Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday January 18 2020, @10:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the It's-pronounced-"Fronkenbreeks" dept.

Engineers at the University of Colorodo, Boulder have demonstrated a novel building material that grows, has self repair capability, and sequesters carbon.

The microbes in the brick are cyanobacteria, which perform photosynthesis to grow, taking in carbon dioxide. They produce a powdery substance called calcium carbonate — the main ingredient in cement — which toughens the material.

The bacteria are mixed with sand and common gelatin like you would buy in a supermarket and require a humid environment to grow.

If researchers can develop a version of the mixture that can withstand dry temperatures, the bricks could even offer a way to build future structures on the Moon or Mars, since less building material would need to be launched and carried on a spacecraft.

This is similar to the myco-architecture project out of NASA's Ames Research Center in California, which aims to grow habitats on the moon and Mars using fungi.

"Right now, traditional habitat designs for Mars are like a turtle - carrying our homes with us on our backs - a reliable plan, but with huge energy costs," said Lynn Rothschild, the principal investigator on the early-stage project.

"Instead, we can harness mycelia (vegetative part of a fungus) to grow these habitats ourselves when we get there".

Ultimately, the project envisions a future where human explorers can bring a compact habitat built out of a lightweight material with dormant fungi that will last on long journeys to places like Mars.

Upon arrival, by unfolding that basic structure and simply adding water, the fungi will be able to grow around that framework into a fully functional human habitat - all while being safely contained within the habitat to avoid contaminating the Martian environment.

These technologies have the potential to reduce our carbon footprint on Earth as well. The construction industry is responsible for 11% of global carbon emissions (39% when heating/cooling/power are included).


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @10:56PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 18 2020, @10:56PM (#945121)

    "taking in carbon dioxide" ...

    "the bricks could even offer a way to build future structures on the Moon or Mars"

    Great, so all we need to do is increase our greenhouse gas emissions on the moon for this to work.

  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday January 18 2020, @11:48PM (1 child)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 18 2020, @11:48PM (#945131) Journal

    These technologies have the potential to reduce our carbon footprint on Earth as well.

    That is bullish.
    Only if you manage to find ways to bring calcium into a reactive form those bacteria can consume and do it more economically than simply applying heat.

    Clinker [wikipedia.org] (the stuff one pulverizes to make cement) - starts with calcium carbonate and other stuff that is roasted to eliminate water and CO2
    Lime [wikipedia.org] - starts with calcium carbonate which is heated to eliminate C)2
    Plaster [wikipedia.org] - is calcium sulfate in different form of hydration. You want it to use in building, you heat it until you get it into a lower degree of hydration.

    All the heating generates now a lot of CO2 - capturing some of it back will still net a lot of CO2 in atmosphere.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 2) by petecox on Sunday January 19 2020, @09:52AM

      by petecox (3228) on Sunday January 19 2020, @09:52AM (#945238)

      What's the carbon footprint of whiteboard markers?

      Bring back blackboards into the classroom and recycle chalk dust as a building material!

  • (Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:27AM (7 children)

    by ElizabethGreene (6748) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:27AM (#945170) Journal

    The moon? Not so much. The moon is annoyingly Carbon deficient. It's one of the big reasons why Mars is a better candidate for independent colonization.

    • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Sunday January 19 2020, @04:10AM (6 children)

      by deimtee (3272) on Sunday January 19 2020, @04:10AM (#945191) Journal

      They've found water at the poles, and likely could find more if they had enough infrastructure to sink deep mines. Pretty good chance they would find carbon compounds too, any moon formation process that doesn't boil off all the water is also going to leave carbon behind.

      --
      If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:44PM (5 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:44PM (#945290)

        we could take a hint from the "big cleanup" in fukushima: freeze water in the right shape then pour cement into shape and then thaw water. rinse repeat.
        should cut down on formwork material.
        also, maybe with some genetic manipulation and nano-mechanics we can get them pesky wasps to collect and deposit their clay balls in a useful way? resulting in some usable structure?

        • (Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Sunday January 19 2020, @04:41PM (4 children)

          by ElizabethGreene (6748) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 19 2020, @04:41PM (#945362) Journal

          I hate to be the spoil sport, but water is also in short supply on the moon, at least until we prove out the reserves at the poles.

          I don't understand the hesitation to use basalt as a building material. It's literally everywhere. The closest analogy I have for not using it would be like landing in the middle of a forest and making a fire by burning hydrogen from electrolysis of water. Sure you can do it, but why would you when you are tripping over firewood in every direction.

          • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Sunday January 19 2020, @09:43PM (3 children)

            by deimtee (3272) on Sunday January 19 2020, @09:43PM (#945480) Journal

            Long term habitation should use the same techniques as Mars. Dig tunnels deep enough to stop radiation and line them to stop air leakage. Initially you would probably use plastic liners or spray sealant from earth, but once you have onsite refining you would switch to metal.
            The main problem seems to be the dust. It's alkaline, very fine, corrosive, and abrasive. On the skin it is only an irritant, but breathing it will give you silicosis.

            --
            If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by ElizabethGreene on Monday January 20 2020, @01:05AM (2 children)

              by ElizabethGreene (6748) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 20 2020, @01:05AM (#945583) Journal

              Mars has CO2, free as air. It's a huge part of why it's more viable for independence from Earth.

              Making the moon anything approaching independent requires asteroid mining and baking regolith for absorbed volatiles. Even then it is a very hard resource constraint.

              • (Score: 3, Interesting) by deimtee on Monday January 20 2020, @02:51AM (1 child)

                by deimtee (3272) on Monday January 20 2020, @02:51AM (#945623) Journal

                Mars has CO2, free as air. It's a huge part of why it's more viable for independence from Earth.

                Mars pretty much has to aim for independence, it's too far away. If a single independent colony is what you want then I agree Mars is better. Long term it has the resources to support a much bigger colony too.

                The moon makes more sense as a mining/manufacturing colony that still trades with Earth and supports space industries. There are a lot of industrial processes that are easier with some gravity to hold things down. (I don't want to work in a free-fall foundry where you have molten steel floating around.)

                Conversely there are some processes that will be easier (or even only possible) in microgravity. Trade between the two makes sense, and it will be a lot easier from the surface of the Moon than from either Mars or Earth.

                I don't just want a colony on Mars, I want O'Neill colonies at L4 and L5, a string of 10GW solar power satellites around the equator, widespread asteroid mining, and people seriously planning to terraform Venus. :)

                --
                If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
                • (Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Monday January 20 2020, @06:47PM

                  by ElizabethGreene (6748) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 20 2020, @06:47PM (#945914) Journal

                  I don't just want a colony on Mars, I want O'Neill colonies at L4 and L5, a string of 10GW solar power satellites around the equator, widespread asteroid mining, and people seriously planning to terraform Venus. :)

                  That'll do, for now. :) Throw in some research for loooooong duration spaceflight (to other stars) as a future goal. :)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @11:33AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 19 2020, @11:33AM (#945250)

    What happens if you breath any of that stuff in whilst living in your nice new Moon or Mars structure?

  • (Score: 1) by Ron on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:55PM (1 child)

    by Ron (5774) on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:55PM (#945297)

    Let's see what our house grows up to be in the next 30 years!

    Isn't the definition of life something about constant change, eventual death and decomposition?

    Doesn't sound like a stable structure.

    • (Score: 2) by dwilson on Sunday January 19 2020, @03:32PM

      by dwilson (2599) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 19 2020, @03:32PM (#945316) Journal

      constant change, eventual death and decomposition?

      Given a long enough timescale, you just described the life-supporting attributes of our planet, too. Doesn't mean we should stop living here. Any building requires constant human presence and intervention to be maintained as stable. This will be no different.

      --
      - D
(1)