Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Moon a great power source (lunar helium-3 mining in 10 years?)
Sydney Morning Herald ^ | July 11 2002 | By Richard Macey

Posted on 07/10/2002 12:26:15 PM PDT by dead

"A business scenario can be put together that could have us back on the moon within 10
to 15 years" ... Dr Schmitt on Earth, and below on the moon in 1972. Photo: Steven Siewert

Within 15 years people could be mining the moon for a safe and clean nuclear fuel that could phase out fossil-burning power stations, the last man to step onto the lunar surface said yesterday.

Harrison "Jack" Schmitt, who with Gene Cernan made the final moon landing aboard Apollo 17 in December 1972, also predicted lunar tourists could eventually follow.

In Sydney yesterday the geologist and only scientist among the 12 Apollo moonwalkers predicted the next lunar explorers would be funded by international investors rather than taxpayers.

Their goal would be an isotope called helium-3, rare on Earth but found in abundance on the moon. It could be used to develop a clean, safe and limitless fuel for nuclear fusion power stations. Unlike atom-splitting fission technology, fusion - the source of the sun's energy - generates power by squeezing atoms together.

"If we are going to see a continued rise in the population of the Earth to 10 or 12 billion people by 2050 and if we also expect to see an improvement in people's standard of living, it's going to take a factor of eight increase in our energy supply."

Helium-3 could provide much of that energy.

"A business scenario can be put together that could have us back on the moon within 10 to 15 years," said Dr Schmitt, putting the cost at about $A20 billion.

He conceded the 1967 international Outer Space Treaty "does prohibit the claiming and the exercising of sovereignty over any lunar territory. However, it does permit the use of its resources".

Lunar miners could be required to make their quarry available to all nations "for the benefit of humankind", with part of the profits being used to help all countries switch from fossil to fusion fuel.

Dr Schmitt described Apollo 17's landing site, the Taurus-Littrow valley, as perfect for tourism.

"It's a valley deeper than the Grand Canyon. The mountains on either side rise 2100 metres above the valley floor and are brilliantly illuminated by a sun brighter than any Australian sun. The hardest thing to get used to is a brilliant sun in a black sky.

"The steep mountains would inevitably attract thrill seekers. Someone, some day is going to try to ski them with some teflon coated skis."

Unlike other moonwalkers - all test pilots - he had not been affected by seeing the Earth hanging in the lunar sky. He was more interested in moon rocks.

While on the moon, Cernan told him to take time to admire the Earth. "I said to Gene, 'Look, when you have seen one Earth, you have seen them all'."

Yesterday Dr Schmitt addressed the Australian Institute of Physics biennial congress. This weekend he will attend the 2002 Australian Mars Exploration Conference, also in Sydney.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 last
To: Frank_Discussion
I believe tourism is what will drive us back to the moon, but there are many other things that could prove profitable to make from Lunar materials, such as glass strong as titanium. Though this could be made in low earth orbit, the raw materials would have to be shipped from Earth. The moon would be rich in the neccessary silicates.
61 posted on 07/10/2002 3:31:55 PM PDT by Brett66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: fuente
"Oh yea, fusion.... "

Helium-3, huh ? Is that the same thing or similiar to tritium ?

62 posted on 07/10/2002 3:33:15 PM PDT by SSN558
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim
I'm not spending a dime on this until I get the flying car they promised


63 posted on 07/10/2002 4:06:04 PM PDT by john in missouri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SSN558
Helium-3, huh ? Is that the same thing or similiar to tritium ?

Hydrogen has one proton in the nucleus. Helium has two. Other versions of hydrogen have also one [deuterium] or two neutrons [tritium] in the nucleus. Helium normally has two neutrons in the nucleus in addition to the two protons, but sometimes it has just one neutron and two protons. There is a substance called neutronium that has just neutrons as a nucleus, but it's not really an atom since it lacks electrons. Neutronium can have 2, 3, or 4 neutrons combined, and is scarce in nature although it can be made artificially.

64 posted on 07/10/2002 4:31:52 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim
I'm not spending a dime on this until I get the flying car they promised. :)

Good news! It's on it's way!

Moller International - Maker of the Skycar

65 posted on 07/10/2002 4:57:20 PM PDT by thmiley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dead
Hey, Hey, Hey... don't have to be mean, just got a little frustrated that I might be the speed bump here.
66 posted on 07/10/2002 5:13:28 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Frank_Discussion
That's the kind of data current market studies on space tourism point to, and they say over and over that if a mechanism existed, folks would embrace space tourism. Even on the most conservative evaluation, the profit is high and sustainable in space tourism.

The major hurdle at this point is that most capital sources can't see the forest for the tinfoil. But that's changing.

I've always loved the idea of space travel. When I was a kid, I never wanted to miss the Space 1999 television show. Shows like Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, Doctor Who, and others have been my inspiration. If I were a billionaire like Bill Gates or George Soros, I would be spending my money on space tourism.

Come to think of it, if one of those billionaires were to put some money behind such a project, I think that their confidence would attract smaller investors, too.

The mind boggles with the possibilities!

67 posted on 07/10/2002 5:15:21 PM PDT by thmiley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I agree NASA needs to resume its original mission.
68 posted on 07/10/2002 5:16:13 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Glad we worked that out.
69 posted on 07/10/2002 5:17:34 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: operation clinton cleanup
I don't believe the US every *signed* the treaty, or ratified it...
70 posted on 07/10/2002 5:19:47 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: operation clinton cleanup
The Chi-com threat is one of my major fears in the future of space exploration and international gamesmanship. I think many folks don't believe they'll be able to do it, but I think those folks are wrong.
71 posted on 07/10/2002 5:21:25 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: thmiley
Billionaire Robert Bigelow in Las Vegas, he's pledging $500 million on his own lunar hotel system. He has capital in cash money, too, not leveraged funds.

http://www.bigelowaerospace.com
72 posted on 07/10/2002 5:24:04 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Frank_Discussion
Billionaire Robert Bigelow in Las Vegas, he's pledging $500 million on his own lunar hotel system

He's under capitalized and won't accept outside investments. I wouldn't wait for him.

73 posted on 07/10/2002 5:28:44 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: dead; 24Karet
While on the moon, Cernan told him to take time to admire the Earth. "I said to Gene, 'Look, when you have seen one Earth, you have seen them all'."

Amen to that. Earth is like, totally and completely unique, man! It's got, like, tons of cool stuff to do!

We really need a consortium of investors and corporations to reach, colonize, and exploit the moon. I wholeheartedly support this 'astronaut guy's ideas.

Notforprophet

74 posted on 07/10/2002 5:30:49 PM PDT by Notforprophet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I'm not sure how you define under-capitalized, but you're right about outside investments. Mr. B is kinda funny that way. On the flipside, the money he's using is all his, and he's known for doing just what he wants to do.

His side projects on the way to the main goal, those may fix the undercapitalization issue. I certainly hope so.
75 posted on 07/10/2002 9:57:43 PM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Frank_Discussion
how you define under-capitalized

It will take more than $0.5 billion to get his project off the ground. By the time he gets his first paying customer up and back it will be ten times that.

76 posted on 07/11/2002 9:11:45 AM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
It will take more than $0.5 billion to get his project off the ground. By the time [Bigelow] gets his first paying customer up and back it will be ten times that.

Five Billion bucks to the Moon, with current technology? That's expensive, but I do agree that $0.5 billion drives a pretty lean program. Perhaps too lean. Then again, this is private enterprise doing its thing, in a market niche the government is currently uninterested in.

Another big spender out there is Andrew Beal, with Beal Aerospace in Frisco, Texas. He was working on a simple and cheap heavy booster, with a single engine in the same thrust range of the old Saturn V F-1 Main engine. Here's where the govenrment's effect on markets is annoying: Beal Aerospace went under when it became apparent that the US Gov't would relentlessly subsidize the "approved" launcher companies. The price from the big firms was less than the cost of the launchers themselves, so Beal couldn't compete. His rockets, however, were actually cheaper in reality and faster to produce. Sucks, don't it?

77 posted on 07/11/2002 10:14:45 AM PDT by Frank_Discussion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson