Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Russia to Mine on the Moon by 2020

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the no-shortage-of-volunteer-workers dept.

sxmjmae writes to tell us News.com is reporting that Russia has unveiled plans to establish a permanent mining operation on the moon by 2020 in order to extract the rare isotope Helium-3. From the article: "Helium-3 is a non-radioactive isotope of helium that can be used in nuclear fusion. Rare on earth but plentiful on the moon, it is seen by some experts as an ideal fuel because it is powerful, non-polluting and generates almost no radioactive by-product."

15 of 145 comments (clear)

  1. Had to be said.. by Tha_Big_Guy23 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Let's go ahead and get this one out of the way...

    In Soviet Russia, the moon mines you...

    --
    If you're looking here for something insightful or thought provoking, you're probably looking in the wrong place.
  2. I love russia by inter+alias · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even if they don't make it there (I think they will), they will reinvigorate the space race. I hope.

  3. And further... by Billosaur · · Score: 4, Funny
    The International Space Station (ISS) would play a key role in the project and a regular transport relay to the moon would be established with the help of the planned Clipper spaceship and the Parom, a space capsule intended to tug heavy cargo containers around space, Mr Sevastyanov said.

    "Then we will be able to drop bombs on... is microphone still on?"

    --
    GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
  4. Maybe... by doctor_nation · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the energy companies (i.e. oil) can be convinced that fusion is the next big energy source, I can see them ponying up the dollars to make this happen. Big investment up front for an even bigger possible return later on. It would certainly be easier to generate funds for doing this for business that it will be/is for scientific purposes.

    1. Re:Maybe... by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I respectfully disagree- I think if the world's governments all got together to find a renewable clean energy source, they could do it quicker. It would certainly lead to more peace on Earth, with China and India clammoring for Oil... (What was that Val Kilmer movie with the cold fusion where he wore the masks, and they gave the technology to the world for free?)
      It sucks that we spend so much effort, blood, money etc on fossil fuels. Maybe I'm a dreamer, but if we could solve the energy problem, we could devote so much more time to science and discovery...

      --
      And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
    2. Re:Maybe... by rtaylor · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think if the world's governments all got together to find a renewable clean energy source
      Clean is debatable. Oil was considered clean back when the alternative was a horse crapping on the street or coal powered boilers.

      We think fusion, wind, solar, etc. are clean simply because we haven't put much thought into what would happen if everyone used it on a massive scale.

      For example, we know that wind and solar impact the local microclimate but we don't really have much data on their impact on a wider scale.

      Better than oil? Certainly, but nothing is free and everything will have some kind of negative impact.

      --
      Rod Taylor
  5. Great energy source! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Assuming, of course, you have, like, a working fusion reactor.

    Two points for forward planning, I guess.

    Isn't there Helium-3 in the Earth's mantle? Could we go after that? Build one of them there driller vehicles.

  6. Can they use Helium-3 yet? by dannytaggart · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do they have a working prototype of a Helium-3 power plant? I have a feeling this is an Energia propaganda piece.

    --
    PimpMyMazda.com - Crazy mods to a 2002 Mazda Protege DX.
  7. A bit early perhaps by Councilor+Hart · · Score: 5, Informative
    Nuclear fusion is not expected by 2020, so it's a bit premature.

    Helium-3 is also not necessary to archive fusion. Deuterium-tritium reactions will also work, and you don't have to go to the moon to get those elements. Deuterium can be extracted from the sea and tritium can be created in situ by reactions with lithium embedded in the wall of the reactor.
    The benefit of using helium 3 is that you bypass the radioactive element tritium.

    It's a good idea for the long term, but let us first try to get a working reactor, shall we?

    1. Re:A bit early perhaps by barawn · · Score: 4, Informative

      The benefit of using helium 3 is that you bypass the radioactive element tritium.

      The benefit of Helium-3 is that its fusion reaction is aneutronic. This means that the containing vessel wouldn't be irradiated, and it's more efficient - that is, it should be easier to generate ignition with Helium-3 than with a similar fuel that wouldn't be aneutronic.

      The downside, of course, is that the reaction involved is D+He3, which means you'd have D+D, and He3-He3 side reactions, and D+D does give off neutrons. And D+He3 takes higher temperatures than D+T. So it's a little - um - daring for the Russians to be saying this, although it's not impossible to believe that given a supply of He3, there'd be economic incentive to build a freaking big fusion reactor.

  8. wikipedia by seann · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wikipedias Helium-3 article.

    For people who were as clueless as I was.

    --
    I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
  9. How much mining? Orbital vectors etc.... by Tragek · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How much mass would have to be removed from the moon (percentage wise) before there would be a noticable effect on the orbit of the moon, or the tides. Which would come first?

    1. Re:How much mining? Orbital vectors etc.... by Jerf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The mass of the Moon is ~7,349,000,000,000,000,000,000 kilograms.

      To cart away even one millionth of one percent of the moon would require staggering amounts of energy. By the time we're dealing with that kind of energy, if we ever can (which I have my doubts about, at least in any way that would be useful for this task), I think we will be able to deal with the consequences.

      Are you worried about whether if we do too much mining, we'll run out of crust on the Earth? Worrying about the Moon's mass is even sillier, since while there may be less moon, you're talking about actually removing the mass, something Earth mines don't have to do.

      You'd also be talking about cosmic levels of heat here, because said "staggering amounts of energy" can't just disappear. Assuming you're talking about moving bits of the Moon to Earth (and not just flinging it uselessly into space) since the Earth is lower in a gravity well, all the mass will pick up the difference in gravitational potential between the Earth and the Moon, 100% in heat (since it won't move on the surface of the Earth, at least not for long). If you moved any cosmically significant amount of the Moon to the Earth, you'd make the surface of the Earth incandescent. (The exact temperature would vary depending on how much mass you're talking, but if you want to have some fun, take the gravitational potential difference of 1% of the mass of the moon, compute how much energy that is, then see how much heat that would add. It's a Big Number.) Until such time as Mankind is so powerful as to be able to revoke the laws of conservation of energy, at which point you can't predict effects anyhow, no significant amount of the Moon is going to get to Earth, at least not with a biosphere on Earth left to care.

  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. Re:All I gotta say is... by WinkyN · · Score: 5, Informative

    Russia may be poor, but their predecessors the Soviets landed unmanned probes on the lunar surface. Here's a Wikipedia link for those missions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_programme

    Many of the attempts failed, but later missions return lunar rock and dust samples as well as included robotic rovers to move across the lunar surface.