it by a country mile ?!
I think it'll be a Tory hold because the Tory candidate is talking the language of the Leavers.
Could be wrong, but isn't the Supreme Court decision due today? Or is the 3rd? (I have the notion it's the day before a political event, but I'm not sure if that's the by-election of the Austrian and Italian shenanigans).
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, I've found May to be underwhelming (and occasionally inexplicably daft) so far, but Starmer's off his head. May was spot on not guaranteeing rights to foreigners that may not be extended to British citizens.
I think Farage's 100k march of the people against the enemies of the people was scheduled for the 5th.
Ah yes, the 100k march of the people, now abandoned because of a fear of hard right infiltration.
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ..
Yes that's a fairly heroic assumption. Much more sensible to take your own!
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
I simply don't see it as ethical. What arrogance makes our species believe that other planets are there for our entertainment?
It's a rock with a thin atmosphere. Do you think we should have not landed on the comet either ? Plants, animals and other multi-celled organisms (And ourselves I guess) are why we need to 'protect' Earth, not the rocks themselves.
Yes, I think we should not have dumped our crap on the comet, or the moon, or Venus, or wherever.
You make the presumption that life forms have a certain value that is lacking in other objects. If ever I happen to do a PhD (unlikely!) questioning that position would be at the centre of my research.
The virtue or vice of lawyers being wealthy is a matter entirely determined by whether they extol their social responsibility by supporting those of lesser means through the meritorious act of buying their recently released, and excellent, novels.
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Don't think so.
You think all the "Leave" voters are going to show up for the by-election ?
75% turnout/UKIP walking it by a country mile ?!
I think it'll be a Tory hold because the Tory candidate is talking the language of the Leavers.
Works for me too
If you wanted it to be a UKIP gain, the Tories would have needed to have selected someone like me as their candidate.
Could be wrong, but isn't the Supreme Court decision due today? Or is the 3rd? (I have the notion it's the day before a political event, but I'm not sure if that's the by-election of the Austrian and Italian shenanigans).
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, I've found May to be underwhelming (and occasionally inexplicably daft) so far, but Starmer's off his head. May was spot on not guaranteeing rights to foreigners that may not be extended to British citizens.
I think Farage's 100k march of the people against the enemies of the people was scheduled for the 5th.
Ah yes, the 100k march of the people, now abandoned because of a fear of hard right infiltration.
*Taps nose* Yeah, that's DEFINITELY the reason.
You're such a cynic.
I read a comment BTL elsewhere that the real reason it was cancelled was millions were going to turn up, and it might have led to a stampede/safety issues.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
I simply don't see it as ethical. What arrogance makes our species believe that other planets are there for our entertainment?
It's a rock with a thin atmosphere. Do you think we should have not landed on the comet either ? Plants, animals and other multi-celled organisms (And ourselves I guess) are why we need to 'protect' Earth, not the rocks themselves.
Yes, I think we should not have dumped our crap on the comet, or the moon, or Venus, or wherever.
You make the presumption that life forms have a certain value that is lacking in other objects. If ever I happen to do a PhD (unlikely!) questioning that position would be at the centre of my research.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
Space probes are sterilised for scientific rather than ethical reasons. If life has evolved independently on Mars, studying it could provide major insights into our understanding of the nature of life. This could, in turn, bring benefits for e.g. medical research.
Until we are as certain as we can be that no indigenous life has evolved on Mars, we should continue to do our utmost to avoid contaminating Mars with Earthly life.
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ..
Yes that's a fairly heroic assumption. Much more sensible to take your own!
The mass penalty in taking your own hydrogen is massive; remember, all that mass needs to be lifted into Earth orbit. *If* they can get it on Mars then it would save a fortune.
In my spare time I've been looking into how it will be done. So far it seems to be: 1) Land on Mars. 2) ???? 3) Use the water to make hydrogen and oxygen.
That second stage is really, really tricky, yet ill-defined. Dig up rocks and heat it to get water? You need diggers and lots of energy. Drill down and melt the underground ice? The ice needs to be shallow enough, and you need to ensure the mass doesn't sublimate out.
"Get water and make hydrogen" is easy on Earth. Doing it on Mars will be massively difficult. And some are talking about getting machines to do it automatically. It's a heck of a job given the small rovers (less than a tonne) we've landed so far.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ...
That particular issue seems to have got a lot less problematic over the last few days if the permafrost reports are correct.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
I simply don't see it as ethical. What arrogance makes our species believe that other planets are there for our entertainment?
It's a rock with a thin atmosphere. Do you think we should have not landed on the comet either ? Plants, animals and other multi-celled organisms (And ourselves I guess) are why we need to 'protect' Earth, not the rocks themselves.
Yes, I think we should not have dumped our crap on the comet, or the moon, or Venus, or wherever.
You make the presumption that life forms have a certain value that is lacking in other objects. If ever I happen to do a PhD (unlikely!) questioning that position would be at the centre of my research.
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
And no doubt the bit of kit used to make the fuel will be left behind to rot, like an old sofa in a lay-by.
You sound a bit like the luddites that bring up arguments against colonising Mars "Might have indigenous microbes"...
Space probes are sterilised for scientific rather than ethical reasons. If life has evolved independently on Mars, studying it could provide major insights into our understanding of the nature of life. This could, in turn, bring benefits for e.g. medical research.
Until we are as certain as we can be that no indigenous life has evolved on Mars, we should continue to do our utmost to avoid contaminating Mars with Earthly life.
How can we be "certain as we can be" that no indigenous life has evolved on Mars, without sending people there? Even the best probes we have can only tell us there isn't certain forms of life in very small areas. Given the size of Mars, and the extremophile life we've found on Earth over the years, means the only way to find life if it's rare (or long-dead) would be to send people.
Machines just aren't good enough.
And as an aside; you can expect to find Earth rocks on Mars, just as we find Martian rocks on Earth (in the form of meteorites). It might be that we've already polluted Mars with our microbes ...
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ..
Yes that's a fairly heroic assumption. Much more sensible to take your own!
The mass penalty in taking your own hydrogen is massive; remember, all that mass needs to be lifted into Earth orbit. *If* they can get it on Mars then it would save a fortune.
In my spare time I've been looking into how it will be done. So far it seems to be: 1) Land on Mars. 2) ???? 3) Use the water to make hydrogen and oxygen.
That second stage is really, really tricky, yet ill-defined. Dig up rocks and heat it to get water? You need diggers and lots of energy. Drill down and melt the underground ice? The ice needs to be shallow enough, and you need to ensure the mass doesn't sublimate out.
"Get water and make hydrogen" is easy on Earth. Doing it on Mars will be massively difficult. And some are talking about getting machines to do it automatically. It's a heck of a job given the small rovers (less than a tonne) we've landed so far.
Read The Case For Mars or look up Mars Direct on the interweb. You really don't need all that much hydrogen. The mass fraction of H molecules in CH4 is low and the fuel fraction of the fuel oxidiser mix is low too. (Yes the local fuel production models ALL assume CH4/LOX fuel not H2/LOX - there is a specific impulse drop from about 450 seconds for a good H2/LOX design to about 380 seconds for a good CH4/LOX one, but is more than enough to get off a planet with only 38% of earth's gravity)
How do I copyright the brandname: "Martian moonshine" ?
I hadn't thought of that. I wonder if this (and the conversion from ethanol to methane) would be easier than the Sabatier reaction to get methane on Mars?
Although probably not until this system has been made to work outside the lab.
How to make fuel from CO2 and water:
Step 1: Plant an acorn Step 2: Come back 50 years later and chop down the oak tree Step 3: Burn the wood
(Alternative, faster growing species are also available!)
A worthy process, but it might fail between steps 1 and 2 on Mars ...
The current thinking on Mars human missions is to make the return fuel there from atmospheric CO2 (over 90% by mass) and hydrogen (taken there and under 10% by mass).
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ...
That particular issue seems to have got a lot less problematic over the last few days if the permafrost reports are correct.
Yep, much shallow than expected (3-30 feet). The only slight downside is that it's almost certain that any base would be solar powered, and for that to be most effective they'd need to be equatorial. However these deposits are at higher latitudes.
I see that support for scottish independence and for the SNP are declining.
Predictably the SNP has difficulty being both Left and Right wing at the same time, and it's contradictions mean that it's losing votes in both directions.
That's another great and informative video from John Harris.
Well worth viewing.
Anyone say they were definitely voting UKIP ?
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones. Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Don't think so.
One old dear said she really liked Farage.
I'm still reeling from the old dear Guardian reader in Sleaford who voted Leave.
Corbynista-Guardianista types - plenty who don't like the EU....
@DPJHodges: Merkel stance on reciprocal residence another example of UK's enhanced sovereignty, presumably...
How come all those Remainers who used to bleat on endlessly on the unfairness of residency uncertainty to UK\EU citizens are now silent when the EU says it doesnt give shit about its own people ?
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ..
Yes that's a fairly heroic assumption. Much more sensible to take your own!
The mass penalty in taking your own hydrogen is massive; remember, all that mass needs to be lifted into Earth orbit. *If* they can get it on Mars then it would save a fortune.
In my spare time I've been looking into how it will be done. So far it seems to be: 1) Land on Mars. 2) ???? 3) Use the water to make hydrogen and oxygen.
That second stage is really, really tricky, yet ill-defined. Dig up rocks and heat it to get water? You need diggers and lots of energy. Drill down and melt the underground ice? The ice needs to be shallow enough, and you need to ensure the mass doesn't sublimate out.
"Get water and make hydrogen" is easy on Earth. Doing it on Mars will be massively difficult. And some are talking about getting machines to do it automatically. It's a heck of a job given the small rovers (less than a tonne) we've landed so far.
Energy !!!! Unless you take thousands of solar panels where would the initial energy come from to split water ? Even when Mars is near to Earth, the insolation will be about 40% of earth.
On top of all that, they would need water just to live !
The plan behind taking H2 from earth is that you can then react with CO2 on Mars [ plentiful ] with a catalyst and produce CH4 [ methane ] and O2. Of course, H2 is less heavy than water [approx. 1/9th ].
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ..
Yes that's a fairly heroic assumption. Much more sensible to take your own!
The mass penalty in taking your own hydrogen is massive; remember, all that mass needs to be lifted into Earth orbit. *If* they can get it on Mars then it would save a fortune.
In my spare time I've been looking into how it will be done. So far it seems to be: 1) Land on Mars. 2) ???? 3) Use the water to make hydrogen and oxygen.
That second stage is really, really tricky, yet ill-defined. Dig up rocks and heat it to get water? You need diggers and lots of energy. Drill down and melt the underground ice? The ice needs to be shallow enough, and you need to ensure the mass doesn't sublimate out.
"Get water and make hydrogen" is easy on Earth. Doing it on Mars will be massively difficult. And some are talking about getting machines to do it automatically. It's a heck of a job given the small rovers (less than a tonne) we've landed so far.
Read The Case For Mars or look up Mars Direct on the interweb. You really don't need all that much hydrogen. The mass fraction of H molecules in CH4 is low and the fuel fraction of the fuel oxidiser mix is low too. (Yes the local fuel production models ALL assume CH4/LOX fuel not H2/LOX - there is a specific impulse drop from about 450 seconds for a good H2/LOX design to about 380 seconds for a good CH4/LOX one, but is more than enough to get off a planet with only 38% of earth's gravity)
"Read The Case For Mars or look up Mars Direct on the interweb. "
Have done and have done. I mentioned Dr Zubrin on here the other day.
I agree; once you can get some water and convert it to hydrogen, you can probably get more. The problem is getting it in the first place. There are a whole load of assumptions that we can't rely on until we land a probe in the right place with the right equipment to do the tests. And maybe not even then.
I can't help but worry that Musk is taking a little too much for granted, and that sending a BFS (his proposed spaceship) on a a one-way trip with a load of fuel before the first astronauts might be best (although you then have the problem of keeping the gasses inside from boiling off). It'd test the whole system to Mars, give the first astronauts fuel for their return, and also useful spares. But it'd cost.
@DPJHodges: Merkel stance on reciprocal residence another example of UK's enhanced sovereignty, presumably...
How come all those Remainers who used to bleat on endlessly on the unfairness of residency uncertainty to UK\EU citizens are now silent when the EU says it doesnt give shit about its own people ?
Cnuts
That is not a very accurate translation of Merkels point. She simply pointed out that it was an issue to be resolved after A50 was served. Negotiations start at that point. Tusk was correct to point out that any uncertainty is due to Britain voting Brexit, not from the actions of the EU.
Brexit voters - Brexit part of the wider disconnect between voters and the Londoners (liberal eliters)
Why are we spending billions on HS2 when people like us cannot afford it, nor can make ends meet.
Err why are we spending billions at DFID when we could fund our own kids Uni fees instead ?
Because it is the right thing to do and benefits us ultimately.
Plus far too many kids are going to university for no purpose other than to reach a government target and racking up debt.
People are going to Uni because it places you behind those that do have the degree on their CV if you don't. In effect it is not a real choice even if your future job/career doesn't need a university education, since others will have it...
Its simply a ~ 1 to 9 % additional tax on wages for anyone under the age of about 33.
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ..
Yes that's a fairly heroic assumption. Much more sensible to take your own!
The mass penalty in taking your own hydrogen is massive; remember, all that mass needs to be lifted into Earth orbit. *If* they can get it on Mars then it would save a fortune.
In my spare time I've been looking into how it will be done. So far it seems to be: 1) Land on Mars. 2) ???? 3) Use the water to make hydrogen and oxygen.
That second stage is really, really tricky, yet ill-defined. Dig up rocks and heat it to get water? You need diggers and lots of energy. Drill down and melt the underground ice? The ice needs to be shallow enough, and you need to ensure the mass doesn't sublimate out.
"Get water and make hydrogen" is easy on Earth. Doing it on Mars will be massively difficult. And some are talking about getting machines to do it automatically. It's a heck of a job given the small rovers (less than a tonne) we've landed so far.
Energy !!!! Unless you take thousands of solar panels where would the initial energy come from to split water ? Even when Mars is near to Earth, the insolation will be about 40% of earth.
On top of all that, they would need water just to live !
The plan behind taking H2 from earth is that you can then react with CO2 on Mars [ plentiful ] with a catalyst and produce CH4 [ methane ] and O2. Of course, H2 is less heavy than water [approx. 1/9th ].
That's right. But again you get to the problem that transporting the hydrogen will be massively expensive when it's available, with difficulty, on Mars.
A nuclear reactor would be ideal, but there's no way Musk, as a private individual, would get the money to do that, or permission. So it'll have to be solar panels and batteries. Now, can you think of anyone close to Musk with experience of solar panels and batteries?
There are so many problems and pitfalls with Musk's grand plans. But I can't help but be drawn in by them. At least someone's trying.
@DPJHodges: Merkel stance on reciprocal residence another example of UK's enhanced sovereignty, presumably...
How come all those Remainers who used to bleat on endlessly on the unfairness of residency uncertainty to UK\EU citizens are now silent when the EU says it doesnt give shit about its own people ?
Cnuts
Both sides are behaving pretty appallingly on this. Theresa May opened up the possibility of residency rights being used a bargaining chip. She seems to have repented of this, but not before giving the EU hierarchy a chance to use the same bargaining chip to drive home the message that there will be no negotiation before notification.
The main message to take away from this is that the EU is out to prove a point against Britain. Yet the Raindrops On Roses Leavers still fantasise that they're going to waltz to an amicable and favourable settlement.
Citizens of other EU countries living in the UK cannot be "bargaining chips" in Brexit negotiations, Tory leadership contender Andrea Leadsom has said. The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU. Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected. Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
@DPJHodges: Merkel stance on reciprocal residence another example of UK's enhanced sovereignty, presumably...
How come all those Remainers who used to bleat on endlessly on the unfairness of residency uncertainty to UK\EU citizens are now silent when the EU says it doesnt give shit about its own people ?
Cnuts
Both sides are behaving pretty appallingly on this. Theresa May opened up the possibility of residency rights being used a bargaining chip. She seems to have repented of this, but not before giving the EU hierarchy a chance to use the same bargaining chip to drive home the message that there will be no negotiation before notification.
The main message to take away from this is that the EU is out to prove a point against Britain. Yet the Raindrops On Roses Leavers still fantasise that they're going to waltz to an amicable and favourable settlement.
A car crash is looking ever more likely.
its one view or one can say EU citizens are treated as helots by their own ruling class
Brexit voters - Brexit part of the wider disconnect between voters and the Londoners (liberal eliters)
Why are we spending billions on HS2 when people like us cannot afford it, nor can make ends meet.
Err why are we spending billions at DFID when we could fund our own kids Uni fees instead ?
Because it is the right thing to do and benefits us ultimately.
Plus far too many kids are going to university for no purpose other than to reach a government target and racking up debt.
People are going to Uni because it places you behind those that do have the degree on their CV if you don't. In effect it is not a real choice even if your future job/career doesn't need a university education, since others will have it...
Its simply a 9% additional tax on wages for anyone under the age of about 33.
A list of those Remainers calling for unilateral rights
There is anxiety for the three million EU citizens who have made their homes in the UK, and the 1.2 million British citizens living in other EU countries. The Prime Minister’s statement that there would be “no immediate changes” to their status will have been less than fully reassuring.
This is also a vital concern for many British businesses and public services employing EU nationals, who do not want retrospective disruption to their workforce at a time of uncertainty.
We would urge the Government, opposition parties and every candidate standing to be the next Conservative Party leader – and hence Prime Minister – to make an unequivocal statement that EU migrants currently living in the UK are welcome here, and that changes would apply only to new migrants.
Daniel Hannan MEP (Con)
Gisela Stuart MP (Lab)
Douglas Carswell MP (Ukip)
Yvette Cooper MP (Lab)
Peter Lilley MP (Con)
Simon Walker Director, Institute of Directors
Frances O'Grady General Secretary, TUC
Matthew Elliott Chief Executive, Vote Leave
Julian David CEO, techUK
Ian Wright CBE Director-General, Food and Drink Federation
Professor Sir Cary Cooper President, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
Peter Cheese Chief Executive, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
Nicola Dandridge Chief Executive, Universities UK
Ufi Ibrahim Chief Executive, British Hospitality Association
Carol Paris Chief Executive, Horticultural Trades Association
Sam Bowman Executive Director, Adam Smith Institute
Roland White Fellow, Adam Smith Institute
Ryan Shorthouse Director, Bright Blue
Sunder Katwala Director, British Future
Tom Kibasi Director, IPPR
Alp Mehmet Vice-Chair, Migration Watch
Stephen Booth Co-Director, Open Europe
David Goodhart Policy Exchange
Toby Young
Nazek Ramadan Migrant Voice
Mark Stears New Economics Foundation
Professor Catherine Barnard University of Cambridge
Professor Tamara Harvey University of Sheffield
Professor Simon Hix London School of Economics and Political Science
Professor Anand Menon Kings College, London
Professor Steve Peers University of Essex
Jonathan Portes Senior Research Fellow, National Institute of Economic and Social Research
Citizens of other EU countries living in the UK cannot be "bargaining chips" in Brexit negotiations, Tory leadership contender Andrea Leadsom has said. The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU. Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected. Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
"Read The Case For Mars or look up Mars Direct on the interweb. "
Have done and have done. I mentioned Dr Zubrin on here the other day.
I agree; once you can get some water and convert it to hydrogen, you can probably get more. The problem is getting it in the first place. There are a whole load of assumptions that we can't rely on until we land a probe in the right place with the right equipment to do the tests. And maybe not even then.
I can't help but worry that Musk is taking a little too much for granted, and that sending a BFS (his proposed spaceship) on a a one-way trip with a load of fuel before the first astronauts might be best (although you then have the problem of keeping the gasses inside from boiling off). It'd test the whole system to Mars, give the first astronauts fuel for their return, and also useful spares. But it'd cost.
In terms of energy the temperature differential between night and day might help with a daytime summer temperature of around 20 celsius and a night time temperature of around -70. Seems the perfect setting for using a TEG.
The thing about the EU and the marriage metaphor. I am very happily married, thank you very much. It's the other people that have a problem, but they are driving the ship and tell me it's time to split and it's everyone else's fault.
Thinking about it, there are two developed countries in the world* that have managed to increase median incomes meaningfully in the last 15 years. They also run large trade surpluses.
And they are Switzerland and Germany,
The one thing those two counties have in common is that their educational systems concentrate very hard on ensuring that the "next 60%", i.e. those who don't go onto university or other higher education, have excellent vocational skills. And both have well established, insitutionalised, apprentice programmes.
The thing about the EU and the marriage metaphor. I am very happily married, thank you very much. It's the other people that have a problem, but they are driving the ship and tell me it's time to split and it's everyone else's fault.
Clearly, to continue your metaphor, you are in a state of denial about the abusive relationship you are in.
Citizens of other EU countries living in the UK cannot be "bargaining chips" in Brexit negotiations, Tory leadership contender Andrea Leadsom has said. The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU. Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected. Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
Citizens of other EU countries living in the UK cannot be "bargaining chips" in Brexit negotiations, Tory leadership contender Andrea Leadsom has said. The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU. Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected. Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
Angie could strike a deal to remove the uncertainty but wont.
Tessa said lets remove the uncertainty
Angi says verpiss dich
The point being made though is that previously the Government has said that EU nationals living in the UK should not be used as bargaining chips. Now they are proposing to do just that. Whatever the EU decide to do on this issue it is beneath us as a country to behave in this manner. Gisela and the other signatories are right. Theresa is wrong.
Citizens of other EU countries living in the UK cannot be "bargaining chips" in Brexit negotiations, Tory leadership contender Andrea Leadsom has said. The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU. Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected. Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
Citizens of other EU countries living in the UK cannot be "bargaining chips" in Brexit negotiations, Tory leadership contender Andrea Leadsom has said. The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU. Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected. Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
"Read The Case For Mars or look up Mars Direct on the interweb. "
Have done and have done. I mentioned Dr Zubrin on here the other day.
I agree; once you can get some water and convert it to hydrogen, you can probably get more. The problem is getting it in the first place. There are a whole load of assumptions that we can't rely on until we land a probe in the right place with the right equipment to do the tests. And maybe not even then.
I can't help but worry that Musk is taking a little too much for granted, and that sending a BFS (his proposed spaceship) on a a one-way trip with a load of fuel before the first astronauts might be best (although you then have the problem of keeping the gasses inside from boiling off). It'd test the whole system to Mars, give the first astronauts fuel for their return, and also useful spares. But it'd cost.
In terms of energy the temperature differential between night and day might help with a daytime summer temperature of around 20 celsius and a night time temperature of around -70. Seems the perfect setting for using a TEG.
Surely it would have to be a radioactive TEG (i.e. an RTG, with the radioactivity providing the heat)? Personally I'd go for a Stiring engine, which NASA *was* developing for space. Stirling engines should be much more efficient, with the downside of a few moving parts that might break.
(Mr Dancer posted a video about Stirling engines the other day).
I see that support for scottish independence and for the SNP are declining.
Predictably the SNP has difficulty being both Left and Right wing at the same time, and it's contradictions mean that it's losing votes in both directions.
I'm not sure it is losing votes to Labour but I do suspect the Tories are potentially winning back the border and highland areas where they were once so strong and maybe one or 2 other of the more m/c leafy suburban areas.
Citizens of other EU countries living in the UK cannot be "bargaining chips" in Brexit negotiations, Tory leadership contender Andrea Leadsom has said. The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU. Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected. Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
Angie could strike a deal to remove the uncertainty but wont.
Tessa said lets remove the uncertainty
Angi says verpiss dich
I think the Germans, like everyone else, is going to prioritising their own interests in the coming negotiations. It's hard to find that offensive.
Au contraire Robert
In every negotiation there are points both sides could agree from day one and which really all know will have to be conceded
residency is one
but know the EU has decided to make it a negotiton point at the expense of its own citizens
No. Both sides have chosen to do that. The UK Government could stop this being a bargaining chip straight away by saying that EU nationals (with the minimum term limit for those arriving recently) will be free to stay after Brexit. It does not need the EU to do anything at all.
I think the Germans, like everyone else, will prioritise their own interests in the coming negotiations. It's hard to find that offensive.
Is there anyone in the world with more experience of leading very tough and consequential negotiations than Angela Merkel? If she wins reelection we will see the contradictions and delusions of the Brexit position systematically and meticulously exposed month by month.
Comments
Real generational divide.
Older people here voted Leave, younger people voted Remain, you've buggered up our generation.
Still watching
Now either Remain or Leavers
Why are we spending billions on HS2 when people like us cannot afford it, nor can make ends meet.
TBF - She described Trump as a global disaster
Well worth viewing.
Edited extra bit: Mr. P, I've found May to be underwhelming (and occasionally inexplicably daft) so far, but Starmer's off his head. May was spot on not guaranteeing rights to foreigners that may not be extended to British citizens.
My guess is the towns of Sleaford and North Hykeham will give alot of UKIP votes but be swamped by rural Tory ones.
Turnout at 2015 GE was just over 70%, Richmond Park 76ish %.
I'd guess turnout will be lower than Richmond Park ( Adding on 6% to correct relative to GE) with many many leave voters not bothering. Rural Tory postal votes to win it.
Mr. Eagles, cheers.
It is imperative that the rule of law be followed in this country.
That legal profession is enriched is merely one of those happy coincidences.
Plants, animals and other multi-celled organisms (And ourselves I guess) are why we need to 'protect' Earth, not the rocks themselves.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ...
75% turnout/UKIP walking it by a country mile ?!
Yeah, that's DEFINITELY the reason.
SpaceX's plan is not to take hydrogen over, but to obtain it from water found in Mars. Then you use the Sabatier reaction to get the methane they need.
But that means they need to get water. There probably isn't enough in the atmosphere, so they'll have to get it from the ground. There are a whole host of problems and assumptions in that ..
Yes that's a fairly heroic assumption. Much more sensible to take your own!
You make the presumption that life forms have a certain value that is lacking in other objects. If ever I happen to do a PhD (unlikely!) questioning that position would be at the centre of my research.
That would be the current pattern of local election voting.
I read a comment BTL elsewhere that the real reason it was cancelled was millions were going to turn up, and it might have led to a stampede/safety issues.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_protection
Planetary protection might be a massive problem for Musk's plans. AIUI he wants to ignore them.
On Merseyrail, just Kirkby and Hunts Cross.
Finished off Sheffield Supertram last Monday week.
Until we are as certain as we can be that no indigenous life has evolved on Mars, we should continue to do our utmost to avoid contaminating Mars with Earthly life.
In my spare time I've been looking into how it will be done. So far it seems to be:
1) Land on Mars.
2) ????
3) Use the water to make hydrogen and oxygen.
That second stage is really, really tricky, yet ill-defined. Dig up rocks and heat it to get water? You need diggers and lots of energy. Drill down and melt the underground ice? The ice needs to be shallow enough, and you need to ensure the mass doesn't sublimate out.
"Get water and make hydrogen" is easy on Earth. Doing it on Mars will be massively difficult. And some are talking about getting machines to do it automatically. It's a heck of a job given the small rovers (less than a tonne) we've landed so far.
UK Politics Sleaford & North Hykeham By Election
08-12-2016 08:00
Betting without Conservatives
Labour @ 15/2
Looks worth a tenner.
Machines just aren't good enough.
And as an aside; you can expect to find Earth rocks on Mars, just as we find Martian rocks on Earth (in the form of meteorites). It might be that we've already polluted Mars with our microbes ...
http://www.science20.com/robert_inventor/blog/does_earth_share_microbes_with_mars_via_meteorites_or_are_they_interestingly_different_for_life-121053
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=6680
Still very promising though. Mars has gone from being barren and dry when I was a kid to having a fair amount of water now.
Predictably the SNP has difficulty being both Left and Right wing at the same time, and it's contradictions mean that it's losing votes in both directions.
Cnuts
On top of all that, they would need water just to live !
The plan behind taking H2 from earth is that you can then react with CO2 on Mars [ plentiful ] with a catalyst and produce CH4 [ methane ] and O2. Of course, H2 is less heavy than water [approx. 1/9th ].
Have done and have done.
I agree; once you can get some water and convert it to hydrogen, you can probably get more. The problem is getting it in the first place. There are a whole load of assumptions that we can't rely on until we land a probe in the right place with the right equipment to do the tests. And maybe not even then.
I can't help but worry that Musk is taking a little too much for granted, and that sending a BFS (his proposed spaceship) on a a one-way trip with a load of fuel before the first astronauts might be best (although you then have the problem of keeping the gasses inside from boiling off). It'd test the whole system to Mars, give the first astronauts fuel for their return, and also useful spares. But it'd cost.
Any person supporting Brexit should have realised this.
Plus far too many kids are going to university for no purpose other than to reach a government target and racking up debt.
yeah right
Its simply a ~ 1 to 9 % additional tax on wages for anyone under the age of about 33.
A nuclear reactor would be ideal, but there's no way Musk, as a private individual, would get the money to do that, or permission. So it'll have to be solar panels and batteries. Now, can you think of anyone close to Musk with experience of solar panels and batteries?
There are so many problems and pitfalls with Musk's grand plans. But I can't help but be drawn in by them. At least someone's trying.
Have you seen piccies of the carbon-fibre LOX tank they've been built and are testing?
http://i.imgur.com/YW4hvJ5.jpg
The main message to take away from this is that the EU is out to prove a point against Britain. Yet the Raindrops On Roses Leavers still fantasise that they're going to waltz to an amicable and favourable settlement.
A car crash is looking ever more likely.
all your saying is the cons have adopted Blairs bollock policy
really youre a Brownite
The UK's foreign secretary had said it would be "absurd" to guarantee a right to stay in the UK before a reciprocal deal was done for UK expats in the EU.
Mrs Leadsom said the rights of EU people already in the UK to stay must be protected.
Meanwhile, her candidacy has received the backing of Boris Johnson.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36701856
Labour’s most high profile Brexit supporter has called for an end to the uncertainty around the status of EU citizens in the UK following the referendum.
Gisela Stuart, who played a big role in the Vote Leave campaign, has said that the people from the EU living in Britain have been “left in limbo” since the Out vote in June. She argues that these citizens were told they would be able to stay by the Leave camp, and the Tories should not use them as “bargaining chips”.
http://labourlist.org/2016/08/gisela-stuart-says-tories-must-not-use-eu-citizens-as-bargaining-chips/
Willetss is a cnut and so is Cameron
more piano wire please
Remainerscalling for unilateral rightsThere is anxiety for the three million EU citizens who have made their homes in the UK, and the 1.2 million British citizens living in other EU countries. The Prime Minister’s statement that there would be “no immediate changes” to their status will have been less than fully reassuring.
This is also a vital concern for many British businesses and public services employing EU nationals, who do not want retrospective disruption to their workforce at a time of uncertainty.
We would urge the Government, opposition parties and every candidate standing to be the next Conservative Party leader – and hence Prime Minister – to make an unequivocal statement that EU migrants currently living in the UK are welcome here, and that changes would apply only to new migrants.
Daniel Hannan MEP (Con)
Gisela Stuart MP (Lab)
Douglas Carswell MP (Ukip)
Yvette Cooper MP (Lab)
Peter Lilley MP (Con)
Simon Walker
Director, Institute of Directors
Frances O'Grady
General Secretary, TUC
Matthew Elliott
Chief Executive, Vote Leave
Julian David
CEO, techUK
Ian Wright CBE
Director-General, Food and Drink Federation
Professor Sir Cary Cooper
President, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
Peter Cheese
Chief Executive, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
Nicola Dandridge
Chief Executive, Universities UK
Ufi Ibrahim
Chief Executive, British Hospitality Association
Carol Paris
Chief Executive, Horticultural Trades Association
Sam Bowman
Executive Director, Adam Smith Institute
Roland White
Fellow, Adam Smith Institute
Ryan Shorthouse
Director, Bright Blue
Sunder Katwala
Director, British Future
Tom Kibasi
Director, IPPR
Alp Mehmet
Vice-Chair, Migration Watch
Stephen Booth
Co-Director, Open Europe
David Goodhart
Policy Exchange
Toby Young
Nazek Ramadan
Migrant Voice
Mark Stears
New Economics Foundation
Professor Catherine Barnard
University of Cambridge
Professor Tamara Harvey
University of Sheffield
Professor Simon Hix
London School of Economics and Political Science
Professor Anand Menon
Kings College, London
Professor Steve Peers
University of Essex
Jonathan Portes
Senior Research Fellow, National Institute of Economic and Social Research
Professor Jo Shaw
Edinburgh Law School
Angie could strike a deal to remove the uncertainty but wont.
Tessa said lets remove the uncertainty
Angi says verpiss dich
Oh, wait...
https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/804005825840713728
I suspect this will be the only thing that he and East 17's Brian Harvey will ever have in common.
Tessa says shell take the remainer views in to account EU says 4 chem
its why were leaving - citizens dont matter
And they are Switzerland and Germany,
The one thing those two counties have in common is that their educational systems concentrate very hard on ensuring that the "next 60%", i.e. those who don't go onto university or other higher education, have excellent vocational skills. And both have well established, insitutionalised, apprentice programmes.
* Excluding commodity exporters
In every negotiation there are points both sides could agree from day one and which really all know will have to be conceded
residency is one
but know the EU has decided to make it a negotiton point at the expense of its own citizens
(Mr Dancer posted a video about Stirling engines the other day).
I'm thinking of what is best for both the country and the people.
The hallmark of true one nation conservatism.
And actually it was Thatcher or Major's policy to set the target of 40% of kids to go uni.
And don't even get me started on the mass conversion of polytechnics to unis.