Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Developing Small Nuclear Reactor For the Moon

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the because-they're-nasa dept.

marshotel writes "NASA astronauts will need power sources when they return to the moon and establish a lunar outpost. NASA engineers are exploring the possibility of nuclear fission to provide the necessary power, and they are taking initial steps toward a non-nuclear technology demonstration of this type of system."

16 of 431 comments (clear)

  1. Can't wait to see... by Schnoogs · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...GreenPeace launch their intergalactic spaceship to intercept NASA in orbit and all of the zero-g protesters.

    1. Re:Can't wait to see... by ivan256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The same thing that happens to everything else we brought to the moon that we didn't also use to get people/objects back. It's going to sit there. It's not like it'll be hurting anybody/anything either.

    2. Re:Can't wait to see... by gentimjs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And if it ever became a problem, just use a big slingshot (or whatever) to hurl it off in the general direction of the sun .. the only reason we dont do this with nuclear waste now is that the cost-to-orbit sucks, but for a reactor on the moon or already in space, most of the cost is absorbed already.

    3. Re:Can't wait to see... by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 5, Funny

      The reactor is going to explode and contaminate the moon, turning it into a place where a human cannot survive without some kind of protective clothing. Clearly, this is unacceptable.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    4. Re:Can't wait to see... by gnick · · Score: 5, Funny

      One big problem with putting a slingshot on the moon capable of achieving escape velocity. I read an analysis on the topic several years back:

      First we establish the means of hurling stuff off of the moon sufficient to achieve escape velocity. Soon we realize the potential of using that mechanism for mining and establish a mining colony. Miners realize that, after several years in 1/6 gravity, they cannot return to Earth and their resources are being irreversibly diminished because hurling ore at Earth is much cheaper than hurling water at the moon. Through the aid of an advanced computer, they decide to declare war and start "throwing rocks" at us.

      Sure, moon culture may turn out to be pretty cool and incorporate some groovy polygamy, but nobody wants a rock war.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    5. Re:Can't wait to see... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Paper beats rock, and we have plenty of trees here on Earth. We can't lose!

    6. Re:Can't wait to see... by HungryHobo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well the sun is a hellish inferno of radiation as it stands, dumping a million tonnes of the nastiest crap we can find into it would be like spitting into niagara falls.

    7. Re:Can't wait to see... by datadood · · Score: 5, Informative

      Um let's see...

      m = 1 kg
      v = 12 km/sec = 12000 m/sec

      KE = 1/2*m*v^2 = 1/2 * 1 * 12000^2 = 72 MJ for a 1kg object

      I was always happy when my lab partner and I came within an order of magnitude of the correct answer in my EE lab.

    8. Re:Can't wait to see... by mpeskett · · Score: 5, Funny

      Until they build a giant pair of scissors out of moon-metal...

  2. Send Homer. by Verdatum · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nuclear technician, spaceflight experience. Not as proficient as the inanimate carbon rod, but who is?

  3. Re:Confused on Nuclear waste by evilviper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Getting anything into space, and all the way out of earth orbit, is monumentally EXPENSIVE.

    Digging a big hole in the ground is monumentally CHEAP (at least in relative terms).

    The people you've heard from, that are scared of sending radioactive material into space, are monumentally STUPID.

    Also, fissile nuclear material is a highly valuable, relatively scarce, and non-renewable resource. It's more than likely that we'll need to dig that stuff up again in a century, and reprocess it. Quite a bit harder to do so if it's on it's way to Pluto.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  4. Re:Not solar? by actionbastard · · Score: 5, Informative

    Except for the fact that it would be dark at your moonbase for nearly two straight weeks at a time, solar power would be great.

    --
    Sig this!
  5. It's not really waste by Neil+Watson · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nuclear waste is not really waste. It simply needs to be used in a different reactor. Storing this waste and doing nothing with it is really a waste.

    --
    UNIX/Linux Consulting
  6. Re:Goodbye Earth, Goodbye Moon by FooAtWFU · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Assume, for a moment, that the LHC destroys the Earth by turning it into a black hole. Know what would happen to the moon?

    The Moon would be unaffected. It's just as happy to orbit a 5.9736*10^24 kg black hole as it is to orbit a 5.9736*10^24 kg planet.

    Black holes are just gravity, people. The only difference between them and anything else with mass is that you can get closer before you hit the event horizon than you could get before you hit the surface.

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  7. Re:Confused on Nuclear waste by Nadaka · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because it is a horrifically bad idea.

    Nuclear waste is not waste, it is nuclear fuel that has been partially used, but still retains 90% or so of its functionality. Using feeder breeder reactors we could easily reprocess this "waste" while generating close to 10 times the energy of a standard nuclear reactor (for the same amount of fuel) while producing waste that is only potentially dangerous for a few hundred years, vs potentially thousands of years.

    The only problem is that people are dumb. And the idea of building anything nuclear (pronounced Nook you ler) invokes the same kind of response as declaring that you worship satan in a southern baptist church.

  8. Doesn't work by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Funny

    just use a big slingshot

    In the thin/nonexistent atmosphere of the moon, the rubber bands dry out and crumble quickly.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.