ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Robo-explorer goes deep

Posted: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 9:36 PM by Alan Boyle

After a successful deep-water test, an autonomous robot is gearing up to go where no machine - or human, for that matter - has gone before. It’s all part of an experiment that could set the stage for seeking life on Europa, an ice-covered moon of Jupiter.


Stone Aerospace
The DEPTHX autonomous robot looks like an 8-foot-
wide orange mushroom packed with electronics.

The autonomous underwater robot is called the Deep Phreatic Thermal Explorer, or DEPTHX for short. The contraption looks like an 8-foot-wide (2.5-meter-wide), 2,860-pound (1.2-metric-ton) orange mushroom - but it has the tools and the smarts to swim down to the depths of a water-filled cavern, create its own maps of the area, then come back up with scientific samples.

This month, DEPTHX successfully explored a 377-foot-deep (115-meter-deep) sinkhole in eastern Mexico, called La Pilita, as a warm-up to an even bigger expedition planned in May: DEPTHX will be dropped into what's thought to be the world's deepest sinkhole, Mexico's El Zacaton, and could descend hundreds of yards (meters) into a dark region no diver has been able to reach. (One diver died trying to plumb Zacaton's depths back in 1994.)

DEPTHX is built to find its own way around an underwater cave without any tethers, guidance or communication from above. That autonomy is what distinguishes DEPTHX from remotely operated vehicles - such as the Alvin submersible robot, which made such a splash in the search for the Titanic.

"The difference between this and an ROV is like the difference between an airplane and a car," said Bill Stone, principal investigator for DEPTHX and the head of Texas-based Stone Aerospace. "This is designed for unexplored territory, where there is no external navigating."

But autonomous navigation is just half of DEPTHX's mission, Stone told me. The other half is what Stone calls "science autonomy" - that is, the robot's ability to identify targets of scientific interest and bring 'em back alive. DEPTHX can check the salinity, acidity, conductivity and chemical content of the water around it, and follow the "scent" to a hydrothermal vent or a microbial mat. It can even look for color variations that signal the presence of organisms. Then it can extend a mechanical arm with a coring mechanism, grab a sample and bring it up to the surface.

The samples from La Pilita's depths have not yet been analyzed - but DEPTHX microbiologist John Spear, an assistant professor of environmental science and engineering at the Colorado School of Mines, expects that those samples will contain several new phyla, or divisions, of bacteria.

"If that's the case, that will be the first robotically cataloged, previously unknown division," Stone said.

The Mexican sinkholes, also known as cenotes, are just the first targets for DEPTHX. Stone Aerospace and the other partners in the project - including the Colorado School of Mines, Carnegie Mellon University, the Southwest Research Institute, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Colorado and the University of Arizona's Lunar and Planetary Laboratory - are already planning to build a more robust robot for exploring Antartica's subsurface lakes.

The ultimate goal is to produce a breed of robots that can be sent to Europa or other moons where liquid water may exist beneath a miles-deep layer of ice. The mother probe would melt its way through the ice and release a nuclear-powered base station into the water below. DEPTHX's grandchildren would then fan out from the base and look for undersea samples bearing the signatures of alien organisms.

Along with Mars, Europa offers one of the best opportunities in the solar system for finding extraterrestrial life. "That's why this is so important," Stone said.

He said the Europa project could get off the ground in seven to 10 years - if only NASA had the money. NASA has allocated $5 million for the DEPTHX project so far, but all that cash has been spent, Stone said.

"Effectively, we're out of money and running on overhead," he told me. "There are a few of us, including myself, who haven't been paid in six or seven months. ... The budget was about $5 million, and we're probably a quarter of a million over that. It's the same at some of the other institutions involved in this."

Despite the tight budgets, Stone and his colleagues are proud of what they've done and intend to keep on doing it - with potential funding from NASA as well as the National Science Foundation and international partners. "They could not have paid Lockheed Martin half a billion to do what we did," he said.

For more about DEPTHX, check out the Carnegie Mellon University news release, the project Web page at CMU's Field Robotics Center, the DEPTHX page at the University of Texas, Stone Aerospace's press kit (which includes video clips of the robot in action) and this report from Popular Science.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Great technology, but I personally think its a waste for several reasons.

1) Europa is bathed in Jovian radiation so you are definitely not going to find anything within three feet of the surface.

2) I can not imagine enough sunlight penetrating the surface to give energy to anything beneath. (I could be wrong, but how would something survive in total darkness without sunlight, volcanic activity, etc.)

3) We still have no clue how thick the surface of Europa is, and we would be drilling/melting through something as thick as our own crust on Earth

4) Even if all of the above could be "reasoned against," we would have to launch a strong (and perhaps large) nuclear powered craft, which most nations would protest against (remember the Pluto probe?).

Although I still think this is a cool idea (and would support it on the basis of exploration alone) I don't see this getting off the the ground because of:

5) NASA is more focused on human exploration than robotic exploration (a good thing in my opinion as we have watched the stars for too long).

Despite being an optimist, (and wanting something like this to happen) I have my doubts. Perhaps those wiser than I could give me hope for this succeeding.
Alan -- just shows to go you - private enterprise is too "busy" making money to ever become involved in projects like this (life giving and life saving at the same time) while NASA and its scientists work overtime and without pay to get the job done.
Wouldn't this thing freeze or reach temperatures too cold to operate in and its engine stop if the area is too cold? Or, is it able to operate in any temperature, no matter how cold or how hot?
Darnell, I'll take a crack at the points you raised:

1. Actually, this probe will have to be designed to melt its way down through miles of ice. Astrobiologists speculate that the best places to look for life would be in the subsurface ocean, totally below the ice, or along the sides of the crevices that are periodically refreshed by upwelling water and slush ... probably miles down the side of the crack.

2. Scientists think that the energy for life is provided by tidal heating ... that is, the flexing of the Europan core as it orbits Jupiter. There is reason to suspect that such flexing can create tectonic movement and volcanic activity on the seafloor, similar to what you seen on Earth's seafloor. Refer to the "Tidal Heating" section on this Web page: http://www.resa.net/nasa/europa_life.htm

3. Yes, it's a challenge. Galileo data indicate that the ice layer is perhaps 10 kilometers deep or even deeper, and that the subsurface ocean could be 30 to 100 kilometers deep - potentially far deeper than the oceans on Earth.

4. Yes, it would take a nuclear-powered probe. Stone estimates something in the 100kw range. This is what was being discussed for the now-canceled JIMO mission to Jupiter's moons. NASA has gone back and forth on nuclear-powered probes ... that was what Project Prometheus (remember that?) was all about.

5. Yes, point well taken. The shift of money from space science to the exploration program is why Europa mission studies are running on empty.
Edward, Stone said that the Europa seabot, as currently conceived, could operate in conditions where the water/slush was twice as viscous as water on Earth ... but it would have to piggyback on a "melt probe" to get through the surface ice/slush to begin with. It sounds as if it wouldn't be designed to move well through ice, slush or slurry. If it's ice all the way down, that would be a bad thing.
I am glad to see some folks right here in Texas are involved in such a worthy endeavor!

Darnell, here is some hope on how this could succeed...

1) The goal would be to search for signs of life in a possible underwater ocean under a mile or more of ice.  Water can make for a good radiation shield, so Jovian radiation would not preclude the possibility of life.  The greatest problem with radiation might be trying to get a signal back up to the surface!  (Might need a communications line to a surface relay unwound behind the base station as it sank?)

2) The discovery of various "extremophiles" over the last few years has shown us that life can exist under some remarkably hostile conditions, and neither sunlight nor volcanic activity are required, some life forms can derive energy simply from chemical reactions.  For example, see -

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6928753/

3) I'm not sure that Europa's ice sheet is quite as thick as the Earth's crust.  But getting through ice is easier than solid rock - the base station just melts the ice, and the moon's own gravity does the rest.

4) A nuclear-based power source would of course need to be designed to survive a launch failure intact.  But the fact remains that solar energy is reduced considerably when you get to the outer plants.  If you plan on doing much beyond taking pretty pictures (like melting though several miles of ice), you are going to need a stronger power source.

5) Human space exploration has also been languishing somewhat lately - man hasn't been out of low earth orbit for decades, and NASA is going to be without any manned spaceflight capability for several years after the shuttle retires in 2010.  Manned and robotic exploration shouldn't be an either/or proposition, however, they should compliment each other.  (For example, before Neil Armstrong ever set foot on the moon, NASA sent the "Surveyor" series to gather the information needed to make the Apollo landing possible) 

But imagine if a probe actually FOUND extraterrestrial life on Europa (or Mars, or Ganymede, or...) the incentive it could generate to send a manned mission out there to check it out in person!
I'm surprised at everyone having missed the point of this article. The advances in computer science in the last several years means that we can finally start on delivering the implied promise of 50 years ago. Artifical Intelligence, since the real thing seems to be in short supply around here.
All they have to do is send the thing to Loch Ness, and they should be able to raise money pretty quickly. These scientists need to think like the great showman Tesla and get the public behind them.
(This story reminds me somewhat of robots in the Matrix that searched the underground transits looking for Neo and Morpheus)

I think what is truly interesting about this robot is that we are entering an age where climate concerns, and tied to that, water concerns will be major issues for the planet. Finding out what opportunities exist for mankind at remote depths is a logical step, and automated systems that can intelligently navigate those environments makes complete sense.

As with all space endeavors, there are always those that try to place an immediate "ROI" on whatever is spent on a project. Exploring Europa seems very reasonable based in the ice evidence and sub surface water. As with any journey of discovery, there are risks and rewards. The only true risk here is in the technology matching the environment into which it is placed, and the rewards potential seems huge.
2) I can not imagine enough sunlight penetrating the surface to give energy to anything beneath. (I could be wrong, but how would something survive in total darkness without sunlight, volcanic activity, etc.)

So what? Who told you sunlight was a prerequisite for finding life? We have numerous examples of communities of life right here on Earth that do not get their energy from sunlight. We discovered deep sea volcanic vent colonies as early as the 1970's

"4) Even if all of the above could be "reasoned against," we would have to launch a strong (and perhaps large) nuclear powered craft, which most nations would protest against (remember the Pluto probe?)."

The nulear power cells we design today pose very little risk to the environment, even in the event of a launch failure. They have very carefully crafted containment canisters which can remain intact even if the rocket the are aboard explodes at altitude and falls back to Earth. Ignorant, scared people protest against everything we do. Tell them to get bent. Problem solved.
Dear Alan, 

   Thanks for the fine coverage of the DEPTHX project, for which I am a consultant.  Also, please be aware of my book "Europa, the Ocean Moon:  Search for an Alien Biosphere" (Springer-Praxis Books), which addresses many of the issues raised by your readers. 

    Richard Greenberg, Prof. of Planetary Sciences, Univ. of Arizona
Robotic probes would be the only way to explore Europa in our lifetime. I would support a nuclear powered craft being sent to Europa because it would be a chance to discover life that evolved seperately from that on earth. Does anybody know if technology exists to withstand the pressure of 10 to 30 or more kilometers of ice and water? Would the pressure be less on Europa than being at the bottom of the ocean on Earth?
-"The nuclear power cells we design today pose very little risk".

Actually this issue could be resolved by simply sending small amounts (that would dissipate anyway in the event of an explosion) of nuclear fuel per launch of any satellite, then combining them later for the final mission. Just collect them for a while at a safe level in space, then go... space missions usually take years anyway, why not use that time productively with no real outcry from the people or risk at all?
ALL THESE ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA -- ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE.
--HAL, 2010

(sorry, couldn't resist ;->)
My opinion is: Understand all that is in front of our very eyes first, here on earth. Running away to other planets doesn't resolve our current world crisis. Save our Mother Earth! Conserve and live as one human race! Then united we can grow and reach for the stars.
The ability to build systems to withstand extreme pressures are actually already with us, we can build items that will withstand with ease the pressures found at the greatest depths of our oceans. The big challenge, as with Alvin, was to design one that would protect a human at these depths, which we were able to plainly do. If there is no need to protect a human then it becomes orders of magnitude easier to design and build such a craft as material strengths of metals and composites easily are up to the task of bearing equalized pressures upon them. It would seem to me that the major difficulties would be in designing the bouyancy chambers to compensate for the compression found at extreme depths. I know that with Alvin the bouyancy chambers were filled with a lighter than water material and weights added that could be dropped when one wanted to surface. I dont think that such a system would be appropriate when one is doing scientific observations of pristine ecosystems where one would want to not add materials that might change that ecosystem either by chemical changes due to the decay of those weights over time (rusting etc) or the unsightly 'trash' of the released objects. Another way to do the same would be using compressed gasses (Air or straight nitrogen) to displace the water in the bouyancy chambers, unless the depths are too great and the gasses would not be able to expand due to the pressures(Hmm, heated gasses, steam??), but on an extended survey (and certainly on Europa) there would be the difficulty of limited gas (or other material) supply. I for one believe that the "mothership" that would help deliver the Europa probes in the future would have to be a combination of self-contained repair/resupply (after a limited fasion) base as well as housing the actual 'melt through' systems and be a repeater for the communications link setup, probably (as D. Fitzpatrick points out) a fine coaxial line unwound behind it as it sank through the ice, leading to a surface repeater that would be able to send the information gained to further points, eventually to our own recievers here on Earth. Just a couple of technical points to ponder. I DO however applaud the building of such a marvelous craft, the fact that it IS autonomous and able to work independently without having to be 'micromanaged' by humans during it's missions is an astounding achievement that is sure to revolutionize the exploration of our deep seas and hard to get to places, such as the cenotes that it is currently exploring. The prospects for this craft and it's ilk are truly exciting! I want to Congratulate the team and the various folks that have helped to make this project an such an amazing success.
Thanks Alan, Patrick, D. Fitzpatrick and anyone else I missed.

I think I now have some hope for this project, at least on questions 1-4.

Now if we could only get some funding for this exploration...
While it is true that we have found microbial life buried deep within 'rock' on land, and fish with anti-freeze in their blood around both north and south poles, and various worms, shrimp and other shellfish living luxuriantly but lightlessly around deepsea vents, all those beings survive because they have evolved and adapted to the conditions in which they find themselves. But their progenitors were just worms and fish trying to make a home in inhospitable spaces within nature. Nature abhors a vacuum in more ways than one. Earth was not anything like it is now. Life was conceived in that darkness and turmoil originally, then born when everything was changed, and evolution made adaptability the prime function to shape life. Otherwise we would be overrun with new forms of life all the time, rather than many forms of life adapting from one primordial germ. Europa may or may not have the prerequisites of life, but it has not evolved into a life-sustaining environment, so we will not find science-fictional beings to greet us there under that foggy, foggy dew.
I hope it works as planned, though I doubt they will find any kind of lifeforms. It would seem to me to have extreme implications if two forms of life could come into creation so close to each other.
To Michael Hubbard: You're right. It would. If we find life on Mars and/or Europa or Callisto, it would tend to show that life isn't a rare thing in the Universe. Getting an answer to that is perhaps the *most* important reason to look for it. (Followed by how different the basic biology of such life may or may not be.)

To Darnell Clayton: The current thinking is that the tidal flexing that makes the entire moon Io highly volcanic, is operating in a less extreme manner on Europa, keeping much of its water as liquid, except near the surface. If so, we could have a situation down there like that around the so-called 'black smokers' in moderately active areas on the sea floors of Earth (a recent documentary by James Cameron, the name of which escapes me at the moment, illustrates the kind of light-free ecology that's possible, utilizing the chemicals from these volcanic vents).

Water is indeed an effective absorber of ionizing radiation (as anyone who's seen pictures of open-pool research reactors will note). Three feet of it (frozen or liquid) equals one foot of concrete. But I also acknowledge that useful light penetration will be problematic.

Also note that 'most nations' didn't object to New Horizons (or Cassini), much of that came from US citizens. Russia has not only launched, but had re-entry accidents with nuclear powered satellites already (notably Cosmos 954 in Canada, which was hardly the end of the world, just a matter of getting them to compensate Canada for the cleanup), so they'd be in the least position to object.

And the ice thickness is indeed an issue, which is why we need the Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) or something like it that can analyze the surface with penetrating radar, to get a better sense of just how much we would indeed have to deal with.
I think it sounds like a good idea to continue to explore as our forfathers did. This capsule looks just like the "bathyscath-triophe" from the 70's. It was made by Jaques Coustoue for deep underwater research in our oceans. We think we know so much about our planet and solar systems, any research helps.
"Europa may or may not have the prerequisites of life, but it has not evolved into a life-sustaining environment, so we will not find science-fictional beings to greet us there under that foggy, foggy dew. "

Europa does indeed appear to have all the prerequisits for life as we know it. Liquid water, organic chemistry, and an abundant source of energy. What else do you suppose is required for life to develop?

As for it not having "evolved into a life-sustaining environment", what precisely do you call a planet-sized ocean of liquid water and organic compounds?

And finally, we aren't going to find life on the "foggy, foggy dew" of the Europan surface because there is no atmosphere and it is baked in radiation from Jupiter. Then again, no one here is talking about finding life on the surface. We're talking about the giant ocean under the surface. You know, the one that has twice the volume of all the water on Earth. The water where most of the life on Earth lives.

This isn't rocket science, people.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=75437

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google