Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 635-670 |
| Number of pages | 36 |
| Journal | Advances in Space Research |
| Volume | 77 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Early online date | 5 Nov 2025 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jan 2026 |
Funding
Beyond energy consumption, another reason for the unfavorable attitude toward AWH was the discovery of shallow-subsurface ice at latitudes at approximately ±40° poleward. While it seems unlikely that human mission landing sites would be at such high latitudes, a great deal of interest has been generated by evidence of shallow (<1 m) subsurface ice at lower latitudes following several observations in the decade between 2000–2010 ( Butcher, 2022 ; Morgan et al., 2021). Shallow subsurface ice was thought to exist in sufficient quantities for ISRU ( Moses and Bushnell, 2016 ) and WER gained traction. The last publication exploring AWH appears to be the conference paper of Esteban and Lee published in 2018 ( Esteban and Lee, 2018 ). This paper focused on the discovery of fog on Mars and its implications on water harvesting. The paper briefly mentions compression, as was the case of M-WIP, without any explanation why compression is needed or how the water acquisition system works. After WAVAR and MARRS, the only notable funded project related to AWH was the Habitability: Brines, Irradiation, and Temperature Instrument (HABIT) that was supported by the Swedish National Space Agency in 2015 and the UK Space Agency in 2024. However, the project objective was not to develop an ISRU system but to explore the phenomenon of deliquescence and availability of liquid water on Mars. Some data on deliquescence was published in 2019 and 2020 but without estimates of energy consumption ( Martín-Torres et al., 2020; Nazarious et al., 2019 ). It is clear that AWH has not been assessed fairly and in all its possibilities.
Keywords
- ISRU
- Mars
- water
- atmosphere
- regolith