Submitted by AskScienceModerator t3_z1rq4e in askscience

We're the Auto Terra Project, one of the top 25 teams in the US competing in the NASA Deep Space Food Challenge, a competition to create the Mars habitat food production system. This system will be used to feed the astronauts at every step of the mission. You'll see us listed on their website as the Arrakis Terrarium Project, as we recently rebranded: https://www.deepspacefoodchallenge.org/teams

Our solution centers around enclosed ecosystems! Think of a 4 foot by 4 foot by 26 inch (1.2 meters by 1.2 meters by 0.66 meters) climate-controlled community garden plot in a box, complete with a water cycle, lights, temperature control, humidity control, sensor data, and more. The internals are separate from the externals, meaning that the plants have an ideal environment despite what's going on outside. We have proof of concept, and if you would like to see our prototype, some of our harvest, and our work, feel free to check out our website: https://autoterraproject.co/

We would also like to someday use our devices to strengthen food security on Earth by partnering with nonprofits to put these into the homes of people in need. The devices require 0 daily maintenance and allow the users to access fresh foods whenever needed, without having to worry about supply lines, costs in grocery stores, or transportation.

If you'd like to support us, the biggest thing you can do is to get on our website and sign up to our email list! It'll help us show others that our project is important and aid us in getting additional funding to continue our work.

The people answering questions from our team include:

  • Ariel Shramko (/u/ATPSpaceFood) the environmental engineer on the team. They create the criteria for the ecosystem, create the ecosystem itself, monitor the health of the units, and complete some of the chemical engineering within the project as well.
  • Eliot Pirone (/u/Necessary_Ad_126) the mechanical engineer behind the physical design of the project. If Ariel determines what the units need to do to maintain healthy environments for the plants and changes the living matter within the ecosystems, Eliot figures out how to make that happen.

The team will begin answering questions at 12pm EST (17 UT). Thanks for listening, AUA!

93

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

PHealthy t1_ixd6efp wrote

Zero maintenance sounds like an over sell, is it truly zero?

Isn't this concept basically the same idea as those ridiculously over-priced aerogardens?

9

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdlaqd wrote

Can confirm that it’s 0 daily maintenance. Time sinks after assembly would be resetting the system and harvest. A system reset takes ~40 minutes with makeshift tools, and a full harvest takes 2.5 hours with me documenting, weighing, photographing, and beginning to prepare samples for testing as I harvest. Cooking time would be the same as beforehand.

Our calorie production per square foot can be higher than with aerogardens because of the emphasis on the substrate. The units are also quite light (even when the substrate is fully saturated), can be re-arranged to fit within a set area, pack up and fold out easily, have in built filters to keep things safe and fresh, and can provide a nice balance of macros and micronutrients. It’s definitely more advanced than aeroponic systems with (as mentioned before) quite a reasonable price tag for the value. This is not priced as much as many of the other space food production systems.

I'm not quite sure what part of the aerogardens you're wondering whether we align with, but feel free to ask further questions if I haven't answered your question!

6

LeJoker t1_ixeov1k wrote

What would cause the need for a system reset? Do you anticipate this needing to be done on any sort of regular basis? If so, how often?

2

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixezeb6 wrote

To clarify, system reset refers to planting the system again. The trigger is that the user wants more food!

It's not easy to say how often this would need to be done, as it depends on the program being run, though the absolute shortest program that it can run is 35 days. Right now, we're running 35 day cycles, so we reset every 35-40 days. Resets could occur as far apart from each other as 120+ days; it all depends on what the user wants out of it. We reset our first prototype after 3-4 months; I can't remember the exact number of days right off the top of my head.

Note that we say that daily maintenance is 0. Expecting to never interact with the device isn't realistic, and it's definitely not something that we're claiming. However...to defend our 40 minute replanting time, resetting the system takes less time per 35 days than I spend shopping for food per week!

3

h3rbi74 t1_ixcuwgm wrote

I hate to be skeptical (and I’m not even gonna touch on any Actual Mars Mission stuff) but… I am skeptical about your plan to use these on Earth to “improve food security.” Food plants on Earth already grow readily in normal environmental conditions with free air and sunlight and in many locations free rainfall as well. Orchards, farms, community and back yard gardens, down to patio tomatoes and outdoor window boxes or indoor windowsill herb planters, and even wild foraging in some locations. A highly climate-controlled over-engineered (for this planet) space age growing box seems like an incredibly inefficient use of resources, which negates the economy of scale and presumes that the individuals in need have the available space and time and water and electricity and ability to care for this planter box but NOT enough of any of those things to care for homegrown food plants the usual way. I’m not sure that target population exists in any meaningful numbers?

Food insecurity is a complicated issue generally tied in with income inequality and runaway capitalism and homelessness and racism and all sorts of huge systemic issues, and almost never a matter of “there wasn’t enough food being produced”, so I really feel like any money that could be spent to deploy these on earth would be better given to an existing non profit organization that works to equitably distribute the food that already exists (often in excess of need so it ends up wasted if profit can’t be made from it). Can you change my mind? (And thanks for putting up with me being negative on your post but I can’t imagine I will be the only one with concerns when you start to try and shop this around, so it might be good practice!)

4

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdijzx wrote

I was waiting for this question! We’ve been working on integrating both our space design and our Earth design for the past 2 years. I’d like to break down the comment and my answer into a couple parts because I have a lot to say about it. To address the elephant in the room, the cost is to construct one of these is significantly less than the cost to construct many of the other space food production systems out there. I don’t want to quote you a price just yet because we are still negotiating costs with our space market. We also have several ways to lower the price to deploy on Earth which again, for negotiation purposes I can’t discuss.

In terms of time, the units require 0 daily maintenance. As one of our primary testers, I can confirm that even with our prototypes, the only maintenance I’ve been required to do is planting and harvest. Planting takes ~40 minutes, and I did it with a plastic spoon, an egg carton, $0.99 packets of seeds, and a small plastic Chinese takeout container. Harvest took me about 2.5 hours, but I was also weighing the harvest, measuring, taking photos, vacuum packing samples, taking photos, and taking notes. I spent significantly less time messing with the units than with my outdoor garden!

In terms of water, it takes significantly less water than an outdoor garden as well. We replant and adjust water content in between harvests. Times between harvests vary, but on the current cycle, it’s ~35 days. The general suggestion for an outdoor garden would be ~ 1 inch depth of water per week per square foot, or 0.623 gallons/square foot per week. At this point, the amount of water we used to restore the entire system after 35 days, about 1.5 gallons, was equal to the amount of water added to about 2.5 square feet of a regular garden per week. If a family is struggling to obtain safe and clean water, our system would be the better choice.

Space! These can be hidden in furniture if needed. Or they can be stacked. Or rearranged. Our current prototypes fit into the 4 foot by 4 foot area right now, but we are making a version whose footprint can be rearranged (think legos), as long as a 16 square foot area can be achieved. We’re based in a city and currently running a couple of these in our apartments for testing. While they are bigger than expected, they allow us to grow more than planters would and take up less space than some pieces of furniture.

Food insecurity is definitely NOT a food production issue, and we’re not pretending to solve all the systemic issues that exist. However, we hope to address some: lack of transportation and lack of fresh food available. People in urban areas often can’t travel to grocery stores, or their grocery stores don’t have healthy food options at a reasonable price point. Many food banks that we’ve spoken to aren’t equipped to ship out food regularly or struggle to obtain and ship out perishables. We’re eliminating the middleman.

Electricity would be our main concern, and we currently have existing no-power required backups for every system except one, which is cooling. We’re exploring options for this one, and there’s a couple interesting possibilities…but this comment is too long already for me to weigh pros and cons for each one!

1

Orollo t1_ixcgmkp wrote

How self sufficient is system? How much water is lost over time?

Can this system also be used as life support for ships/ colonies if it works?

3

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdi0uc wrote

What it does require: substrate, seeds, a one-time larger addition of water (and subsequent smaller additions of water, that even with a significant margin of error would be less than 10 gallons worth), electricity, and fertilizer. To address water loss, we recently added 1.5 gallons worth of water to our 2 foot by 2 foot prototype that had been sitting open for the past 2 months when we reset it. I overestimated the amount of water it required and accidentally overwatered it…

In terms of colonies and ships, it depends on the gravity of the environment. As long as there is some gravity, it should function as expected. In 0 g environments, things get more complicated. That’s one of the challenges we’ll face in the future. NASA explicitly said that 0 g would be addressed in a future iteration of design.

Just to clarify what you mean by "life support," do you mean for food production or for air?

2

AtTheFirePit t1_ixckneb wrote

I read a while ago that one of the biggest obstacles of colonizing Mars is the dust storms and the static electricity they create. It was said that the dust would stick to and get into everything, reducing vision and mobility for anyone outside and damage equipment.

Is that actually a concern and if so, what's the plan to mitigate it?

3

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdk0bb wrote

I’m going to be completely honest and say that I’m not sure how NASA is tackling this or how much of an issue it is for their systems. However, this is something that they don’t want us to design for. I expect that if it is an issue, they’ll be attempting to deal with it at the habitat level. Our solution would fit within individual rooms in the habitat, so they'd never be directly exposed to and operating outside the habitat.

4

Jeb0211 t1_ixeptm5 wrote

Hi, mycology student here. I don't have any question, just here to remind you that fungi are cool and mushrooms are cute. Keep up the good work, sounds super interesting!

3

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixesbdk wrote

Hello! Thanks for the interest and for checking in! I do agree that fungi are amazing. I'm certainly not a mycologist, but mushrooms are some of my favorite food! While we unfortunately don't have any plans to grow them in the system just yet, hopefully we can cultivate them someday.

2

StringOfLights t1_ixd49x3 wrote

Hello, thanks for doing this AMA! What surprising issues have popped up that you didn’t expect? How did you handle them?

2

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdit5a wrote

There’s a couple! The first was how differently our substrate interacts with water than expected and how it distributes water than traditional substrate, combined with the water cycle within the units. We’re still feeling it out the specific watering regimen required for our mix.

Something else extremely unexpected that happened was that we had a random weed pop up at the very end of a grow cycle! Current theory is that it came from one of our seed packets, as our substrate ingredients are inert until mixed together. It hasn’t happened before or since. I still have samples of that weed stored.

Not an issue, but I was surprised by the water cycle we have going! I knew it would happen, but for some reason the first time it happened, I called one of my friends and gushed about how I couldn't believe that a water cycle was formed.

2

Flaky_Farmer_459 t1_ixdj2e1 wrote

I've done hydroponic food production and no regelith substrate needed, even potato's can grow in intermittent spray systems. No fancy multi billion thing needed.

2

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdonwt wrote

Glad that you weighed in! We decided against a hydroponics system for several reasons, including that our planting patterns wouldn't work very well with a hydroponics system. Our heating and cooling (and humidity) systems are significantly less taxed with our current system as well. The in-built filters are more easily integrated with the rest of the system. The entire system as a whole weighs significantly less. We were working with an aquaponics research group a while back, and our current 2 foot by 2 foot by 26 inch system weighs less than the water that their 36 inch by 16 inch by ~6.5 inch unit used. While intermittent spray systems may consume less water, they also require more energy for the spray systems (in addition to the increased cooling and humidity regulation costs).

As for cost, I had a good (well-meant) laugh at the overestimation of the price. If only we had access to several billion in funding! I fear that you overestimate the price of a single unit by several zeroes. I can't tell you the exact price as we are negotiating the selling price with the space sector, but a full solution will be significantly, significantly less than that.

Edit: a word.

3

zestycircus t1_ixerw84 wrote

What kind of things could go wrong with the system and what kind of redundancies/contingency plans are in place to ensure continued food supply if something disastrous happened?

2

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixewd1i wrote

We had to fill out an entire HACCP and friends plan for this! While I won't go over everything that could possibly go wrong, I'll hit some of the highlights.

  1. The wrong micro-organisms could grow within the system. This would have certain "cues" that would show up in sensor data. If this happens, the entire unit can be emptied out, the substrate can be dried out, and the frame can be disassembled and disinfected.
  2. Speaking of sensor data, while the system only needs a few sensors to operate, we have multiple redundant sensors installed in the case that one fails. If they somehow all go berserk and fail, the user can easily swap in another one.
  3. We have humidity stabilizers that can pop with mishandling. It's bad for the plants (though not for humans) if these get punctured and leak out into into the substrate. We've segmented them off, have drip trays in case of punctures, and instructions on how to change them out. To clarify what I mean about the humidity stabilizers being not harmful for humans: you can literally drink the gel inside them. It wouldn't be tasty, and it'll give you a major stomach ache, but it's 100% food ingredients in there.
  4. Finally, let's say something unforeseen goes terribly, terribly wrong in one of the units, and it can't be fixed - maybe some sort of weird Martian bacteria gets into it or the electronics (and all the backups and all the replacements) on a specific unit mysteriously fail in some way that can't be fixed. Because the system is made of several units, the others are all separate and unaffected by the issue. In the case of a weird bacterial infection, the infected unit can also be sealed. The seal would act as a quarantine in this case!

There's a lot more on our documents to NASA, but I didn't want to make this comment too long!

3

PerspectivePure2169 t1_iy1xx05 wrote

Who did you consult with for the agronomy part of it? Does the system measure cues from the plants (NVDI etc) to determine water and fertility needs? Or does it just follow a recipe that dictates nutrient/water timing?

Also, what do you use for fertilizer? Recycling the N and Phosphate from astronaut waste and uneaten plant material would be ideal in terms of self sufficiency. Otherwise nutrients will eventually limit growth. And most of the fertilizers used in agriculture are corrosive, reactive etc so not ideal in space. Curios what the choice is there.

2

themeaningofhaste t1_ixd5vvo wrote

Thanks for doing this! I see a whole bunch of the solutions listed on NASA's site. What do you think gives this enclosed ecosystem an advantage over some of the others listed?

1

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdj3g3 wrote

A couple, actually! Our solution is substrate based, which means that we can use some clever planting methods to grow multiple types of food in the same area – more variety is good for the palate. We also can grow root-based crops (which are comparatively high in calories) with much less fuss than a hydroponics or aeroponics system. Because ours is entirely based on plants, human waste from the astronauts can also possibly be composted to “refresh” the system so to speak. Note that I'm only bringing this up because this was a question that NASA asked us, and in no way am I saying that the astronauts can or should use one of these as a toilet. Composting waste should only be done safely and responsibly.

Our solution is also surprisingly light. I’m not a big person (5’2, doesn’t lift weights), but I can move our 2 foot by 2 foot around alone with a fully saturated substrate. I can’t remember what the weigh in was for our second plant, but I fully expect that a couple of astronauts in decent physical condition can move even a fully planted unit around. Not that they have to move the whole thing around – it breaks down easily.

Also, extremely low water consumption! It’s surprisingly lower than we originally expected. As mentioned before, to restore our 2 foot by 2 foot unit after a 35 day cycle and 2 months sitting unplanted and open, we added 1.5 gallons. That was an overestimation of the water that the system needed.

1

atomfullerene t1_ixd8n75 wrote

What sort of growing medium are you using, and do you have thoughts on whether a space mission would be able to produce their own nutrients for the plants?

1

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixdmhwb wrote

We’re using our own mix of inert materials to create the substrate. I can’t tell you exactly what we’re using, but it’s cheap and very light, with a bulk density of about 12% that of loose soils. Shipping something to space costs a LOT, so we’ve been trying to make it as light as possible.

While any fertilizer can be used, NASA did ask us whether the system could be used beneficially in any other part of the habitat or trip there. It is possible that the astronauts can turn their waste into fertilizer for use in the system, though it must be done safely and responsibly. In terms of decades or centuries long fertilization of the system, I’m not entirely sure to be honest. With our current technology, there’d almost certainly be some loss in terms of water filtration, so a perfect system can’t be achieved. How long would that be? I’m not sure because I haven’t seen the details of their water filtration system.

TL;DR: It’s unlikely that it’ll be able to run itself forever with our current technology, but we expect to get a good 3-5 years out of it.

3

ATPSpaceFood t1_ixewnia wrote

Sorry if I don't get to your questions immediately! I'm getting notifications that some people are posting and replying to me, but I'm unable to see your comments. When they show up formally on the thread, I'll answer them. Thanks for your patience!

1