Slashdot Mirror


One Small Breath For Man

An anonymous reader writes "The New York Times reports on a new technique that may allow Oxygen to be wrung from the soil on the moon. This may pave the way for a moonbase, and allow permanent habitation on Earth's only natural satellite." From the article: "Lunar soil brought back to Earth is in short supply and highly prized, so Nasa researchers have been using matter with the same composition for its tests. The soil contains about 45 per cent oxygen by weight, but it is mostly 'trapped' in the form of silicon dioxide ... At the moment, all oxygen supplies would have to be brought from Earth, which is so expensive and energy-inefficient that it effectively rules out a permanent Moon base. "

4 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Isn't energy enough? by Bombula · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am no chemist, but I thought that with enough energy it is usually possible to break up compounds into their constituent elements. Is energy in short supply on the moon? Seems like solar and possibly nuclear energy from the moon's deuterium should be able to supply lots of energy. Am I completely retarded here? Probably...

    --
    A-Bomb
  2. Not so hard to bring from Earth by techno-vampire · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Oxygen isn't as hard to bring from Earth as you might think. Not only do you have to bring air to breath, you have to bring water, both for drinking and for cooling. Once a base is set up, some of that water can be broken down, releasing oxygen. Not only that, the food you carry there also contains oxygen. Part of the base will be a greenhouse, fertilized by waste products and converting CO2 into O2, plus part of the colonist's food supply. If there's too much organic waste, some of it can be incinerated, leaving (mostly) water and CO2, both of which the greenhouse can use. Yes, if we can't get much oxygen out of the regolith, we'll have to ship it up, but that's a one-time expense, not an ongoing one.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  3. Re:Can this article be even more pretentios? by ian_mackereth · · Score: 4, Interesting
    One of the prime differences between doing this on Earth and on the Moon is that vacuum is more plentiful on Luna than it is on Terra.

    This lowers the temperature required to disassociate the SiO2, making the engineering sufficiently feasible.

    Well, that's what _this_ group says to the funding body within NASA, anyway!

  4. Mod parent up (Read: I'm flat out wrong) by mattmacf · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Like I said, I'm no chemist. Obviously, your comment about density clearly shows a glaring flaw in my calculations.

    I think the point I should've make clearer is the fact that the energy required to release this (relatively) miniscule amount of oxygen is astronomical (no pun intended). Even assuming that I'm wrong about my interpretation of the article and that a full one fifth of the 100g of the sample becomes oxygen, that we get a total of 20g of O2 or roughly 100L of breatheable air. In order to release this, we need to heat a quantity of 100g of SiO2 to 2500C for several hours. As the article stated, this requires the concentration of sunlight from a 12' wide dish onto a sample of just 100g. I'm not exactly sure how much energy that is (and I'm not about to try and calculate it), but it seems like an awful lot. Hopefully this technique scales incredibly well or the alternate methods of liquifying or electrocuting the sand have more promise. I realize this is fledgling technology were talking about, but it still looks like it has a long way to go.

    --
    I only mod funny =D