Mission to Europa: Life as We Thought We Knew It

We’ve talked about Europa and the search for extraterrestrial life on the ice giant here at To Infinity and…In Theory before. We’ve delved into life’s ability to thrive in some of the most hostile environments imaginable. (Missed those entries? Catch up on the four part series “Livin’ Life to the Extremophile” by following these links. Part 1: Vostok. Part 2: Europa. Part 3: Chemosynthesis. Part 4: Biodiversity.)

But when we talked about all that stuff before we didn’t talk very much about the most important thing. How exactly are we going to get underneath the huge sheet of ice surrounding Europa to the ocean of frozen mystery beneath? Scientists at several different agencies, from the big ones like NASA and the ESA to other firms like Stone Aerospace and Honeybee Robotics, are coming together to help answer that question.

The answer seems to lie in a multi-stage plan that will play out over the course of a few decades. Further testing still needs to be done to decide what will be the best approach for drilling into the ice for starters. Then the funding has to be raised in order to launch a mission of this scale. Luckily, researchers think they have an answer to that as well.

Today we’re going to talk about Jupiter and her moons, a program called JUICE, a payload delivery system called The Penetrator, cryobots, and a mission to Europa just to listen to the ice.

But first, a quick recap on why Europa is so promising in the search for life.

Sometimes You Just Have To Vent

For the longest time scientists purported that life could not exist at the depths of the ocean. The pressure was too high, it would crush anything organic. The light didn’t reach, nothing could possibly see to hunt and forage. Above all it would be far too cold. Then a mission to the outskirts of the Marianas Trench changed everyone’s tune. Not only was life discovered at the deepest depths at that time reached, but it was thriving.

Now we know that life is even capable of existing around some of the most hostile environments imaginable by using a process called Chemosynthesis. These hostile environments I’m talking about are the hydrothermal vents at the bottom of the ocean. Think of it like an underwater volcano.

As the ocean floor shifts due to tectonic activity from the way gravity affects our planet as it whirls through space, it causes buildups of pressure. This internal pressure has to be released somehow, so it vents it out to the ocean floor. Amongst this debris are little organic bits. Not stuff you and I like, but the kind of stuff microorganisms flourish on.

The same kind of thing is happening on Europa. It’s believed to have a rocky mantle and a molten iron core just like us. As it orbits around Jupiter, the stress from the gas giant’s gravitational force causes geothermal activity within the core. Just like our planet it has to be vented, hence the proposal for hydrothermal vents.

Only the surface is thought to be ice, the thickest ice in our solar system, but underneath that is believed to be a liquid ocean. If scientists are right the hydrothermal activity is what would make this possible, heating the water just enough to keep it from freezing near the mantle. How can they guess this from a few flybys and satellite snapshots?

The surface of Europa’s ice sheet is heavily scarred, and most of it isn’t from collisions with interstellar objects. Like Lake Vostok, a pocket lake within a sheet of ice in Antarctica, Europa is believed to be dotted with miniature bodies of water. The reason is because of the pattern of the scarring, there is no uniform structure to it.

It’s possible that as the moon orbits Jupiter the stress causes the ice to crack, but it wouldn’t be quite so varied and so jagged. When hydrothermal activity increases on the ice it may briefly unthaw some of the ice above the pocket lake (not entirely) and shift the ice around, causing the terrain patterns.

So now that we know what’s probably happening underneath the ice, what’s the plan for getting us to it? I’m going to ask you to try to keep your mind out of the gutter as we move on to our next section…

The Penetrator: Between the Ice Sheets

Europa had better prepare its Uranus for scientist Sanjay Vijendran’s payload delivery system because it looks like whatever method the mission chooses to drill into the planet “The Penetrator” is what’s going to be getting it there. It’s already been “drilled” through its paces, and is officially marked as ready for space travel. It’s fairly light given what it does, meaning an orbiting craft could launch several at a time, and it’s extremely durable.

So what is it and how does it work?

During testing the Penetrator was aimed at a 10 ton block of ice in order to simulate the effects of what it will be like to land (or crash really) on the surface of Europa. Weighing 44 pounds, it hit the block at 760 MPH showing a peak deceleration of 24-25,000g. For a point of reference, an ejecting fighter pilot experiences 14gs and typical soft-landing spacecraft experience 30-40gs.

What’s even more incredible is it was fully loaded with instruments and everything was just fine. All that happened was a little cosmetic damage, a few scratches in the paint. Being that it’s capable of burrowing up to 3m into the surface without the use of a drill, this could be the most useful tool in planetary exploration to date. It could deliver a vast array of scientific equipment for analysis of various factors. From seismometers to chemical labs.

The Penetrator is split into two different sections, the warm bay and the cold bay. The cold bay is for taking in samples and the warm bay houses instruments and keeps them from being damaged by the extreme temperatures on Europa (minus 200 degrees Celsius).

Its designer, Vijendran, has made note of its advantages over soft landers. Where they have to slow down, this can hit at full force, so all the space wasted from expensive instrumentation meant to decelerate a craft can be utilized by other items.

And just what might those other things be? Let’s take a look at some of the other toys possibly going along for the ride to Europa.

Lasers, Auto-Gophers, And Cryobots, Oh My!

So now that we know how they intend to get onto the surface and drop off the equipment, what exactly are they bringing? And not just that, what exactly is this equipment going to do and how does it work? That’s a very good question and I’m so glad you asked it. The answer however is sort of difficult because as of the time of this writing, even the scientists aren’t sure what to pack in their lunchbox yet.

First and foremost they’re going to need something to drill into the ice. Secondly they’re going to need something to obtain and analyze samples. Lastly the equipment needs to be extremely durable and able to withstand the tremendously frigid temperatures.

Two scientists named Victoria Siegel and Kris Zacny have two very separate approaches to this same problem.

The Cryobot

According to Siegel’s team at Stone Aerospace the ocean is where it’s at, “That’s where the big stuff is going to be happening,” she says. But in order to get down to that “big stuff” we have to be able to drill through 10 km of ice. (That’s a little over 6 miles.) There is nowhere on Earth with a sheet of ice 6 miles thick. The Antarctic Ice Sheet is the closest we have at 2.6, but we’re still talking about something over double that. And it’s an exponentially colder and harsher environment trillions of miles away.

Not to mention drilling creates problems. There’s a lot of moving parts, in order to go deeper extensions need to be added, and if something breaks it’s not like a maintenance crew can just catch an interstellar taxi to Europa to fix it. The VALKYRIE cryobots hope to solve all of those problems and give the team just what they’re shooting for.

They have been working on a device since 2011 that is capable of using meltwater (water sucked up through the jets and heated) to bore its way through the ice. Once it reaches the ocean it will launch a small submarine from its belly to get a bird’s eye view of the world beneath the ice and to collect water samples to scan for signs of life.

Listen to how ScienceNews.org describes the working of the cryobot.

“The cryobot, a tube about as long as a compact car, holds wires coiled within a sleek aluminum frame and five jets arranged in a domed head. By heating aluminum blocks within the head, the cryobot can melt ice, and then suck in the water and shoot out hot streams. To thaw the ultracold ice of Europa, the bot will need to carry some sort of onboard nuclear reactor. Siegel and colleagues are testing their device on Earth using laser light pumped down a fiber optics wire connected to the machine.”

As of now the cryobot has moved into Phase-II of its development and the underwater submersible, being developed by NASA are solid candidates for the mission to Europa. The only thing (like most ambitious missions) that could possibly hold them back is funding. Launching a piece of equipment like that is costly and time will tell if the government is willing to shell out the funds necessary to give Stone Aerospace the chance to prowl the depths of Jupiter’s moon, and the go-ahead to launch a nuclear device to the surface of a foreign and pristine world.

The Auto-Gopher

The Auto-Gopher is a wire-line rotary hammer drill. In other words, it smashes its way through the ground as it digs into it. Kris Zacny of the company Honeybee Robotics believes that this is the way to go. It’s cheaper to use a drill then a robot, not to mention this will require a significant amount less power to operate. So how does it all work?

“It’s like a fishing rod,” Zacny says, “and at the end of the fishing line, you have a drill.” I suppose that’s an apt description if you’re used to fishing with explosives. (Metaphorically speaking) The teeth that jut out on the end of the drill are made of tungsten carbide and to get it through the particularly rough spots in the ice they gave it the ability to “thump” its way through by adding in a percussive system.

It only draws about 350 watts of power all in all. That’s less than your microwave uses. The whole thing is attached to a wire and pulley system so that sections don’t need to be added or removed. And now they have funding for an even better drill. From the same ScienceNews.org article check out this excerpt.

“Now the team is working on a new and improved drill, the AMNH Deep Drill, named after its funding source, the American Museum of Natural History. This drill will shuttle rock or ice cuttings to a container inside the tube instead of creating cores that have to be pulled from the borehole. And researchers plan to pack electronics and equipment, such as a microscope and sensors, inside the tube.”

This method has several advantages. It means every foot that the device goes down will be analyzed for scientific record and the Kevlar coated wire is strong and avoids using bulky extensions that would be difficult to add and remove. They’re also doing research into carbon nano-tubes (so did we! “Nano-Tech:Big Problems, Small Answers”) in order to make the device even more lightweight, making the Auto-Gopher just as, if not more, appealing to potential backers.

In my personal opinion they should combine the underwater submersible with the drill and go for broke. But what do I know? I do know that this is all expensive, and while the president wants to give funding to space programs, there isn’t a whole lot of money to spare, (what with the bankers needing bailouts for gold Cadillac’s, Rolex’s, and private jet fuel.) So what’s the plan?

Budget “Clipper”

NASA’s got a plan for Europa exploration as well. It’s called Clipper. It’s a highly advanced, extremely durable satellite that will optimally perform 45 flybys of the ice moon at varying altitudes. It will take highly advanced pictures of the surface, scan the exact thickness of the ice (right now the thickness is just an educated guess), document radiation levels in the atmosphere and record exact temperatures on the entirety of Europa, there are a host of other possibilities this device brings to the table as well.

The problem is the $2.2 billion price tag. The Obama administration is willing to work with NASA, but only to the extent of $1 billion. Dr. Britney Schmidt who is spear-heading Clipper is thrilled the President has brought Space Exploration to the party finally but the budget is less than ideal.

Another scientist however, by the name of Christopher McKay thinks that that will be plenty enough. If the whole goal is to examine the surface of Europa and scan under the ice then he has just the plan for them. He intends to land a camera and a microphone on the surface to “listen” to the ice.

No that isn’t a joke. As the ice moves around scientists will be able to tell exactly what’s going on beneath the surface. How they are able to do this eludes me but if there’s a person who can translate it then I can get behind it. While I doubt Europa will be appearing on the next Santana album for a live duet with the guitar playing legend, this “ice noise” could bring us one step closer to missions like Spiegel’s, Schmidt’s, and Zacny’s.

This kind of exploration builds confidence and public interest, which is exactly what missions like Clipper and the Auto-Gopher are hinging on now. But while America is scrambling for the scraps, the ESA grabbed a V-8 and got juiced up for a little mission of their own.

Europe JUICE-in’ Up For Europa

While NASA is tuned into the Europa station, the European Space Agency is looking at the whole picture. All three Galilean moons are thought to contain liquid water somewhere beneath the surface. If we’re going to be in the neighborhood, why not see all the sights? The ESA is planning to send a probe called JUICE (JUpiter ICy moons Explorer) into orbit around Callisto, Europa, and Ganymede.

The goal is to study the composition of water beneath, survey the topographical features of the planets more thoroughly, investigate their potentiality to contain life as we think we know it, and many, many other awesome plans. There’s something even better, this is already in the works.

The time frame to deliver JUICE to the Jovian system is 2030 with a launch from Earth taking place as early as 2022. The prospect of this is exciting and they have plenty of time to make revisions and add other instrumentation. Russia is developing most of the components and say what you will about their foreign policy, they make some really good stuff.

With all the options open to us above and many others that could become potential candidates in the future we will certainly be seeing some kind of landing within the next twenty to forty years. Time will tell. Speaking of time, here at TI&IT we like to delve into the history of things as well as the science, after all, what are we without our past?

The question really isn’t who discovered these moons, we attribute that to astronomer Galileo, but what some may not know is while he is credited, someone may have discovered them first. Let’s take a look at the remarkable past of Jupiter’s biggest satellites.

Galileo and the Medicean Planets

The photo above that looks like the scribbling of a madman in a ward is actually the handwriting of the brilliant Galileo Galilei himself. He discovered the planets sometime around 1609-1610 while he was making improvements to his telescope. He originally named them the Medicean Stars in honor of the Medici family, but later it was discovered they were moons.

And it wasn’t much later either. In fact, it may have been earlier. A man named Simon Marius, a German astronomer, had made observations a few days prior of the same nature. In 1614 he published his paper  “Mundus Lovialis” detailing his discovery of Jupiter’s moons. You can imagine this led to some heated debates between him and Galileo.

In the end it is irrelevant who discovered it first, Marius ultimately won out the name-calling as the celestial bodies Io, Ganymede, Europa, and Callisto were the names he selected. And thankfully history was kind enough to remember him for that. Remnants of his work are scarce but he’s credited as “a clever observer” which is probably not the most sought after title in the scientific community.

But then again, what are all of us now?

Jupiter’s moons are named after Greek mythology. To be exact they are named after the lovers of Zeus. For the sake of the length of this article already we won’t go into too much about this now, but I’m sure in the future we will be talking about Europa once again.

Europa’s Cold Future

While we probably won’t find space penguins orbiting around the moons of Jupiter or Saturn we may find some sort of life. That is if we can get the funding to get off the ground and get there. From cryobots to satellites there are a number of possibilities for exploring these intriguing heavenly worlds.

But as usual, money will hold scientific progress back. While that is depressing I hope you enjoyed this article on the future of Europa. Please share this around on Facebook and Twitter, I would be eternally grateful. Thank you all for reading, and enjoy this comical pun.

-Ryan Sanders

If you want to know more about any of the topics discussed above feel free to follow any of the links below! As always, thanks for reading and Happy Learning!

-       ScienceNews.org article on Europa Exploration

-       ESA website information on JUICE

-       Space.com article on JUICE

-       SpaceDaily article on Penetrator

-       Video of the Penetrator in action

-       Scientific Article on Cryobots

-       Wired.com article on how Cryobots work

-       Wiki on Europa Clipper

-       Honeybee Robotics website on their Auto-Gopher

-       Space.com breakdown of Europa’s potential chemical composition

-       More information on Hydrothermal Vents and adapting Ocean technology for Space

-       Interesting trivia facts about Europa’s history

-       Information about Europa’s specifications and composition

Earth to Rosetta, Time to Wake Up

After napping for a little over two years, the European Space Agency’s Rosetta is ready to stretch her…panels. On the 20^th of January this year the ESA held a competition to see who could issue the best wake-up call to the hibernating spacecraft. While I don’t know who won I do know they are quite lucky, as they win a free trip to Mission Control in Germany to see what Rosetta discovers.

In 2008 it passed a comet while flying by Mars. While 2867 Šteins had been discovered in 1969, this was the first time clear images of the comet were transmitted and its massive 5.6 km size could be clearly determined. In 2010 she flew by another one, 21 Lutetia, once again transmitting crystal clear images of an asteroid discovered in 1852. How was it discovered in 1852 with the limited technology available you ask? Probably because it’s over 1,000 km in diameter. That’s astronomically huge! (pun intended)

What makes this spacecraft so unique an sets her apart from other satellites is that Rosetta is the first one to be powered solely by solar technology! As it hibernated during its orbit around the sun to gain momentum its instruments were powered down in order to conserve energy. But while it was powered down it was gaining energy from the sun by gathering it on its massive solar arrays. Hopefully this will give Rosetta the extra “umph!” she needs to survive her mission out in deep space where she will only receive 4% of the sun’s power.

It’s been awhile since we’ve flown out into the deep reaches of space here at To Infinity And…In Theory. So let’s strap on our rocket boots, throw on some Elton John, and climb aboard the red eye to see what Rosetta and her little buddy Philae the Lander have in store for scientists at the ESA.

Comets, Asteroids, and Meteoroids

Yay! We get to start with terminology. I know what you’re saying, “my favorite…” but it’s important to understand there are very important differences between comets, asteroids, and meteoroids. The only reason I do this is because technically these words aren’t really interchangeable like so many others in Astronomy. There are a few key variances.

Let’s start with a comet.

Quite possibly one of the most well-known comets is Halley’s. It was discovered in 1531. Then discovered again in 1607…and again in 1682. It wasn’t until a man named Edmond Halley dug through the various reports of these sightings that he came to one very important conclusion. This comet was the same one. He also predicted that it would come back in 1758. While he didn’t live long enough to see that he was right, plenty of other astronomers did, which led to this comet being named after him.

So what makes a comet a comet? A comet is defined as a relatively small solar system body that orbits the Sun. When close enough to the Sun they display a visible coma (a fuzzy outline or atmosphere due to solar radiation) and sometimes a tail. But what creates the tail on a comet?

As it passes by the sun (which as we know is pretty darn warm…) it begins to burn gases and ice off the surface of the orbiting rock. These superheated gases trail behind the asteroid, sometimes miles long, as it rockets through space. This is what turns the space rock from an asteroid into a comet.

Speaking of asteroids, let’s talk about those next.

That’s Ceres. I know, I know, you’ve seen Armageddon and you’re saying “woah dude, that isn’t an asteroid, that’s totally a planet.” Well you’re half right. It was discovered in 1801 by Sicilian astronomer Giuseppi Piazzi. Originally he thought it was a comet but upon further observation it was determined that it was indeed a planet. Well…a dwarf planet. (They prefer to be called “Little Celestial People”) But seeing as it floats within the asteroid belt, it’s earned its moniker as an asteroid.

Asteroids are small solar system bodies that orbit the Sun. Made of rock and metal, they can also contain organic compounds. Asteroids are similar to comets but do not have a visible coma (fuzzy outline and tail) like comets do. It floats happily between Mars and Jupiter and actually contains one third of the mass of the entire asteroid belt. (Once again…huge) That’s not to say that if it broke orbit and passed close enough to the sun it couldn’t develop a tail, after all, the surface is believed to be made of dust and ice, perfect conditions to grow a coma. However that scenario is quite unlikely considering it’s been content with its lot in life to this point.

The third space rock type we’re going to talk about now is the Meteoroid. This particular floating stone actually has three forms like a Dragonball Z villain. Meteoroids are the first stage, Meteors are the second, and Meteorites are the last. We’ll break down all three in the next section.

A meteoroid is a small rock or particle of debris in our solar system. They range in size from dust to around 10 meters in diameter (larger objects are usually referred to as asteroids). But don’t mistake their smaller diameters for cute and cuddly. Once they enter the atmosphere of Earth they become known as a Meteor. Most of the time they’ll burn up in orbit, but as the blast in Chelyabinsk, Russia in February of last year showed us that’s not always the case.

Once a Meteoroid enters our atmosphere and becomes a Meteor about to cause an impending strike it is officially classified as a Meteorite. The effects of a Meteorite impact can be devastating, equivalent to several nuclear megaton blasts. (Time to call in Bruce Willis) That’s why NASA’s new Near Earth Object monitoring program is so important so we are able to identify threats like this long before they enter our atmosphere in the future so we don’t end up embedded in the crust of the Earth next to the dinosaurs.

So why am I telling you all this? Because the ESA is looking to land on a comet and it’s important to know the extreme challenges they face in doing this. Comets slingshot through the solar system gradually gaining speed as they play off the gravitational forces of the bodies they orbit. Asteroids like Ceres are essentially locked in orbit unless a huge impact was to send them rocketing out of alignment. (Typically that’s how an asteroid becomes a comet or a meteoroid)

Next we’ll talk about the challenges the ESA faces, how they intend to overcome them, and what they expect to learn from this unique mission into the far reaches of space. Let’s start with the biggest one of all, how exactly they intend to make contact with this orbiting mass. The details are far more intricate than you may think.

Space Darts

We’ve all played darts, but space agencies around the world have adapted the game to a whole new level. Think of it like this. When you look at a dart board you select the spot you want to hit. You close one eye, pull your arm back, take a couple practice swings and release it. If you’re experienced, nine times out of ten you hit what you’re aiming at.

Now imagine that dart board is several million miles away. It takes more than closing one eye and a deep breath to hit what they’re aiming for. It takes a series of complicated mathematical equations, physics, and a whole plethora of very expensive technology. Luckily, the ESA has all three down to a…well…a science.

When Rosetta was initially conceptualized in 1993 they were aiming at a different dartboard altogether. Comet 46 P/Wirtanen was caught in the crosshairs but due to postponements and complications with the rocket Ariane 5 ECA they switched it up. So in 2004, when Rosetta was launched its new target was designated 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.

But in order for Rosetta to “dock” with this comet certain parameters needed to be met at the outset. First and foremost speeds have to be matched. But 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko has been orbiting for a long time. It’s had thousands upon thousands of years to gather the speed it moves at. Unfortunately, we don’t have thousands of years to follow it in orbit trying to play catch up. So how are they going to dock with it?

Through a process called a Gravity Assist Maneuver or Gravitational Slingshot. What it’s doing is moving around the sun and using its gravitational mass in order to gain momentum. The process can be used to accelerate or even decelerate depending on the arc of the object in motion. During its approach vector it makes a wide loop first, then, in order to garner further velocity, the orbit gets smaller and smaller on each approach until finally it’s commanded to break free toward its target.

Think of it in terms of a tether ball. The ball tied to the end of the string in this analogy would be Rosetta; the pole that the string is attached to is the sun. When the ball is struck hard enough it makes a lazy, slow loop around the pole. As the string gets shorter and shorter the speed at which the ball is moving begins to increase until it reaches its terminal velocity. If the ball were to be released from the string it would rocket off in the direction of its trajectory until outside factors like gravity and resistance pulled it down.

However, as we all should know, the voids of space have no gravity or atmosphere; therefore there is no resistance to slow the object down until it enters the gravity of another celestial body. Because of this the object maintains its velocity and is able to quickly get up to the speed of its intended target. But this is just the first problem the ESA has to overcome, the second one, believe it or not, is far more difficult in comparison to that.

The gravity on 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko is a million times less than that of Earth’s. In other words, one wrong step and you’re floating off into deep space. (Yikes!) This poses a huge obstacle to the European Space Agency in getting Rosetta’s lander Philae to catch a piggyback ride through space.

With the gravity being so low on the surface of this comet one misstep could destroy over two decades of hard work and effort. Because of this Philae was outfitted with some special equipment to help it “stick” to the comet. Two harpoons will inject themselves into the surface to anchor it in place. Philae has also been equipped with self-righting landing gear to make sure he doesn’t tip over and once the feet make contact they will drill into the surface, further ensuring this multi-million dollar piece of tech doesn’t just fling off into space.

Outfitted with several different instruments including radio-spectrographs and sub-surface drills to take samples of the rock to determine the composition, this may be one of the most ambitious projects launched in recent years. But what exactly are they intending to learn from this mission? Would you believe me if I told you they’re looking to answer the question of where we came from? I hope so, because it’s basically the goal here.

But how exactly will some barren ice rock in space tell us where the complicated diversity of life on our planet originated from. Glad you asked. Let’s briefly explore that next in our final section today.

From Space Rocks to Building Blocks

Comet’s, Asteroid’s, and Meteoroids are all capable of containing a variety of materials. Certain classes of the space rocks contain mostly metals, some have been found to be highly dense carbon (diamonds), and some are even stranger still, because they contain organic compounds. If you don’t know, we’re organic compounds, and if you subscribe to the theory of evolution such as I do, then you know we all evolved from single celled organisms that likely were transported here by these tourists of the solar system.

Our planet didn’t start out as a planet. It started out as superheated gasses that formed into heavy elements. As gravity pulled those elements together it formed a solid mass. That solid mass slowly became heavier and generated more gravity and passing comets, asteroids, and meteoroids were pulled into its gravity. That is how we ended up with such a diversity of elements on the planets in our solar system…well, theoretically anyway.

But if some of the bacteria and organic compounds hitching a ride on the backs of these objects survived the entry into atmosphere that would certainly explain how we got here. That’s why landing on this comet is so important. By studying the subterranean composition of it and the formation of its coma as it passes the sun it will give scientists a much clearer understanding of exactly how comets play into the evolution of our solar system.

Philae is expected to make its daring descent onto the surface of 67 P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko later this autumn. I’ll be following this mission closely in the news and when new information develops I’ll be sure to write a follow-up blog on Rosetta and Philae. Until then, good morning, good morrow, and Godspeed Rosetta. I hope you enjoyed your nap, because now it’s time to get down to business.

-       Ryan Sanders

Thanks as always for reading and be sure to share this on Twitter, Facebook and Reddit and EVERYWHERE ELSE! J You guys and gals continue to make this one of the most enjoyable and ambitious undertakings for me to write and I hope they are just as enjoyable for you to read. Comments, questions, or corrections are always welcome so feel free to post them below. For further reading you can follow-up on any of the links listed below. Happy learning everyone!

-       Phys.org article on Philae Lander

-       Wiki entry on Rosetta

-       ESA overview of the entire mission, goals, and instruments

-       Information on the Chelyabinsk blast in Russia early last year

-       Space.com article on many unique facts of Halley’s comet

-       More information from the ESA on 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko

-       Information from NASA on Rosetta

Green Energy (Part 1): Four Score and Twenty Years Ago Fuel Cells Were Born ...(ish)

We’ve talked about green energy here at TI&IT before (Fossilizing Fossil Fuels ForFundamental Molecules) but coming up we’re going to get a bit more literal with it. In the 1990’s, researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) in Tennessee, United States put a patent on electricity producing Spinach. Well Spinach proteins to be exact, but I mean, if a salad can provide the energy for our bodies to function, why can’t it power our cars too?

And that is exactly the strange line of thinking that brought us gel-like artificial chlorophyll in North Carolina and the hydrogen fuel producing solar powered trees at MIT. But how does this craziness actually work?

Well unlike electrolysis, which uses metal connectors and electrical currents to separate Hydrogen from Oxygen molecules in water, this method uses solar power through a form photosynthesis. So from start to finish, it’s a clean, green, energy producing machine. And do you want to know the best part about this? It’s cheap.

That’s right. For so long Hydrogen fuel cells seemed to elude us due to the fact that the production methods byproducts were harmful to us, not energy efficient, and above all, were not cost effective for the small quantities of power it yielded. In fact, depending on which process scientists used for past extraction methods, the energy loss percentage could sometimes be as high as ¾. That’s a lot of waste when you think about it.

Not everyone can keep paying seven dollars a gallon here in the U.S. for gasoline. In truth, even the ones who can afford it don’t want to. We burn through billions of gallons of the stuff worldwide every year, polluting the environment and avoiding clean energy. For our next multi-part series at TI&IT, let’s take an in depth look at just how the brilliant minds at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) are looking to change this. But first, let me tell you a little bit about a War, the telegraph, and four men named Grove, Bacon, Olds and Ford.

Telegraph For Mr. Grove

Believe it or not, fuel cell technology goes back a lot further than you think. In fact, it technically predates the Civil War. I know what you’re thinking, “You’re full of crap guy. The combustion engine came way before the fuel cell.” The truth is, you’re wrong. But at the same time, you’re also right.

In 1839 a man named Sir William Grove went to work on what would later earn him the sobriquet “The father of the fuel cell.” It was a power cell of sorts that consisted of a zinc anode in dilute sulfuric acid and a platinum cathode in concentrated nitric acid, the two separated by a porous ceramic pot.

Grove discovered that by arranging two platinum electrodes with one end of each immersed in a container of sulfuric acid and the other ends separately sealed in containers of oxygen and hydrogen, a constant current would flow between the electrodes. The sealed containers held water as well as the gases, and he noted that the water level rose in both tubes as the current flowed.

This invention changed the technological landscape. The Grove Cell was quickly implemented into American telegraph systems. The cells were grouped together and soldered on a wooden table to increase their output. This configuration was known as a battery. (And as we all know a “cell” is the smallest component of a “battery.”) This became a staple in the Telegraph system until the time of the Civil War.

But a problem soon set in. The high volume of traffic across the lines would sometimes cause the Grove Cells to overheat and convert the chemicals to gas causing them to discharge Nitrogen Dioxide. This is bad. Nitrogen Dioxide is toxic if inhaled. The good news? NO2 has a distinct and acrid odor to it, so detection is relatively easy. However it can anesthetize the nose, meaning after you smell enough of it, you don’t notice it anymore. In a large quantity it will lead to Pulmonary Edema (fluid in the lungs). If overexposed you basically drown from the inside out.

Luckily it was replaced by the Daniell Cell, but that’s another story for another day…now what was I babbling about? Oh yes, fuel cells.

While the concept of hydrogen power was nothing new, (British scientists William Nicholson and Anthony Carlisle had already described the process of using electricity to decompose water into hydrogen and oxygen in 1800), Grove took it a step further by describing a new kind of battery. In 1843, he developed what he called, a gas voltaic battery. The funniest part of it all however was that, while it operated by producing electrical current through the melding of hydrogen and oxygen, the technology and understanding of chemical properties was limited by the times.

In short, while it was neat to look at in awe, nobody really knew how it worked.

German scientist Ludwig Mond and his assistant Charles Langer were the next to capture the public’s attention with what was truly the first fuel cell. In fact, they’re the ones who coined it the name. Even though Grove is considered the founder of the technology, these two took everything to a whole new level.

They introduced porous electrodes which increased the productivity, and in 1889, they built the first working fuel cell that operated using air and coal gas to cause the reaction. It was truly phenomenal, but they still weren’t entirely sure about what was happening. It seemed some materials were more conductive than others and they just couldn’t figure out why.

It wouldn’t be until almost the turn of the century that Friedrich Wilhelm Ostwald, a founder of the field of physical chemistry, provided much of the theoretical understanding of how fuel cells operate. In 1893, he experimentally determined the interconnected roles of the various components of the fuel cell: electrodes, electrolyte, oxidizing and reducing agents, anions (a negative ion), and cations (a positive ion).

But there was still work to be done in order to perfect fuel cells. And a man named Francis Bacon was determined to make that happen.

Submarines and Spaceships

Pictured above is Francis Bacon standing proudly in front of the first somewhat efficient Fuel Cell ever developed. (And Lordy Almighty it’s a biggun!) See, Bacon’s design differed from Grove’s and Ludwig Mond’s significantly, as well it should. While the other two were researchers and scientists not used to working with high temperatures and huge pressures in heavy machinery, Bacon was an engineer. (Remember to respect your Engineers in the scientific community ladies and gentlemen! You may dream it up, but these guys are the ones who build it!)

He proposed that with the right changes made to the original design that the Fuel Cell could be a viable source of power for Submarines. Building off the work of Emil Bauer just a few years before him and his research into Fuel Cells and high temperatures, Francis Bacon hit the lab and began wrenching away on his invention. His discoveries opened the door for all modern research into Fuel Cell technology.

He first concluded that the diluted acidic solutions used to power the Fuel Cells currently available just wouldn’t cut it. The chemicals were far too corrosive to be truly efficient. He replaced the acid mixture with potassium hydroxide which wouldn’t damage the electrodes as much. The next change he made was even more significant. The platinum cathodes that Grove had used as his primary method of conducting electrolysis were switched out for much cheaper activated nickel electrodes.

In 1940 he moved to London to continue his research with a little more funding and equipment. It was here he discovered his “Eureka!” moment. Bacon developed the first double-cell with one unit for generating the hydrogen and oxygen gases and the other for the fuel cell. This could be reversed so that it acted as both an electrolyzer and a fuel cell. But problems were encountered due to the high operating temperatures and pressures and the corrosive nature of the chemicals.

The world was impressed to say the least and fuel cells moved from the realm of obscurity and scientific curiosity into the realm of, “hey, these may actually be useful!” The government gave him access to porous nickel, an invention so strange that it was actually protected under the Official Secrets Act. He used it to develop electrodes with large pores on the gas side and finer ones on the electrolyte side. This resulted in a much more stable product. The government began throwing funding at Bacon by the fistfuls.

Instead of embezzling this money (like we would in modern times *eye roll*) Francis actually used it for the betterment of mankind and in 1959 he built the Hydroxide Fuel Cell pictured above. But instead of going into the ocean the world had another idea for this wondrous new technology. And no, it wasn’t bombs.

Pictured above is a cutaway of the Gemini V fuel cell. As the Soviet Union was sending Sputnik up into Space, the United States knew it couldn’t just rest on its laurels, we had to compete. Bacon’s fuel cell model became the standard after outperforming standard battery power of the time by over 200 times the longevity of safe operation.

While the design may have changed over the years, variations of Bacon’s original fuel cell are used today to put spacecraft into orbit. During the Apollo missions, fuel cells were also used to produce clean drinking water. While they were capable of splitting hydrogen molecules from oxygen molecules they could also put them back together. (Hydrogen plus oxygen equals yummy nutritious water!)

It’s too bad that American’s favor cheap over innovation, a trend met with recent unrest over jobs leaving North America to head to China. But as Henry Ford discovered, an assembly line trumps manual progress every time.

Moving Forward

With the advent of the internal combustion engine, fuel cells seemed to fall to the wayside. While they were developed alongside fuel cells technically, the mass beginnings of petroleum excavation in the mid-1850s began to degrade public interest. After all, fuel cells weren’t widely understood, capable of producing toxic gases, and didn’t provide the same amount of power and efficiency that ICEs did.

China had already proven to the world the efficient nature of division of labor. To explain it, let’s modernize it a little bit. Pretend you work at McDonald’s as a cashier. Your duties involve interacting with the customer, taking the order, exchanging currency, and handing the customer a receipt. The order then goes to the back where a fry cook makes the burgers and French Fries. Another worker then comes up, bags the food, and hands it to the customer. At the end of the day another worker cleans the dishes while a manager counts all the income that was made that day in the back office before dropping the deposit off to the bank.

The splitting and designation of these tasks is called division of labor.

And of course the brilliant Chinese had developed this process.

Industrialization also brought about the decline of the fuel cell technology. It gave us machines that could cut and smooth parts using jigs and fixtures to guide them. The only human interactions were pressing a button, moving a platform, and placing the material to be cut. These were called interchangeable parts. Fast, accurate, and efficient, this lead to the assembly line.

While a man named Ransom Olds (you may remember him from his namesake, the “Oldsmobile”) developed the assembly line process, Henry Ford is often incorrectly credited. Ford did NOT invent the assembly line; he just perfected the process by adding conveyor belts into the mix. This resulted in the ability to build an entire Model T automobile in approximately an hour and a half. Now that’s production.

Luckily though fuel cells didn’t die out entirely and were just pushed aside temporarily.

Until now.

The “Anodes” of History

We too often think of fuel cells as being “new technology”, but as you can see, their rich history takes us back now almost two centuries! While we may have improved on the materials and costs of building fuel cells, and we understand now how they do what they do, the core of them has never changed. They still require electrodes, they still require chemical production, and they still aren’t as energy efficient as the internal combustion. However…

Recent advances in Green Technology (and I literally mean “Green”) have put fuel cells back into the mainstream again. Now that scientists and OPEC executives are beginning to grow squirrely over potentially dwindling petroleum wells, this could be the technology that saves the human race from ourselves.

Tomorrow we’re going to talk about how modern fuel cells operate and what they’re being used for currently. We’ll also discuss the various methods that go into creating them and who is pioneering the field now. Plus, a new way of gathering the fuel for the cells that should “leaf” you totally breathless. Hope you enjoyed the first part of this guys and gals! And thank you so much for reading To Infinity And…In Theory, it truly means the world to me.

-       Ryan Sanders

(Dilbert, from the gut-bustingly hilarious Scott Adams)

Thank you for reading this article on the history of the fuel cell. If you would like to know more about any of the above material you can by following any of the links below. Feel free to share this on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or any other Social Media site you may use. Happy learning everyone!

*Some time frames may be subject to discrepancy. Dates used in the article above are the assumed time frames within 1-3 years as information on specificities vary depending on the source. While I try to remain as accurate as possible, I am only as accurate as my sources. Thank you for your understanding.*

-       History of the Internal Combustion Engine

-       Applications of Fuel Cells

-       A timeline of events in Fuel Cell history

-       History of Fuel Cells and their correlation to modern trends

-       Full explanation and history of the Olds/Ford Assembly Lines

-       Early Fuel Cells in NASA applications

-       Wiki entry on Sir William Robert Grove

-       Brief history of the telegraph and use of the Grove Cells