WASP 3D Prints Geopolymers Made from Lunar Soil

Italian 3D printer manufacturer WASP is heading to the moon… someday. In a new initiative called the Geopolymers for Additive Manufacturing and Lunar Monitoring (GLAMS) Project, WASP and its partners—which include Italy’s space agency, ASI, the Center for Space Studies and Activities Giuseppe Colombo (CISAS) of the University of Padua, and Genoa’s Institute of Condensed Matter Chemistry and Energy Technologies of the CNR (ICMATE)—aim to use lunar regolith to create specialized lunar cement for constructing structures on the moon. At the University of Padua, researchers used chemically activated lunar regolith to develop geopolymer binders. The team in Genoa then added foaming agents to enhance porosity. Currently, the focus is on optimizing various formulations and 3D printing teeny tiny prototypes. Future plans include embedding sensors in the structures during fabrication to monitor loads and meteor impacts.

Right now, the experiments are LEGO-figure-sized, but the team hopes to scale them up in the future. They state that their work will “help meet the needs of space agencies by creating semi-permanent human settlements on the Moon within the next decade.” To me, that sounds like a fantasy, but it’s nice to have ambition.

The team employed the WASP 40100 LDM, a $9,000 delta printer designed for ceramics, capable of printing objects up to one meter in size using compressed air and a screw extruder. In this project, the printer features a manual feeding extruder with a hopper specifically designed for geopolymers. The hopper consists of a 2.5-liter cone that allows material to be added manually.

Over the past decade, significant efforts have focused on developing lunar habitats and construction methods using 3D printing. The logic behind this approach is compelling. Transporting materials to the Moon is prohibitively expensive, but leveraging local resources can dramatically cut costs. For instance, less than 1% of the total weight in binder might need to be shuttled in, and in time, even the binder or its components could potentially be produced on the lunar surface.

Additionally, the logistical challenges of lunar transport are considerable. The journey to the Moon takes three days and costs tens of thousands of dollars per kilogram. The more improvisational stuff that can be done on the moon the better. The more repairs that can be done locally the better as well.

This research is likely to resonate with the lunar exploration community. Over the years, various lunar construction concepts have been proposed, including lunar igloos, Contour Crafting’s lunar initiatives, ICON’s projects, and the now-defunct Masten’s efforts. Lunar bases seem a bit abstract to me given all the problems we have on earth. If we look at the possible benefits of space exploration, mining could perhaps be better done on particular asteroids where conditions would be better. Meanwhile in space production in micro gravity could perhaps be better done on space stations. Focus on these applications may give a better return financially or in terms of doing really mind-blowing research into bioprinting and exotic materials.

Mars exploration continues to overshadow the Moon in ambition and appeal, making the Moon seem relatively close and mundane by comparison. With global economic pressures, governments might reassess funding priorities. The U.S., for instance, appears to be scaling back NASA and JPL funding while fostering a competitive New Space industry. Europe—as a continent, as an EU, as an ESA or as a collection of relatively wealthy countries—lacks a cohesive space strategy, often producing scattered efforts with limited impact, occasionally dropping a $100 on something ineffectual. Meanwhile Japan, an efficient India, and an ambitious China could emerge as key players in lunar exploration.

The Moon’s primary advantage lies in its potential cost efficiencies. Lunar bases could offer logistical and economic benefits over space stations, potentially serving as staging points for deeper space exploration. If these cost benefits become clear, lunar habitats may gain significant geopolitical importance. However, uncertainties remain about ownership and governance of the Moon. Theoretically it’s a kind of happy cuddly commons that is everyone´s. That only works if an area is unreachable.

As soon as lunar exploration becomes important or easy then our moon will become suddenly crowded. The arctic and antarctic were fun and unimportant until people see resources could be gotten from these areas. The moon and 3D printing on the moon may yet become important but for now it is not sure that our thirst for exploration will lead us there in any fundamentally important way.