Moon a great power source (lunar helium-3 mining in 10 years?)

Sydney Morning Herald ^ | July 11 2002 | By Richard Macey

[Brett66]

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.

[SSN558]

"Oh yea, fusion.... "

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

[john in missouri]

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

[RightWhale]

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.

[thmiley]

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

[Frank_Discussion]

Hey, Hey, Hey... don't have to be mean, just got a little frustrated that I might be the speed bump here.

[thmiley]

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!

[Frank_Discussion]

I agree NASA needs to resume its original mission.

[Frank_Discussion]

Glad we worked that out.

[Frank_Discussion]

I don't believe the US every *signed* the treaty, or ratified it...

[Frank_Discussion]

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.

[Frank_Discussion]

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

[RightWhale]

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.

[Notforprophet]

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

[Frank_Discussion]

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.

[RightWhale]

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.

[Frank_Discussion]

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?