Posted on 05/28/2006 1:25:09 PM PDT by Dark Skies
Can we all agree that a 100% oxygen atmosphere is not optimal, or will we have to experince an appolo type burn-out to get smart? I sure hope not!
true, but this stuff is pretty darn cool.
Where is the MSM in the USA? We have to get this kind of news from the UK?
The entire moon would be a no-smoking area.
"The entire moon would be a no-smoking area."
How hard will that be. The entire earth will be one in 5-10 years.
On a more conventional note, the most abundant element on the lunar surface is oxygen - 42 percent of the total. It's not breathable but is locked up in oxides of silicon (21%), iron (13%), calcium (8%), aluminum (7%), magnesium (6%), and other materials (the actual composition varies with the region). The metals are useful for buildings and even new spacecraft - the silicon can be made into solar cells and windows, and the oxygen freed from the soil can be breathed or used in rocket propellant.Source: http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/msad28apr98_1a.htm
As I understand it, Martian soil contains similar sources of oxygen. Now, if we can just find some hydrogen...
I thought the grays already had huge mining operations and bases on the far side of the moon .....
Interesting that this topic comes up so often. Lack of oxygen on the moon has never been the main impediment to settlement. Lack of hydrogen is a problem, as is lack of nitrogen and lack of carbon. Missing three out of four isn't such a hot record.
ping
But now that you bring it up, Canadian radio had a piece on it a week ago. Here's a link to the page of mp3/ogg files
http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/archives/05-06/may20.html#2
Look for "Moon oxygen"
I get the RSS feed, but I try listen Saturday mornings, short wave gods permitting.
This would be better than using the hypothetical water at the lunar south pole for oxygen.
That would be a disater that would far surpass the Apollo fire, I imagine if such a thing would happen we would abandon it in place and not return for another 50 years at least.
I'm sure NASA is willing to import nitrogen from Earth to keep from the 100% oxygen mix.
The pressure of the oxygen is part of the equation. The Apollo atmosphere was designed to be kept at 1/5 earth sea level pressure. I'm pretty sure the fire happened while the oxygen was at full sea level pressure.
From a biological perspective, an atmosphere that's 80% nitrogen and 20% oxygen at 1ATM is probably about equivalent to one that's 100% oxygen at 0.2ATM. From a fire-safety perspective, though, I'd expect the latter to be worse. In addition to displacing oxygen, nitrogen absorbs heat. Remove the nitrogen, even if it's not replaced with oxygen, and fires will be able to spread more rapidly.
Still, given the weight difference between hydrogen and oxygen, it might possibly be useful to transport an excess of hydrogen to the Moon for the purposes of both generating water, and also for the purpose of extracting oxygen from the lunar soil. If a pound of hydrogen plus eight pounds of oxygen can together extract more than nine pounds of oxygen from the soil, that would make possible a net weight savings even if the nine pounds of water thus produced weren't used (if they were used, it would be an even clearer win).
Good old H20!
They can use helium and argon instead of nitrogen if they just want to dilute the atmosphere. The purpose of adding nitrogen to the mix is for purposes of agriculture.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.