New projections for what a biosphere would need?

[Sociotard]

Biosphere 2 didn't really work as hoped. People inside were generally hungry and increasingly out of breath. Cabin fever didn't help either. (I'm told the Russian version worked better).

 

I was thinking of making a small, ring shaped space station for a low-tech space station. It won't really matter for game-planning purposes but I'm still curious: Are there any newer/better guesses for what a biosphere-type project would need?

 

For reference, Biosphere 2 had, for eight people:

a 1900 square meter rainforest, an 850 square meter ocean with a coral reef, a 450 square meter mangrove wetlands, a 1300 square meter savannah grassland, a 1400 square meter fog desert, a 2500 square meter agricultural system, a human habitat with living quarters and office, and a below-ground level technical facility.

 

On a related note, how small could a remote (10 light years in a no FTL travel or communication galaxy) colony be and still have enough people to provide (most of) the services one would expect in a 1st world civilization?

[L. Marcus]

Re: New projections for what a biosphere would need?

 

. . . What it really needs is to let the concrete cure before anything is built on it.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: New projections for what a biosphere would need?

 

I'd say that a nuclear sub is a much better working model than an open-endedecosystem. Certainly I'd feel a much better about climbing into my generation ship if the designer said, "I know this works," than if he said, "Hey, how hard can it be to scale down a planet wide complex system!" It won't grow food for you, but then I have a hunch that's going to turn out to be harder than people think, too.

 

As for population/tech level? On the philosophical assumption that our ancestors weren't stupid, I'd say just correlate your population to the technologies in use back when the Earth held that many people.