Newsletter Articles 2022

January ~ Carbon Sequestration

Carbon sequestration is the process of mineralizing or storing carbon dioxide underground to reduce atmospheric levels more rapidly than occurs via natural processes.

Most of us are familiar with the carbon cycle. I recall learning about it in elementary school. Plants take up carbon dioxide through photosynthesis and convert it to basic six-carbon sugars. Respiration returns some to the atmosphere within minutes or hours. Some is converted to cellulose and lignin–wood, which is stored for the life of the plant. Once dead, fungi and other saprophytes begin the process of breaking the woody material down and returning the carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere.

The biogenic storage of carbon can be extended under certain conditions. Peat build-up in ponds or tundra leads to longer-term storage. Arctic permafrost in Siberia has been dated to 650,000 BCE.

Longer term burial of organic matter can result in the familiar fossils coal (terrestrial plant material) and oil (marine deposits of plankton and algae). The oldest known coal deposits date to the Carboniferous Period, some 300 million years ago. The oldest oil deposits date to 1.4 billion years ago, though most formations date to the age of the dinosaurs or more recent.

There are other carbon cycles many of us are less familiar with. For example, when carbon dioxide is absorbed into seawater, it can be mineralized into calcium carbonate. A process harnessed by marine creatures early in their evolution. Mollusks use this mineral for their shells. Bony fishes use it in their bones.

Lastly, there is inorganic mineralization of carbon dioxide into carbonates. This occurs in soils, in rock and in the ocean.

On average, a carbon dioxide molecule remains in the air 300 to 1,000 years. Atmospheric levels have been rising since the beginning of the industrial age in the mid-1700s, when it stood at about 280 ppm. By 2000, the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide was 370ppm. By 2020 it has risen to 412 ppm.

World leaders have set goals for their countries to achieve carbon neutrality (the amount added to the atmosphere is balanced by the amount taken out) typically by mid-century. However, the global warming attributed to anthropogenic atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane(i.e., greenhouse gases) may not necessarily stop or reverse.

Scientists have identified feedback loops that will continue atmospheric warming after human-caused carbon dioxide emissions stabilize. The loss of arctic sea ice decreases albedo. The sunlight that normally reflects off the pack ice back into space is absorbed by the waves in open water, raising surface temperatures and the atmosphere above it.

Thawing of arctic permafrost has already released vast quantities of carbon dioxide and methane, which are not accounted for by present reduction goals.
Longer, more frequent heat events and drought conditions have resulted in increased number and individual acreage of wildfires. Increased wildfire releases otherwise-stored carbon dioxide.

The results of these carbon dioxide feedback loops? Additional warming, deeper droughts, more intense and longer storm seasons, and rapid sea level rise that inundates low coastal development from Miami, Florida to Dhaka, Bangladesh.

If we rely on natural processes to reduce carbon dioxide concentrations (consideration of feedback loops aside) in about a thousand years, 20% to 30% of human-emitted carbon dioxide will still remain in the atmosphere. Global temperatures will stabilize at their reached levels(again, discounting any feedback loops) and stay high for hundreds of years.

Clearly, simple carbon-neutrality may not be sufficient to stave off the serious side-effects of climate change, given the feedback loops mentioned above. Two technologies have emerged to sequester carbon dioxide pulled from the atmosphere or out of fossil fuel emissions. Both rely on direct capture to collect it. A process known as “incumbent amines” is the most mature carbon-capture technology in use today. It pumps emissions from industrial processes such as steel and cement production and the burning of fossil fuels for power generation through a solution that absorbs carbon dioxide but allows other atmospheric gasses to pass through. The carbon dioxide -rich solvent then flows into a boiler where heat drives the pure gas out of solution. The carbon dioxide can be collected for containerized transport or transported via pipes to sequestration sites.

Currently, the most common sequestration sites are oil or natural gas fields, where carbon dioxide is injected to drive out more product. While this results in a net increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide, it still lowers total emissions by the amount trapped underground. Some of it is mineralized to carbonates, some remains as free gas within the pores and voids of the deposit rock formations.

The Orka carbon sequestration project in Iceland is the world’s largest. It sequesters 10,000 tons of carbon dioxide annually, a natural by-product from the Hellisheidi geothermal power plant. The underlying basalt is high in magnesium and calcium, which bind it as carbonate minerals.

An even more attractive option for carbon dioxide mineralization is mantle rock sequestration. Mantle rocks can mineralize 500kg of carbon dioxide per ton of rock compared to 170 kg of carbon dioxide per ton of basalt. Where mantle rock has been exposed at the Earth’s surface, peridotite reacts with airborne carbon dioxide dissolved in rainwater that percolates through cracks, forming white veins of carbonate minerals. Mantle deposits in Oman, Alaska, Canada, California, New Zealand and Japan could potentially mineralize and store 60 to 600 trillion tons of carbon dioxide. A single injection well under study in Oman could capture up to 50,000metric tons of per year. While direct capture of atmospheric carbon dioxide is not financially feasible today, gas captured from industrial processes could be shipped to injection wells positioned above such mantle deposits.

This could become important in the production of blue hydrogen if demand for green hydrogen outstrips demand while electrolyzer capacity ramps up, assuming direct reinjection of carbon dioxide back into methane wells is impractical.

To actually reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to mitigate for feedback loops will require carbon negative processes. Hydrogen production from biogenerated methane or emissions from cogeneration powerplants would pull carbon dioxide out of its short-term cycle, reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide over shorter time spans.

Seeding the oceans with iron to “fertilize” plankton growth would also remove additional carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere where it would settle to the sediments under the world’s oceans. However, this type of ecosystem tampering carries risks, possibly to human food chains.

An industrial process developed to capture atmospheric carbon dioxide directly would require enormous facilities to trap appreciable quantities of gas. They could be co-sited with extensive photoelectric facilities, which would power the carbon capture processes.

How prevalent will carbon sequestration be by 2035? For the near-future, efforts (and funding) will prioritize green power generation, electrification of transportation and green/blue hydrogen production. But, once the low hanging fruit is picked ten years from now, more funding will be directed to carbon sequestration technologies. This tech may be especially important to industries where de-carbonizing is problematic, like commercial aviation. Carbon sequestration should allow such economic sectors to achieve carbon neutrality sooner, allowing their conversion to hydrogen-based thrust generation systems over a longer time span.

For further reading
https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2915/the-atmosphere-getting-a-handle-on-carbon-dioxide/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_climate_change#Amazon_rainforest
https://cen.acs.org/environment/greenhouse-gases/capture-flue-gas-co2-emissions/99/i26
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rare-mantle-rocks-in-oman-could-sequester-massive-amounts-of-co2/
https://www.hydrogenfuelnews.com/green-hydrogen-production-emerson/8550898/?mc_cid=6c14c8d0bc&mc_eid=45b5618dca

February ~ Beam Weapons

  I remember as a five-year-old cowering as I watched a rerun of H.G. Wells’ War of the Worlds on TV. Those evil Martians could even destroy the vaunted weapons that had won World War II with their deadly heat ray. Flash forward about seven years and I marveled at the power and accuracy of phasers used by the starship Enterprise. Klingons never stood a chance against Captain Kirk (unless they were cloaked). Later still, the Star Wars franchise made liberal use of beam weapons. The Death Star could obliterate whole planets with a single strike.

Beam weapons have been standard fare in Science Fiction my entire life. Imagine my surprise when I googled “beam weapons” recently to discover the US military has actually been testing and deploying laser-based systems. The future has arrived.

In very broad terms, a laser is a device that converts a form of energy (it can be either photons or electrons) into a directed beam of light of a single wavelength (coherent light). Coherent light possesses some interesting properties. The waves are oriented perpendicular to the photon’s direction of travel, and the wave amplitudes self-align. These attributes allow a laser to pack quite a punch, maintaining a highly focused beam of radiant energy over much longer distances than non-coherent light.

In principle a laser is a simple device. There are four different technologies in use today, but the most likely used by the military is a solid-state laser, so I’ll describe that.

A solid-state laser consists of an energy pumping source(a bright light emitter), and a laser medium (a solid cylinder of transparent glass-like material doped with specific rare earth elements). The flat ends of the cylindrical laser medium are mirror coated. One end is fully reflective, the opposite face is partially mirrored.

Quantum magic occurs inside the laser medium. The pump irradiates the medium, exciting electrons within its matrix. These electrons jump to higher but unstable orbitals which then cascade down lower energy states to return to the original base energy level. Some intermediate energy levels are meta stable, meaning the electrons can persist there until bumped by a photon. When this disturbed electron falls to the base energy state, it can emit two or more photons of a specific wavelength. These photons bounce back and forth between the mirrors, often colliding with other metastable electrons, generating a cascading effect. Eventually, a percentage of these coherent photons escape through the partially reflective mirror, creating the laser beam. The resultant beam of light can be guided and directed by passing it through an optical fiber not unlike the fibers that carry your cable and internet signals.

The power output of a laser is measured in Watts. Consider a 100W incandescent light bulb, its light radiating in all directions. If you hold your hand near an illuminated 100W bulb, it can get uncomfortably hot in a pretty short time. Imagine if all that energy were concentrated into a narrow beam the width of a pencil lead. Ouch. Now imagine a beam of one kilo Watt(kW), ten times as powerful.
Now let’s talk beam weapons.

Of the military service branches, the US Navy is the farthest along in laser deployment. A system called HELIOS (High Energy Laser and Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance), has been installed aboard a DDG Arleigh Burke class guided missile destroyer since 2016. This 60kWbeam weapon system is designed to defend against inexpensive non-self-guided weapons such as drones or small watercraft (like the small boat that bombed the USS Cole in 2000).

The Navy is deploying lasers because after the initial development and installation, they are cheaper to use than anti-aircraft missiles or .50 caliber bullets.

Last year a 150kW system was deployed aboard the USS Portland, a San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ship to protect landing craft and amphibious assault vehicles carrying Marines, their equipment and their supporting helicopters and Ospreys.

The Army has announced the deployment of four Stryker battalions mounted with 50kW lasers early this year for short range air defense against drones, rockets, artillery and mortars. Like the Navy, the Army is using beam weapons to defend against non-self-guided weapons at close range.

Last October, the Army awarded a contract to develop a300kW solid state truck-mounted laser by 2024 powerful enough to destroy a continuum of objects, from cruise missiles, manned and unmanned aircraft, to drones.

That same month the U.S. Air Force took delivery of the Airborne High Energy Laser (AHEL) weapon to begin testing aboard AC-130JGhostrider gunships within the next year. The Air Force seems especially enamored with the stealth capabilities of this 60kW beam weapon. With no sound and no visible beam, the AHEL can engage targets from miles away, burning through materials, starting fires, and even detonating munitions, all with the enemy unable to trace the source of the attack.

Unlike the Navy’s and Army’s laser deployments, the Air Force is deploying their system as an offensive weapon. Given the incredible sophistication of the tracking systems utilized by military lasers, they could be extremely accurate and effective weapons.

Today’s laser-based weapons are bulky, due to their power requirements. Ship- or aircraft-based systems are wired directly into the carrier vehicle’s power system. Truck-mounted systems must use a very large battery pack (the most powerful civilian electric vehicle battery packs are roughly100kWh), or a generator.

In the near-term, I expect to see two trends. Vehicle-based or fixed systems will become more powerful, allowing destruction of ever larger targets at ever greater distances, or of greater numbers of small targets at close range (think a cloud of bomb-carrying drones). I foresee the eventual replacement of the Star Wars missile-based missile defense with a laser-based system, assuming no new antiballistic missile treaties preclude it. As a child of the Cold War, I personally welcome the day when nuclear missiles, including hyper missiles, will be rendered obsolete.

The other trend will be miniaturization, toward deployment of hand-held weapons. Ten or fifteen years from now I foresee a backpack version of the Stryker-mounted system used by remote foot patrols when they come under mortar attack. Another portable system could employ laser rifles tethered to a backpack power source. Not exactly hand-held Star Trek phasers, but a step in that direction.

For Further Reading
https://www.physics-and-radio-electronics.com/physics/laser/differenttypesoflasers.html
https://www.zmescience.com/science/u-s-army-tests-its-first-high-energy-laser-weapon/#:~:text=According%20to%20Task%20%26%20Purpose%2C%20the,truck%2Dmounted%20laser%20by%202024
https://www.popsci.com/technology/us-navy-laser-weapon-test/
https://www.popsci.com/technology/military-defensive-laser-weapon/
https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/air-force-takes-delivery-of-stealthy-laser-weapon-for-ghostrider-gunships/

March ~ Fusion Power On Mars

For nearly a century, scientists have dreamed of harnessing the power of the sun and stars to generate electricity. Fusion combines the atomic nuclei of two isotopes of hydrogen: deuterium (one proton and one neutron) and tritium (one proton and two neutrons). The reaction creates one helium atom (two protons and two neutrons) plus one free neutron plus energy. Lots of energy.

Nuclear fusion is incredibly efficient. A 1000 mega Watt coal-fired power plant requires 3 million tons of coal per year, but a fusion plant will only need 550 pounds of fuel per year, half of it deuterium, half of it tritium.

Deuterium is naturally abundant. About one out of every 5,000 hydrogen atoms in seawater is deuterium. This means our oceans contain many tons of this isotope. When fusion power becomes a reality, just one gallon of seawater could produce as much energy as 300 gallons of gasoline.

Tritium, on the other hand, is quite rare. The atmosphere has only trace amounts, formed by the interaction of its gases with cosmic rays. But it can be produced at commercial scale by neutron bombardment of metallic lithium or lithium-bearing ceramic beads in special nuclear breeder reactors. Future fusion reactors may also produce tritium within a helium-cooled ceramic pebble bed called a breeder blanket.

Deuterium is one of two stable isotopes of hydrogen and is therefore not radioactive. Tritium is unstable but emits only weak beta radiation (an electron). It has a short half-life of about twelve and one-third years. While beta radiation from tritium decay won’t even penetrate human skin, it can be injurious if breathed in or ingested. Fortunately, a single exposure only remains within the body for about a week, flushed out during the body’s normal water cycling processes.

For fusion to occur deuterium and tritium must be heated to a plasma (elections become unbound to any atomic nuclei), under intense pressure. For example, the temperature at the very center of the Sun is about 27 million degrees Fahrenheit, at an estimated 265 billion atmospheres (3.84 trillion psi).

Fusion reactors are rated by a factor called fusion energy gain (Q). Q is the ratio of the energy produced divided by the thermal power injected to superheat the plasma and initiate the reaction. For a reaction to be self-sustaining, the reactor must have a fusion energy gain factor of 1 or greater.

In 1950 soviet scientists Andrei Sakharov and Igor Tamm proposed using a torus(donut-shaped) magnetic field to constrain deuterium-tritium plasma. The magnetic field is partially externally generated and partially generated by inducing an electric current in the plasma itself. Tokamaks confine their fuel at low pressure (around 1 millionth of an atmosphere) but high temperatures(150 million degrees Celsius) and attempt to keep those conditions stable for ever-increasing times on the order of seconds to minutes. In 1997 the Joint European Torus (JET) tokamak, succeeded in generating a Q of 0.67.

The most advanced tokamak facility, ITER, is under construction in southern France. ITER is a thirty-five-country collaborative nuclear fusion experiment. It is expected to be the first tokamak reactor to achieve a net gain, where the heat of fusion is sufficient to heat incoming plasma, maintaining a sustained reaction.

Inertial Confinement. In the 1970s, scientists began experimenting with laser beams to compress and heat the hydrogen isotopes to the point of fusion. Today, the leading inertial confinement project is the National Ignition Facility (NIF) at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. NIF precisely guides, amplifies, reflects, and focuses 192 powerful lasers into a target about the size of a pencil eraser in a few billionths of a second. It generates temperatures in the target of more than 180 million degrees F and pressures of more than 100 billion Earth atmospheres. In August of 2021, the National Ignition Facility set the record for Q at 0.70. Inertial confinement reactors are envisioned to produce power in pulses, rather than a steady reaction like tokamak reactors.

Can a fusion reactor explode or melt down? In a word, no. A few grams of fuel is sufficient to produce the heat to maintain fusion and generate electricity in a tokamak reactor. A working inertial confinement reactor may require fuel pellets as small as one gram. Whenever plasma containment is lost, it results in both a loss of temperature and pressure. The reaction simply winks out, like a thermonuclear candle flame in the wind.

Nuclear reactors utilize hundreds of pounds of highly radioactive uranium-235 or plutonium. The fuel must be constantly cooled and/or damped to prevent a runaway reaction. Once a meltdown occurs, and containment is lost, radioactive material can spread across the globe. The half-life of U-235 is about 700 million years. Once the genii is out of the bottle, it doesn’t go away.

Fuel for fusion reactors is either nonradioactive(deuterium) or weakly radioactive (tritium) with a half-life of a dozen years. A fusion reaction is highly controllable. It can be stopped instantly, long before any sort of reactor vessel breach is even possible. If a vessel is ever breached under conditions of war or sabotage, the quantity of tritium is so small, it would be virtually unmeasurable outside the reactor.

Will fusion reactors power bases on Mars? Not in the foreseeable future. Fusion reactors have yet to achieve break-even ignition, let alone a self-sustaining reaction. I expect this to be achieved within the next ten years or so. Then reactors will have to be fine-tuned to be able to be economically viable. The power produced and sold must exceed the cost of development and construction. Barring some unanticipated technological breakthrough, this won’t occur until around 2050.

Then there is the matter of size. NIF is as big as a sports stadium. The ITER campus is the size of 60 soccer fields! Of the two technologies, I think inertial confinement is most amenable to miniaturization. But to be a candidate for transport to Mars, an inertial confinement plant would have to be as a small as a shipping container.

And there is the issue of providing the powerfor ignition. When it comes to fusion, it takes energy to make energy. What’s not known is the power required to produce the roughly 2 MW needed for ignition. A small base on Mars will only need four or five 10 kW generators. Given the extreme brevity of the laser pulses required to ignite a single fusion power plant, It’s possible a supplemental power source wouldn’t be needed but it’s a complication that could only add to the volume and mass required to provide fusion energy on Mars.

So, I don’t foresee fusion power in use on Mars until well after 2050. But who knows? If Dr. Emmett Brown can come up with a Mr. Fusion model that runs on banana peels, maybe there’s a chance.

For Further Reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion
https://www.iaea.org/topics/energy/fusion/background
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokamak
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellarator
https://scitechdaily.com/fusion-breakthrough-once-thought-impossible-brings-energy-device-closer-to-realization/
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/08/210831095614.htm
https://scitechdaily.com/fusion-breakthrough-at-the-brink-of-fusion-ignition-at-national-ignition-facility/

April ~ Powered Exoskeletons

A few weeks ago, I ran across an internet ad for commercial exoskeletons. You know, wearable robotic devices like the Amplified Mobility Platforms used by the Resources Development Administration to battle the Na’vi in Avatar or the Armored Personnel Units used for the defense of Zion in the Matrix movie franchise. Powered exoskeletons have been standard fare in science fiction since Robert A. Heinlein’s 1959 novel Starship Troopers. My first thought on seeing this ad was, we’ve finally realized Heinlein’s vision. Or have we?

As the name implies, an exoskeleton is worn outside the body. Some can be made of flexible materials, such as gloves. Others are made of rigid parts that supplement the movement of arms, back and legs.

Heinlein envisioned a fully independent powered suit that protected the wearer from environmental hazards like the vacuum of space, or hostile weapons. They also magnified the operator’s strength, speed and endurance in battle, and possessed some mean weaponry.

The versions in the ad that I read were created for commercial use. Other companies manufacture models used for physical therapy or neuro-motor augmentation (i.e., personal mobility). Does the US military have some super-secret exoskeleton that will convert a run-of-the-mill grunt into a super soldier?

The websites the ads directed me to touted that powered exoskeletons  combined human intelligence and judgement with the power and durability of machinery. The user was controlling the actions of a robot that did the actual work. By augmenting muscular action, the suits reduce exertion and fatigue of the shoulders, back, arms and legs. Commercial exoskeletons are designed for specific applications. In logistics, they are employed in warehouse or military settings loading and unloading heavy boxes and crates, or transferring airport baggage. In industrial environments operators lifted and set massive components, then used their hands for fine manipulation like threading lug nuts, bolts, etc. Their power source was a rechargeable lithium-ion battery, allowing user autonomy.

Given their utility at preventing repetitive stress or injury from overexertion I foresee (maybe in the next five years?), workers in some Amazon warehouse, or in some heavy industry, demanding the company provide exoskeletons as a condition of their labor contract.

Long before commercial exoskeletons became available, they were used in medicine. As early as the 1960s the first generation facilitated physical therapy for recovery from injury or temporary paralysis.

Medical exoskeletons are highly diverse and can be categorized in a number of ways: rehabilitation vs mobility aid, upper body vs lower body(or even a smaller body region like a hand or foot), and control strategy.

The most basic direction is a pre-programmed wearable robot that executes predetermined motions. A more complicated device waits for a set of conditions to be met such as detection of a shift in the center of mass by the wearer before executing a motion. Even more complex medical exoskeletons read nerve signals from the spine, arms and legs and produce a proportionate motor activation. The most complicated machines can provide functional electrical stimulation of a wearer’s limb(s) as the device controls movement.

Medical exoskeletons can be controlled directly from the brain. I’ve read some fascinating articles about such advances for controlling prosthetics or providing mobility. But I’ll cover the topic of brain implant-machine control in a future Just Over the Horizon edition.

A number of FDA-approved devices provide temporary physical therapy for patients recovering from stoke, brain and spinal cord injury. Their preprogrammed motions retrain limbs to walk or pick up objects. They supply support where needed to avoid compensating and fatigue and overcome muscle weakness. Therapist-controlled assistance can be adjusted from zero to one hundred percent (used for pre-gait muscle training).These devices also record data related to posture and gait, to give corrective feedback.

Some medical powered exoskeletons provide mobility for those with permanent neuro-muscular weakness due to injury or disease. These apparatuses enable a degree of autonomy and dignity beyond other devices such as motorized wheelchairs.

We live in amazing times. I predict that in the very near future, when combined with brain implants, exoskeletons will allow mobility for para- and quadriplegics.

In 2013 The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) initiated a grant program titled Exoskeletons for Human Performance Augmentation. The idea was to develop technology for potential military applications. A number of companies participated. As of 2020, one of these – Sarcos – is providing the US Marines with an exoskeleton based on a commercial version they developed as an outcome of the DARPA program. But rather than deploy in battle, the Guardian Alpha XO is used primarily for logistics support, enabling individual soldiers to lift and move objects weighing up to a thousand pounds.

As recently as 2019 the US Army ran the TALOS exoskeleton project. Consider that the Army’s advised weight of a soldier’s backpack is fifty pounds. But in practice, packs can weigh up to a hundred forty pounds when adding body armor, night vision goggles and radio systems. The Army has a keen interest in improving soldiers’ ability to haul that amount of gear and still participate in battle. But the program was put on hold.

In March of this year, the Army issued a Request for Information to commercial exoskeleton providers for any devices that would be suitable for enhancing soldier performance and reducing fatigue. Perhaps the Army is scaling back their vision of a fully mechanized foot soldier. So far, the vision of a Starship Troopers-esque exoskeleton has eluded the US military. And probably will for the next thirty years.

A number of technological problems have yet to be overcome. The first is power supply. Lithium-ion batteries need frequent charging due to the tremendous power consumption of exoskeletons. Other options are even less desirable. Hydrogen fuel cells emit too much heat to be safe for the operator. Tethered units limit the range of use to a nearby power source, such as a truck-mounted generator.

Another challenge is limited flexibility. Human hip and shoulder joints are marvels of engineering. They allow an astounding range of motion that so far, no mechanical system has been able to duplicate. The best medical exoskeletons require three rigid hinges to approximate the three dimensional movement of hip joints. While the mobility they provide is miraculous, their movements are awkward to even the most casual observer. In the heat of battle, fluid motion is a supreme requirement to target weapons or avoiding dangerous exposure to enemy fire.

Another significant issue is response lag. This is the time differential between the wearer’s input, and the device’s movement. Exoskeletons are not agile. This is not an asset during a firefight, or when needing to dodge a falling tree or object. To put this in perspective, I have yet to see a video of two people using these suits playing “catch”.

Exoskeletons have their critics. In 2020 Forbes wrote an article critical of the military’s pursuit of the technology. Per Forbes, the devices must be custom fitted to each individual soldier. The feature deemed this a dealbreaker. However, in my opinion, the use of interchangeable components largely gets around this obstacle. For example, rather than issuing a complete exoskeleton, the Army would issue a helmet size W, a shoulder/arm component size X, a thorax size Y, and leg units size Z.

I thought the Forbes article’s more cogent argument was that while the suit may survive the forces generated in battle, the human inside likely would not. Imagine the scenario of an exoskeleton-wearing soldier being thrown by an IED explosion. In The Avengers: Endgame movie Iron Man is repeatedly flung hundreds of feet against solid objects as he battles Thanos. Tony Stark’s brain and internal organs would be catastrophically damaged by the resulting forces (his later exposure to the Infinity Stones notwithstanding).

Most likely uses of exoskeletons over the next thirty years will be medical/therapy, logistics (transferring heavy boxes, crates), industrial assembly (automotive, shipbuilding, farm and heavy machinery manufacturing), commercial construction, and mining.

Speaking of mining, if combined with a pressure suit and environmental controls, an exoskeleton would be perfect for mining on Mars. Look for their use in my upcoming book, Blood Moon.

Do you or someone you know have personal experience with a powered exoskeleton? If you’re willing to share your impressions with me, reply directly to this email. I’d love to hear from you.

For Further Reading
https://www.sarcos.com/products/guardian-xo-powered-exoskeleton/
https://www.suitx.com/
https://exoskeletonreport.com/2016/06/medical-exoskeletons/
https://eksobionics.com/eksohealth/
https://rewalk.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powered_exoskeleton
https://www.zdnet.com/article/u-s-marines-to-get-alpha-exoskeleton-for-super-strength/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/vikrammittal/2020/08/17/military-exoskeletons-science-fiction-or-science-reality/?sh=25f346aca69e
http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=506
https://www.thedefensepost.com/2022/03/30/us-army-exoskeleton/

May ~ Mining on Mars

Key to sustaining a long-term presence on Mars will be the extraction of resources supporting local manufacture and use. In the extreme cold and dusty conditions, electronic and mechanical equipment can be expected to break down at an alarming rate.

Given the high cost to ship replacement parts to the Red Planet, not to mention the months-to-years-long shipping time, certain resources will be mined and refined to fabricate those parts instead.

So, let’s examine some of the most likely minerals to be mined there, what they will be used for, the mining and technology needed to extract them, and the processing required to obtain useful constituents. This list isn’t exhaustive, but it gives us an idea about the effort needed to maintain a continuous human presence there.

Likely Mineral Candidates for Mining on Mars:

Ice. Water will be needed for the essential functions of drinking, cooking, bathing and growing crops. Hydrogen and oxygen electrolyzed from water will be used for rocket fuel. They will also be vital for portable energy, a host of industrial chemical processes, air supply and metallurgy.

Perchlorates. These highly toxic salt anions are globally present in Martian soils, which will need to be decontaminated to be useful for growing crops. Perchlorate salts of certain metals are used in explosives and solid booster rocket fuel here on Earth.

What about rare earth elements (REEs)? After all, they’re being prospected in Crimson Lucre and Red Dragon. They are a collection of seventeen metals from the periodic table—yttrium and the lanthanide series. Unlike their name implies, they are common constituents of Earth’s crust. But they are rarely concentrated into ore deposits that are economical to mine. Once mined, these minerals are refined and converted to oxides for storage and treatment, then reduced to their metallic form(s) for incorporation into finished products.

REEs are critical components of computers, cellphones, batteries, and military technology. Their uses are as diverse as doping agents in transistors and in lasing chambers in lasers, small powerful magnets in electronics, and as catalysts for a host of chemical reactions. China leads the world in REE consumption. The United States ranks third. While US production has risen with the rising commodity prices, China still mines ninety percent of the Earth’s supply.

Copper. Mars will run on electricity for heating and lighting, to power environmental equipment, operate computers and communications equipment, and operate vehicles. Copper wire will transmit electricity to fixed facilities inside and outside bases. Transportation will be powered by electrical fuel cells.

Electric motors will be ubiquitous, running water pumps, air circulators, hydraulic system pumps and propelling transportation and heavy machinery.

Silica. Sand? Really? Silica is an important resource on Earth: used to make glass for windows, beverage containers and electrical insulators. Fiberglass products range from bathroom fixtures to roofing material, boat hulls to auto bodies. Fiber optic lines are critical internet infrastructure.

The melting point of silica is high (3,110 degrees F). Large-scale high temperature furnaces would place an enormous strain on the limited power supply on Mars. But small batches will be melted and doped with carbon, resulting in carbon dioxide and silicon. Transistors will be fabricated from this raw silicon with some additional processing. It will be critical for maintaining electronic equipment when spare parts are otherwise months to years away.

Water is abundant and accessible on the Blue Planet. Rather than mining ice, it is manufactured, primarily for use in food processing or for consumption.

Perchlorates are most often obtained by industrial chemical processes that bond four oxygen atoms to one chlorine atom. The resulting molecule dissociates in water to perchloric acid. When reacted with metallic bases useful—though toxic—perchlorate salts result.

REEs are found in a class of igneous minerals known as alkaline rocks. They form under certain magma conditions associated with crustal subduction zones that allow these less-common elements to concentrate.

They also exist in placer (sandy or gravelly sedimentary deposits)where formation favored heavier material selectively settling out. REEs are often associated with gold placer deposits.

Mined in an open pit, the rock is crushed, and then subjected to a series of chemical baths that leach out and precipitate the various REE oxides. Because of China’s market manipulation, they are the only class of minerals considered in this article that could be economically feasible to ship back to Earth from Mars.

Copper porphyry deposits are created by hydrothermal processes close to subduction zone magmas. Chalcocites are copper sulfate ores formed as veins within magmas. The largest open pit mines in the world extract copper of either geological origin.

Silica is mined from huge sand beds or from large quartz formations. Granite and other silica-based minerals constitute planetary crustal materials. Sand is a byproduct of crustal weathering and erosion. Quartz veins, which can contain enormous glass-clear crystals, is hydrothermal in origin. Superheated water will dissolve quartz within granite formations (batholiths and plutons) and redeposit it in underground fissures. Some of these veins are so large and numerous that they can be mined in open pits.

Mars is a tough place to operate heavy machinery. Most places on the surface experience nighttime winter temperatures at or below minus 150 degrees F. Diesel fuel begins to gel at plus 15 degrees F. Hydraulic fluid, the non-compressible liquid that enables hydraulic equipment to lift and move massive loads, freezes at minus 10 degrees F. The cold-tolerant hydraulic fluid used on the space shuttle landing gear had an operating range of minus 70 to plus 700 degrees F. Properly insulating and heating pumps, reservoirs, lines and cylinders will be critical for operating mining machinery on Mars.

Mars’s atmospheric pressure is one-one-hundredth that of Earth, plus there is no free oxygen. This poses a dual challenge for mining equipment. Whatever power source is used, the machine will have to carry its own oxygen supply, whether for an internal combustion engine (ICE), or for an operator environment inside a sealed cab.

Internal combustion on Mars will be a viable option, provided the fuel is a gas or liquid down to minus 150 degrees F, and tanked oxygen is supplied to burn it. Methane will not be readily available, as there are no known subterranean sources like hereon Earth. But hydrogen and oxygen can be from electrolyzed from water. Both are gases within the frigid temperature range, enabling a simple fuel injection system. The excess heat could help maintain an operating temperature for hydraulic fluid.

Mars will be much too cold for batteries to function outdoors. Rather, when not in use, an ICE must be plugged in to a power source—to warm the lubricant reservoir preventing the fluids from freezing and to turn over the ignition to restart the machine.

A hydrogen fuel cell would employ the same fuel and oxidizer as an ICE but would run electric motors for transport and the hydraulic pump. A lubricant reservoir would not be needed, making an external power source less important.

The extreme cold and lack of atmosphere would require a sealed climate-controlled cab for the operator. But given the semiautonomous nature of modern construction equipment here on Earth, Mars mining machinery will also be semi-autonomous as well. A nearby building would house drivers who could remotely operate the mining equipment if trouble developed. Haul trucks might not need any assistance at all, given the exact same route would be taken from loading point to dumping point and back.

Water. Water ice will be mined on Mars using much the same methods used for hard rock mining on Earth. Hellas Planitia, the massive impact crater that serves as the setting for Crimson Lucre and Red Dragon, contains the largest concentration of glaciers outside the poles, and with warmer overall temperatures. But ice, buried under layers of dust, persists in many locations around Mars. Most water and ice is heavily contaminated with perchlorates and will have to be purified before it can be used, or processed into hydrogen and oxygen. Equipment needed will be rock drills, explosives, excavators, loaders and haul trucks. Distillation or other means will be required for water purification.

Perchlorates. Because perchlorates are water soluble salts, they will be derived from two sources: byproducts of water purification, and leached from regolith or windblown deposits of dust and sand. Material will be excavated and treated to a water bath within a pressurized environment, to prevent the water from boiling away and/or freezing. Purifying the resultant contaminated water will yield perchlorate salts. One byproduct will be decontaminated soil for growing crops. Primary equipment needed would be excavators, loaders, haul trucks, and self-contained pressurized reaction vessels to isolate or create desirable salt species.

REEs. No known deposits have been identified on Mars. But alkaline rock minerals no doubt exist within some of the volcanic provinces. Hellas Planitia undoubtedly was a magma sea after the impact that created it. It, and other large impact craters might be reasonable places to prospect for alkaline rock formations as well.

Mining for REEs will employ open pit surface mines. Rock drills, explosives, excavators, loaders, rock crushers and haul trucks will be required. An enclosed pressurized environment will be needed for the water-based chemical processing to produce the oxides.

Copper. The lack of tectonic processes on Mars may restrict copper to chalcocite veins within volcanic regions. The hydrothermal conditions that lead to Earth’s massive porphyry copper deposits were likely rare, if ever present. This will make it difficult to find a concentration of ore-bearing veins to mine.

It could take years of prospecting to find sites suitable for open pit mines, delaying Mars’s self-sufficiency in this metal. Colonies will have to rely on copper from Earth and strict recycling regimens for the first several decades.

Silica. The same methods and equipment for surface mining regolith for perchlorate harvesting can be applied to silica. It’s conceivable the same deposits will source both minerals. Silica sand beds will be available in alluvial fans and sedimentary deposits downstream of granite-bearing highlands. Excavators, loaders and haul trucks will be the primary equipment needed.

As noted earlier, the high temperatures required to refine silicon from silica may restrict processing to small, boutique batches for fabricating transistors. Either lasers, or a hydrogen/oxygen torch could provide the necessary heat source. Once fusion power comes to Mars (I predicted in my March 2022 edition that won’t occur until well after 2050), high energy smelting and refining processes will be able to scale up. Until then, glass will be a relatively rare material.

There you have it. A high-level look at the economic foundation of the first long-term colony on Mars. If you’re a geologist, cold weather hydraulic equipment mechanic or operator, industrial chemist, mechanical engineer or farmer(everyone’s got to eat, right?) get your application in today. Fifteen years from now might be too late.

For Further Reading
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perchlorate#/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyethylene
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polypropylene
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fibers
https://geology.com/articles/rare-earth-elements/
https://geology.com/usgs/ree-geology/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porphyry_copper_deposit

June ~ Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence figures prominently in my EPSILON Sci-Fi Thriller series. My AI computer systems think like humans and perform tasks independently of human input. In Crimson Lucre, Robbie tends the hydroponic lettuce in the greenhouse. He surveils Pang Xianjing’s garrison in Red Dragon.

What do we use AI for?
     AI is so ubiquitous we hardly recognize it anymore. Is that customer service rep on the phone a person or a bot? The results of a biopsy the doctor holds in her hand–did a technician or a program perform the diagnosis?
     We are most familiar with AI in autonomous vehicle research and development. It executes tasks of vehicle control, sensor data analysis, trajectory prediction, and object identification. However, artificial intelligence does much more. In the domain of language and communication AI performs gesture, speech, handwriting and text recognition, and translation. AI’s prowess at data mining facilitates quantum chemistry, facial identification, radar signal classification, 3D reconstruction and visualization, financial commodity trading, hydrology, ocean modeling, coastal engineering, and geomorphology. It diagnoses medical conditions, including several types of cancers. AI can distinguish highly invasive cancer cell lines from less invasive ones using only cell shape information.
     In cybersecurity, it discriminates between legitimate activities and malicious ones. For example, it performs social network and e-mail spam filtering. AI systems classify Android malware, identify domains belonging to cybercriminals, find URLs posing a security risk, detect botnets, credit cards frauds and network intrusions. In short, we’re building the Smith collection of programs in the matrix movies.

Will AI end the human race? I wouldn’t be a bona fide Sci-Fi writer if I didn’t ask this question, right? The novels, TV series and movies exploring this topic are too numerous to count. There are certain properties about artificial intelligence, and digital systems in general, that give us pause (more on this later). But the short answer is no, at least not with the AI technology we have today and in the foreseeable future. Here’s why.

A computer uses artificial intelligence to think like a human and perform tasks on its own. Let’s examine how AI works in real life.

A patient with lumps in a breast visits her doctor, who takes a punch biopsy and forwards it to a lab. A tech prepares a series of slides, creates digital images, and inputs them to abreast cancer diagnosis program. The software recognizes the image and analyzes it for the presence of cancer.

The program subjects the images to a number of algorithms–precise lists of instructions directing step by step actions in software-based routines. These algorithms are organized into a Neural Network. An NN consists of three layers, each of which may contain multiple algorithms.

An Input Layer searches the image for certain characteristics such as shape, color, texture, size (absolute and relative), etc. The IL forwards the constituent attributes to the Hidden Layer, which itself may have numerous layers, each with multiple algorithms. The Hidden Layer evaluates each property and assigns a statistical correlation to cancer based on its training. The properties and their statistical correlations are next sent to the Output Layer, which aggregates the probabilities and determines a final probability.

If the analysis outcome is 0%, the doctor will share the results with the patient and say, “You don’t have cancer.” If the result is a low number, say 20%, the doctor may choose to pursue further tests looking for genetic markers, or certain blood-borne proteins. If the probability is 95%, the doctor will evaluate appropriate treatment regimens.

How does the neural network identify cancer in the first place? Prior to deployment, it was subjected to a process called Machine Learning where the NN was shown millions of digital images of cancer. Its algorithms broke the images down into distinct properties and overtime established cancer cells display Property “X” 75% of the time, Property “Y” 80% of the time, and Property “Z” 95% of the time. It uses this analysis to construct a statistical model of a cancer cell. Once the model values stabilize, the program switches from training to deployment.

Once deployed, the model remains static. For any additional learning to take place the software must be taken out of deployment and fed the new or revised database–costly in terms of time and CPU usage.

AI’s main advantage over humans lies in its data analytics and pattern recognition. It can detect incredibly subtle patterns within large quantities of data. Our discussion on breast cancer diagnosis is a good example.

Artificial intelligence reduces human error. Its mind won’t wander or make a mistake out of fatigue. It minimizes human risk. Coupled with robotics, it can perform in dangerous environments like a smoke-filled high-rise building. It’s available 24/7. AI can operate in a factory setting without lunch or rest breaks or shift changes. It provides digital assistance and engagement–think Alexa or Siri.                           Businesses use AI for robotic process automation. It handles repetitive, rules-based tasks with great speed and accuracy.

Artificial intelligence develops new or improved inventions. Everything from designer molecules to novel engineering approaches to strength, durability, aerodynamics, weight savings, etc. Its pattern recognition in massive data sets offers analysis and insight, a powerful productivity tool.

It can offer unbiased decisions. Needless to say, this is a double-edged sword. AI is only as unbiased as its data set. In other words, artificial intelligence is completely amoral.

AI systems are rules-based and statistically correlated. They are highly constrained compared to human intelligence.

Artificial intelligence can’t reason ethically. What’s more, we don’t know how to build an ethical AI , possessing amoral compass consistent with our own.

Theorists have proposed constructing ethical AI systems based on statistical models of how we act, but we humans aren’t consistent ethically. We routinely implement our sense of right and wrong in a contradictory fashion. Rule-breaking is common when done for “the greater good,” for a “higher purpose,” or plain old self-interest. Generations of philosophers have grappled with human ethics without resolving the contradictions. There have been times when whole societies behaved unethically (Nazi Germany comes to mind), seemingly poor sources for AI ethical models.

Even objective artificial intelligence systems can become unethical if statistical anomalies exist within the data set. Facial recognition software, less accurate for brown-skinned faces, leads to false identifications in criminal cases, further burdening classes of people already struggling with disparities in housing, education, and economic opportunity. The amoral nature of AI requires thoughtful human supervision and intervention.

Artificial intelligence lacks commonsense. In other words, it can’t apply learning from one domain to another situation or problem. Even minor changes in a task necessitates the system be entirely retrained.

Let’s say we trained our AI robot to brew a cup of coffee, add just the right amount of cream and deliver it to the table in the breakfast nook. Now we ask our robot to bring a mug to our sunken living room at the base of a ramp. It would not keep the cup level to avoid spillage. If we provide it with smaller cups, our AI would not stop pouring when the liquid reaches the brim. Switched to porcelain china after we trained it using double-walled steel cups, we can expect a broken cup and spilled coffee.

We understand from life experience a fluid self-levels and won’t maintain its position in a tipped vessel. We know a small cup has less capacity than a larger one, and we won’t overfill it. We recognize a steel mug can endure more force and impact than a porcelain china cup and treat the fragile cup more delicately. Unless AI trains in specific rules for specific circumstances, it lacks the common sense of a human.

AI lacks dexterity, unable to learn continuously and adapt on the fly. This renders it incapable of dealing with unknowns or unstructured spaces.

This makes artificial intelligence impractical for exploring deep space in the absence of humans. Whether on Earth or on a distant planet, AI cannot apply information from one domain to another without going offline and retraining. In contrast, we can dynamically and smoothly incorporate continuous environmental input, adapting their behavior as they go. In other words, humans train and deploy in parallel and in real-time. Without close human supervision, AI quickly encounters circumstances beyond its training, catastrophically ending its mission.

Artificial intelligence can’t understand cause and effect. With the right data, a machine learning model has no problem correlating when the wind blows a windmill turns. However, it’s unable to distinguish if the wind causes the turbine to turn, or if the turning turbine causes the wind to blow.

Recalling the question posed at the beginning of this section, AI systems can’t do the strategic planning necessary to end the human race. Even if some future artificial intelligence associates humans with “bad”–an ethical decision it’s incapable of– AI possesses no way to plan and execute the nuclear first strike to affect our demise. The ability to comprehend the requisite chain of cause and effect is simply not possible with digital architecture in use today or in theory. So, breathe a sigh of relief as you read the next great computer apocalypse novel, knowing it’s pure fiction.

What will AI do in the next ten to fifteen years? Imagine a sweltering summer afternoon. For the past three hours you worked on a project in your garage. You’re tired and hungry but don’t want to make dinner.

“I know, I’ll pick up something at the drive-through,” you say to yourself.

Reaching inside the kitchen door you grab your Autonomous Vehicle key fob. The AV factory relied on AI to control its robotics. When a widget supply diminished, the program knew to order more widgets. The supplier, whose widgets were designed by AI, ramped up its 3-Dprinter fabrication. If the widgets were delayed, AV production at the factory was slowed based on self-generated projections. You toss up and re-grab your key fob, turn and walk back out into the garage.

As you approach your AV in the driveway, it recognizes your fob and unlocks the driver door. The onboard displays and interfaces wake up as you slip inside.
It’s been a stressful week. You say, “De-stress music.”

A soothing piano melody rises and falls to the accompaniment of rustling leaves. The piece spontaneously composed for you, based on your previous musical selections and preferences. You settle back into your seat, close your eyes and utter a contented sigh.

You’re still hungry. “Go to McMegaBurger,” you say. (Your future eating habits are obviously no better than mine at the present.

Your hydrogen fuel cell electric AV backs out your driveway and onto your local street. Your car halts midway down the block when a ball bounces across its path. After waiting for the child to retrieve his ball and return to his yard the vehicle silently moves on.

Your AV stops at the intersection with a four-lane arterial, where it identifies a potential gap if one vehicle shifts over. Your AV communicates with the other car, which moves over one lane.

After entering the arterial your car adjusts its speed to match traffic. Scrolling through FaceAlbum to pass the time, you watch a video of a politician furtively stuffing money into his pockets. You aren’t outraged by the content because a prominent label across the top of the image identifies it as a fake. Thanks to FaceAlbum’s social network filtering and deepfake discrimination software, you weren’t fooled.

After cruising a few minutes, your AV pulls into a two-way left-turn lane, waiting for a safe gap. One appears, but the car doesn’t proceed. A mother with a stroller occupies the sidewalk in the driveway. It proceeds when the way is clear, and a new gap arrives. Once in the lot, the car yields control to you. You steer into the drive-through and rolldown your window.

A bot takes your order, flashing a text copy on the video screen. You confirm and pay by facing a camera. Facial recognition ties your face to your credit account. Transaction complete, you pull forward and pick up your meal at the automated take-out window.

The smell of burgers and fries fills your car as you tear into the bag. “Take me home,” you say before stuffing several fries into your mouth.

For Further Reading
https://jlhancock.com/optogenetics/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_neural_network
https://www.vaughn.edu/blog/artificial-intelligence-a-real-game-changer-in-the-aerospace-industry/
https://www.simplilearn.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-artificial-intelligence-article
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/12/16/what-ai-isnt-good-at/?sh=7de315965a7c
https://www.forbes.com/sites/robtoews/2021/06/01/what-artificial-intelligence-still-cant-do/?sh=1ce781d766f6
https://bigthink.com/the-future/what-ai-cannot-do/#:~:text=AI%20cannot%20create%2C%20conceptualize%2C%20or,domains%20or%20apply%20common%20sense.