I try to refrain from posts looking too far into the scientific future; but, I figure this one is relevent to recent discussions of nuclear fission and fusion power plants.
Russia is planning to mine a rare fuel on the moon by 2020 with a permanent base and a heavy-cargo transport link, a Russian space official said Wednesday.
“We are planning to build a permanent base on the moon by 2015 and by 2020 we can begin the industrial-scale delivery… of the rare isotope Helium-3,” [said] Nikolai Sevastyanov.
Helium-3 is a non-radioactive isotope of helium that can be used in nuclear fusion. Rare on earth but plentiful on the moon, it is seen by some experts as an ideal fuel because it is powerful, non-polluting and generates almost no radioactive by-product.
Just don’t let the freighter get redirected on the return leg — to a strange site with leathery eggs in suspended animation.
Now that is a worthy goal: have an operating mine on the moon by 2020.
Compared to: duplicate in 15 years what we accomplished in 8 years, 36 years ago.
We could be back on the moon in 4 years if we set our minds to it.
Smart. They are also way ahead in environmental systems. Didn’t we use to think this way?
(Sigh)
Good This is what will keep humans in space. Research along isn’t enough. Start bringing back something valuable and governments will be more willing to open the wallet to fund them.
almost NO radio-active by product? If we don’t want to deal with the waste in the first place (according to the other article on nuclear power plants) than why would we want to get into this discussion? radioactive waste=BAD…right?
vincerelli — read up on the differences between nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. From the environmental side, this is a significant portion.
Well I hope they screw up the piece of land that Tom cruise supposedly bought >:)
Do you suppose they’ll dig up the Monolith from 2001: A Space Odyssey?
G
It is definately an interesting though but it seems to me I can remember George W. Bush saying that he too wanted to put a base on the moon. Do you think we have another Space Race on our hands. I mean the Americans my see the fact that Russia has there hands an a rare and powerfull isotope as a threat.
Can you imagine where we would be with just the money from Iraq?
Sounds the alarm, if the money was not used for the Iraq war, the gov would have found some other way to waste it. It wouldn’t have gone to NASA.
“Can you imagine where we would be with just the money from Iraq?”
Yes, still trillions in debt.
The reason the Chinese will taken longer is because they are still gathering information from NASA and Russia, plus they are in the midst of rebuilding their country.
How can the Russians afford to go to the moon? They have to take in
“guest” astronauts for 20 mil to help pay for their trips to the space station.
Sounds
Interesting comment about Iraq. Tough I agree with gquaglia, I like rus62’s answer . Maybe a better question might be where would we be if the Republicans hadn’t given all those tax cuts to the wealthy. Doesn’t it boggle the mind seeing that we went from surplus to massive debt in just a couple of years under Bush. But I digress.
Let’s go back to the moon. Our technology has improved to the point that this could be done much cheaper then in 1969. Moon Shuttles could ferry the ore or refined product from the moon to Space Shuttles. This would relieve the Moon Shuttles of several requirements and save a lot on fuel. The Space Shuttles wouldn’t need to land and take off again from the moon so their extra weight would mean less. The Space Shuttles would now be carrying cargo both ways so each trip would be more economical.
I imagine there would be more to mine on the moon then He-3. Maybe they would find a deposit or two of Lithium crystals. Maybe this could even be a joint world effort to provoke peace among all nations. I just don’t want to hear Bush say we have to do it because the Moonies have WMDs.
I should mention,
Smith, excellent point. I like it.:
“duplicate in 15 years what we accomplished in 8 years, 36 years ago.”
Personally if I was rebuilding my country, I couldn’t think of a better, long term investment with a bigger payoff. I’m sure many would disagree with me.
If they have the national will to go – they’ll go. They or the Chinese.
Re: comment 13. There’s another side to the debt equation: spending. Tax revenues during Bush’s tenure have actually increased modestly, but the spending has increased by 22% over the Clinton administration’s (http://tinyurl.com/7eumz). Whatever the reason for the lower rate of revenue growth (tax cuts, economic downturn, etc.), the government annually increases spending well beyond the rate of inflation. Congress, like most Americans, can’t seem to fathom that there *is* such a thing as wasted spending.
Sounds,
Sorry, a typo in my post #13. The first word in the second sentence should have been THOUGH. Missing the H sure makes it a different word. No insult intended.
What if they mine so much it changes the gravitational effects, including tides?
“Smith, excellent point. I like it.:
“duplicate in 15 years what we accomplished in 8 years, 36 years ago.” ”
-USA has a base and mine on the moon?
“How can the Russians afford to go to the moon? They have to take in
“guest” astronauts for 20 mil to help pay for their trips to the space station.” Firstable, the Russian economy is rapidly increasing. Secondabl,e the Russian government, OWNS ONE OF THE LARGEST OIL RESERVES ON EARTH, I personally think that with funding from that, they can afford to go to the moon a couple of times . They also heavily tax one of the worlds largest diamond mines (which fetch them a very nice profit). They are also amongst the largest arms dealers in the world. (below the USA, just so you guys don’t turn that into a “russia is terorist” comment) Russia currently has the only active space program on earth, and by that, I mean people go to space often. Russia fetches a very nice profit from selling ticket’s to NASA’s “guest” austranuts, who don’t have a rocket of their own. And, finally, Russia is NOT IN DEBT, especially, not in a 3 TRILLION DEBT.
“What if they mine so much it changes the gravitational effects, including tides?”
ROFL
Has NOBODY read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress?
“A heavy-cargo transport link” on the moon makes a dandy infinite supply of ICBM-equivalents. (My first thought when I read that the Chinese were planning a moonbase.)
True, Russia has vast amount of natural resources but climate, terrain, and distance make it difficult to exploit all of these resources. Their 2005 GDP is ranked 12th behind Brasil at about 1.5 trillion compared to ours at 12.3 trillion. In 1998 their foreign debt was 90% of their GDP. I’ll admit they have improved it tremendously to about 35% (better than the U.S.). Their manufacturing systems are old and need to be updated. They have a weak banking system, corruption (which we all have), and a poor business climate that makes it difficult for foreign and Russian investors to invest. Yes, they are in debt, more ways than one.
What happened to their plan of making lead into gold?