Architecture Working Group
2020 WORKSHOP FINAL REPORT

14-16 December 2020
Released: 02 April 2021

Moon Village Association
Architectural Concepts and Considerations
Working GroupMoon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Note: cover image downloaded from https://trek.nasa.gov/moon/#v=0.1&x=-14017.689857482903&y=7951.579513550002&z=8&p=urn%3Aogc%3Adef%3Acrs%3AIAU2000%3A%3A30120&d=&locale=&b=moon&e=37763.731727600054%2C-20426.61277771014%2C9728.352012634246%2C4523.453750610135&sfz=&w= on 10 March 2021.

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SUMMARY
The Moon Village Association (MVA) is an international non-Governmentalorganization (NGO), based in Vienna and established for the purpose of advancing
humanity’s presence and activities on and near Earth’s Moon. The MVA’s Moon Village(MV) Architecture Working Group (WG) is conducting during 2020-2021 an“Architecture Reference Case Study” – addressing prospects for the first humansettlement on the Moon, targeting the 2045 timeframe, but looking back toward thepresent (e.g., 2025 and 2035) and beyond to the further future. During 14-16 December
2020, the MVA Moon Village Architectural Concepts and Considerations Working
Group (MV Arch WG) organized an online workshop.
This document is the final report from that workshop. It comprises several
primary sections as well as ‘annexes’ that address specific details; the contents aredescribed on the second page following.
Participants in the event included individuals from the Netherlands, France,
Italy, Japan, Kuwait, The Netherlands, Ukraine and the USA, and other countries.
Co-organizers of the event included: Dr. Madhu THANGAVELU (Conductor,
Graduate Space Concepts Studio, University of Southern California (USC), and North
American Coordinator, Moon Village Association (MVA); INATANI, Yoshifumi(Member of the Board, MVA, and Co-Chair, MVA Moon Village Architecture Working
Group); and, John C. MANKINS (Vice President, MVA, and Co-Chair, MVA Moon
Village Architecture Working Group).

John C. MANKINS
Vice President, Moon Village Association
Co-Chair, MVA Moon Village Architecture Working GroupMoon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

A REMEMBRANCEIn March 2021, a good friend and space visionary, Charles (Chuck) Lauer passed. His many valuable
contributions toward realizing an ambitious future in space – at the December 2020 Moon Village
Architecture Workshop and in other venues and activities over a lifetime of accomplishment – will
be remembered.

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTSSECTIONPAGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.

TABLE OF CONTENTS...............................................................................................................

i...............................................................................................

1......................................................................................

5........................................

7

SECTION 4: WORKSHOP RESULTS BY SESSION & SPEAKER.......................................................

19

SECTION 5: WORKSHOP SUMMARY BY THEME.....................................................

53

SECTION 6: KEY FINDINGS & PLAN FORWARD.........................................................................

61

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTIONSECTION 2: WORKSHOP OVERVIEWSECTION 3: 2020-2021 MV ARCHITECTURE CASE STUDY PROJECTANNEXESANNEX A: GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS.....................................................................

A-1

ANNEX B: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS.......................................................................................

B-1.................................................................

C-1

ANNEX C: MOON VILLAGE ASSOCIATIONSCENARIOS (2020 UPDATE)ANNEX D: “MOON VILLAGE READINESS LEVELS” (MVRLS)i.......................................................

D-1

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK

ii

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION
The “Moon Village” represents an encompassing concept for a diverse assortment of plannedand prospective activities on and near Earth’s Moon. It is not limited to a specific project, location ororganization. The Moon Village is the ensemble of all efforts from the private sector, governments andothers to explore and use the Moon in a sustainable manner. It is not a literal village on the Moon, it is
not an “International Space Station on the Moon,” and it is not a single science facility.
The Moon Village will rely on automatic, robotic and human-tended elements to achievesustainable lunar orbital and surface operations, serving multiple purposes on an open-architecture basis.
Additionally, the Moon Village could achieve multiple objectives: astronomy, fundamental research,science, communications, space resources utilization, manufacturing, arts, entertainment, tourism,
discovery, human settlement etc. Moreover, it could stimulate new alliances between public and private
entities, including non-space industries and operators. Additionally, the Moon Village could provide astrong inspirational and educational foundation for younger generations.
The Moon Village vision can be a key factor for the peaceful future of humankind. It could serve
as a catalyst for government, scientific research, education and industry activities, stimulating a virtuous
cycle of economic development by all and for all humankind. Industry will build infrastructures, withthe assistance of government and private funding, and will also facilitate the creation of a governanceand contractual framework to sustain the architecture and create new products, applications, services,and markets. Another significant value of the Moon Village is its potential role as a proving ground for
missions farther out in the solar system.
To turn this vision into a reality, the space community should rally all sectors and disciplines
and help put the Moon Village vision on the political agenda – as an innovation platform, inspirationand network for research during the 21st Century.
1.1

Moon Village Association Overview

Created in 2017, the Moon Village Association (MVA) is a non-governmental organization(NGO), dedicated to the goal of advancing humanity’s exploration, utilization, development andeventual settlement of Earth’s Moon. The organization has more than 500 members and participants in
its activities, including individuals and organizations from countries around the world. The mission of
the MVA is to: “Facilitate and catalyze the world-wide decision-making process for the creation ofMoon Village infrastructure in/beyond LEO under sustainable and open-ended human and robotic
programs, in partnership with space agencies, industry and society by creating a forum/platform”, andin particular to:•Consolidate a compelling shared vision that fosters a sense of belonging and inspires a groupof people to create the Moon Village together.

1

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020•

Coordinate space and non-space organizations in supporting the vision, creating a new open
dynamic that includes ideas from space agencies, commercial space, donors, philanthropist
and citizens.

•

Stimulate global awareness of the prospective benefits of the Moon Village, with arguments
about how Earth’s citizens, regions, and the environment will benefit in the near and midterm if humanity advances to establish a permanent base on the Moon.

•

Coordinate discussions and workshops with financial industry experts and entities with thegoal to establish the necessary financial infrastructure and means to support the developmentof the Moon Village and associated economic activities.

•

Create a paradigm shift in how international space missions are being designed - in a fast, lowcost, creative and collaborative manner.

•

Foster the vision to the society at large to engage citizens worldwide.

•

Act as representative of the civil society and international space community in the decisionmaking process.

The Moon Village vision encompasses a large variety of actors and motivations, and it is gaining
support from a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including those beyond the usual space community:
industrial verticals financial sector, scientific community, civil society, and others. As a consequence, it isnecessary to implement new frameworks for discussion and cooperation, beside the on-going classicalgroups led by government Space Agencies and groups (such as the ISEC-G, ILEWG, LEAG, etc.). The
intent is not to replace these groups which deliver important beneficial results, but to offer the opportunity
to new non-governmental and non-space stakeholders to play a role in the definition of the concept.
1.2

MVA Architectural Concepts and Considerations Working Group

Within the MVA, there are various working groups; one of which is the Architectural Concepts
and Considerations Working Group (the “Architecture WG”). The Architecture WG concerns itself with avariety of technical issues that pertain to the Moon Village concept, including scenarios, building blocks
and case studies. The WG considers current government and industry plans, but looks beyond to the longerterm future on the Moon – as discussed in the paragraphs that follow.
1.2.1

Scenarios

The Moon Village Scenarios build upon the official government plans – for example, as
documented in the ‘Global Exploration Roadmap” (GER) by the International Space Exploration
Coordination Group (ISEC-G). Where the GER only extends to the end of the coming decade, however;the MV Architecture WG considers activities that reach to the middle of this century and beyond. Moreover,both government and private sector circumstances and plans are constantly changing: it is impossible toknow the future.
As a result, the Architecture WG defined a set of three possible high-level scenarios for how
humanity’s lunar activities may unfold over the coming years. These involve three distinct drivers forhuman activity at Earth’s Moon. The first version of the scenarios (developed in 2018) has been updated
during 2020 based on external events during 2019-2020, as well as working group activities. The new
scenarios involve the following drivers: exploration, science and development. Annex B of this reportprovides a preliminary update of the Moon Village Scenarios.

2Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group

1.2.2

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Building Blocks

Another Architecture WG activity is the identification of candidate MV systems, including the socalled ‘MV Building Blocks’ as well as key interfaces and standards among the building blocks. The MV
Building Blocks provide a useful reference for organizations and countries. One such activity has been
MVA’s PESC program (“Participation of Emerging Space Countries”), in which various teams in countries
around the world have used the Building Blocks and the Scenarios as a framework for developing their own
plans for prospective involvement in lunar activities.
1.2.3

Reference Case Studies

Finally, during 2020-2021 the Architecture WG is conducting its first design reference case study– focused on the idea of establishing the first human settlement on the Moon by 2045. This case study was
the principal topic for discussion during the December 2020 workshop that is the subject of this report.
Additional details regarding the current case study are discussed in Section 3.
1.3

The 2020 Moon Village Architecture Workshop

As noted above, the MVA’s Moon Village (MV) Architecture Working Group (WG) is conducting
during 2020-2021 an “Architecture Reference Case Study” – addressing prospects for the Moon Village,
targeting the 2045 timeframe, but looking back toward the present (e.g., 2025 and 2035) and beyond to thefurther future.1 USC, including the Viterbi School of Engineering has for years conducted well-known andrespected academic programs in space systems engineering and architecture studies – during 2020 focusing
in part on lunar surface developments.2 The recorded zoom videos for the event are available from the MVA
website at: https://moonvillageassociation.org/?s=moon+village+architecture+working+group+workshop
During the workshop and for several weeks following, inputs were invited from individual
participants in the form of “ITBCs” – i.e., “issues to be considered”, which were treated as though they
were inputs to the discussion during the meeting. This report reflects the ITBC inputs received.3
1.4

This Report

This workshop report is organized into several major sections, including: Section 1, the introduction(i.e., this section); Section 2, which provides an overview of the workshop and its organization; Section 3that summarizes the ‘going in’ version of the MV Architecture WG Case Study ‘going into’ the workshop;
Section 4, which provides a brief synopsis of each day and session at the meeting; Section 5, presenting a
synthetic summary of the results by theme; and Section 6, comprising key findings and the plan forward
for the case study. In addition, there are several annexes, including a glossary of acronyms, a listing ofworkshop participants, an update of the MVA scenarios (discussed below), and a brief discussion of a newtool for assessing maturity of prospective lunar activities described as the Moon Village Readiness Levels(i.e., the “MVRLs”).

1

See https://moonvillageassociation.org/about/working-groups/architectural-concepts/.

2

Please see https://sites.google.com/a/usc.edu/aste527/home.

3

Special thanks to everyone who provided an “ITBC” for the workshop – especially Mark Henley and Dallas Bienhoff.

3

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK.

4

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SECTION 2

WORKSHOP OVERVIEW
2.1

Workshop Goals & Objectives

2.1.1

Goals4

The goals of the 2020 MV Architecture Workshop included the following: (1) advance theimplementation of 2020-2021 studies by the Moon Village Architecture Working Group (MV ArchitectureWG); (2) communicate MV Architecture WG ‘work in progress’, including updates of the 2018 ”Moon
Village Scenarios,” updates of the 2019 Architecture WG studies, and the status and interim results from
the MV Architecture WG “2045 Space Settlement Case Study” – including identification of key ‘building
blocks’, interfaces and standards, etc. An additional goal included communicating and coordinating MV
Architecture Working Group activities with those of the Moon Village Evolution Team.
Finally, two other goals of the meeting were to review through invited presentations global concepts
and progress toward the key ‘building blocks’ and other related topics, and to review and update plans for2021 MV Architecture WG activities.
2.1.2

Objectives

In order to accomplish the above goals, the detailed objectives of the MV Architecture Workshop
were the following:•

Present the 2019-2020 MVA Architecture study results, focusing on the MV Architecture
Reference Case Study;•

Communicate the results of recent studies related to lunar and cis-lunar exploration,
development and settlement from various organizations, in the context of the MV Architecture
Reference Case Study;•

Identify critical ‘building blocks’ for the Moon Village –in particular those that might emerge
early and continue to play important functions in lunar development and settlement during theremainder of this century (including key interfaces and standards for interoperability);•

Examine in particular the potential role that extraterrestrial resources might play in lunar
architectures, including assessing potential connections among international government andcommercial programs now being undertaken.

•

Identify and assess technology options, readiness and risks associated with the various systems
concepts; and,•Discuss important topics for further development during 2021 as the ongoing studies continue.
The paragraph that follows described the organization of the December 2020 workshop.

4

Note that neither the study to date, nor this workshop addressed the various important governance or cultural considerations
that will, of course be associated with realizing a lunar settlement by 2045. Those topics may be considered in the second partof this study, and will be the topic of other, future MVA efforts.

5

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group

2.2

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Workshop Organization

The format for this online MVA event included four major types of sessions: (1) an opening session,presenting overview topics; (2) several working sessions, comprising presentations that address specificsubjects important to the lunar exploration, development and settlement; (3) a number of online 'panels' atwhich specific previously identified questions were discussed; and, (4) a closing summary session, which
included highlights from the meeting and plans going forward.
Several themes (corresponding to MV Architecture Working Group ‘building blocks’) wereaddressed, including:•

Theme 1: In Situ Fabrication of structural systems, including habitation systems;•

Theme 2: In Situ Resource Utilization (including propellant production);•

Theme 3: Life Support Systems (including air and water, food and agricultural systems,
bioregenerative life support, recycling of biological materials, etc.);•

Theme 4: Reusable Space Transportation Systems (including vehicles for access to the Lunar
Surface, refueling systems such as propellants, transportation to cis-lunar space, etc.);•

Theme 5: Power (including generation, storage and distribution); and,•

Theme 6: Lunar Market Development options, Lunar Surface Architectures, and other topics.

2.3

Workshop Logistics

Due to the ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic, a variety of online meeting tools have come into
widespread use during 2020; these enable new modes of communications and information gathering. The
technology chosen for this online meeting was "ZOOM". Participation was by invitation only, with aplanned maximum of 50-60 individuals. The sessions were planned to be recorded to facilitate the use of
the information presented for the development of an interim study report – planned to be completed (as adraft) during Winter 2020-2021. The meeting took place for several hours on each of 3 days to enable
participation by individuals in Europe, North America and Asia.
Presentations involved both slides (which were requested ahead of time) and an online narration in
real-time by the speaker. The time allotted for each presentation was approximately 15-20 minutes.
2.4

Workshop Deliverables
Planned workshop deliverables included the following:•

A written summary of the workshop; this document is that report.

•

Copies of the presented materials (i.e., slide decks); those presented materials that areavailable were posted on the MVA website (see: https//www.moonvillageassociation.org).

•

Recorded videos of the various sessions, which have also been posted to the MVA Website;
see above.

•

Updated planning for MVA Architecture Working Group in 2021; see Section 6 of thissummary report from the workshop.

•

Other products.

6

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SECTION 3

2020-2021 MOON VILLAGE ARCHITECTURE CASE STUDY PROJECT
During 2020-2021, the Moon Village Architectural Concepts and Considerations Working Group(‘Architecture WG’) is conducting a focused Case Study on the topic of the first human settlement on theMoon, to be established by 2045. This study builds upon the foundation of the Moon Village Scenarios,
which have also been updated during 2020 (see Annex D), and the Global Exploration Roadmap (GER)
produced by the International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISEC-G).
In addition to the Architecture WG case study, there is a parallel activity being conducted in Japan,
under the leadership of the WG co-chair, Prof. Yoshifumi Inatani who is also the lead for ‘MVA Evolution
Studies.’ A brief summary of Prof. Inatani’s presentation on the Evolution Studies is provided below inparagraph 3.1.
3.1

MVA Evolution Team Study Summary

The MVA Evolution Team (focused in Japan and lead by Prof. Inatani) is conducting a study ofthe longer-term prospects for lunar settlement in parallel with the MV Architecture WG Case Study. During
workshop Day 1 presentations (December 14, 2020), Prof. Yoshifumi INATANI provided an introductory
overview of the various Moon Village activities that are ongoing in Japan.
These activities look to the latter portion of the 21st Century – well after the timeframe of the Moon
Village Architecture Working Group (which is 2045). Prof. Inatani described various candidate elementsof a ‘value proposition’ for a sustainable lunar settlement. He highlighted a potential ‘analogue’ in terrestrial
economics: large scale mining in remote locations. Prof. Inatani recounted various details of ongoing lunar
programs and activities – focusing on both architectural issues for sustainability (e.g., food production),and the exceptionally high-costs of transportation hat would be involved if a sustainable lunar humanpresence were to be founded on such ongoing systems.
A stand-alone, Japan-centric working group has been formed to formulate a ‘reference model’ for
the Moon. Japanese activities are based on the presumption that for a sustainable society on the Moon, thathigh-frequency mass transport will be required. Such transport will of necessity involve dramatic reductions
in cost, and that the reference model must generate the key requirements for such infrastructure.
The key assumptions for this reference model included the following: a population of 1,000
individuals to scope supply chain requirements; these would include residents, workers and immigrants.
Several options are being considered for how this population might be realized, including (a) 1000 workers
with a one-year duration stay (workers with ages from 30-50); (b) 1,000 population including workers andtheir families with a many-year duration stay; and (c) a population of 1,000 in a steady-state population(including a sustainable ‘pyramid’ of individuals of various ages). Other key questions that the group willconsider will include the type and quality of habitation and the sources of revenues for the lunar activity,
such as lunar resources mining and processing and lunar space tourism (with a baseline of 10,000 visitorsfrom Earth per year).
7

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Prof. Inatani stated that requirements and constraints are imposed by various technical and nontechnical disciplines, and described how the team in Japan has organized to consider several factors,
including:
1. An architecture working group examining infrastructure for sustainable human presence on theMoon has been formed in Japan. This group comprises various sub-groups, including systems,
transportation, energy, construction, in situ resource utilization, and agriculture and life
support.
2. A business working group has been formed that will examine economic activities that might
create value on the Moon.
3. Also, a working group focused on regulatory issues (including rule-making and governanceissues) has been formed.
4. Finally, a working group has been formed that addresses human and cultural anthropologic
issues.
Also, many of the members of the various groups were indicated by Prof. Inatani.
Prof. Inatani summarized his remarks at the December workshop by noting that a reference model
for a village and/or society on the Moon is now under discussion, and observed that various assumptions
for such a reference model have been made. He noted that the interactions among other disciplines – suchas legal, business and human aspects – will impose the requirements and constraints to architecturalconsiderations. These will be necessary for studies to determine if and how a sustainable society may beachieved on the Moon.
As stated, the Japan-centered MVA Evolution Team activity is distinct from the Case Study, but
the two activities are being coordinated.
3.2

The MV Architecture Case Study 2020-2021: First Lunar Settlement by 2045

As noted previously, the MVA Architecture Working Group has updated the scenarios, firstpublished in 2018-2019; these are being published in parallel with this workshop report. During 2020-2021,
the MVA Architecture Working Group is also conducting a focused ‘case study’ that examines in greater
detail the potential consequences of a specific set of assumptions regarding the future course of events.
3.2.1

Key Assumptions
Key assumptions that provide a framework for this case study include the following:••

Assumption 1: Low-cost commercial access to low Earth orbit will transform cis-Lunar space
operations during the next decade; the only question: precisely when?
o

Two options were considered: (a) that low cost launch might be available before 2025, or(b) that low cost launch might be available before 2030 – which is a less optimistic future.

o

The latter, ‘option b’ as described above is the assumption that has been made forpurposes of this Case Study.

Assumption 2: Massive government mission opportunities and commercial market ventures
will be the result of the emergence of very low-cost launch; examples include:

8

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group

•

3.2.2

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020oSpace-based global connectivity through low Earth orbit (LEO) ‘mega-constellations’(such as StarLink, Kuiper, OneWeb, etc.)oThese ‘new space’ systems will involve large-scale, low-cost production of modular spacesystems at costs radically lower than those of prior large space systems.

As a result of these Assumptions, there will be several Consequences, including:oConsequence A: Affordable megawatt power systems (solar, wireless and potentiallynuclear) will become possible, throughout cis-lunar space and the inner solar system given
the market demand for powering mega-constellations.

oConsequence B: Development of physical space resources – beginning with the Moon
(and initially focused on volatiles) – will become affordable and feasible given large-scale
production of modular flight hardware and large-scale power systems fabrication.

oConsequence C: And, finally: given affordable hardware, then sustainable permanenthuman presence in cis-Lunar space will become technically feasible and financially viable– pending resolution of key biologically-derived questions.

The Economics of ‘Settlement 2045’

Any lunar settlement must have a sound economic foundation. This includes but is not limited togovernment-sponsored lunar activities. For purposes of the MV Reference Architecture Settlement Case
Study, it is assumed that in 2045 there will be a diverse set of market customers and providers for a wide
range of goods and services. The following are the assumed elements of a settlement economy:•

Contracting to Government Projects•

Providing Goods and/or Services to Government Missions•

Providing Goods and/or Services to Commercial Markets•

Contracting to Commercial Firms•

Providing Goods and/or Services to Private Individuals•

Selling to “Visitors” (e.g., government or commercial sponsored visitors)•

Selling to Public Space Travelers or “Tourists” (e.g., personally financed visitors)•

Selling to “Settlers” (i.e., those who intend to stay)•

Providing Goods and/or Services to ‘the Settlement’And others, to be identified.
3.2.3

Primary Questions being Addressed

There are several important questions that are being addressed through the case study project; theseinclude the following.
First: what do we mean by the term ‘settlement’ and what is the difference between a base or camp
and a settlement? Clearly, the International Space Station (ISS) is a ‘base’ – with resupply and no recyclingof trash depending on Earth, no permanent or semi-permanent inhabitants, etc. Although much larger, thestations in Antarctica are also not settlements for similar reasons. For the purposes of this study, thefollowing definition has been formulated:

9

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

“A ‘space settlement’ is an artificial environment located beyond Earth’s biosphere inwhich an indefinite number of generations of healthy human beings are born, raised, live,
work, and eventually die – without external inputs of materials from Earth beyond thosethat might be used in creating said settlement.”
Second, what is a reasonable, minimum size for a human lunar settlement? This topic has been
examined in various papers, in many cases in the context of sizing of concepts for multi-generational
interstellar vehicles. For purposes of the case study, the primary drivers are presumed to be human biology
and skill-sets required for operational viability. In that framework, it is assumed that an initial more-or-lesspermanent population of settlers will be about 40 individuals, with the goal to grow to an approximate
steady population of about 120 individuals.
Finally, there is the basic question of what is an optimal location for a human settlement on the
Moon? Answering this question depends upon identifying a set of requirements for such an installation,
including resources, operations, and other topics. The working set of these requirements are provided
below.
3.2.4

Requirements

A set of requirements were defined as a first step to address the key questions indicated above;these included primary requirements, secondary / biological sustainability-focused requirements, andtertiary market / mission related requirements.
Primary Requirements. The primary requirements for a lunar settlement include the following:
•
•
•
•
•

Access from and to Earth; In other words, the settlement must be located in a place where it ispossible to accomplish safe and timely vehicle landing and ascent.
Energy Flows; This challenge includes the availability of significant amounts of energy –particularly solar energy – and an environment that allows waste heat rejection.5
Concepts of Operations (CONOPS) considerations, including an acceptable degree of surface‘smoothness’ to enable surface mobility for various operations.
Resources considerations, including proximity to volatiles, surface access to permanently
shadowed regions (PSR), and the opportunity to transmit energy to the ‘cold traps’ in the PSRs.
And, others to be identified.

Secondary / Biologically-Driven Requirements. The secondary human factors and/or biologicallyfocused requirements identified for a lunar settlement included the following:•

Survival; primarily, requirements for breathable air, potable (i.e., drinkable) water and for
nutrition (food), as well as biological waste disposalo•5Also, requirements related to thermal management and radiation protection

Health, which was include addressing the single greatest unknown – requirements related tothe impact of partial gravity over the long-term on human health (including reproduction)

It is likely that both solar energy and space nuclear power will continue to be used in the exploration and development of theMoon; however, only solar energy can provide the essential capabilities to both scale-up easily and deliver the sheer scale ofthe power required for (1) harvesting lunar resources, (2) manufacturing of all types, (3) processing and storage of lunarderived propellants, and (4) self-sufficient bio-regenerative life support systems (BRLSS), including agriculture.

10

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group•MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Self-sufficiency, including again requirements for appropriate chemical cycles – including air(carbon dioxide, nitrogen, etc.) and water (including waste management), and others, such asoIncluding both personal and agricultural requirementsoBiological Life Support / Ecosystem, including Agriculture (all species required, etc.)oLighting / Energy Flowso

Recycling (all sorts)•

Concepts of Operations (CONOPS), including extravehicular activity (EVA) systems, EVA
mobility systems, and others such as repair and maintenance (both inside habitats and external tothem), communications, and others.

•

Quality of Life related requirements, including habitable volume (per person and for common
spaces – including ‘ceiling heights’ etc. Other QoL requirements include:oPersonal Energy (devices, lighting, thermal)oCommunications / Info

Tertiary / Market Driven Requirements. Finally, the tertiary market and/or mission related
requirements identified included the following:•

Maximum use of locally-sourced materials such that the settlement as a whole should be like a‘living thing’ – including the capability to ‘ingest’ new materials, to ‘digest’ those materials anduse them to manufacture materials and systems of value, to recycle and/or repair parts of thesettlement when they need to be decommissioned, and finally to ‘excrete’ (i.e., to remove toxic or
unusable materials from the settlement).

•

Capability to Grow, which includes the ability to add more volume with more air, more soil, etc.,
and to do so largely or entirely independent of Earth.

•

Tourism Accommodations, in particular the capability to support and/or entertain lunar tourists, asa primary market / economic opportunity to financially support the settlement. Such capabilities
could include:•oAvailability of sports and/or athletics.

oAccess to the outsideoUrgent medical careoInformation / infotainmentoAcceptable surface ‘smoothness’ for mobility

A Multi-Vehicle Spaceport, including the capability to support both multiple vehicles, and different
types of vehicles arriving and potentially departing, includingoDifferent types, different countries, different fuels

3.3

Baseline Description of ‘Settlement 2045’

3.3.1

Introduction

To begin the workshop, a baseline description of the MV ‘Settlement 2045’ Reference Architecture
was distributed (and presented at the meeting); this concept encompasses activities in several zones,

11

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

including the South Polar region of the Moon, low lunar orbit (LLO), cis-lunar space and Earth orbit. The
systems and activities associated with these zones have been examined in three timeframes: 2025 (justfollowing current plans for a human lunar return), 2035 (following the availability of low-cost lunar
transportation systems and 2045 (when extensive lunar surface operations may have emerged).

Figure 3.1 Overview of the Moon Village 2020-2021 Case Study Reference Architecture

The following are the zones referenced in the Case Study: Zone 1, south polar settlement habitation
location; Zone 2, south polar ice mining and ISRU operations location (in a PSR); Zone 3, a science
operations location on the far-side of the Moon (nomically in the South Polar Aiken Basin); Zone 4, LLO
operations location; Zone 5, cis-lunar space operations location (nomically an Earth-Moon Libration point);
and Zone 6, an Earth orbit operations location (nomically LEO). The primary focus for the discussions at
the workshop was on the lunar surface zones, in order of time at the workshop involving Zone 1 (habitation),
Zone 2 (mining and ISRU), and Zone 3 (science). The following paragraphs summarize the baseline‘Settlement 2045’.
3.3.1

Settlement Location

There are many locations where a lunar settlement might be established; the South Pole of theMoon may be pre-selected as the general site – based on the availability of ice at the poles and the fact thatmany lunar missions – including those of the US, China, Japan, India, South Korea and others – are targetingthe south pole. The question remains: where specifically? This case study has focused in on a site thatsatisfies the requirements stated in Section 3.2.4 above.
The key requirements that must be satisfied include: (1) proximity to one or more PSRs andresources located there; (2) availability of solar energy; (3) local smoothness and slopes (i.e., terrain thatcan be traversed readily by people and machines); (4) convenient surface access to locations nearby wherelanding and launch operations may be conducted; and, (5) convenient use of regolith to provide criticallyneeded radiation protection. In addition, to satisfy ‘quality of life’ (QoL) considerations it is desirable thatthe settlement be placed in a location where the Earth will be visible. The figures that follow present a seriesof relevant images of the Moon’s south pole that step one-by-one through these requirements.

12

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 3-1 presents a topographical overview of the entire lunar south polar region, while Figure
3-2 indicates locations where the presence of ice has been strongly indicated.6 However, the question
remains: where exactly to locate the settlement? Availability of solar energy is a key discriminator. Figure
3-3 presents average temperature across a number of locations around the South Pole – which is a simple
surrogate for the average illumination of the various locations – i.e., the availability of solar energy.

Figure 3-1 Topographical Overview of the Lunar South Pole and PSRs (Centeredat South Pole, out to 87° South Latitude)

Based on an assessment of the information provided by the LRO instruments as illustrated in Figures 3-1
through 3-3, a general location was chosen: the lunar south polar ridge, just to the left of Shackleton Crateras shown in Figure 3-3. In addition, Figure 3-4 presents slope data in that vicinity – demonstrating that theslopes near the ridge appear adequate for surface mobility.

6

These data are drawn in large measure from the results of the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbit (LRO) mission – particularly the
LOLA instrument (Lunar Orbiter Laser Altimeter), and the Diviner Lunar Radiometer Experiment (DLRE), which measured
surface temperatures.

13

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 3-2 Lunar South Polar Region: Illustrating the Average
Temperature of various Locations (as a surrogate for Illumination)

Figure 3-3 Lunar South Polar Region: Illustrating the Elevations Near Shackleton, Along the South
Polar Ridge

14

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 3-4 Lunar South Polar Region: Illustrating the Slopes Near the South Polar
Ridge
Finally, as noted previously an important, albeit secondary question relates to the ‘quality of life’ for settlers
and visitors is that of whether they will be able to see Earth. Figure 3-5 provides an illustration (based on
JAXA data from the Kayuga mission) of Earth in the sky as seen over Shackleton Crater. In the figure,
Shackleton Crater is in the lower right of the frame; the selected sites are on the shoulder of a ridge to the leftof Shackleton just at the shadow’s edge.

Figure 3-5 Lunar South Polar Region: View Across Shackleton Crater
Toward Earth7

7Image from JAXA Kaguya Mission; c. 2007.

15

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Based on the various factors, a specific location has been chosen. As illustrated in Figure 3-6, the lunar
settlement would be located along the upper edge of crater 1, facing downslope and toward Earth (low on thesouth polar horizon). This will afford an excellent view from the settlement of Earth, availability of solar energy,
and access to resources. Landing and launch facilities would be located on the far-side of the south polar lunar
ridge line, at a distance of approximately three kilometers to minimize the risks due to ‘ejecta’ produced during
arrivals and/or departures from the settlement.

Figure 3-6 Moon Village Reference Architecture: Craters (Closeup from LRO
LOLA Data)

The location of the notional MV settlement has been chosen to facilitate access by surface
transportation to permanently shadowed regions (PSR) where ice has been detected during recent years.
However, key locations of the settlement would be linked by tunnels.
3.3.2

Settlement Functional Description

It is envisioned that Settlement 2045 will comprise several major segments, including functions related
to habitation for the inhabitants, supporting infrastructures (including power systems), mission systems (such as
surface science systems), and others. Figure 3-7 presents a preliminary high-level functional block diagram ofthe proposed Moon Village 2045 Reference Settlement Architecture.
As illustrated in this figure, this case study is approaching the question in a ‘whole-of-system’ fashionin which living organisms are a part of the system; hence the distinct functions include•••

Habitation Systems, comprising both humans (residents and visitors) and the biosphere (which
includes all other living organisms, air, water, soil, etc.)
Energy Systems‘Air’ Imports and Systems••

ISRU Systems, comprising regolith, ice/water/volatiles, and waste management
Surface Operations Systems

16

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group

•
•
•
•

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Surface Science Systems
Space Transportation Systems
In-Space Systems, andVarious Cis-Lunar Markets.

Cis-Lunar
Markets‘Air’ Imports /Systems

Space
Transportation
Systems

In-Space Systems

Habitation Systems
EnergyBiosphere

Ice / Water /Volatiles

Regolith(Residents &Visitors)

Humans

Surface
Operations
Systems

Waste
Management

Surface Science
Systems

ISRU Systems

Figure 3-7 Moon Village Reference Architecture: Settlement
More detailed consideration of the nature of a lunar settlement at the selected location is needed;
prospective activities during 2021 are discussed in Section 5 and Section 6.

Section 4 that follows presents a summary of the workshop results, organized by session, theme andspeaker, including the several keynote speakers that started each of the three days of the meeting.

17

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK.

18

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SECTION 4

WORKSHOP RESULTS BY SESSION AND SPEAKER
The following section presents a brief summary of the presentations of each of the several speakers
at the workshop, organized by day, session and theme.
4.1

Day 1

There were two primary topics discussed during Day 1: local manufacturing and construction andin-situ resource utilization. During Day 1 of the workshop, there were speakers from the USA, Japan, and
The Netherlands. The paragraphs below summarize the speakers during Day 1 of the MV Architecture
Workshop. The paragraphs that follow provide information on each of the sessions. To watch the Day 1
videos, please visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-J35UUku3o
4.1.1

Day 1 Opening Plenary Session

The Day 1 opening session was the beginning of the workshop, comprising presentations on theworking group activities, as well as the activities of the MV Evolution Study activity. Table 4.1.1 presents
a summary of the speakers during the workshop opening plenary session.
Table 4.1.1 Speakers During the Day 1 Opening Plenary Session8

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

5:00

MANKINS, John C.

Opening & Introduction

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

5:10

MANKINS, John C.

Moon Village Architecture Studies
Overview

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

5:30

INATANI, Yoshifumi

A reference model consideration for
MV as a society on the Moon

MVA / ISAS

JAPAN

6:00

CLINTON, RaymondG. (Corky)

In Situ Fabrication, Keynote

NASA MSFC

USA

The following are brief summaries of the several presentations made during the opening session on
Day 1 of the workshop. Illustrative slides from the latter two presentations are provided in Figure 4-1-1 and4-1-2. (Images from the MV Architecture Studies overview are provided in Section 3.)•

John C. MANKINS, Prof. Madhu THANGAVELU and Dr. Yoshifumi INATANI made opening
remarks at the beginning of the workshop.

•

John C. MANKINS presented an overview of Moon Village Association (MVA) architecturestudies during 2020-2021, providing the conceptual context for the workshop. (Note: this material
is provided in some detail in Section 3 of this report.)

8

All ‘times’ in all tables are for Pacific Time, AM; for example, the meeting started at 5:00 AM on December 14, 2021 in
California.

19

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group•MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Yoshifumi INATANI, Ph.D. gave a keynote presentation for the workshop.
oo

TITLE: “A reference model consideration for Moon Village as a society on the Moon”
SUMMARY: A sustainable human activity and settlement on the Moon are the first challenge
for building a society in outer space. In this context, how will this society look and how it is tobe built are topics that must be considered in thinking about the further future. A reference modelof relatively large human settlement as a society in comparison with the existing human space
program is to be figured out, such as 1000 habitants and economical activities by resource
utilization, tourism business, and so on. A background idea, basic assumptions and study statusof the reference model were presented.

Figure 4-1-1 A reference model consideration for MV as a society on the Moon•

Raymond (aka, “Corky”) CLINTON, Ph.D. gave a keynote presentation for the workshop.
o

TITLE: You Can’t Always Take What You Want! In Space Manufacturing andExtraterrestrial Construction – Addressing the Exploration Logistics Challenges.

o

SUMMARY: NASA Marshal Space Flight Center’s (MSFCs) first “proof of concept”
experiment to assess additive manufacturing in a microgravity environment was conducted in
1999 on NASA’s KC-135 reduced-gravity aircraft. Other milestones followed during the early
2000s, such as the In-Situ Fabrication and Repair (ISFR) Program Element (2004) supportedby NASA’s Office of Biological and Physical Research (OBPR) and formulated by the MSFC
Exploration Science and Technology Division. The importance of such technologies wasvalidated by analyses (Cirillo and Owens) for the International Space Station (ISS), leading toan early demonstration on ISS that involved fabrications of parts and tools from plastic
feedstock.

20

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

During recent years, work related to additive manufacturing has evolved and expanded to
involve new materials (metals), new fabricated items (electronics), new goals (such as ISRU,
recycling and others) and new settings, primarily lunar surface fabrication and construction.
The overall vision of current efforts at NASA MSFC, other NASA organizations and a rangeof academic and industry partners is to establish the capabilities needed to ‘print’ customdesigned expeditionary structures on-demand and in the field using locally-available materials.
These efforts are now focused through ‘MMPACT’ – the Moon-to Mars Planetary
Autonomous Construction Technologies activity (under NASA’s Space Technology Mission
Directorate (STMD) Lunar Surface Innovation Initiative, LSII) and were the topic of several
talks during the current workshop.

Figure 4-1-2 In Situ Fabrication, Keynote

4.1.2

Theme 1 Presentations

The topics of Theme 1 involved aspects of local manufacturing and construction including structural
systems such as pressurized volume. Table 4.1.2 provides a summary of the speakers and topics during theTheme 1 session.
Table 4.1.2 Speakers During the Day 1 / Theme 1 Session

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

6:30

MANKINS, John C.

Introduction of Theme 1

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

6:40

BALLARD, Jason

ICON Overview & Project Olympus

ICON

USA

21

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table 4.1.2 Speakers During the Day 1 / Theme 1 Session

TIME

NAME

7:00

DiMARZIO, Kevin

7:20

IGNATIEV, Alex Ph.D.
MORRIS, Michael

7:40

PALLES-FRIEDMAN,
Rebeccah

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

Manufacturing Lunar Infrastructure

Red Wire / Made-inSpace IMIS)USAISRU & Energy

Lunar Resources, Inc.

USA

Space Exploration
Architecture; (SEArch+)

USA

Space Exploration
Architecture; (SEArch+)

USA

Lunar Lantern: Project Olympus
Habitation & Landing Pads

The following are brief summaries of the several presentations made during Theme 1 on Day 1 of
the workshop. Illustrative slides from the several of the presentations are provided in Figure 4-1-3 through
4-1-5.
•

John C. MANKINS gave an introduction of the topics to be discussed under workshop Theme 1 as
well as introductions for the several speakers. One key observation: there are topics discussed
during each ‘Thematic’ portion of the workshop that also applied to / were discussed in otherportions.

•

Jason BALLARD, CEO of ICON, Inc. gave a presentation on ‘Project Olympus’, an effort under
the auspices of MMPACT (see above).
o

TITLE: “ICON Overview and Project Olympus”.

o

SUMMARY: Project Olympus is advancing architectural concepts and technologies for spacebased construction system to support future exploration of the Moon. These include systems
concepts involving quite large additive manufacturing machines using layered construction
techniques, that can be used for structural fabrication both on Earth and on the Moon.
Terrestrial applications include commercial building, military structures and homes in diverse
settings. Past efforts related to extraterrestrial applications have addressed potential Mars
surface habitats. More recently under the MMPACT program, efforts have addressed lunar
surface pressurized structural systems – i.e., habitats. In all cases, a major strategic benefit isenvisioned to be the use of locally-source materials, rather than importation from Earth.
The goal of “Olympus” is to develop an autonomous construction system capable of delivering
landing pads, roads, habitats and other forms of construction the lunar surface by 2025 using a
3D printing / additive construction paradigm with a strong bias toward in situ resources.
Moreover, these systems must be extensible and designed with an eye toward multiple
deposition subsystem usage and eventual Martian operations.
The environment of the Moon is quite different from that of Earth, and a wide variety ofdifferent 3D printing machine approaches have been examined, including gantries, rovers,
robotic arms, towers with booms (like terrestrial construction site cranes), and the ‘flying
delta’ (a cable suspension systems, like the Arecibo receiver suspension). Within thisframework, there are several potential techniques for sintering – i.e., heating and fusing theregolith – including both lasers and microwave heating. A variety of nearer-term experiments

22

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

have been conducted, and are continuing. R&D is ongoing, including examination of various
concepts of operations (CONOPS).

Figure 4-1-3 ICON Overview & Project Olympus•

Kevin DiMARZIO of Redwire / Made-in-Space (MIS) gave a catalytic presentation providing an
overview of business activities and relevant technical R&D activities.
o

TITLE: “Manufacturing Lunar Surface Infrastructure”.
SUMMARY: Redwire (aka / formerly Made-in-Space) comprises a wide range of capabilities
including on-orbit servicing, assembly and manufacturing; low Earth orbit (LEO)
commercialization; advanced sensors and components; space domain awareness andresiliency; and, digitally engineering spacecraft. Redwire’s in-space manufacturing and robotic
assembly technology enable remote construction of large complex structures and spaceoptimized assets that transform the future of mission architecture and lunar surface
infrastructure. These in-space manufacturing technologies and ISRU capabilities will deliver
the resilient infrastructure needed for humans to sustainably venture farther from Earth thanever before on critical missions. Relevant space exploration solutions address next-generation
capabilities for deep space exploration, including space-based science, ISRU, and sustainable
mission campaigns (including at the Moon and Mars). Current R&D includes “RegISS” – afirst-of-a-kind technology demonstration of 3D printing technology on the ISS with a polymer
and regolith simulant. Other R&D efforts are developing concepts and technology for future
lunar surface landing pads using locally-fabricated brick (“Regobricks”), as well as orbital
metallic welding systems for potential use in cis-Lunar space.

23

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group•MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Alex IGNATIEV of Lunar Resources, Inc. gave a catalytic presentation addressing a diverse set of
ISRU-related topics. See Figure 4-1-4 for an illustrate slide from the projection.
o

TITLE: “Lunar Surface Manufacturing”.

o

SUMMARY: The fundamental stages in lunar in situ resource utilization comprise: (1)resource extraction and refining; (2) production of raw materials (i.e., feedstocks); and, (3)manufacturing of final products. These stages begin with the lunar regolith – a powdery
mixture of metal oxides formed over billions of years of impacts and deposited to a depth of
5m-15m across the entire surface of the Moon. With a fair degree of uniformity, the regolithcomprises various Oxides: Silicon, Iron, Aluminum, Calcium, Magnesium and other elements
such as Titanium; missing are the lighter elements (such as Hydrogen, Carbon, Nitrogen, andso on). The key challenge for making various feedstocks is to break apart the oxygen bonds.
One simple technique is that of molten regolith electrolysis (MRE) using high-temperatureelectrodes – e.g., about 2,000 °C – which has the advantage of requiring no reagents or
secondary processing, but which does require a great deal of electricity.

Figure 4-1-4 Lunar Surface Manufacturing

Industrial scale MRE is readily feasible and can produce not only metallurgical grade metals
and semiconductor grade Silicon but also Oxygen. Power requirements for a nominal 1 m3
MRE reactor with an annual capacity to process 64,000 kg (64 MT) per year would require
some 1500 Amps (i.e., 150 kW at 100 Volts – or 1.3 x 106 kWh over one year) to produce
approximately: (1) 13 MT of Iron; (2) 3.7 MT of Oxygen; and, (3) 3.2 MT of Silicon – alongwith other elemental materials in lesser amounts. Specific products will depend on thecomposition of the regolith used, of course.
Several R&D efforts are underway with varying objectives. For example, the ‘Magma
Program’ will produce structural elements such as rebar, conduits, conductors, etc. from
Aluminum, Iron and other elements. And, in conjunction with the hard vacuum found on the24Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Moon (10-9 torr), the Magma Program will also produce metals and semiconductors for
vacuum deposition (e.g., thin film solar cells, Aluminum electrodes and wires, battery
components, etc.). In contrast, the ‘Farview Program’ will enable the construction of one ormore exceptionally large-scale radio telescopes on the lunar surface (through direct
deposition). This option will involve the use of a properly configured surface rover, that canaccomplish the deposition of thin-film materials and then move on – tracing out a largeantenna over time. A similar rover system would be involved in the “1MW Program”, butwould fabricate solar cells from lunar regolith, while still on the surface and deposit needed
electrical wires to produce PV arrays. The goal of this effort would be to enable 1MW ofpower generation capacity by 2030, as well as lunar ISRU-based battery systems.
In summary, the fabrication of both structural materials and functional materials can readily be
accomplished with sufficient power / energy – and through processes that will produce
significant Oxygen as a bi-product.
•

Michael MORRIS and Rebecca PALLES-FRIEDMAN of Space Exploration Architecture(SEArch+), presented a variety of architectural concepts for lunar surface fabrication (as part of
the ICON Project Olympus). See Figure 4-1-5 for an illustrative slide from the presentation.
o

TITLE: “The Lunar Lantern for ICON’s Project Olympus”.

o

SUMMARY: Space Exploration Architecture (SEArch+) introduces the “Lunar Lantern”,
designed for ICON’s Project Olympus, a research and development initiative for a space-based
construction system to support future exploration of the Moon.

Figure 4-1-5 Lunar Lantern: Project Olympus Habitation & Landing Pads

SEArch+’s Lunar Lantern survey presentation included a discussion of habitat, sheds, landing
pads, blast walls, and roadway proposals. Key elements of the Lunar Lantern (which
resembles a very large, old-style lantern) include not only the overall design but also detailed

25

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

elements of the interior layout, a multifunctional wall system, the construction approach, andmore. The Lunar Lantern project comprehensively aims to exceed the factors of safety for its
inhabitants in support of mankind's first extended mission on the Moon’s surface.
4.1.3

Theme 2 Presentations

Theme 2 comprised various aspects of in situ resource utilization (ISRU), including materials
process and precursor activities such as mining, resource extraction, and others. Table 4.1.3 provides asummary of the speakers and topics during the Theme 2 session.
Table 4.3 Speakers During the Day 1 / Theme 2 Session

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

8:10

MANKINS, John C.

Introduction of Theme 2

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

8:20

ABBUD-MADRID,
Angel

Overview of School of Mines Activities

Center for Space
Resources, Colorado
School of Mines

USA

8:40

UYAMA, Naohiro

Future Lunar Construction

Shimuzu Corporation

JAPAN

9:00

KERAVALA, Jim

Offworld, Inc. Robotic Mining

OffWorld, IncUSA

The following are brief summaries of the several presentations made during Theme 2 on Day 1 of
the workshop. Illustrative slides from the latter three presentations are provided in Figure 4-1-6 through 41-8.
•

John C. MANKINS gave a brief introduction of Theme 2 – in situ resource utilization (ISRU) –and the planned speakers for the session. One key observation: there are topics discussed during
each ‘Thematic’ portion of the workshop that will also apply to / be discussed in other portions.

•Angle ABBUD-MADRID, Director of the Center for Space Resources at the Colorado School ofMines and Director, Space Resources Graduate Program made the initial catalytic technicalpresentation during Theme 2 discussion.
oTitle: “Lunar ISRU activities at Colorado School of Mines”.

o

SUMMARY: In recent years, space agencies and the private sector have increasingly realizedthat further robotic and human exploration, as well as growth of commercial opportunities incislunar space and the Moon will require extraction of materials, production of propellants andhuman consumables, and power generation from in situ lunar resources. This will result in
more affordable and flexible transportation, facilities construction, manufacturing of parts,
energy production, and life support systems.
In addition to its long-standing educational programs, the Colorado School of Mines (CSM) is
currently involved in a variety of projects in all aspects of the lunar resources value chain,including fundamental studies of lunar regolith properties, excavation, drilling, extraction,
processing, manufacturing, and construction, as well as the important legal, economic, social,and education aspects of this rapidly developing field. Specific developments are being
pursued in areas such as thermal ‘ice mining’, 3D printing of habitats, regolith sintering, metal

26

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020and oxide extraction, and others. CSM has also pursued studies of the economics ofcommercial propellant production, involving multiple companies.

Figure 4-1-6 Colorado School of Mines Activities: Thermal Ice Mining Experiments•

Naohiro UYAMA of Space Programs, Emerging Frontiers Division, Shimizu Corporation gave acatalytic presentation.
o

TITLE: “Future Lunar Construction Concepts and Related Studies”.

o

SUMMARY: Living on the Moon needs safe, comfortable and sustainable habitats. In-Space
Architecture beyond the International Space Station (ISS) has not been achieved yet and is a
big challenge for expanding human presence beyond the Earth. We have been working on therealization of lunar construction from future concepts to research and development. In thispresentation, various concepts were presented involving lunar construction and Shimizu
studies on various topics of construction-related in situ resources utilization, terra-mechanics,
and lunar habitats.
The presentation began with an introduction to Shimizu Corporation (founded in 1804, morethan 200 years ago), and discussion of Shimizu’s space programs, which go back to the latter
1980s. It also included a discussion of general topics of lunar construction, including
comparison of environment, examples of lunar habitat architecture, and a summary of thefactors that make lunar construction challenging. The presentation them presented a brief
review of Shimizu’s R&D activities, including ISRU, terra-mechanics, and inflatablestructures. Activities are ongoing in production of lunar regolith simulants, lunar regolithtargeted ‘basalt casting’ using a solar concentrator, production of lunar concrete, production ofO2 and water from regolith with imported / recycled H2 (not ices), mechanics and drilling in a
vacuum, inflatable structures, and more.

27

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 4-1-7 Future Lunar Construction at Shimizu: Inflatable Structures R&D with TUS & JAXA•James KERAVALA of OffWorld, Inc. gave a catalytic presentation on developments in allelectric / robotic mining technologies and systems applicable to both terrestrial and extraterrestrial
mining opportunities.
o

TITLE: “Toward an AI-Powered Industrial Lunar Mining & Construction Robotic
Workforce”.

o

SUMMARY: There are extensive developments underway at OffWorld, Inc. vis-à-vis robotic
mining and operational systems for a variety of heavy-duty industrial operations. There are anumber of reasons why humans living off the Earth is an important option that must be
enabled: first, as a life insurance policy again catastrophe affecting Earth; second, to support
ongoing sustainable development here on Earth; and, third, because space is a new frontier forhuman exploration and settlement. However, settlement has always been difficult. Limited
supply chains and harsh environments have in past centuries resulted in many instances inrecourse to forced labor.
Space development and settlement will be even more challenging. Various difficult tasks mustbe accomplished by future machine systems: building landing pads, excavating undergroundhabitats, extracting water ice and other materials, making consumables (including drinkablewater, breathable air and rocket propellants), manufacturing basic structures and functional
systems (such as solar cells / arrays), producing electricity; and, eventually self-replicating.
Developing the needed systems will take time and resources; one strategy is to begin byreinventing how we mine, process, manufacture and undertake logistics here on Earth. To
accomplish this, we need not start from scratch – instead we can draw on lessons learned overdecades of experience in remote location. On that basis, while humans remain safe, we candevelop the means to settle space using a new generation of AI-based industrial workforce

28

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

involving ultra-low cost, thousands of modular robotic systems within ‘solar system wide’
standards.

Figure 4-1-8 OffWorld, Inc. R&D involving AI / Learning / Avatar based modular robotic systems
To accomplish this, technical and economic goals must be ambitious: (1) to reduce total costof operations by 10-fold; (2) to create fully-scalable solutions (valid across a range ofindustries); and, (3) to choose only options that can accelerate improvements in industrial
productivity over the coming years. And, there are design constraints for the needed
developments; these including first, no infrastructure (no facilities, no large-scale external
power, etc.); second, no human involvement on site (only oversight); third, no long-term footprint (sites must be returned to their pre-existing format to the degree feasible; and fourth, no
imported consumables can be used (unless fully recycled).
A simple set of modular robotics can accomplish – with changing tools and extensions – awide variety of specific objectives, ranging from mining to tunneling to repair operations andmore, on the Moon and beyond. The key is AI-driving operations, with extensive reliance on
machine learning.
4.2

Day 2

There were two primary topics discussed during Day 2: regenerative life support systems (RLSS)
and agricultural systems (including food projection), and reusable space transportation systems (RSTS),
including both vehicles and required infrastructure systems. During Day 2 there were speakers from theUSA, Italy, Japan and Ukraine. See Table 4.2.1 for a summary of the speakers who presented during theDay 2 opening plenary and technical sessions.
To watch the Day 2 videos, please visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVqdDq3NHjA.

29

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group

4.2.1

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Day 2 Opening Plenary Session

The following are brief summaries of the presentations made during the opening plenary session
on Day 2 of the workshop. Illustrative slides from the latter two presentations are provided in Figure 4-2-1
and 4-2-2.
Table 4.2.1 Speakers During the Day 2 Opening Session

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

5:00

MANKINS, John C.

Opening Remarks, Start of Day 2

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

5:10

SHERWOOD, Brent

Keynote: “On Our Way ... to the Moon”

Blue Origin

USA

NASA HQ

USA(Blue Origin Lunar Exploration Activities)

5:40

MOORE, Christopher

Keynote: NASA Life Support R&D•

John C. MANKINS presented introductions of the two keynote speakers: Brent Sherwood of Blue
Origin, and Chris Moore of NASA HQ / HEOMD.

•

Brent SHERWOOD, Blue Origin (Advanced Programs) presented a keynote address on Day 2 of
the workshop.
o

TITLE: “On Our Way ... to the Moon”.

o

SUMMARY: The achievable human destinations in space aren’t equal in terms of challenge or
reward. Among them, only the Moon advances all Four Futures (explore, experience, extract,and expand). Opening the Moon will be more complex than building and using theInternational Space Station, so public-private partnerships and commercial business outside ofgovernment contracting are needed to progress through four stages of growth at a rate wewould all like. The very first step is getting there and back. The National Team has submitted
its proposal for the Artemis Human Landing System (HLS) to NASA. Blue Origin, Lockheed
Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Draper have designed a modular vehicle system for an
accelerated schedule and a sustainable future of routine lunar transportation.
There are several phases to the extension of humanity on the Moon; these include sciencedriven exploration, reducing discoveries to practical applications, developing industrial-scale
operations, and finally the possibility of settlement of the Moon. Operations at the Moon are
significantly more complex than operations at the ISS in LEO. Writ large, the former involves
up and down ‘shuttle’ flights, power, laboratories and habitats. However, the Moon will
involve all of these as well as transportation to/from the LLO, transportation from LLO
to/from the lunar surface, surface mobility and construction, and resource utilization (ISRU).
Public-Private partnerships will play a key role in humanities lunar activities, including:science program sponsors spacefaring customers, and in the farther term terrestrial markets(including media, travel, energy and materials). Blue Origin activities in the nearer term willleverage the capabilities inherent in the HLS that will support multiple important capabilities,
including cargo delivery, reuse of systems, life after landing, and supporting establishing a
lunar water economy – all targeting the realization of sustainable lunar operations.

30

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 4-2-1 “On Our Way...to the Moon” (Blue Origin Lunar Exploration Activities)•

Christopher MOORE, NASA HEOMD (Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate)presented a keynote address on Day 2 of the event.
o

TITLE: “Life Support Systems for Human Exploration”.

o

SUMMARY: NASA’s Artemis Program is working to achieve a human return to the Moon by2024, with the goal of establishing a foundation for later human missions to Mars during the2030s. Life support systems – particularly regenerative life support systems (RLSS) – will be
critical for safe, affordable long-duration human space exploration. A foundation for future
RLSS is being established by the life support systems programs of the International Space
Station (ISS) – both the current systems as well as R&D for future systems now underway.
ISS life support comprises a variety of key functions, including CO2 scrubbing, Oxygen
generation, water / brine recycling and waste management and disposal. In addition,
continuing and accurate environmental monitoring is crucial to the operation of all of thesesystems; sensor systems consider air quality, airborne particulates, radiation monitoring, andothers. Another important component of the ISS life support system is fire detection andsuppression. For the longer-term, R&D activities are now underway to develop
bioregenerative life support systems capabilities, including plant growth, bioreactors for waste
management and others.
ISS-based R&D is also working to reduce the logistics footprint of human exploration
activities in space. These include in-space manufacturing using additive manufacturing
techniques, waste ‘destruction’ via heating-melting and compaction, and the development ofautonomous logistics management systems.
A wide range of topics are being pursued by HEOMD in support of future exploration goals.
These include surface habitats, advanced life support systems, logistics reduction, crew

31

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

mobility systems, exercise equipment, food production, radiation and protection and fire
safety. In addition, working with the NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate (STMD),
HEOMD is pursuing diverse important additional capabilities for human exploration andoperations, including autonomous systems, precision landing, surface power systems, in-situ
resource utilization, cryogenic fluid management, lunar dust mitigation, access to extreme
environments, and excavation and construction.

Figure 4-2-2 NASA Closed Life Support R&D
4.2.2

Theme 3 Presentations

Theme 3 involves regenerative life support systems (RLSS) and agricultural systems (including
food projection). Table 4.2.2 indicates the order and timing of the presentations given.
Table 4.2.2 Speakers During the Day 2 / Theme 3 Session

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

6:10

MANKINS, John C.

Introduction of Theme 3

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

6:20

IGARASHI, Iwao

Experimental Study on Reclamation in
Closed System for Sustainable
Human Presence on the Moon

Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries

JAPAN

6:40

KITAYA, YoshiakiSpace agriculture in the center ofmaterial circulation in Moon Village

Osaka Prefecture
University; Environmental
Sciences & Technology

JAPAN

7:00

PERINO, Maria
Antonietta

Deep Space Habitats

Thales Alenia Space
ItaliaITALY

32

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table 4.2.2 Speakers During the Day 2 / Theme 3 Session

TIME

NAME

7:20

PINO, Paolo

7:35

SALMERI, Antonino

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

SGAC ‘Biosphere Studies’

Space Generation
Advisory Council (SGAC)

ITALY“T.U.R.T.L.E.”

Space Generation
Advisory Council (SGAC)

ITALY

The following are brief summaries of the several presentations made during Theme 3 on Day 2 of
the workshop. Illustrative slides from the latter five presentations are provided in Figure 4-2-3 throughFigure 4-2-7.
•

John C. MANKINS presented a brief overview of the planned Theme 3 discussion, including
introductions of the several speakers.

•

Iwao IGARASHI of the Space Division of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) made a catalytic
presentation.
o

TITLE: "An Experimental Study on Reclamation in Closed System for Sustainable Human
Presence on the Moon”

o

SUMMARY: Environmental Control and Life Support System (ECLSS) is an essential
element for human activities in Space. It is self-sustaining, especially in the remote andfaraway places like the Moon. This presentation shows our past experiment on oxygen
reclamation from carbon dioxide in a closed system, so-called regenerative oxygen.
Experiments and tests were done in a facility of a closed environment system in Tohoku Japan,
operated by the Institute for Environmental Sciences. Based on the findings and conclusion,
substantive discussions are to be considered to overcome the challenges, e.g. cleaning-up
carbon inside the system, in achieving fully sustainable ECLSS in the future. Stress will beplaced on building sustainable settlement on the Moon.

Figure 4-2-3 Reclamation in Closed System for Sustainable Human Presence on the Moon

33

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group•MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Yoshiaki KITAYA of Environmental Sciences & Technology, Graduate School of Life andEnvironmental Sciences, Osaka Prefecture University made a catalytic presentation.
o

TITLE: “Space agriculture in the center of material circulation in Moon Village”.

o

SUMMARY: Human habitation on the Moon will be highly dependent on self-sufficiency inthe production of food, atmospheric O2 and clean water – which will only be accomplishedthrough space farming in bio-regenerative life support systems. Plants play important roles infood production, CO2/O2 conversion, water purification, etc. and are at the center of material
circulation. Space agriculture is essential for long-duration human habitation on the Moon andits contribution to construction of a sustainable human society consisting of 1000 people on
the Moon (the target for the Moon Village Evolution study team – discussed above).

Figure 4-2-4 Space Agriculture for Essential Materials Circulation in a
Lunar Settlement
An important issue to be considered further will be that of thermal management for the plants
involved – particularly the sexual organs of the plants – due to the sensitivity of these organs to heating. In
low or partial gravity, thermal convection will be reduced – and the temperature of various plant organs
may be increased beyond acceptable limits. One option could involve the selection of plants that do nothave temperature-sensitivity sexual organs – such as specific types of sweet potatoes, that have many (ifnot all) of the nutrients needed for human sustenance.
•

Maria Antonietta PERINO of Thales Alenia Space Italia make a catalytic presentation on the topic
of deep space habitats R&D.
o

TITLE: “Deep-Space Habitats”.

o

SUMMARY: Human space exploration is being pursued in a step-wise approach as describedin the Global Exploration Roadmap (GER), which includes enabling technology
developments, robotic preparatory missions, and developing early orbital and surface planetary
outposts before introducing humans ‘in the loop’. A key element of the GER, which involves
more than a dozen space agencies is the plan to develop and deploying a lunar orbital platform– aka, the “Gateway” in cis-lunar space. In the frame of this program, the European Space

34

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Agency (ESA) will be providing the European Service Module (ESM) to support NASA’smulti-mission Orion capsule for travel beyond LEO

Figure 4-2-5 Thales Alenia Space Italia identified ‘building blocks’ for lunar exploration
The Gateway program in cis-lunar space will both validate key technologies for human
missions to Mars as well as allowing the study of psycho-physiological factors during longduration missions in deep space, including radiation protection, psychological effects, deepspace extravehicular activity (EVA), etc. The Gateway program will also enable testing of newautonomous systems and operations (such as RLSS and in-situ diagnostic and maintenancecapabilities) as well as demonstrations of remote teleoperations on a planetary surface (inpreparation for future Mars missions). The first elements of the lunar Gateway will comprise
the Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) and the Habitat and Logistics Outpost (HALO) for
which the structure and radiation protection are being provided by Thales Alenia Space. Laterelements (after 2024) will include the I-HAB (International Habitat) and ESPRIT (European
System Providing Refueling, Infrastructure and Telecommunications), both being provided byThales Alenia Space (in Italy and France respectively).
The experience from the ISS program will inform planning and development for future deepspace habitats. One potential issue: how crowded space habitats can become over time. New
module developments for the Lunar Gateway incorporate a range of differences – including
lower mass, new docking ports, autonomous thermal control, modular avionics and others.
One difference will be incorporation of water for radiation shielding in the crew quarters.
Another will be the application of ‘human-centered’ design philosophy throughout – includinginterior design, access to augmented and virtual reality (VR) techniques, provision ofrelaxation areas, and environmental controls.

35

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Lunar surface human missions are planned to begin as early as 2024 with NASA’s Artemis
Program; Thales Alenia Space is a part of this effort. Key ‘building blocks’ for future lunar
surface activities will include lunar landers / ascent vehicles, habitats, rovers (pressurized andunpressurized), telecommunications systems, ISRU systems, and power systems. OngoingR&D including development of extensible / inflatable crew airlocks for use on the Moon,pressurized rovers, a lunar greenhouse, and other capabilities. The key challenges for theMoon include operations in 1/6th gravity, lack of atmosphere, exposure to micro-meteors andradiation, limit solar power and extreme temperatures at the polar regions, and the use ofregolith for use in 3D printing of habitats.
•

Paolo PINO, et al. of the Space Exploration Program Group (SEPG) of the Space Generation
Advisory Committee (SGAC) made a catalytic presentation on the topic of biosphere studies.
o

TITLE: “Lunar Biosphere”.

o

SUMMARY: The goal of this research is to evaluate a sustainable ecosystem that could allow
the establishment of a human colony on the lunar surface to be settled around the rim of the
Shackleton Crater, including a preliminary assessment of the challenges and opportunities toleverage local resources and an analysis of plants compatible with the environment andecosystem. Near-term efforts are focused on processing regolith to turn it into living soil, andan ‘equivalent system mass’ study. In particular, the project is examining crop selection byevaluating and comparing species which survive in hostile environment, and evaluating
possible factors to enhance the fixation of nitrogen (fungi and bacteria) and support theecosystem (insects).

Figure 4-2-6 SGAC Space Exploration Program Group – Example Biosphere Plant
Selections
Key factors being examined vis-à-vis crop selection include: (1) partial pressure of CO2, (2)humidity, and (3) temperature. Examples of crop selection include Nitrogen-fixing crops (suchas annual clovers, which can grow in a dry environment and stony soil) and edible plants (for36

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

example, tomato plants that grow easily in soil, organic substrates, soilless mixes, perlite, sandor hydroponics).
The equivalent system mass study is examining two options: (1) using lunar regolith as living
soil, and (2) aquaponics. The goal is to quantify benefits and opportunities, and to understandthe impact of in-situ manufacturing and resources utilization.
•

Paolo PINO (speaking on behalf of Antonino SALMERI) of the Space Exploration ProgramGroup (SEPG) of the Space Generation Advisory Committee (SGAC) made a catalytic
presentation on the topic of “T.U.R.T.L.E.”.
o

TITLE: “T.U.R.T.L.E.” (Technical Unit for Research for a Thriving Lunar Ecosystem)SUMMARY: The purpose of this research is to solve multidisciplinary technologicalchallenges for the fair and sustainable development of the Moon. Goals include: (1) assessing
development scenarios; (2) identifying sustainable technologies; (3) developing pragmatic
solutions; and, (4) involving relevant stakeholders. The “T.U.R.T.L.E.” team involves some 15
members across 5 countries. It is targeting three important areas: landing sites and systems(i.e., sites mapping and classification, spaceports development, and traffic control), logistics
and architecture (e.g., assessing strategic areas and activities for shared infrastructure andlogistics, and creating alternative scenarios to discover potential conflict areas in acollaborative workshop), and power systems (including technology ‘landscaping’ and tradeoffs, interoperability as figure of merit and site-solution matching).

Figure 4-2-7 “T.U.R.T.L.E.” topics being examine by the Team...
4.2.3

Theme 4 Presentations

During the latter portion of Day 2 of the workshop, the discussion of ‘Theme 4’ occurred –involving reusable space transportation systems and related infrastructure. Table 4.2.3 below summarizes
the order and timing of the several speakers who spoke about the theme.

37

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table 4.2.3 Speakers During the Day 2 / Theme 4 Session

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATION

7:55

MANKINS, John C.

Introduction of Theme 4

MVA / NSS / IAA

8:00

BERDNYK, Oleksandr

Reusable Space Transportation

Yuzhnoye State Design
OfficeUKRAINE

8:30

EFFINGER, Michael

Microwave Sintering – Landing Pads

NASA MSFC

USA

8:50

BIENHOFF, Dallas

Space Transportation

Cislunar Space Dev. Co.,
LLC

USA

9:10

IWASAKI, Akhiro Ph.D

Yspace

JAPAN

9:10

SAKATOMO, Yuki

Japanese Rocket Society
(JRS)

JAPAN

9:30

KOBAYASHI, Hiroaki

Japanese Rocket Society(JRS) / ISAS (JAXA)JAPANSpace Traffic & Supply Chain
Management
Hydrogen will realize a sustainable
society on the Moon for future
humankind

COUNTRY

The following are brief summaries of the several presentations made during Theme 4 on Day 2 of
the workshop. Illustrative slides from the latter two presentations are provided in Figures 4-2-8 through 42-12.
•

John C. MANKINS presented a brief overview of the planned Theme 4 discussion, including
introductions of the several speakers.

•

Oleksandr BERDNYK of the Yuhnoye State Design Office, an Institutional Member of the MVA,
made the opening catalytic presentation on the topic of space transportation during the discussionof Theme 4 of the workshop.
o

TITLE: “Reusable Space Transportation and Supporting Infrastructure”.

o

SUMMARY: In the 50 years of the space era, humanity has been overcoming many parries tothe exploitation of near-Earth space and exploration of the Solar System. However, a newtechnological foundation will be needed to implement the next step: exploration of
extraterrestrial energy and raw materials resources – enabling expansion of human habitation
at first to the Moon and then to Mars and other locations. A critical issue now being addressedby R&D is that of affordable cargo and crew delivery from Earth to near-Moon orbits and thelunar surface. The key technology for this objective is the transition from expendable vehicle
to reusable and refuelable vehicles, and the in-space production of propellent.
Various concepts are now being studied, including a lander-hopper that could transport 50 kgof payload through point-to-point flight (up to 3 locations) or 150 kg one way to the surface, a
LOX-H2 fueled reusable lunar lander (RLL) that could transport payloads to/from the lunar
surface and LLO. Two modes of operation have been examined for a 3 MT dry-mass vehicle.
First, with fuel from a depot in LLO; in which case a vehicle with propellant load of 9 MT
could deliver 8 MT to the surface one way, or could deliver a 3.2 MT payload to the surface
and return to LLO after delivery.

38

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 4-2-8 Reusable Space Transportation and Supporting Infrastructure
Second, the same vehicle with refueling on the lunar surface could deliver 8 MT to LLO fromthe surface, or 5.25 MT from LLO to the surface, or 3.2 MT round-trip. With this foundation,
the key elements of an Earth-Moon transportation system have been defined as including:•A heavy lift launch vehicle with a reusable first state (54-61 MT) such as the Falcon 9
Heavy (FH) or the New Glenn launch vehicle.

•

A reusuable and re-fuelable in-space ‘tug’ (such as the Yuzhnoye ALTUS concept, fordelivering of 17-20 MT payloads from LEO to LLO•

A reusable lunar lander (RLL) using LOX-LH2 (described previously)•

Refueling stations (in LLO initially and later on the lunar surface); and,•Crew spacecraft.

The ALTUS reusable LEO-LLO ‘tug’ concept might involve LOX-LH2 propellants, and about
36 MT of propellant in LEO to deliver a payload of 20 MT to LLO (including 9 MT of fuel for
the RLL and 11 MT of RLL-payload and fuel for Earth-return). With this foundation, a wide
variety of payloads could be delivered to locations on the lunar surface, including crew
vehicles, surface habitation modules, etc.
Of course, ISRU and propellant production will be required for this architecture, including
exploration for materials, delivering of raw materials to processing facilities, processing(including extraction and purification of water and production of LOX-LH2 propellants, and39

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

storage and transfer of lunar propellant to customers). All of these functions will require
specific systems – ranging from power supplies to transportation vehicles, equipment forelectrolysis and liquefaction, contactors etc. And, in the farther-term ongoing transportation
systems R&D will pursue advanced rocket systems (e.g., reusable nuclear propulsion, reusable
electric propulsion systems, etc.) and non-rocket transportation concepts (such as
electromagnetic launchers, etc.).
•

Michael EFFINGER of NASA MSFC made a catalytic presentation on the topic of microwave
sintering in general, and landing pads and related infrastructures in particular.
o

TITLE: “Microwave Sintering Lunar Landing Pads & Horizontal Infrastructure”.

o

SUMMARY: There are a variety of potential uses for the lunar regolith in the manufacturingof local infrastructure. NASA MSFC is exploring a variety of these, with goals that include
maturing the technology and capability to emplace in-situ based construction materials on theMoon to form horizontal infrastructure elements (e.g., landing pads, roads, etc.), anddeveloping and demonstrating microwave sintering of lunar simulants that can be used to form
infrastructure on the Moon for a mid-sized payload (e.g., a 2MT microwave paver vehicle).

Figure 4-2-9 Microwave Sintering Lunar Landing Pads
Achieving these goals will require overcoming a number of disparate challenges, involving (1)developing a concept of operations (CONOPS); (2) availability of relevant simulant and othermaterials for R&D purposes; (3) technical issues involving site preparation and design; (4)accomplishing microwave sintering; and, (5) developing testing and requirements for ancillary
instruments. Work is ongoing, and will address redundant paths to timely success.

40

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group•MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Dallas BIENHOFF of Cislunar Space Development Company, LLC made a catalytic presentation
on transportation systems and infrastructure.
o

TITLE: “Reusable Cislunar Transportation Architecture”.

o

SUMMARY: Cislunar Space Development Company, LLC is developing a reusable cislunar
transportation architecture to operate from low Earth orbit to the Moon and all points in
between. This presentation describes one potential growth path from a minimally viablecapability to full operational capability as well as paths matched to the Moon Village
Architecture Working Group Scenarios Alpha, Beta and Gamma. The architecture includes
space tugs, Moon shuttles, propellant depots, Earth-to-orbit refuelers, space tanker elements
and personnel module elements. The architecture is sized to deliver up to 25 metric tons to any
point on the Moon's surface from its Earth Moon L1 propellant depot and 25 MT to Earth
Moon L1 from low Earth Orbit.

Figure 4-2-10 Reusable Cislunar Transportation•

Yuki SAKAMOTO of the Japan Rocket Society (JRS) and Dr. Akhiro IWASAKI of YSpace madea catalytic presentation concerning supporting operational capabilities in association with reusable
space transportation.
o

TITLE: “Space Traffic & Supply Chain Management”.

o

SUMMARY: The importance of expanding the human frontier into space will increase.
Considering the entire process of space exploration, the space-transportation-network will
determine the architecture. Concept studies have been started of a space transportation

41

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

network including utilization of the lunar water ISRU assuming there is a village of a thousandpeople on the Moon. The study aims to contribute insight to support the eventual constructionof routine and sustainable space logistics. This presentation reported the status of studies on
the Earth-Moon-Mars transportation network.

Figure 4-2-11 Space Traffic & Supply Chain Management•

Hiroaki KOBAYASHI made a catalytic presentation on hydrogen technology and applications forlunar and terrestrial applications.
o

TITLE: “Hydrogen will realize a sustainable society on the Moon for future humankind”.

o

SUMMARY: We have been conducting research of hydrogen energy-related technology
utilizing a large-scale hydrogen handling technology cultivated over many years of rocket
development. As a result of the recent Moon exploration, the possibility that water orhydrogen is present on the lunar surface has been increased, and studies on using this for acontinuous space exploration have been conducted in various areas.
Specifically, it is envisaged that mining water on the Moon’s surface, liquefying and storinghydrogen and oxygen generated by solar power generation and water electrolysis equipment,
and using this as a propellant and a chemical material. The process of creating Hydrogen for
use will be energy intensive – including electrolysis of lunar water and liquefaction of
Hydrogen gas produced. This concept is to create a hydrogen energy-based society on theMoon, so it is expected that Japan's hydrogen technology acquired so far can be applied.

42

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 4-2-12 Hydrogen enables a Sustainable Society on the Moon
In the use of hydrogen in the Moon, it is necessary to realize more efficient equipment andhydrogen storage and utilization systems than the earth. These activities are expected togreatly contribute to the realization of the ‘hydrogen society’ on Earth.
4.3

Day 3

The final day of the workshop addressed topics related to surface power systems and related
infrastructure, as well as Moon market development and final topics concerning lunar architectures.
Speakers included individuals from the US, Italy, Japan, Kuwait, Ukraine, and the Netherlands. To watch
the Day 3 videos, please see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOTGsmeaWvk
4.3.1

Day 3 Opening Plenary Session

The opening of the third and final day of the Workshop 5 involved a brief review of the workshop
to date, as well as a discussion of various lunar surface operations concepts during the past century andmore. Table 4.3.1 indicates the two speakers during this portion of the workshop.
Table 4.3.1 Speakers During the Day 3 Opening Session

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

5:00

MANKINS, John C.

Opening Remarks, Start of Day 3

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

5:10

THANGAVELU,
Madhu

Past Visions of Lunar Operations &Outposts

USC / NSS / MVA

USA

The following are brief summaries of the two presentations made during the opening session on
Day 3 of the workshop. Illustrative slides from the latter presentation are provided in Figure 4-3-1.

43

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020•

John C. MANKINS presented opening remarks for the third and final day of the workshop, andintroduced the final day keynote speaker, Dr. Madhu Thangavelu.

•

Dr. Madhu THANGAVELU. Conductor of the ASTE527 Graduate Space Concept Synthesis
Studio in the Department of Astronautical Engineering within the Viterbi School of Engineeringand the Arch599 Space Architecture and Extreme Environment seminar for graduate students in
the School of Architecture at the University of Southern California.
o

TITLE: “Past Visions of Lunar Operations and Outposts”.

o

SUMMARY: Imagination and creativity are the faculties that distinguish our species from theother beautiful creatures of Nature. The ability to Dream, project Visions and then persuade
large and diverse groups of talented professionals to work together to manifest complex
missions is as much an art form as it is a multi-pronged, cutting-edge scientific and technology
effort. Dreams and Visions precede all human endeavor, and space exploration and humanspace activity is no exception. This talk depicted a wide variety of the dreams and visions oflunar missions and settlements from before the dawn of the space age, through the earliest
years of the space age to the present. One of the first such visions was that of Jules Verne in
his late-19th Century novel, “From Earth to the Moon”.

Figure 4-3-1 Past Visions of Lunar Operations and Outposts

44

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group

4.3.2

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Theme 5 Presentations

Workshop Theme 5 concerned lunar surface power systems, and related surface operations andsystems. Table 4.3.2 indicates the several presentations (order and timing) during this portion of theworkshop.
Table 4.3.2 Speakers During the Day 3 / Theme 5

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

5:40

MANKINS, John C.

Introduction of Theme 5

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

5:50

EDWARDS, ChristinePower Distribution

Lockheed Martin
Company

USA

6:10

SHINOHARA, Naoki

Solar power and WPT utilization tosustainable human society on theMoon

Kyoto University

JAPAN

6:30

FOING, Bernard

Lunar Science / ILEWG / Analogues

ESTEC

Netherlands

6:50

LAUER, Charles, &TANASYUK, Pavlo

Surface Robotics

SPACE BITUK

The following are brief summaries of the presentations made during Theme 5 on Day 3 of theworkshop. Illustrative slides from the latter presentations are provided in Figure 4-3-2 through 4-3-4.
•

John C. MANKINS made introductory remarkets for the beginning of the final day and second-tolast session of the workshop.

•

Christine EDWARDS, Deputy Exploration Architect of Lockheed Martin Corporation / Space
presented recent activities related to power systems for lunar polar exploration and operations.
o

TITLE: “Power Architecture for Sustainable Lunar Presence”.

o

SUMMARY: The Global Exploration Roadmap (GER) published by the International
Exploration Coordination Group (ISEC-G) presents a series of planned advances in lunar
capabilities over the coming decade. These comprise from the first human landing a variety ofsurface systems (e.g., rovers, EVA systems, science payloads, etc.), as well a several powersystems. However, when ISRU operations begin in earnest, demand could exceed supply.
Peak loads can be managed to help manage and balance supply and demand – for example, byrestricting ISRU operations to hours when there is sunlight available.
For missions and infrastructure planned for the post-2030 timeframe, additional power will be
required. A diverse, modular and interoperable ‘ecosystem’ can be built through international
partnerships; including habitation systems, ISRU, and both solar and nuclear surface powersystems. A flexible and resilient lunar surface power architecture should comprise solar power
generation, space nuclear power systems coupled through local power distribution to energy
storage, with charging stations for rovers and other mobile systems – and to stationary loads
including habitation systems, ISRU and others.

45

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Figure 4-3-2 Power Architecture for Sustainable Lunar Presence•

Dr. Naoki SHINOHARA of Kyoto University made a catalytic presentation concerning wirelesspower transmission for lunar development.
o

TITLE: “Solar power and wireless power transfer utilization to sustainable human society on
the Moon”.

o

SUMMARY: One of problems for sustainable human society on the Moon is energy
management. We propose utilization of wireless power transfer (WPT) technology via radio
waves and space solar power with the WPT.

Figure 4-3-3 Solar Power and Wireless Power Transfer

46

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

WPT can manage the electricity not only on the Moon but also from Moon orbit without
extra power lines. It also can drive a rover and a drone on the Moon. The WPT is recently
well developed as commercial products, however, it's a problem that there were few
experiments only. In this talk, he introduced recent wireless power transmission researchand development (R&D) and discussed its utilization on the Moon.
•

Professor Bernard FOING (with multiple co-authors) of the European Space Agency / ESTEC andthe International Lunar Exploration Working Group (ILEWG) presented on the topic of lunar
science and Analogues.
o

TITLE: “Together on the Moon: Missions, Science, Technology, Simulations, Inspiration andDiversity”.

o

SUMMARY: The presentation began with a review of various topics in lunar science as well
as a review of an early lunar missions of the European Space Agency (ESA), SMART-1 (aka,‘Small Missions for Advanced Research and Technology’) that included a demonstration ofsolar electric propulsion (SEP) for the Moon. This mission captured an early (2006) elevation
map of the lunar South Pole ridge – now under consideration as the location of the MVA’s“Lunar Settlement 2045” case study. The talk also reviewed activities by the International
Lunar Exploration Working Group, including the definition of various science questions that
may be used to drive lunar exploration planning and the formulation of a high-level roadmap
for the Moon comprising both robotic missions and later human sorties.

Figure 4-3-4 Preparing for Humans on the Moon: Requirements and Simulations on Earth
The second half of the presentation focused on ongoing lunar analogue activities in various
countries, including robotic demonstrations. Challenges for implementation of the Moon
Village concept were discussed, including robotics, human operations, transportation,communications, mobility systems and others. A number of ILEWG organized campaigns
implemented during 2009-2019 were discussed. The presentation concluded with a discussionof prospective activities to prepare for the Moon Village, including both robotic village andhuman base related requirements.
•

Charles LAUER and Pavlo TANASYUK of SpaceBit made a catalytic presentation concerning
novel lunar robotic mission concepts and systems (Mr. Lauer speaking).

47

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020o

TITLE: “SpaceBit; Space Robotics for Lunar Exploration”.

o

SUMMARY: Mr. Lauer presented a brief history of the SpaceBit firm, which was organizedin the UK in 2014 and has operations in the USA, the UAE, Ukraine, Poland and Israel. A
commercial firm, SpaceBit plans to fly on multiple upcoming “CLPS’ landers of NASA
(Commercial Lunar Payload Services) beginning in 2021 as well as other robotic lunar lander
missions over the coming several years. Missions to the International Space Station (ISS) arealso planned for technology demonstration and verification. Both legged and wheeled verysmall-scale lunar rovers are under development – with a form factor similar to orbital‘cubesats’. These will evolve and conducted expanded lunar exploration, including a range ofsensors and mobility operations; the latter including prospects for sub-surface exploration in
the next 4-5 years.

4.3.3

Theme 6 Presentations

Workshop Theme 6 concerned various lunar market development options, as well as several
different lunar surface architecture concepts. Table 4.3.3 indicates the speakers and topics during thisportion of the workshop.
Table 4.3.3 Speakers During the Day 3 / Theme 6

TIME

NAME

TOPIC / PRESENTATIONORGANIZATIONCOUNTRY

7:20

MANKINS, John C.

Introduction of Theme 6

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

7:30

VENTSKOVSKY, Oleh

En route to the Moon Market

Yuzhnoye SDO, MVA
Moon Market

UKRAINE

7:50

ALOTAIBI, Ghanim

PESC & Building Blocks

MVA PESC Project

KUWAIT

8:10

RUSSO, Gennaro
Ph.D.

Lunar Habitat Architecture Studies

Italian Institute for the
Future; Center for Near
Space

ITALY

8:30

OCAMPO SALAZAR,
JulianProject Olympus: the emerging
vernacular of Lunar habitat
architecture

BIG – Bjarke Ingels
Group

USA /
DENMARK

9:00

MANKINS, John C.

END of the Workshop Remarks

MVA / NSS / IAA

USA

The following are brief summaries of the several presentations made during Theme 6 on Day 3 ofthe workshop. Illustrative slides from the latter 4 presentations are provided in Figures 4-3-4 through 4-37. Images from the final presentation (“End of the Workshop Remarks”) are in Section 6.
•

John C. MANKINS made introductory remarkets for the beginning of this, the final session andthe workshop.

•

Oleh VENTSKOVSKY, member of the MVA Board of Directors and the Representative ofYuzhnoye Design Bureau in Brussels, made a presentation concerning Moon Village market
development.
o

TITLE: “En route to the Moon Market”.

48

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupoMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SUMMARY: Mr. Oleh Ventskovsky presented a high-level summary of the MVA ‘Moon
Market’ development effort, including identification of the some twenty-six (26) institutional
members of the Association; these institutional members included major aerospace firms (suchas Lockheed Martin, Yuzhnoye Design Bureau), new space firms (such as ASTRAX,
academic organizations, such as the Colorado School of Mines and the Kepler Space Institute,as well non-Governmental organizations (NGOs), such as ‘For All Moonkind’ and the OpenLunar Foundation.

Figure 4-3-4 En route to the Moon Market
The discussion of Moon Market activities included a description of a working session on nonspace businesses and the Moon that was jointly organized with the European Space Agency(ESA), and planning for events to be organized during 2021. The presentation concluded a
description of a new MVA working group under the chairmanship of Derek Webber, focusing
on the future of ‘Lunar Commerce and Economy’.
•Ghanim ALOTAIBI made a presentation on the subject of “Participation of Emerging SpaceCountries (PESC) & Building Blocks.
o

TITLE: “Participation of Emerging Space Countries (PESC)”.

o

SUMMARY: Mr. Ghanim Alotaibi presented an overview of the Moon Village Association’s
PESC program, along with a summary of various recent events (during 2019-2020). He also
focused on the actions assigned to various teams, primarily the definition of country-centricMoon Village roadmaps organized around the ‘building blocks’ that had been earlier definedby the Architecture Working Group. The PESC process, which began during summer 2020
comprised identifying various prospective MV activities in each country, according to the49

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

building blocks and the high-level MV scenarios created by the MV Architecture WG. Mr.
Alotaibi also presented an example of a PESC roadmap and discussed future plans for the
program.

Figure 4-3-5 Participation of Emerging Space Countries (PESC)•

Gennaro (aka, ‘Rino’) RUSSO, presenter; with co-authors G. De Martino, R. Minichini, M. Pica
Ciamarra (Center for Near Space, Italian Institute for the Future).
o

TITLE: “OrbiTecture: New Paradigms for Space Habitats”.

o

SUMMARY: The Center for Near Space of the Italian Institute for the Future focused its
activity on the conviction that the era of the Expansion of Humanity in Space has actually
begun and that its evolution requires the development of adequate private / commercial
component.

Figure 4-3-6 New Paradigms for Space Habitats

50

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

The OrbiTecture Working Group is presently investigating long-term lunar habitats. Withreference to the previously-studied Cislunar City vision, a 100-person Moon settlement isthought to be mainly devoted to industrial activities such as mining or separation of
constituent elements or construction of semi-finished products. A group of young
engineering, physicists and students is actively participating in the WG studies,
contributing with various ideas and analysis.
•

Julian OCAMPO SALAZAR of BIG (aka, the Bjarke Ingels Group) presented selected results fromrecent lunar architecture studies.
o

TITLE: “Project Olympus: the emerging vernacular of Lunar habitat architecture”.

o

SUMMARY: Shipping building materials from Earth to the lunar surface would be aprohibitively expensive undertaking. As a result, some approach to living off the land will beessential to affordable lunar development and habitation.

Figure 4-3-7 Project Olympus: the emerging vernacular of Lunar habitat architecture51

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

There are various examples on Earth from which we might learn – such as igloos cut from ice
to insulated against the cold in the far north or underground / troglodyte homes cut into thecooler rock below hot and arid climes. On the Moon, we must work with the local regolith forstructures, thermal insulation, radiation protection, etc. R&D is advancing technologies that
could be used to shape and create structural systems from the regolith. The strategy is toemploy the concept of 3D printing of local materials so as to minimize transportation andequipment requirements.
Beginning with a flat surface on which to do construction, there are several possible geometricshapes that might make sense – such as cylinders, domes / spheres and doughnuts (i.e., atorus), of which the latter appear to better optimize access for 3D printing and use of materials(surface to volume, etc.). Design analysis suggests that for areas of 100 m2 or less, that aconical dome is more efficient, while for areas of 100 m2 or more, that a torus is more
efficient. Moreover, these design concepts must deal with a range of hazards, including
meteorite impacts, lunar dust, the radiation environment (solar particles and galactic cosmicrays), extremes of temperature, vacuum, and moon-quakes. The manner of construction also
matters – and for fully 3D printed structures, an approximately (somewhat rounded) triangularcross-section with a particular taper is optimal. An overcover of regolith to protect against
micrometeorites is also needed; the same overcover can also – if thicker – provide protection
from radiation. All in all, the current R&D suggests a modified conical cross-section
including a diamond-pattern to increase strength with an externally-supported regolith
overcover.
Internal accommodations are also needed, and should be designed to reflect the geometry of
the habitat, with adjustments to the interior lighting being provided as appropriate to the timeof day vis-à-vis Earth.
4.3.4

Closing Session

During the final, closing session of the workshop, Mr. Mankins presented several observations andupdates on the topic of the MV Architecture Case Study, based on the interim findings and conclusions
presented during the three-day event. These closing observations are reflected in Section 5, which follows.

52

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SECTION 5

WORKSHOP RESULTS BY THEME
The following section presents the summary results of the workshop, organized according to theprincipal themes discussed at the meeting, but does not highlight the specific presentations or speakers.
(That information is provided in Section 4.) Please note that during the meeting, presentations wereorganized predominantly according to the various Themes; however, some presentations included
information from more than one theme while others were accommodated at a time / in a theme where they
fit best because of time constraints of the speaker.
The summary of each workshop theme includes both a synthesis of the results and integrated
assessment of how each topic stands as of December 2020. This assessment (presented in tabular form)
comprises four areas: (1) Requirements (i.e., what are the requirements in this Theme for a 2045
Settlement?); (2) Capabilities (in other words, what Capabilities are needed by 2045 to satisfy thoserequirements); (3) Players (i.e., who kinds of organizations are, or will be involved in realizing thosecapabilities?); and, (4) Maturity (in this discussion, what is the ‘Moon Village Readiness Level” (MVRL)
for the Theme?). Annex D presents current, high-level definitions of the MVRLs – which are a newlyproposed maturity scale, related to the TRLs but addressing a broader set of considerations than technology
and focused on the Moon Village concept.
5.1

Theme 1: Local Manufacturing and Construction

Theme 1 of the Moon Village Architecture Workshop concerned local manufacture andconstruction of structural systems on the Moon. Although they would not be required for a base on theMoon, such capabilities are essential – a sine qua non – for a human lunar settlement. The workshop
discussion indicated that that local manufacturing of diverse products and local construction of various
structural systems using either imported and/or locally-sourced materials are technically feasible and should
be available by the 2030s, in time to support the Settlement 2045 concept. A variety of systems can belocally manufactured and/or constructed on the lunar surface either from imported materials or from thelunar regolith. See Table 5-1 for a summary assessment of this area.
For example, construction includes structural systems such as habitat pressure vessels, landing pads
and roads (and other planar structures), tunnels, and others. If local material is used, then local
manufacturing and construction might be accomplished with largely untransformed regolith – without
extraction or processing to produce interim feedstocks. One process for such regolith-based manufacturing– beyond ‘Earth moving’ and sculpting – is known as ‘sintering’; i.e., the heating of regolith with lasers or
microwaves.
In addition, lunar regolith may be processed – for example using high-temperature electrolysis – toproduce elemental feedstock materials, including Oxygen from the oxides (FeO2, SiO2, etc.) that make upa large percentage of the regolith. Alternatively, imported ‘binding agents’ might be imported and used inconstruction such as polymer resins. Also, concrete might be produce using recycling of water and otheragents needed to achieve the relevant chemical reactions.

53

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table 5-1 Settlement 2045 / Theme 1 Summary Assessment9
THEME

Local Manufacturing and Construction (Theme 1)

REQUIREMENTS?

• Local manufacturing and construction are enabling for a future
Lunar Settlement, but not necessarily for an inhabited base orcamp on the Moon (which could be accomplished with animported pressurized module and then provided with radiation
protection locally).

CAPABILITIES?

• Construction of habitat and other pressure vessels (such a fueltanks), landing pads, roads, tunnels are all the subject ofongoing R&D.

PLAYERS?

• Diverse space agencies, particular in the US, Japan andEuropean organizations• Multiple companies, including ‘majors’ and new space firms

MATURITY?

• Concepts exists and R&D is being conducted, but is still at thelaboratory level of testing / experiments.
• More analytical modeling needed to test ‘economic viability’for Settlement 2045.
• Maturity = MVRL 3, approximately. (See Annex D)With appropriate feedstocks high-quality electronics such as photovoltaic (PV) cells and arrays,
electrical wiring and devices (such as electromagnetic devices), components for batteries and other systems
can be fabricated on the Moon, perhaps with selected imported materials or components. Relatively small
fabrication systems – including either fixed or mobile systems – might be used to accomplish this kind of
fabrication if energy is provided, due in part to the ambient ‘hard’ vacuum environment on the Moon.
Moreover, extremely large-scale (10s of kilometers) radio telescopes might also be manufactured by roving
fabricators – enabling unprecedented observations of the universe.
5.2

Theme 2: In Situ Resource Utilization

Theme 2 addressed a topic closely related to local manufacturing and construction, namely in situ
resource utilization, also known as ‘ISRU’. The resources of the Moon are diverse and promise a wide
variety of highly useful materials as feedstocks for local processing and manufacturing. Research anddevelopment (R&D) of various specific approaches to ISRU have been ongoing for decades, generallyspeaking using lunar regolith simulants. The discovery of water ice at the Moon’s poles opened new
avenues for ISRU that are only now being explored. The workshop discussion validated that ISRU is
technically feasible and can be available by the 2030s and to support the Settlement 2045 concept. See
Table 5-2 for a summary assessment of this area.
However, typically the regolith must first be excavated, processed and transformed – and theresulting materials purified and, in some cases further processed and stored. For example, since the Apollo9

As noted above, the “Moon Village Readiness Levels” (MVRLs) are discussed in Annex D as a proposed, disciplineindependent scale for evaluating the maturity of various capabilities, missions, systems, etc. vis-à-vis the Settlement 2045
concept. The assessments presented in Section 5 are entirely preliminary in character, and will be updated.

54

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

era, it has been known that the regolith comprises a number of metal and semiconductor oxides. If theoxides are ‘cracked’ – for example by means of high-temperature electrolysis – then only electricity will
be required to produce Oxygen (O2), Iron (Fe), Aluminum (Al), Silicon (Si) and a host of other materials.
During the past the two decades the presence of water ice in the permanently shadowed regions (PSRs) of
the Moon’s polar regions has been confirmed by various spacecraft. This discovery opened up entirely newopportunities for ISRU – and relevant technologies – both in terms of required systems and the operational
environments involved.
Considerably more information is still to be gathered regarding the details for the physicalcharacteristics of the water ice-bearing regolith in the permanently shadowed regions (PSRs). And, thespecific chemical composition of regolith in the vicinity of the poles needs to be better understood to refineplans and processes for its use.
Table 5-2 Settlement 2045 / Theme 2 Summary Assessment
THEME

5.3

In Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) (Theme 2)

REQUIREMENTS?

• ISRU for key materials – particularly production of water,
Oxygen, propellants, etc. – are enabling for a Lunar
Settlement, but are only high-leverage for an inhabited base orcamp on the Moon (i.e., reducing costs, risks, etc.).

CAPABILITIES?

• ISRU of various types is the subject of R&D, often in close
conjunction with manufacturing R&D in particular.

PLAYERS?

• Diverse space agencies, particularly in the US, Japan andEuropean organizations.
• Various universities – particularly CSM.
• Multiple companies, including ‘majors’ and new space firms;
however, corporate research in many cases appears lesscomprehensive / mature than that at universities.

MATURITY?

• More information is needed regarding the details of ices in the
PSRs and the composition of polar regolith• Concepts exists and R&D is being conducted, but is still at thelaboratory level of testing / experiments.
• More analytical modeling needed to test ‘economic viability’for Settlement 2045 and potential commercial applications.
• Maturity = MVRL 2, approximately. (See Annex D)

Theme 3: Life Support Systems & Agriculture

Workshop Theme 3 life support systems and agriculture – the local recycling of various elements
through bioregenerative means. The discussion indicated that significant advances beyond the foundationon those currently operating on the ISS (and other LEO space stations) are possible, but significant issues
remain if agriculture is to be available by the 2030s, in time to support the Settlement 2045 concept. See
Table 5-3 for a summary assessment of this area.

55

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Many of the regenerative life support systems (RLSS) now in use onboard the International Space
Station (ISS) depend upon consumable materials, such as filters and process chemistry-based systems.
Such systems are practical only because the ISS can be resupplied regularly from Earth. The realization ofa biologically-sustainable settlement on Earth’s Moon will depend upon the capacity to, without recourse
to filters or systems imported from Earth:
1)
2)
3)
4)

locally regenerate air;locally deliver fresh water indefinitely to people, other animals, plants, etc.);
locally produce a diverse variety of nutritious food, sufficient for indefinite habitation; andrecycle indefinitely biological and physical waste associated with human society.

Fundamental necessities for all of the above will be (a) the local fabrication, construction, repair
and expansion of structural systems – including pressurized habitable volumes, (b) the production of viablesoil locally from a feedstock comprising primarily lunar regolith, (c) the production of both Earth-like airand potable water.
Table 5-3 Settlement 2045 / Theme 3 Summary Assessment
THEME

Life Support and Agriculture (Theme 3)

REQUIREMENTS? • Regenerative ECLSS is essential for affordable long-duration
human missions beyond LEO.
• Bio-regenerative life support systems involving food growth anduse of living systems in air recycling, waste processing, etc. isessential.
CAPABILITIES?

• ECLSS of various types is the subject of many governmentsponsored R&D, particularly in the context of the ISS, and planningfor the soon-to-be-deployed Chinese space station.

PLAYERS?

• Diverse space agencies, ISS partners particularly – including theUS, Europe, Japan, Russian Federation, China, and others.
• Only selected companies appear to be strong players, including
some ‘majors’ and few new space firms.
• Various universities are involved, but typically in plant research.

MATURITY?

• Fundamental understanding is lacking regarding plant growth andanimal species in 1/6th gravity.
• Concepts exist and R&D is being conducted, but is still at thelaboratory level of testing / experiments, typically with individual
plant species.
• More analytical modeling needed to verify the technical feasibility
for Settlement 2045.
• Maturity = MVRL 2, approximately. (See Annex D).

In appears entirely feasible to accomplish these functions; however, the system-of-systems required
will be exceptionally complex and involve ‘emergent’ behaviors difficult to discern – much less understand– in simulations, sub-scale / partial testbeds or similar environments. Moreover, an ‘unknown-unknown’ in56

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

all of this involves the detailed effects of lunar gravity at 1/6th Earth normal on the various species in thesettlement biosphere.
5.4

Theme 4: Reusable Space Transportation Systems

Affordable, regular and reliable transportation to and from a lunar settlement will be extremely
important for both physical and economic sustainability. Such transportation will certainly require
reusability of vehicle systems – at least for human-rated, passenger-carrying vehicles; and, of course
reusability depends upon the ability to refuel vehicles. The workshop discussion indicated that reusable andtherefore refueled space transportation are technically feasible and should be available by the 2030s, in time
to support the Settlement 2045 concept. See Table 5-4 for a summary assessment of this area.
Table 5-4 Settlement 2045 / Theme 4 Summary Assessment
THEME

Reusable Space Transportation (Theme 4)

REQUIREMENTS?

• Low cost space transportation from Earth to the Moon and backis essential for a lunar settlement – and reusable spacetransportation for each segment is required.
o to/from LEO, to/from LLO, to/from the lunar surface

CAPABILITIES?

• Reusable space transportation systems have been proven for
ETO transport – the most difficult segment;• Both in-space and orbit-to-surface transportation is the subject ofongoing R&D.

PLAYERS?

• Diverse space agencies, ISS partners particularly – including theUS, Europe, Japan, Russian Federation, China, and others.
• Only selected companies appear to be strong players, including
some ‘majors’ and few new space firms.
• Various universities are involved, but typically in plant research.

MATURITY?

• Concepts exists and R&D is being conducted, but is still at thelaboratory level of testing / experiments.
• More analytical modeling needed to test ‘economic viability’ for
Settlement 2045 and potential commercial applications.
• Maturity = MVRL 3, approximately.10 (See Annex D)

The deployment of Earth-supplied lunar orbit-surface-orbit vehicles, based and refueled in LLO(or cis-lunar space) would continue the sequence. This would be followed by the development of lunar
surface systems for ice ‘mining’, extraction, and processing – followed by ‘cracking’ of the purified waterto produce O2 and H2, followed by liquefaction and LOx-LH2 propellant storage and use. At this point,
lunar surface based (and refueled) RSTS will become possible – enabling truly low-cost access to the Moon.
Lunar surface refueling of RSTS will depend upon ISRU, discussed previously.

10

The maturity assessment if for the RSTS vehicle systems; there are closely related capabilities re: ISRU that are less maturity(due to the need for more information about the PSR ices) and operations (due to the need for local servicing andmaintenance of vehicles).

57

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group5.5

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Theme 5: Power & Operations

The discussion related to Theme 5 addressed both space power and a number of operations
associated with the settlement concept. The workshop discussion indicated that advances beyond current
power systems – particularly for solar power – are technically feasible and should be available by the 2030s,
in time to support the Settlement 2045 concept. See Table 5-5 for a summary assessment of this area.
In order to accomplish a biologically and economically self-sufficient settlement on the Moon asignificant advance in current capabilities for space power is essential. The ISS has an onboard powersystem capable of generating (peak) some 150 kW, and delivering (using battery systems) an average ofabout 100 kW – representing about 24 kW per person for a crew of 4. Taking into account the systemdevelopment cost, the operations costs, repair and maintenance, and the lifetime of the ISS power system,
the cost for this power may be estimated at approximately $50 per kilowatt-hour. This is very roughly 100times greater than the cost of power in the US, for power equivalent to a small suburban neighborhood.
Dramatically more power, and a much, much lower cost will be required to realize a sustainable space
settlement on the Moon.
Table 5-5 Settlement 2045 / Theme 5 Summary Assessment
THEME

Power and Operations (Theme 5)

REQUIREMENTS?

• Significant power – in the multiple MW – is essential for the
Settlement 2045 concept. Moreover, significant power must be
delivered to the PSR to enable ice mining operations.
• A variety of advanced ‘CONOPS’ are also essential, including
surface transportation, local servicing of systems, etc.

CAPABILITIES?

• The capabilities of the ISS represent a baseline for both power
and operations for the Moon
• However, a variety of other capabilities are also in development– particularly large-scale mass production of power systems‘mega-constellations’• Power for the PSRs is a special issue; but developments of
WPT and space nuclear power systems are both underway.

PLAYERS?

• Systems are being developed by a diverse set of space agencies,
including the US, Europe, Japan, Russian Federation, China, theUK and others.
• In addition, a number of companies appear to be strong players,
including both ‘majors’ and new space firms.
• Various universities are involved, but typically in plantresearch.

MATURITY?

• Concepts exists and R&D is being conducted, but is still at thelaboratory level of testing / experiments.
• More analytical modeling needed to test ‘economic viability’for Settlement 2045 and potential commercial applications.
• Maturity = MVRL 3, approximately. (See Annex D)58

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

One of the fundamental assumptions of the current case study is that affordable, megawatt-classspace power system are now being enabled – as a result of the mass production of solar powered spacecraft
as a result of the deployment of mega-constellations in LEO.
5.6

Theme 6: Architectural Concepts & Markets

This final session addressed two cross-cutting topics: architectural concepts and markets. The
workshop discussion indicated that a variety of activities are underway, exploring diverse architecturalconcepts for the Moon that could be relevant to a future lunar settlement. Markets are also emerging withnew players (e.g., MVA’s PESC program), and communications being coordinated through means such as
the MVA ‘moon market’ activity and the economics working group. However, additional work is needed
to better reflect the special character of the lunar polar regions and the opportunities that will emerge
through accomplishing Settlement 2045. See Table 5-6 for a summary assessment of this area.
Table 5-6A Settlement 2045 / Theme 6A Summary Assessment
THEME

Architectural and Related Concepts (Theme 6A)

REQUIREMENTS?

• Architectural concepts appropriate to the lunar polar regions are
essential to the Settlement 2045 concept.
• These must address not just traditional ‘architecture’ – i.e.,buildings – but also urban planning, power engineering, etc.

CAPABILITIES?

• There is a rich history of design and planning for lunar surface
installations, going back to the 1950s.
• R&D is ongoing, with multiple studies. However, these tend tonot be focused on the lunar polar region.

PLAYERS?

• Diverse space agencies, ISS partners particularly – including theUS, Europe, Japan, Russian Federation, China, and others.
• Only selected companies appear to be strong players, including
some ‘majors’ and few new space firms.
• Various universities are involved, but typically in plant research.

MATURITY?

• Concepts exists and R&D is being conducted, but is still at thelaboratory level of testing / experiments.
• More analytical modeling needed to test ‘economic viability’ for
Settlement 2045 and potential commercial applications.
• Maturity = MVRL 3, approximately. (See Annex D)

The discipline known as ‘architecture’ is defined as referring to ‘the art or science of building’ in
general, and more specifically ‘the art or practice of designing and building structures and especially
habitable ones.’11 Designing a lunar settlement must involve a wide variety of disciplines – including not
only ‘architecture’, but also lunar geophysics, space systems engineering, electrical engineering and many

11

See: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/architecture, downloaded on 23 December 2020.

59

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

others.12 There is a general consensus for a lunar settlement to be ‘sustainable’, it must be sustainable not
only in terms of the physical aspects of the installation, but also with regards to its economics. Only ahandful of market opportunities have been identified that suit the capabilities of a lunar settlement during
the coming several decades and which also technically feasible.
Table 5-6B Settlement 2045 / Theme 6B Summary Assessment
THEME

Market Development (Theme 6B)

REQUIREMENTS?

• A settlement on the Moon must not only be technicallyfeasible, it must also be economically viable; this will depend
upon the early• Establishing a permanent settlement on Earth’s Moon must bea peaceful endeavor of all humanity – hence broadening thebase of global participation is a key requirement

CAPABILITIES?

• Only very limited concepts have emerged for a viable‘economy of the Moon’.
• There are ongoing efforts – particularly by the MVA – tobroaden international participation in lunar programs.

PLAYERS?

• Diverse space agencies, ISS partners particularly – including
the US, Europe, Japan, Russian Federation, China, and others.
• Only selected companies appear to be strong players, including
some ‘majors’ and few new space firms.
• Various universities are involved but studies are limited.

MATURITY?

• Concepts exists and R&D is being conducted, but is still at thelaboratory level of testing / experiments.
• More analytical modeling needed to test ‘economic viability’for Settlement 2045 and potential commercial applications.
• Maturity = MVRL 1-2, approximately. (See Annex D)

Section 6, which follows presents closing observations, including an update of the baseline
Settlement 2045 concept and the plan forward.

12

As a ‘term of art’ to reflect this diverse of disciplines and skills the following is suggested: “Lunatect” as someone whopractices the art and science of ‘Lunatecture’ – including the diverse and dynamic combination of skills, modeling tools, etc.
etc. that must be employed to create a new biosphere on Earth’s satellites.

60

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

SECTION 6

KEY FINDINGS & PLAN FORWARD
6.1

High-Level Findings

The following are some of the key findings and potential actions that could be taken both for theremainder of the current ongoing Case Study, as well as after its completion. The topics addressed include:(1) settlement technical feasibility; (2) the importance of terrain near the chosen location; (3) long-distance
operational mobility; (4) the building blocks needed; (5) interfaces that must be defined; (6) promotinginteroperability; (7) settlement economic viability; and, (8) assessing ‘readiness’ to accomplish these goals.
The section also identifies selected updates of the Reference Architecture that are needed. Each of these isaddressed in the paragraphs that follow.
6.1.1

Settlement Technical Feasibility

In terms of the requirements identified by the Case Study (see Section 3), a lunar settlement locatednear the south pole of the Moon appears to be technically feasible. Habitable volume manufactured locally,
power and thermal systems, reusable (i.e., refueled) space transportation, communications, in-situ resource
utilization, radiation shielding, etc. all appear achievable. However, there are some significant unknowns
that must still be resolved.
First and foremost, the most important ‘known unknown’ involves the biological feasibility of longterm healthy human life in a low-gravity environment, such as that of the Moon (at approximately 1/6th
gravity) must still be established. The same is true for healthy existence of the many other animals, plants,
fungi and other species that are essential to establishing a sustainable biosphere. And, for agriculture to berealized, an affordable source of large amounts of Nitrogen and Carbon (which are not meaningfully
available in the lunar regolith) must be identified. Moreover, there are other ‘unknown unknowns’
associated with the lunar polar environment itself, as contrasted with the lunar environment at the Apollo
landing sites. The structure of the regolith in the PSRs has not been determined in detail, nor has thechemical composition of the ices that have been discovered.
Although a settlement appears technically feasible (with the exception of various unknowns, suchas those mentioned above) a wide variety of technologies and systems still must be developed or adaptedfrom terrestrial applications by not later than the mid-2030s if a settlement is to be accomplished by 2045.
The outstanding issues concerning technical feasibility will be examined in greater detail by the ongoing
Case Study in 2021.
6.1.2

The Importance of Terrain

The current focus of international and commercial interest in the Moon is on the poles of the lunar
surface – primarily the south polar region – due to the presence of water ice in the permanently shadowed
regions (PSRs). The existence of PSRs is due to the extremes of terrain at the poles. For example, thedifference in elevation from the rim of Shackleton Crater to its floor is approximately 5,000 meters, achange that occurs over a linear distance of only some 5-6 km. For comparison, recall that the depth of theGrand Canyon in the US is only a little more than 1,800 meters.

61

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Many lunar surface habitat architecture studies have been conducted over the years, addressing awide range of variations – including buried ISS-like modules, locally fabricated domes, mobile habitats,and other concepts. however, most of these have addressed generic locations, typically similar to the Apollo
landing sites, which were quite ‘flat’ or sometimes involving lava tubes. And only a few have looked atusing the Moon’s most common feature – craters – in a habitation design. However, none of the typicalconcepts are especially suitable as points of comparison for the majority of the lunar south polar region,
which is quite rugged.
Additional factors in a lunar settlement that are impacted by terrain include power supplies, launchand landing sites, and others. Again, few past studies have been set in a terrain model similar to that at the
Moon’s south pole – although recent consideration has been given to often-illuminated high-elevation
locations (e.g., ridgelines, crater rims, etc.) for solar power generation. Also, cost-effective transportation
among the various operational locations of a settlement will be on the surface – and hence the terrain will
be extremely important.
6.1.3

Long-Distance Operational Mobility

As noted in the prior paragraph, little R&D has been done concerning long-distance traverse
mobility over rugged terrain – such as exists at the lunar south pole – for operational purposes (e.g., mining,transporting cargos or crews over 10s of km) in the south polar region. Many countries have developed
robotic ‘rovers’ for scientific purposes, including both the Moon and Mars; and, building on the Apollo
program R&D is being conducted to develop both unpressurized and pressurized astronaut mobility
systems. For a lunar settlement, it is likely that ‘trucks’ to move regolith (or water) from a mining site to
the location of a processing plant will likely need to traverse tens of kilometers daily, 100s of km per monthand 1,000s per year, and to do so while hauling up to tons of material. Dust will be a major issue, of course;
and its mitigation for surface mobility systems essential. However, the fabrication of roadways (e.g.,pavement or paving stones that together comprise a roadway) by sintering regolith may accomplish thisobjective. During 2021, further characterization will be pursued of mobility requirements, concepts andtechnologies.
6.1.4

Building Blocks Needed

One key result of the current case study was the development of a set of ‘building blocks’(mentioned above) that will be important to the realization of the reference architecture, these address theissues identified above and many others. These are sketched in the paragraphs that follow, along withpreliminary plans for additional work to be pursued during 2021.
Utilities. ‘Utilities’ building blocks include communications & network systems; Position locationand navigation; Imaging & Operational Sensing; computing and data management; and, power generation& energy systems. More information is needed on the requirements to be satisfied by the various utilities;
for example, power for life support systems, waste heat to be dissipated, etc. Clearly solar power generation
systems will be located either at a system user or in a sunlit location within reach by power transmission(wired or wireless). However, space nuclear power generation system siting is somewhat lessstraightforward as it will involve sizing for transportation, choosing an appropriate thermal environment,planning for the system once it is radioactive, and other topics. Various utilities – but especially power –will be considered in greater detail during 2021.

62

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Transport & Logistics. ‘Transport & logistics’ building blocks include Space Transport Systems(including surface-to-surface transportation – i.e., ‘hoppers’); Space Transport Vehicles (Expendable,
Reusable, etc.); Landing Systems & Vehicle Support Systems; Advanced Lunar Launch Concepts; and,Surface Transport Systems (including transportation of crew, cargo and materials). In addition, harvesting
residual propellants from landers will be an important source of consumables. Recycling of one-way
expendable vehicles will be a key function for both the ‘Transport & Logistics ‘and ‘Operations’ Building
Blocks. Also, it is unlikely that vehicles will be able to arrive at will at a spaceport near a settlement.
Schedules will be impacted by orbital locations of facilities in space, flight paths on the lunar surface, accessto facilities, and other factors. Integrated analysis of traffic models is needed – coupled to systems studies
of both space transportation systems, and surface-based capabilities (such as ISRU, ISPP, CPDs, spaceports and surface transportation).
Operations. A wide range of building blocks fall under the general category of ‘operations’,
including dust mitigation; construction systems; physical waste processing and recycling; and,manufacturing. Another critical ‘Operations’ building block for the lunar settlement reference case study
will be Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs) that are capable of full dry tunneling and producing sealed tunnel
structural systems.
Resources. These building blocks involve all manner of systems and capabilities related to lunar
surface resources, such as exploration for and characterization of lunar resources (including ice and othervolatiles, minerals in the regolith, etc.); mining systems & resources extraction capabilities; resources
processing & handling systems; and the production of pure feedstocks for use in habitation andtransportation operations (e.g., pure water, pure O2, pure H2, etc.). Integrated assessment and analysis ofresources-related considerations in the context of the other Building Blocks will be pursued during theremainder of the Case Study.
Habitation / Self-sustaining ‘Biospheres’. Including habitable volume (pressure vessel, air, water,lighting, thermal management, etc.); radiation protection; agricultural systems; biological waste processing& recycling. Options of the integration of possible low-gravity mitigation systems (e.g., a centrifuge) in the
habitation systems are needed. Having multiple habitats appears to be an excellent risk-mitigation strategy
for a lunar settlement (i.e., not putting all of one’s ‘eggs in one basket’). However, connecting these places
where people will live without requiring individuals to go outside into the vacuum will be essential. (Thesame issue arises in many communities on Earth where the weather is too hot or too cold during much of
the year, and is solved by elevated walkways and/or tunnels.) These factors will be examined during 2021.
Human Operations & Health. Human operations and health related building blocks include EVA
systems; airlocks; EVA Suits; personal mobility systems; EVA maintenance systems; medical care systems(including urgent care, immunology, surgical care, dental care systems, etc.). Lunar gravity mitigation is a
closely-related consideration. All of these systems must be able to be fabricated locally in large measure, if
not entirely for a settlement to be ‘self-sufficient’. In 2021, the Case Study will examine these
considerations.
Robotic Systems (Surrogates / Augmentation). A wide variety of robotic systems will be essential
to the successful development and subsequent operations of the Moon Village – both as surrogates forhuman actors and to augment or support them. These include robotic systems that will operate inside humanhabitation systems, those that may operate either on the interior or the exterior of habitats (just as humans

63

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020do), and those that are restricted to operations exterior to habitats (and perhaps at locations remote fromthem (such as mining sites).
Science Missions / Payloads. Science Missions and/or Payloads include three major categories ofscience: (1) Science of the Moon (for example, geophysics); (2) Science from the Moon (such as
astrophysics); and, (3) Science on the Moon (for example, generic research laboratories as well as focusedresearch installations, such Mars mission testbeds on the Moon).
6.1.5

Interfaces and Standards

With the above definition of Interoperability and the identified Building Blocks, a set of interfaces
and standards may be defined. A handful of draft ‘deep space interoperability standards’ have been
identified by a sub-set of ISS participants.i However, there are diverse additional interfaces and interface
standards that must be considered in greater detail – even though they will not be finalized for years. Suchearlier insight can inform decisions by both entrepreneurs and space agencies (and their contractors) in thenearer term. Some of the likely interfaces will include:•

Communications systems related interfaces and standards (e.g., spectrum use, non-interference,standards and protocols for networks, etc.).

•

Human systems related interfaces (e.g., atmospheres, airlocks, EVA systems, medical caresystems and coordination, and many others).

•

Transportation systems interfaces and standards (including especially propellants, supporting
services, landing and launch installations and ‘space traffic control’ and others).

•

Agricultural and bio-systems standards and coordination (including protection of individual
habitats from inadvertent contamination and/or invasive species, and more).

•

Energy systems and standards (including access to solar energy, use of wireless powertransmission (WPT), power lines and specifications (e.g., voltage, AC or DC, etc.).
The closely related topic of ‘interoperability’ is discussed in the paragraph that follows.

6.1.6

Promoting Interoperability

It is clear that the various building blocks must be capable of working together – and with othersystems that may be operating on the Moon that are external to the “Moon Village Settlement”. Hence,‘Interoperability’ will be an important characteristic of any future lunar settlement. However, the precise
meaning of this term for lunar and cis-lunar systems appears somewhat fluid at present, usually focusing
on interoperability for data systems and networks, and sometimes documented at the detailed level – but
without a clear conceptual framework.ii For purposes of the MV Architecture WG studies during 20202021, efforts will adhere to the following definition:“Interoperability is the capability of space systems of all types to interact,
communicate and cooperate safely, efficiently, cost-effectively and securely –including but not limited to computing, positioning and navigation, imaging, physicalsystems and interactions, and living systems & their interfaces.”

For purposes of the MV Architecture WG, Interoperability comprises the full range of functions
and interfaces of diverse systems – including data systems, power systems, mechanical systems (such as

64

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

airlocks), fluids (such as atmospheres – pressures and composition), fire safety, living species interactions,and more.
6.1.7

Settlement Economic Viability

It is highly likely that ‘outposts’ – of which the International Space Station (ISS) is an example –may be deployed in Earth orbit, in cis-lunar space and perhaps on the lunar surface in the coming 10-20
years. However, at present it seems unlikely that governments for policy reasons will invest the necessary
funds to deploy and maintain a space settlement. As a result, in addition to technical feasibility, a lunar
settlement must also be economically viable.
As noted elsewhere, there are only a few ‘primary markets’ for a lunar surface settlement. These
will certainly be focused for many years on providing goods and services to government-sponsoredactivities (both human space flight related and science oriented). From early in the development of theMoon Village it can be expected that there will also be commercial activities related to providing goods
and services to private visitors to the Moon – particularly if the key assumptions of this case study regarding
low-cost transportation emerge. In addition to scientific exploration and preparation for later Mars missions,
the Moon may also be an important R&D facility for future lunar capabilities. For example, a biosphere on
the Moon may well be the best possible facility for may sorts of partial gravity biological research.
During 2021 the potential markets for a lunar settlement will be examined in terms of the several‘building block’ capabilities identified during 2020. Potential services that might support these (forexample, related to space tourism) will be identified and assessed.
6.1.8

Assessing Readiness

There are diverse programs and projects around the world relating to future human activities onand near the Moon. One thing that was apparent from the numerous presentations and resulting discussion
at the workshop was that some standardize way of assessing the ‘readiness’ for different lunar-focused
activities to begin / proceed might be very helpful. If activities only involved technology, the alreadystandard “technology readiness levels” (TRLs) would be sufficient, of course. However, lunar activities
involve technologies, systems, analogues and other facilities, market developments and more.
6.2

Actions and Plan Forward

6.2.1

Current Implementation Planning
The current implementation plan involves:••

Already Achieved: During 2020, preliminary studies and modelingoSelected results were presented at the online International Astronautical Congress (IAC)in October 2020

o2020 September – Initial ‘Webinar’ on MV Architecture Studieso2020 November – Preliminary inputs presented at the MVA 2020 Online Symposium

o2020 December – An online MVA Workshop focusing on the MV Reference
Architecture will be jointly organized; this meeting is that online event

OngoingoInterim reports are being developed and posted to the MVA website in early 2021
65

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Group

•

6.2.2

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Future: During 2021, further studies and meetings, includingoMV evolution in terms of international cooperation, business society and legal
considerations will be jointly organized during late Spring 2021.

oCase Study 2nd workshop during Spring/SummeroPossible ESTEC Concept Development Facility-type (CDF) studieso2021 Fall/Winter – Working results will be presented at IAC 2021 and at the 2021 Moon
Village Association Workshop and Symposiumo2022 January – Final reports will be developed and posted to the MVA website

Settlement 2045 Reference Updates

This section has presented a number of topics that will be considered in framing prospective updates
to the Settlement 2045 reference based on the Case Study thus far. These included the various issues related
to each of the Building Blocks, as well as cross-cutting technical and programmatic matters – ranging from
evaluating the economic viability of a lunar settlement in 2045 to assessing in the near-term the readinessto accomplish essential capabilities. During 2021, two updates of the Settlement 2045 are planned – one in
the summer and a second update prior to the planning final workshop.
6.2.3

A Few Other Factors

A number of additional factors have been identified in the context of the December 2020 workshop.
For example, the view of Earth from the current target location for a settlement will vary over the courseof a lunar month and year – with the Earth moving up and down near and likely below the horizon. Willthat be acceptable, or should another location be considered – perhaps one just for viewing our home? Also,
the candidate location for Settlement 2045 was chosen with a view toward avoiding clear issues of publicconcern (such as a settlement exactly at the lunar south pole of the Moon – a unique location). However,what other concerns should be taken into account, particularly with respect to changes to the nearly
permanent record of the Moon’s regolith that might result from mining operations?
In addition, the MVA Evolution Team (based in Japan) is considering the longer-term future ofhumanity on the Moon, beyond 2045. How might such later-21st Century considerations more correctly
influence the 2045 Reference Concept? These and other factors will be considered during the remainderof 2021.
6.2.4

Signposts?

The workshop comprised a discussion of the various global studies and R&D activities. These
represented common threads that spanned various Moon Village scenarios, but were generally focused on
the current Case Study and highlighted a preliminary vision for a MV Reference Architecture – including
a candidate settlement at the south pole of the Moon to be established by 2045. The current Case Study isfounded on a set of specific assumptions about the future course of events. However, these may not becorrect. How then to judge the best course for government planning, future R&D and businessdevelopments?
There may well be ‘signposts’ during the coming several years that will indicate which path
humanity will be taking to its lunar future.

66

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

One signpost could well be the beginning of ETO services by two or more reusable launch vehicle
service providers (rather than only one). If this occurs, the key question will be the impact of multiple
service providers on ETO prices for a range of customers? If prices drop as seems likely, then the cost ofoperations throughout cis-Lunar space could be significantly reduced. Another important indicator of future
directions will be the detailed results from various lunar polar missions – particularly rovers and sample
returns. This will indicate the physical character of volatiles already detected at the Moon’s poles, thereby
enabling planning for and development of ISRU systems to proceed.
Many such signposts exist; however, one final indicator of future directions must be mentioned.
What will be the disposition in practiced law of the ownership of ‘processed’ materials on the lunar surface?
At the moment, the indication is that the major space-faring countries (e.g., the US, China, etc.) will assign
ownership of “a fish” to the “fisherman who caught it” (metaphorically speaking). When – and if – the firstlunar rock is ‘owned’ by a firm that collects it, that will be a significant signpost of which lunar path we areon.
It is the hope of the MVA Architecture Working Group that the current Settlement 2045 Case Study
will provide a framework for evaluating the potential consequences of these and other future developments– and inform timely decisions regarding prospective courses of action by governments, companies,
universities and individuals.

67

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK.

68

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

ANNEX AGLOSSARY OF ACRONYMSAI

Artificial IntelligencesBIG

Bjarke Ingels Group

CDF(ESA) Concept Development
Facility

CLPS(NASA) Commercial Lunar
Payload Services program

CNS(IIF) Center for Near SpaceCO2

The chemical formula for Carbon
Dioxide

CONOPS Concept of Operations
CSM

Colorado School of Mines

ECLSS

Environmental Control and Life
Support System

ESA

European Space Agency

ESPRIT(Lunar Gateway) European
System Providing Refueling,
Infrastructure andTelecommunications

IAA

International Academy of
Astronautics

I-HAB(Lunar Gateway) International
Habitat

IIF(Italian) Institute for the Future

ILEWG

International Lunar Exploration
Working GroupISAAC

In Space Assembly andConstruction

ISAS(JAXA) Institute of Space andAstronautical Science

ISEC-GInternational Space Exploration
Coordination GroupISRU

In situ resource utilization

ISS

International Space Station

JAXA

Japan Aerospace Exploration
AgencyJRSJapan Rocket Societykgkilogramkm

kilometerkWkilowattkWhkilowatt-hour

ESTEC

ESA Science and Technology
Engineering Center

ETO

Earth-to-orbit (transportation)

EVA

Extravehicular Activity

GER(ISEC-G) Global Exploration
Roadmap

LEAG

Lunar Exploration Advisory
Group

H2

The chemical formula for
Hydrogen

LEO

low Earth orbit

H2O

The chemical formula for water

LH2

Liquid Hydrogen

HALO(Lunar Gateway) Habitat andLogistics Outpost

LLO

low lunar orbit

LOX

Liquid Oxygen

HEOMD(NASA) Human Exploration andOperations Mission Directorate

LSII(NASA) Lunar Surface
Innovation Initiative

HLS(NASA) Human Landing Systemmmeter(s)MIS

Made-in-Space

A- 1

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working Groupm2

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

‘meters-squared’, aka ‘square
meters’PPE(Lunar Gateway) Power and
Propulsion Element

MMPACT Moon-to-Mars Processing andConstruction Technology

PSR

Permanently Shadowed Region

R&D

research and development

RLL

Reusable Lunar Lander

RLSS

Regenerative Life Support
Systems

RSTS

Reusable Space Transportation
Systemsm3

meters-cubed

MRE

Molten Regolith Electrolysis

MSFC(NASA) Marshall Space Flight
CenterMT

Metric Tons

MVA

Moon Village Association

SDO(Yuzhnoye) State Design Office

MVRL

Moon Village Readiness Level(s)

STMD

MW

megawatt(NASA) Space Technology
Mission DirectorateMWhmegawatt-hour

TBD

to be determined

TBM

Tunnel Boring Machine

Team X(NASA) ‘Team-X’

TRA

Technology Readiness
Assessment

MV Architecture WG
Moon Village Architectural
Concepts & Considerations
Working Group
MW

megawatts

TRL

Technology Readiness Level(s)N2

The chemical formula for
Nitrogen gas

TRRA

Technology Readiness and Risk
Assessment

NASA

National Aeronautics and Space
Administration

TUS

Tokyo University of Science

UAE

United Arab EmiratesNGO

non-Governmental organization

USA

United States of America

NSS

National Space Society

USC

University of Southern California

O2

The chemical formula for Oxygengas

VR / AR

Virtual Reality / Augmented
Reality

PESC(MVA) Program for Emerging
Space Countries

WG

working group

A- 2

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

ANNEX B

WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
The following Annex table presents a summary listing of the registered participants of the MV
Architecture WG Workshop (14-16 December 2020).
NAME (LAST, FIRST)

COUNTRY

ORGANIZATION

ROLE

USA

Center for Space Resources,
Colorado School of Mines

Participant, Speaker

ALOTAIBI, Ghanim

KUWAIT

MVA PESC Project

Participant, Speaker

ASAZUMA, Taro

JAPANIspaceParticipant

BALLARD, Jason

USA

ICON

Participant, Speaker

BARNHARD, GaryUSA

XISP, Inc.

Participant

BAYCAN, Serdar

AUSTRALIA

TecturaParticipant

BERDNYK, Oleksandr

UKRAINE

Yuzhnoye State Design Office

Participant; Speaker

BIENHOFF, Dallas

USA

Cislunar Space Dev. Co., LLC

Participant; Speaker

BURKE, James D. (Jim)USA

JPL, Retired; MVA

Participant

BURKE, Margaret (Margie)USA

Jim Burke's Daughter

Participant

CARRELI, Paolo

UAE

College of Engineering; Abu Dhabi
University

Participant

CHEUVRONT, David

USA

NSS

Participant

CLINTON, Raymond G. (Corky)

USA

NASA MSFC

Participant, Speaker

CLINTON, TreyUSA

Red Wire / Made-in-Space

Participant

COLE, Troy

USA

MVA Member

Participant

DAVID, Leopard

USA

Participant, Media

Participant

DE CHIARA, Giuseppe

ITALY

IIF

Participant

DE MARTINO, Guido

ITALY

IIF

Participant

DEEPAK, Adarsh

USA

Taksha Insittute

Participant

DEEPAK, Ravi

USA

Taksha Insittute

Participant

DiMARZIO, Kevin

USARed Wire / Made-in-Space

Participant, Speaker

EDMUNDSON, Jennifer

USA

NASA MSFC

Participant

EDWARDS, Christine

USA

Lockheed Martin Company

Participant, Speaker

EFFINGER, Michael

USA

NASA MSFC

Participant, Speaker

ENLOE, Sandy

USA

Blue Origin

Participant

FISCHER, Richard T.

USA

NASA MSFC

Participant

FISKE, Mike

USA

NASA MSFC

Participant

Netherlands

ESTEC

Participant, Speaker

ABBUD-MADRID, AngelFOING, Bernard

B- 1

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupNAME (LAST, FIRST)

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

COUNTRY

ORGANIZATIONROLE

FOUST, Jeff

USA

The Space Review / Space.com

Participant; MediaFUKUNAGA, Mihoko

JAPAN

IHI

Participant

FUKUSHIMA, ShoJAPANShimizu Corporation

Participant

GOTO, Takuya

JAPAN

Doshisha University

Participant

GRISSIM, Robert

USA

Drake State University

Participant(Future Lunar Construction)

HENLEY, MarkUSA

Boeing (Retired)

Participant

HIGUCHI, KiyoshiJAPAN

former IAF president, JAXA vicepresident

Participant

IGARASHI, Iwao

JAPAN

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

Participant, Speaker

IGNATIEV, Alex Ph.D.

USA

Lunar Resources, Inc.

Participant, Speaker

INATANI, Yoshifumi

JAPAN

MVA / ISAS

Co-Chair, Keynote

INATOMI, Yuko

JAPAN

JAXA

Participant

IWASAKI, Akhiro Ph.D

JAPAN

YspaceParticipant; co-Speaker

KERAVALA, Jim

USA

OffWorld, Inc

Participant, Speaker

KITAYA, Yoshiaki

JAPANOsaka Prefecture University,
Environmental Sciences & Technology

Participant, Speaker

KOBAYASHI, Hiroaki

JAPAN

Japanese Rocket Society (JRS) /ISAS (JAXA)

Participant; Speaker

LAUER, Chuck

UK / USASPACE BIT

Participant

MANKINS, John C.

USA

MVA / NSS / IAA

Co-Chair, Keynote, Speaker

MESSINA, Piero

FRANCEESA HQ

Participant

MINICHINI, Raffaele

ITALY

IIF

Participant

MITSUI, Masami

JAPAN

JAXA

Participant

MIYAJIMA, Hiroyuki

JAPANInternational University of Health andWelfareParticipant

MOORE, Christopher

USA

NASA HQ

Participant, Day 2 Keynote

MORITA, ken

JAPAN

Takasago Thermal Engineering

Participant

MORRIS, Michael

USA

Space Exploration Architecture;(SEArch+)Participant, Speaker

USA /DENMARKBIG – Bjarke Ingels Group

Participant, Speaker

OKAMOTO, Yuki

JAPAN

IHI AEROSPACE

Participant

ONUKI, Misuzu

JAPANSpaceAccessParticipant

PALLES-FRIEDMAN, Rebeccah

USASpace Exploration Architecture;(SEArch+)Participant, Speaker

OCAMPO SALAZAR, Julian

PELKEY, Tina

USABlue Origin

Participant

PERINO, Maria Antonietta

ITALY

Thales Alenia Space Italia

Participant, Speaker

PICA CIAMARRA, Massimo

ITALY

IIF

Participant

B- 2

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupNAME (LAST, FIRST)

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

COUNTRY

ORGANIZATION

ROLE

ITALY

Space Generation Advisory
Committee

Participant, Speaker

REIBALDI, Giuseppe

The
Netherlands

Moon Village Organization

Participant

RUSSO, Gennaro Ph.D.

ITALY

Italian Institute for the Future; Center
for Near Space

Participant, Speaker

SAITO, Akio

JAPAN

IHI AEROSPACE

Participant

SAITO, Akio

JAPAN

IHI AEROSPACE

Participant

SAKATOMO, Yuki

JAPANJapanese Rocket Society (JRS)

Participant; co-Speaker

SALMERI, Antonino

ITALYSpace Generation Advisory
Committee

Participant, co-Speaker; with
P. Pino

SASAMURA, Mami

JAPAN

JAXA

Participant

SATO, Naoki

JAPAN

JAXA space exploration Center

Participant

SATTLER, Antoniia

GERMANY

Student; DLR; Space Architect dot
Org

Participant

SCARSPI, Floriana

ITALYSpace Gen. Advisory Committee /Lunar Biosphere Project

Participant / Speaker(Life Support & Habitation)

SHERWOOD, Brent

USA

Blue Origin

Participant, Day 2 Keynote

SHINOHARA, Naoki

JAPANKyoto University

Participant, Speaker

STONE, Dennis

USA

NASA JSC

Participant

STRASHKO, Vitalii

UKRAINE

Dnieper State Academy of Civil
Engineering and Architecture

Participant

TAKAHASHI, Akihisa

JAPAN

Gunma University

Participant

TANASYUK, Pavlo

UK

SPACE BIT

Participant & Speaker

THANGAVELU, Madhu

USA

USC / NSS / MVA

Co-Chair, Keynote

UCHIDA, Atsushi

JAPAN

Mitsubishi Research InstituteParticipant

UYAMA, Naohiro

JAPAN

Shimuzu Corporation

Participant, Speaker

VENTSKOVSKY, Oleh

UKRAINE

Yuzhnoye SDO, MVA Moon Market

Participant, Speaker

WERKHEISER, Niki

USA

NASA HQ / Lunar Surface Innovation
Initiative (LSII)

Participant, TBD?

YASHAR, Melodie

USA

San Jose State University

Participant

PINO, Paolo

B- 3

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK

B- 4

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

ANNEX C

Moon Village Architectural Concepts and Concerns
MOON VILLAGE SCENARIOS / VERSION II
v.2 | 17 December 2020

C.1.

Introduction

The Moon Village Association (MVA) is dedicated to advancing the goal of humanity’s expansion to theMoon (comprising in-space, and lunar surface) systems, missions and operations) under the rubric of the ‘Moon
Village’ (MV) concept. Within the MVA, the MV Architectural Concepts and Considerations Working Group (MVArch WG) is responsible for conducting technical studies that build upon current government and private sector
lunar plans. During 2018, the MV Arch-WG developed and published a set of three high-level ‘MV Scenarios’that encompassed a wide range of potential lunar goals, programs and accomplishments.
This update of the Moon Village Architecture Working Group ‘Scenarios’ for lunar exploration,
development and (eventual) settlement represents a major revision of the initial scenarios, developed during
and published at the end of 2018. Over the past several years, there have been significant policy and program
planning changes (particularly in the US space program) as well as meaningful technology advances. Some ofthese changes are ongoing as management changes in the US program are imminent. Moreover, the August2020 version of the Global Exploration Roadmap (GER) released by International Space Exploration Coordination
Group (ISEC-G) provides a common set of events over the next 8-10 years that should be reflected in all MV
Architecture Working Group (MV Architecture WG) scenarios.1
The updated MV scenarios continue to comprise three (3) alternative visions of the future, but withrevisions in their definitions to better correspond with recent developments, described above. In addition, theMV Arch. WG ‘case study’ being conducted during 2020-2021 has produced useful interim results (e.g., the MV‘Building Blocks’) that are incorporated into the updated scenarios. The following are the new scenarios:•••

Scenario Alpha: Exploration-Driven.
Scenario Beta: Science-Driven.
Scenario Gamma: Development-Driven.

The paragraphs that following provide additional details on each of these; these are organizedaccording to the classic questions: who? what? when? where? and why” (just as was true in Version I of the
Scenarios). A prospective schedule of major milestones for each scenario is identified in terms of for timeframes:
near-term (2021-2030), mid-term (2031-2040), far-term (2041-2050); and far-future (post 2051).

C.2.

Scenario Turning Points

The actual future of human space activities will almost certainly not be any one of the three scenarios
outlined here. Rather, the future may very well involve a combination of all them, with the ‘level’ of each’s
1

For information on the ISEC-G and the GER, see: https://www.globalspaceexploration.org/wordpress/?cat=1 (downloaded
on 22 November 2020), and 2020 Supplement: Global Exploration Roadmap Supplement – Lunar Surface Exploration
Scenario Update (also downloaded on 22 November 2020).

C- 1

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

contribution depending on identifiable ‘turning-points’ that may occur during the remainder of the 2020s. Alongwith the descriptions below, following each are suggested example ‘turning-points’ for each of the three
scenarios; each turning point comprises a statement of a potential future event, including selected details ofwhat might be entailed.

C.3.

Scenario Alpha: Exploration Goals & Objectives-Driven Lunar Activities

In this alternative future, lunar activities will be planned and implemented to best support the goals ofnational government-sponsored space exploration programs, focused on or using the Moon. Human Space
Flight (HSF) – the focus of Scenario Alpha in Version I of the MVA Scenarios – plays a large role in this new
scenario, but robotic exploration is also emphasized. Primary activities will be conducted by contractors,
working for government managers, and to a lesser extent in proportion by university researchers, although thetotal amount of effort will depend upon the overall funding for any program. Eventual human missions to Mars
(HMM) are an over-arching motivation for a wide range of programs under this scenario during the 2020s and2030s.
Within Scenario Alpha, major science goals will be accomplished, but typically this will occur as they areenabled by exploration programs (rather than as science goals in and of themselves). Similarly, important spacedevelopment milestones will be realized; however, these will be primarily pursued for the benefits that new
capabilities can deliver to exploration programs, or by providing useful ongoing services as required. Space‘development’ might have commercial benefits, but these would not the purpose of government support forsuch efforts.
A primary purpose of government-sponsored exploration activities involving the Moon under Scenario
Alpha will be preparation for later human Mars Missions (HMM). This purpose will result in the development
and demonstration of various new capabilities – such as very long-range mobility, very long-duration (but limited
capacity) habitation systems, and multi-use, locally maintained extravehicular activity (EVA) systems. Table 1
provides a schedule of major milestones that might results from Scenario Alpha occurring.
Scenario Alpha (Exploration-Driven) Turning Points
The following are ‘turning points’ that – if they occur in the near-term – would indicate that Scenario
Alpha is likely to be a strong part of humanity’s future vis-à-vis the Moon.
•

Turning Point A.1 / Policy makers in a number of space-faring countries continue to support steadyongoing funding for lunar robotic missions (including orbiters, landers, rovers and sample return
missions).

•

Turning Point A.2 / Policy makers in major space-faring countries support significant additional
resources for lunar exploration programs (particularly in the US, China, Europe and/or the RussianFederation). These might include a permanent outpost on the Moon or the significant use of theMoon as a testbed for later Mars missions.

•

Turning Point A.3 / Policy makers in major space-faring countries support significant resources during
the 2020s to develop capabilities for later human Mars Missions.

C- 2

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table D.1: Scenario Alpha (Exploration) Schedule of Major Milestones (Version II)
WHEN? (YEARS)

WHAT? & WHERE? (MILESTONE SUMMARYNOTE_1)

WHO? & WHY?

WHO?
Government Space
Agencies
Commercial Services
Providers
Universities, etc.
After the Mid-Term
Private Ventures(Increasingly)

c. 2031-2032

Ongoing / multiple robotic exploration missions, including
orbiters, landers, rovers and sample return. (GER NOTE_2)
Lunar surface and orbital technology demonstrations
Lunar surface / orbit comm and nav systems deployed
Lunar ‘Gateway’ Operational in cis-Lunar space (GER)
US-Partners Human Mission to the Moon’s South Polar Region(GER) NOTE_3.
Advanced Lunar EVA Operational (GER)
Launch of Robotic Mars Sample Return Mission
Long-Range Pressurized Rover Operational (GER)
Lunar Surface Mars Habitation Systems (GER)
Large-scale (350 kW) Power Emplaced on Surface (GER)
Fuel Production Systems Emplaced on Surface (GER)
Human Moon Missions by Others Begin, including to the
Moon’s South Polar Region
Ongoing / multiple robotic exploration missions, including
orbiters, landers, rovers and sample return missions.
Fuel Production @ 50 MT / year on Surface (GER)c. 2031-2032

500-day Mars Habitation Demonstration (GER)c. 2031-2035

Various Lunar Mars Mission Simulations & Demos (GER)c. 2035-2042

First Human Mission to Mars (HMM) NOTE_4

c. 2042-2046

Second Human Mission to Mars (HMM) NOTE_4
Small-scale Lunar Outpost Established at the Lunar South
Polar Region (Human Tended)
Small Lunar Far-side Observatory EstablishedMultiple
Multiple
Multiplec. 2024-2026
c. 2024-2026
Near-Term(2021-2030)

c. 2024-2026
c. ‘24, ’26, ‘29
c. 2028-2029
c. 2028-2029
c. 2028-2029
c. 2029-2030
c. 2029-2030
Multiple

Mid-Term(2031-2040)

Far-Term(2041-2050)

c. 2043-‘44
c. 2046-‘48
c. TBDc. 2051-‘53

Far-Future(2051-2100)

c. 2054-‘58
c. 2060-2070
c. 2070-2080+

Lunar Space Tourism and Travel Begins
Larger Lunar Outpost Established at the South Polar Region(Permanent Staff)
Third Human Mission to Mars (HMM)
Private / Commercial Lunar Outpost for Tourism
Permanent Lunar Settlement Established (Location depends on
Markets-supported)

WHY?
National Policy
Geopolitical PolicyDriven International
Cooperation
Resource Exploration &Exploitation to reduce
costs
Near-Term & Mid-Term:
Demonstration of
Capabilities for
Humans-to-Mars
Missions
After the Mid-Term
Profit Motives(Increasingly)

NOTES:
Note 1: Ongoing operations (e.g., the Gateway in the Mid-term) are not shown as milestones.
Note_2: “GER” indicated that this Scenario Milestone is included in the ISEC-G Global Exploration Roadmap supplement of August 2020.
Note_3: this GER milestone requires an immediate and significant increase in funding in the US and partnering countries to remain on its
November 2020 schedule.
Note_4: this milestone depends on the dates / funding for the Mars Sample Return in the Near-Term.

C- 3

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupC.4.

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Scenario Beta: Hypothesis-Based Science- Driven Lunar Activities

In this version of the future of human lunar activities, hypothesis-driven science goals and objectives
will motivate lunar programs, again largely funded by government programs, but now involving a greater
proportion of university-led science instruments and investigations relative to contractor implemented projects.
(Again, the total scope of any program will determine whether a greater or lesser amount of contracted but
government-funded work is ultimately performed.) In this scenario, steady resources over long periods ispresumed, without dramatic surges in government spending or development of new capabilities. The several
international science stations in Antarctica,2 as well as major ground-based international observatories (such as
the Square Kilometer Array3) or major facilities class international instruments such as the Large Hadron Collider(LHC)4 represent models for envisioned science-drive lunar activities under This scenario.
Human space flight plays a more modest role in overall activities under Scenario Beta, with major new
missions achieved only occasionally. A human Mars mission (HMM) would still occur, but probably later andonly in the context of other science-driven goals and objectives. Periodic, regularly-funded small and medium
scale science mission may be more typical. Development of space milestones are realized, but these are more
typically in the form of services to ongoing science facilities and programs, rather than in the context ofdeveloping new capabilities for economic benefits. Permanent, but possibility human-tended outposts on theMoon man play a role – particularly if they can cost-effectively support science program requirements. Table 2
provides a schedule of major milestones for Scenario Beta.
Scenario Beta (Science-Driven) Turning Points
The following are ‘turning points’ that – if they occur in the near-term – would indicate that Scenario
Beta is likely to be a strong part of humanity’s future vis-à-vis the Moon.

2
3
4
5

•

Turning Point B.1 / Policy makers in a number of space-faring countries continue to support steadyongoing funding for lunar robotic missions (including orbiters, landers, rovers and sample return
missions).

•

Turning Point B.2 / The international scientific community embraces a coordinated (not necessarily
joint) family of major initiatives for lunar science – e.g., analogous to the “Great Observatories” modelof the 1990s NASA, and policy makers in involved space-faring countries must support funding forthese initiatives.5

As an example of an Antarctic research station, (downloaded on 22 November 2020), see:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amundsen%E2%80%93Scott_South_Pole_Station.
For additional information about the Square Kilometer Array, see: https://www.skatelescope.org/ (downloaded on 22
November 2020).
For additional information about the Large Hadron Collider, see: https://home.cern/science/accelerators/large-hadroncollider (downloaded on 22 November 2020).
For information about the so-called “Great Observatories”, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Observatories_program(downloaded on 22 November 2020).

C- 4

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table D.2: Scenario Beta (Science) Schedule of Major Milestones (Version II)
WHEN? (YEARS)

c. 2031-2032

Ongoing / multiple robotic exploration missions, including
orbiters, landers, rovers and sample return. (GER)NOTE_2
Lunar surface and orbital technology demonstrations
Lunar surface / orbit comm and nav systems deployed
Lunar ‘Gateway’ Operational in cis-Lunar space (GER)
Human Mission to the Moon (GER) NOTE_3.
Advanced Lunar EVA Operational (GER)
Launch of Robotic Mars Sample Return Mission
Long-Range Pressurized Rover Operational (GER)
Ongoing / multiple robotic exploration missions, including
orbiters, landers, rovers and sample return missions.
Lunar Surface Mars Habitation Systems (GER)c. 2032-2035

Various Lunar Mars Mission Simulations & Demos (GER)c. 2033-2034

Large-scale (350 kW) Power Emplaced on Surface (GER)c. 2034-2035

Fuel Production Systems Emplaced on Surface (GER)c. 2036-2037

500-day Mars Habitation Demonstration (GER)c. 2036-2037

Fuel Production @ 50 MT / year on Surface (GER)c. 2037-’2039

First Human Mission to Mars (HMM) NOTE_4

c. 2042-‘43

Small Lunar Far-side Observatory Established
Human-Tended Lunar Laboratory Established at the Lunar
South Polar Region
Second Human Mission to Mars (HMM)

Multiple

Near-Term(2021-2030)

Multiple
Multiplec. 2024-2026
c. 2027-2028
c. 2027-2028
c. ‘24, ’26, ‘29
c. 2029-2030
Multiple

Mid-Term(2031-2040)

Far-Term(2041-2050)

c. 2044-‘45
c. 2046-2048
c. 2050

Far-Future(2051-2100)

WHAT? & WHERE? (MILESTONE SUMMARYNOTE_1)

Lunar visits per year continues to increasec. 2050-2055

Permanent-inhabited human outpost establishedc. 2054-2056

Third / Final Human Mission to Mars (HMM)

c. 2070

Large Lunar Far-side Observatory Establishedc. 2070-2080

Lunar sourced logistics (e.g., propellants) begin sales in the
cis-lunar economy

WHO? & WHY?

WHO?
Government Space
Agencies
Commercial Services
Providers
University Space
Science Labs, etc.
After the Mid-Term:
Private Ventures
Increasingly

WHY?
Science Goals:
Science-on-the-Moon
Science-of-the-Moon
Science-from-the-Moon
Geopolitical PolicyDriven International
Cooperation
Resource Exploitation
to reduce costs
Near-Term & Mid-Term:
Demos for Humans-toMars Missions
After the Mid-Term:
Profit Motives(Increasingly)

NOTES:
Note_1: Ongoing operations (e.g., the Gateway in the Mid-term) are not shown as milestones.
Note_2: “GER” indicated that this Scenario Milestone is included in the ISEC-G Global Exploration Roadmap supplement of August 2020.
Note_3: this GER milestone requires an immediate and significant increase in funding in the US and partnering countries to remain on its
November 2020 schedule.
Note_4: this milestone depends on the dates / funding for the Mars Sample Return in the Near-Term.

C- 5

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupC.5.

MV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Scenario Gamma: Development- Driven Lunar Activities

The third and final scenario is the most divergent from class models of space and/or lunar activities,
however in comports most closely with events that have occurred in near-Earth space during the past several
decades. Scenario Gamma presumes that the development of new capabilities and services – both bycommercial firms for profit or by government agencies for economic reasons lunar development will drive
activities on, near or for the Moon. These will include development of a wide range of novel systems, access to
new resources and delivery of new services.

Government-sponsored exploration and science programs will play ‘turn-key’ roles in supportingand enabling lunar development, including buying services analogous to NASA’s Commercial Cargo
Program for the International Space Station (ISS) to incentivize the creation of important new capabilities.
These could include more affordable transportation systems for LEO-to-LLO, lunar surface access, etc. Sucha ‘turn-key’ role might also involve establishing international frameworks for regulation, cooperation andstandards among others.
Under Scenario Gamma, it is presumed that activities will be predominantly commercial incharacter; however, government-sponsored programs may also play important roles, particular inresource-focused exploration and prospecting, development of new technologies, etc. Establishingpermanent human outposts – leading to one or more settlements in the longer term – are expected toresult in cost-effective means to supporting both operational needs (e.g., resource mining, extraction, etc.)
and commercial opportunities (e.g., private lunar space travel and tourism). Both exploration and science
government-sponsored programs are expected to benefit dramatically in the mid- to later- term due tolower-cost services and systems, and the availability of in situ resources.
Scenario Gamma (Development-Driven) Turning Points
The following are ‘turning points’ that – if they occur in the near-term – would indicate that
Scenario Gamma is likely to be a strong part of humanity’s future vis-à-vis the Moon.
•

Turning Point C.1 / Very low-cost transportation to low Earth orbit (LEO) becomes available forcommercial and government customers, at less than $600-$1,000 per kilogram to LEO.

•

Turning Point C.2 / Affordable megawatt-class solar power becomes available through cis-lunar
space at less than 25¢ to 50¢ per kilowatt-hour.

•

Turning Point C.3 / Reusable space transportation systems provide affordable service from LEO to
low Lunar orbit (LLO), to/from the lunar surface, etc.

•

Turning Point C.4 / Fuels and structural systems can be created affordably from lunar materials.

C- 6

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table D.3: Scenario Gamma (Development) Schedule of Major Milestones (Version II)
WHEN? (YEARS)

c. 2028-2029
c. 2028-2029
c. 2028-2029
c. 2029-2030
c. 2031-2032

Ongoing / multiple robotic exploration missions, including
orbiters, landers, rovers and sample return. (GER NOTE_2)
Lunar surface and orbital technology demonstrations
Lunar surface / orbit comm and nav systems deployedFirst launch of operational very low-cost ETO system, withcosts less than $1,000 per kilogram
Lunar ‘Gateway’ Operational in cis-Lunar space (GER)
Human Mission to the Moon (GER) NOTE_3.
Advanced Lunar EVA Operational (GER)
Launch of Robotic Mars Sample Return Mission
First affordable reusable space transport system to theMoon, with costs less than $25,000 per kilogram
Long-Range Pressurized Rover Operational (GER)
Lunar Surface Mars Demo Habitation Systems (GER)
Large-scale (350 kW) Power Emplaced on Surface (GER)
Fuel Production Systems Emplaced on Surface (GER)
Fuel Production @ 50 MT / year on Surface (GER)c. 2031-2032

500-day Mars Habitation Demonstration (GER)c. 2033-‘34

Surface Refueled Space Transport @ <$10,000 / kgc. 2031-‘35

Various Lunar Mars Mission Simulations & Demos (GER)c. 2033-‘34

Cis-Lunar Space / LLO Propellant Depot Deployedc. 2035-2036

Private / Commercial Lunar Outpost for Tourismc. 2035 or ‘37

First Human Mission to Mars (HMM) NOTE_4

c. 2039-2040

Lunar Radio Far-Side Telescope Deployment

Multiple
Multiple
Multiplec. 2023-2024
Near-Term(2021-2030)

c. 2024-2026
c. 2024-2026
c. 2024-2026
c. 2024, ’26,,‘29
c. 2026-2027

Mid-Term(2031-2040)

Far-Term(2041-2050)

Far-Future(2051-2100)

WHAT? (MILESTONE SUMMARYNOTE_1)

c. 2041

Lunar Pole Permanently-Staffed Solar Polar Outpost

c. 2042-2043

Large-Scale Lunar Manufacturing from Local Materialsc. 2045First lunar settlement (40 residents) at the South Polec. 2039+

Human Missions to Mars at each Opportunity (@ 26 mos)c. 2051

Second lunar settlement (80 residents) at the South Polec. 2070

Third lunar settlement (>200 residents) – Location TBD

c. 2080-2085

Electromagnetic Lunar Launcher Operational @ <$1K / kg

WHO? & WHY?

WHO?
Government Space
Agencies
Commercial Services
Providers
Universities, etc.
After Near-Term
Private Ventures / firms(Increasingly)

WHY?
National Policy
Geopolitical PolicyDriven International
Cooperation
Resource Exploration &Exploitation to reduce
costs
After the Near-Term
Profit Motives(Increasingly)
Science Goals(Increasingly)

c. 2085+
Commercial Products for cis-Lunar Space (e.g., SPS)NOTES:
Note_1: Ongoing operations (e.g., the Gateway in the Mid-term) are not shown as milestones.
Note_2: “GER” indicated that this Scenario Milestone is included in the ISEC-G Global Exploration Roadmap supplement ofAugust 2020.
Note_3: this GER milestone requires an immediate and significant increase in funding in the US and partnering countries toremain on its November 2020 schedule.
Note_4: this milestone depends on the dates / funding for the Mars Sample Return in the Near-Term.

C- 7

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK

C- 8

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

ANNEX D

MOON VILLAGE READINESS LEVELS (MVRLS)
D.1

Introduction

The 2020 Architecture Workshop demonstrated that a wide variety of activities are now ongoingthat will contribute to the eventual realization of a lunar outpost – and perhaps a settlement on the Moon.
However, a central question also emerged: how best to evaluate in a consistent fashion the diverse activities,
which involve much more than simply technology? For R&D programs, the ‘technology readiness levels”(TRLs) can be employed through technology readiness assessments (TRAs). TRLs were first defined in thelate 1960s / early 1970s as an R&D analogue to NASA’s “flight readiness reviews” (FRRs), and were
codified in detail in 1995. Since then, a wide variety of derivative ‘readiness level” scales have been defined– including manufacturing readiness levels (MRLs), integration readiness levels (IRLs), etc.
D.2

The MVRL Scale1

Emerging from the discussions at and following the MV Architecture WG workshop, an issue to beconsidered (ITBC) identified the need for a maturity assessment tool for Moon Village related activities andcapabilities. The “MVRL” (Moon Village Readiness Level) scale was identified to meet this need; it is areadiness level scale that is allows the discipline-independent evaluation of the ‘maturity’ of diverse lunar
activities – including not just systems development, but also markets and missions, etc.
Table D-1 on the page following presents a preliminary set of MVRL definitions.
D.3

Difference between the TRLs and the MVRL Scale

The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) was created in the 1960s-1970s, and codified in 1995 toenable assessment of the maturity of a technology or group of technologies being developed and for an
application. See: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247705707_Technology_Readiness_Level__A_White_Paper. Technology Readiness Levels (TRL 1 through TRL 9) are equally valid for applications
in Earth orbit for a satellite or a space station, for a Mars orbiter or lander, or for a lunar rover. However,scale does not address considerations such the definition and validation of a ‘concept of operations’(CONOPS), testing in an analogue, market identification, etc.
The MVRL scale (MVRL 1 through MVRL 7) other the other hand address only lunar-focused
activities and addresses not only technology and/or systems, but also CONOPS, markets, missions, analogue
testing and other topics essential to the realization of a particular capability for the Moon Village vision.

D-1

The MVRL scale, including the definitions here, was created and applied in Section 6 by J.C. Mankins in response to asuggestion (an “ITBC”) made by G. Reibaldi in discussions immediately following the Workshop.

D- 1

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

Table D.1 Definitions of the MVRL Scale (04 April 2021 Version)

MOON VILLAGEREADINESS LEVELDRAFT – MVRL DESCRIPTION / DEFINITION – DRAFTMVRL 1

Basic market, environmental and/or physical information known relating to the Moon
and/or cis-lunar space.

MVRL 2Functional, physical or economic concept formulated for a market and/or mission
activity on the Moon or in cis-lunar space, including systems and/or services.

MVRL 3

Essential characteristics of the prospective Moon Village system and/or service
experimentally and/or analytically identified and/or modeled for a general class ofmarket and/or mission activities concerning the Moon (surface or Earth-Moon space).

MVRL 4

Essential and selected additional characteristics for a potential market segment and/or
mission activity concerning the Moon (surface, LLO, cis-lunar space or Earth orbit),modeled in an integrated environment and/or experimentally validated in a laboratory
or analogue environment, including systems and/or services.

MVRL 5All relevant characteristics for a specific market and/or mission activity modeled in an
integrated environment or demonstrated in a relevant simulated and/or analogue
environment, including systems and/or services.

MVRL 6

Market and/or mission activity demonstrated at the ‘prototype level’ in the expected
operational environment (e.g., on the Moon and/or in cis-lunar space), including
systems and/or services.

MVRL 7Highest MVRL; market and/or mission activity fully operational on the Moon or in
cis-lunar space, including systems and/or services.

Comments on this DRAFT concept for “MVRLs” will be invited during 2021. A final definitionis planned by the end of the current Case Study.

D- 2

Moon Village Association
MVA Architectural Considerations &Concerns Working GroupMV 2020 Architecture Workshop
Summary Report
14-16 December 2020

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK.

D- 3