Slashdot Mirror
The Quest To Find Nuclear Fuel On the Moon (businessweekme.com)
Bloomberg Businessweek Middle East reports:
India's space program wants to go where no nation has gone before -- to the south side of the moon. And once it gets there, it will study the potential for mining a source of waste-free nuclear energy that could be worth trillions of dollars. The nation's equivalent of NASA will launch a rover in October to explore virgin territory on the lunar surface and analyze crust samples for signs of water and helium-3. That isotope is limited on Earth yet so abundant on the moon that it theoretically could meet global energy demands for 250 years if harnessed....
[A]ccomplishing feats on the cheap has been a hallmark of the agency since the 1960s. The upcoming mission will cost about $125 million -- or less than a quarter of Snap Inc. co-founder Evan Spiegel's compensation last year, the highest for an executive of a publicly traded company, according to the Bloomberg Pay Index... The upcoming launch of Chandrayaan-2 includes an orbiter, lander and a rectangular rover. The six-wheeled vehicle, powered by solar energy, will collect information for at least 14 days and cover an area with a 400-meter radius. The rover will send images to the lander, and the lander will transmit those back to ISRO for analysis. A primary objective, though, is to search for deposits of helium-3. Solar winds have bombarded the moon with immense quantities of helium-3 because it's not protected by a magnetic field like Earth is.
The European Space Agency points out that helium-3 isotope isn't radioactive and "would not produce dangerous waste products." And one former member of the NASA Advisory Council estimates that the moon-derived fuel could generate enough power to meet the world's energy demands for between two at least two centuries.
[A]ccomplishing feats on the cheap has been a hallmark of the agency since the 1960s. The upcoming mission will cost about $125 million -- or less than a quarter of Snap Inc. co-founder Evan Spiegel's compensation last year, the highest for an executive of a publicly traded company, according to the Bloomberg Pay Index... The upcoming launch of Chandrayaan-2 includes an orbiter, lander and a rectangular rover. The six-wheeled vehicle, powered by solar energy, will collect information for at least 14 days and cover an area with a 400-meter radius. The rover will send images to the lander, and the lander will transmit those back to ISRO for analysis. A primary objective, though, is to search for deposits of helium-3. Solar winds have bombarded the moon with immense quantities of helium-3 because it's not protected by a magnetic field like Earth is.
The European Space Agency points out that helium-3 isotope isn't radioactive and "would not produce dangerous waste products." And one former member of the NASA Advisory Council estimates that the moon-derived fuel could generate enough power to meet the world's energy demands for between two at least two centuries.
But the quest for first posts in Slashdot is always worthwhile.
Note: Huge Success
Feel free to look for unicorns too. We have no such reactors, and if we had the energy and technology to mine the Moon in that fashion, there wouldn't be an energy crisis in the first place.
Stupid Space Nuttery.
i'm more of an upper east side lad myself...
I think they forgot about a thing or two. For one, after like 50 years, commercial fusion power is still 50 years off. For two, returning mass to the earth going to be cheap. For three, building a mining infrastructure on the moon will be exorbitantly expensive. There are already simpler, cheaper options here on earth.
If I remember, it didn't turn out well. Loved the roving ATM machine robot.
Quite frankly, the rest of the world would take India and its government a bit more seriously if, instead of making big announcements to the effect that they can pee farther than anybody, they announced the investment in the implementation of a policy to supply with running water, electricity and sanitation to the more than 600 million Indian citizens who lack such basic services.
for between two at least two centuries
Boo, editors, boo.
Ezekiel 23:20
Like those other crap stories about exoplanets et al.
He3 is great but we still don't know how to make an economically viable fusion reactor. A sufficiently scaled up magnetic confinement fusion machine will work, but its not clear how the costs can ever be competitive. Unlike fission where you basically just pile up fuel and it gets hot, all the current fusion designs require that a substantial portion of the reactor output be redirected into the reactor in some technically complex (eg expensive) system. (neutral beams, plasma jets, millimeter waves etc etc).
He3 makes things better, but I don't see how it helps enough.
I would love to see fusion become practical, but I just don't see it moving that way.
They are stealing our helium-3.
This didn't end well in SPACE: 1999.
Goodbye, Slashdot!
How can we find a way to rage against Trump in this article?
Watch out for the sentient vending machines.
Best album of all time.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"Solar winds have bombarded the moon with immense quantities of helium-3 because it's not protected by a magnetic field like Earth is."
"moon-derived fuel could generate enough power to meet the world's energy demands for between two at least two centuries."
I've seen better English from my seven year old child.
Finding fuel for nuclear fusion is very easy. The difficult part (if possible at all) is actually building something which can generate electricity by relying on that approach. Without forgetting that mining on the Moon is far from easy. If I was the one to be convinced, I would have preferred a much more honest motivation like "we are just feeling like going there".
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
SHUT THE FUCK UP
It won't be as hard as they think to find it on the moon. Just head over to the Dark side of the moon and that Nazi base, they'll have lots of spent fuel rods built up in their dump by now.
So the joke goes, "If someone said there was oil on the moon, the United States would be all in" -- So helium-3 is India's version of this?
If one were to pause and think about looking for a mineral on the moon, and the logistics cost, I think this project is truly representative of all H1Bâ(TM)s. But hay, it would be fun to be a part of the lunar exploration team.
I'm certain that He3 will be a critically important energy source for Lunar colonies. Solar will also be important, but (as here on Earth) the Sun is only up for half the time. After 14 "days" of lunar "day", there will be 14 "days" of lunar darkness.
If we ever figure out how to fuse He3 and generate energy, THEN we can start an economic discussion on the costs and benefits of shipping it down to Earth.
On the Moon, there is not Helium-3 as say many critical people.
Your planet have virus.
Mapping the helium-3 distribution on the Moon is a worthy scientific endeavor - it will tell us much about how the solar wind interacts with the lunar surface.
But promoting the project for its "nuclear fuel" potential is so out of line with reality that it is deception, pure and simple.
First there is no prospect of building a helium-3 reactor. We currently cannot build a power-producing fusion reactor using the easiest fuel, deuterium-tritium, even though is reaction rate is ten thousand times faster than He-3/D at plausible temperatures.
Second we already can accurately forecast that when we can build a fusion reactor that uses that easiest to burn D-T fuel it will not be able to compete with any commercial source of electricity. The capital and operating costs of such a plant place the electricity cost at about ten times what wholesale electricity has been selling at for decades (an inflation adjusted current $30/MWh). This recent paper (accessible through Sci-hub) places the economics of a D-T plant in the best possible light and comes up with electricity costs due to the high capital cost of $175-$312 MWh*. Remember that He-3 fusion is ten thousand times harder, and we now have to mine the fuel on the Moon.
The only theoretical advantage of He-3 fusion is the lack of neutron emission from the main reaction (side reactions would still produce some). This would greatly reduce the neutron damage that requires periodic replacement of parts in D/T (or D/D) reactor, and greatly reduce the radioactive waste produced from neutron activated components. These are not major contributors to the projected cost of fusion power (the paper above assigns $14/MWh for these combined, 5-8% of the projected costs), so greatly reducing them does little to improve it.
And long before we can build a working He-3/D reactor, we will be able to build a D/D reactor using cheap, plentiful deuterium, available for a few thousand dollars a kilogram on Earth in effectively unlimited supply. The D/D reaction is "only" a few hundred times harder than D/T.
*The paper ultimately claims that it would be competitive, when externalities are costed, mostly by assigning very high externality costs to every other form of power, and assumes that all of that will be some day captured in electricity pricing. Its treatment of on-shore wind, and solar PV is especially suspect since it assigns levelized costs per MWh, 40 years in the future, that are several times higher than current, demonstrated costs now. This is a lot of special pleading.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
Mining He3 -- "Moon" https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1...
Invalid Checksum. Retrying.
question; Fusion power will be practical within 30 years or so (must be true, the have been telling us so for sixty years...)
A more interesting question is: how can any single human being reasonably claim to create over HALF a BILLION DOLLARS of value per year?
Silicon for solar panels, any rare earths needed would be minimal, and the entirety of the lunar surface is pretty much a better clean room for prodding them. Or sterling engines. The take the generated power beam it as microwaves to a station at L4 or L5 (or both) and then to earth. Orbital logistics might make other arrangements possible too. No need to haul material from the moon to the earth. Though a huge lunar catapult would be cool to heave containers to earth orbit...
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
between two at least two centuries
That's...wac
So less than fossil fuel on Earth? That does not seem like a lot for being "nuclear fuel".
Iron sky is coming true
It smells like farts!
Aren't we in enough trouble already, because we sucked dry earth?
Yea, I know it's just a little sip, it's not like the moon needs all of the moon.
The correct quote is:
I saw the movie "Iron Sky" last night. Will the Indians build a giant space saucer to attack us with if we allow them to mine the He3?
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
You mean the fools don't realize why? Over the past billions of years, moon rock has absorbed enough solar radiation helium-3 that one single Space-shuttle load of just 25 tons would be able to power all the electrical needs of the entire United States for a year! It's the fuel source of the future. So YES, you better believe humans will indeed be back up there collecting it.