Power Systems for Establishing an Initial SelfSustaining Human Settlement on Mars

KEY FINDINGS FOR SPACEX

Abstract:
This two page mini-report summaries an academic literature review discussing feasibility of various power
systems for creating an initial Mars settlement. Page 1 summarises the literature reviews key findings and
Page 2 discusses potential strategies for both solar and nuclear power specifically for SpaceX.

Author:
Parikshat Singh Imperial College London Department of Mechanical Engineering

Contact:
ps2612@ic.ac.uk

Page |1

Paper Summary Extracts from Abstract and Conclusion:

Settlement locations and capability are directly derived from the power system selected, therefore it is crucial to explore
power methods first. This summary will briefly discuss the attached literature review and give specific recommendations
for SpaceX to help move towards its goal of creating a Mars settlement for in depth extensive research and analysis,
please refer to the attached document.
The report summarises and compares several power sources necessary to maintain life on Mars, in particular, for early
missions endeavouring to bring about an independent, self-sustaining human civilisation without prior support, resources
or infrastructure. Four power sources were found to be feasible on Mars: nuclear, solar, wind and geothermal. It should
be noted that only a small quantity of literature for Mars based application exists.
To critically compare these power sources, power requirements for the initial settlement were identified. A consensus
exists that, before humans arrive to inhabit the settlement, breathable oxygen and rocket fuel for a backup Earth return
vehicle will need to be ready. This process, which involves delivering hydrogen to the surface and reacting it with the
carbon dioxide rich atmosphere, requires 60kW for 6 months. On human arrival, crew life support requires only 10kW
of power, additionally, in total, relevant systems would require 100kW for at least 10 years. This review found that all
four power sources were capable of delivering the necessary power, each with different benefits and restrictions.
Nuclear power has a key advantage a closed system is impervious to atmospheric conditions. It will produce a lower
constant level of power until fuel is depleted decades later; can enable global access; and is generally a lighter, more
compact system. The optimal proposal produces 30kW at 4200kg. In particular, LFTR fission technology has the
greatest potential, but has been exempt from most nuclear studies for Mars. The unavoidable disadvantages of fission
include the inability to repair on Mars and increased radiation levels to crew. The principle disadvantage lies in political
viewpoints on launching a large scale nuclear reactor into space (Moss, 2013). Public perception of nuclear power,
especially intensified by the events of Chernobyl and more recently Fukushima, is an increasingly negative one. Space
agencies such as NASA have already established nuclear power to be the preferred strategy. However, both the public
and private sector, will need to conform to political views which are dictated by public perception, and may have
restrictions imposed on them. RTGs produce little power and use rare, expensive fuel. Therefore they are not feasible
for full base power, though may be useful for smaller levels of power generation such as for rovers.
Solar power has the longest heritage on Mars, with previous rovers often using solar arrays. It is also the most well
understood of the sources, with previous rovers, such as Viking, enabling us access to opacity and light intensity levels
over long periods of time (Figure 4.4). If effects from dust storms and accumulation are considered fully, 100kW can be
produced with 25000m2 of solar arrays, dropping to 10kW during severe dust storms. Several sources still conflict on
how much of an issue these concerns pose. (Cataldo, 2009) discusses the uncertainty of the Martian environment
creating a disproportional impact on the worst case scenario. Due to the infancy of our missions and lack of complete
understanding of the Martian environment, these sources point towards speculation of unforeseen circumstances or
events that are not yet fully understood, which may lead to a power cut-off. Nevertheless, it has been shown that solar
power at the optimal latitude can outperform nuclear power in mass specific and volume specific power, making it an
attractive option for an initial settlement, when energy systems must be transported.
A strong case can be made for nuclear and solar power as primary power sources as they best meet the criteria.
Contrary to intuition, if an optimal landing site of 31N is selected, solar power outperforms all other power sources,
including nuclear, in mass and volume specific power. Although for global access, nuclear is the sole feasible source.

Please see next page for SpaceX recommendations or literature review for extensive breakdown.

Parikshat Singh Imperial College London Department of Mechanical Engineering

Page |2

Potential Strategies for SpaceX:

From the above findings it is clear that solar and nuclear fission are the two primary sources of feasible
power. Below are the recommendations for each source.

Solar Power:
For an initial settlement, solar power holds several key advantages in risk, specific power and
public/political perception. This paper recommends SpaceX should explore solar power fully due to these
advantages. Despite this, nuclear fission will be a likely necessity in the long run.

1) Site selection: For more detail please refer to the full literature review attached, section 4.2.5
(31 X) N is the optimal latitude for solar power, where X is the additional feasible margin that may be
accessible with extra power or lighter technology. This number X, needs to be calculated by factoring mass
of selected solar panels, payload to Mars and minimum critical power required.
In addition, further research is required for categorising appropriate sites which need to be compatible with
human biology, technology and landing capabilities.
Site selection is more than simply a technical choice with power optimisation. SpaceX may want to consider
the impact of confinement in a specific crater to the mental health of its permanent residents, as well as to
transportation and long run settlement expansion. This paper does not cover the wider aspects of site
selection but it would like to note that some benefits in site location will likely outweigh losses in power.

2) Deployment:
In the event that SpaceX meets its ambitious goals, it may find itself to be the first group ready to send
humans to Mars. For the settlement setup, SpaceX should consider an unmanned colony deployment
mission. However this may be a challenge and it may be simpler and more cost effective to send a
preliminary deployment crew. In which case, SpaceX must take a careful stance with cost risk benefit
analysis.

Nuclear Power:
Nuclear power is an alternative to solar in the event that the above yields no suitable sites. In terms of
nuclear fission power, caution is key. A launch failure from Earth or an unsuccessful landing on Mars could
lead to catastrophic consequences for both existing and potential inhabitants. If SpaceX would like to
explore nuclear power further, the following should be taken into account:
1) Selection of nuclear fission and thermo electric conversion source recommended that research is
conducted into LFTR technology
2) Selection of compatible landing site a landing site that minimises radiation to its inhabitants is
essential.
3) Consideration of stage by stage deployment of nuclear material to minimise risk.
For full list of references, please see full literature review.
Parikshat Singh Imperial College London Department of Mechanical Engineering