|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
Andrew Smith, the author of Moondust: In Search of the Men Who Fell to
Earth, recently published a polemic in the British newspaper The Guardian, entitled Plundering the Moon, that argued against the economic development of the Moon. Apparently the idea of mining Helium 3, an isotope found on the Moon but not on the Earth (at least in nature) disturbs Mr. Smith from an environmentalist standpoint. Even a cursory examination of the issue makes one wonder why. http://www.associatedcontent.com/art..._the_moon.html |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
"Mark R. Whittington" writes:
Andrew Smith, the author of Moondust: In Search of the Men Who Fell to Earth, recently published a polemic in the British newspaper The Guardian, entitled Plundering the Moon, that argued against the economic development of the Moon. Apparently the idea of mining Helium 3, an isotope found on the Moon but not on the Earth (at least in nature) disturbs Mr. Smith from an environmentalist standpoint. Even a cursory examination of the issue makes one wonder why. You know, I'm curious. Has anyone demonstrated that helium-3 is in fact of any particular benefit in making a fusion reactor? Like, have experiments borne out that it's easier to make a sustainable and power-generating reaction using the stuff? -- Joseph Nebus ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
Fred J. McCall writes:
(Joseph Nebus) wrote: : You know, I'm curious. Has anyone demonstrated that helium-3 :is in fact of any particular benefit in making a fusion reactor? Like, :have experiments borne out that it's easier to make a sustainable and ower-generating reaction using the stuff? The point isn't "it's easier to make a sustainable and power-generating reaction". It's actually somewhat more difficult than D-T fusion. The point is that a fusion reactor using it wouldn't spray out neutrons like a D-T reactor would. This is basic physics and has been known for a long time. So, it would be a fusion reactor with an easier operational cycle. Less need for handling and replacing irradiated parts of the reactor. My point is, can we actually use helium-3 for fusion or is talk about how great mining the Moon for the stuff roughly like talk about how we could mine the asteroids for copper, except that we actually know how to turn copper into a useful product? -- Joseph Nebus ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
In article ,
Joseph Nebus wrote: Fred J. McCall writes: (Joseph Nebus) wrote: : You know, I'm curious. Has anyone demonstrated that helium-3 :is in fact of any particular benefit in making a fusion reactor? Like, :have experiments borne out that it's easier to make a sustainable and ower-generating reaction using the stuff? The point isn't "it's easier to make a sustainable and power-generating reaction". It's actually somewhat more difficult than D-T fusion. The point is that a fusion reactor using it wouldn't spray out neutrons like a D-T reactor would. This is basic physics and has been known for a long time. So, it would be a fusion reactor with an easier operational cycle. Less need for handling and replacing irradiated parts of the reactor. My point is, can we actually use helium-3 for fusion or is talk about how great mining the Moon for the stuff roughly like talk about how we could mine the asteroids for copper, except that we actually know how to turn copper into a useful product? Well, I think the fact that we don't currently have commercial fusion of any flavour is something of a hint as to the answer to your question. Of course, if you are going to go to the bother of developing 3He fusion, you might as well try for a truly aneutronic reaction and develop 11B fusion. That's somewhat less attractive to the space fans because 11B is fairly common on Earth. On the plus side, the cheaper energy is, the less difficult interplanetary travel is likely to look. Also, a 11B fusion rocket could in theory have an exhaust velocity of up to ~12,000 km/s. -- http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs) |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
On 5 Nov, 15:49, Fred J. McCall wrote:
(Joseph Nebus) wrote: :Fred J. McCall writes: (Joseph Nebus) wrote: : :: You know, I'm curious. Has anyone demonstrated that helium-3 ::is in fact of any particular benefit in making a fusion reactor? Like, ::have experiments borne out that it's easier to make a sustainable and :ower-generating reaction using the stuff? : :The point isn't "it's easier to make a sustainable and :power-generating reaction". It's actually somewhat more difficult :than D-T fusion. The point is that a fusion reactor using it wouldn't :spray out neutrons like a D-T reactor would. : :This is basic physics and has been known for a long time. : : : So, it would be a fusion reactor with an easier operational :cycle. Less need for handling and replacing irradiated parts of the :reactor. : Correct. : :My point is, can we actually use helium-3 for fusion ... : That's a different question than the first one you asked. Since we currently can't use anything for fusion in a non-explosive way and get commercial quantities of power, we can't use He3 just like we can't use any other fusion fuel. However, the question is just when we *will* be able to use it, since mining the stuff isn't going to happen in the snap of a finger, either. The question is also whether it will be commercially viable to use it. The current Tokamak designs don't make me confident that it will ever be competitive with fission or solar. : :... or is talk :about how great mining the Moon for the stuff roughly like talk about how :we could mine the asteroids for copper, except that we actually know how :to turn copper into a useful product? : I don't know a lot of people talking about going after asteroids for copper. The usual list of high-value materials is iron, magnesium, nickel, aluminum, cobalt, titanium, and platinum. Copper is way down the list. A 1 km asteroid is worth well over a trillion dollars, just counting the elements I listed. I've seen that PGMs come top of the list, simply because they're viable for return. Dennis Wingo in moonrush calculates that there are a lot of intact, metallic asteroids on the surface of the moon. Once there, these could be easily mined, with the bulk metals being used on the moon and precious metals sent to Earth. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
The Economic Development of the Moon
Alex Terrell wrote:
:On 5 Nov, 15:49, Fred J. McCall wrote: : (Joseph Nebus) wrote: : : That's a different question than the first one you asked. Since we : currently can't use anything for fusion in a non-explosive way and get : commercial quantities of power, we can't use He3 just like we can't : use any other fusion fuel. : : However, the question is just when we *will* be able to use it, since : mining the stuff isn't going to happen in the snap of a finger, : either. : : :The question is also whether it will be commercially viable to use it. :The current Tokamak designs don't make me confident that it will ever :be competitive with fission or solar. : Well, if your view is that fusion will never be possible commercially there is indeed little point in planning to acquire the capability to get fusion fuel. Of course, that same sort of thinking carried to its logical extreme has us naked, living in the bush, and only acquiring fire from lightning strikes. Why fixated on tokamaks? There are lots of other confinement approaches. -- "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man." --George Bernard Shaw |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The ONLY way to avoid the coming economic catastrophie | greysky | Misc | 1 | August 28th 07 11:39 AM |
Expert Warns of Economic 9/11 for U.S. | Phineas T Puddleduck | Misc | 0 | June 22nd 06 09:33 PM |
A model for the international development of the Moon? | Space Cadet | Policy | 3 | December 9th 05 01:01 AM |
A brief history of Japanese economic development and parallels with the China of today | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | February 23rd 05 09:56 PM |
Moon and Mars expeditions vs. RLV development | vthokie | Policy | 62 | March 30th 04 04:51 AM |