Moon Base

[Verteron]

Hi all,
I corrected my reply to this topic,and tend to agree with Tachyon Shield,about the use of nuclear reactors for power on the base,but could we use fusion instead to burn or liquefy the frozen water deposit?
Also since we have not discussed a green way of getting the Moon base built remember the moon has no atmosphere so solar powered fusion reactors could supply some of the needed energy needs for the base as a whole.

I don't think you need to worry about 'green' on the Moon. There's no atmosphere to pollute, no animal species to kill, so you can belch out as many nasty by-products as you like from your reactor or build process.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

Hi all,
I corrected my reply to this topic,and tend to agree with Tachyon Shield,about the use of nuclear reactors for power on the base,but could we use fusion instead to burn or liquefy the frozen water deposit?
Also since we have not discussed a green way of getting the Moon base built remember the moon has no atmosphere so solar powered fusion reactors could supply some of the needed energy needs for the base as a whole.

Thats all for now

Signed

Buck Rogers

We can't even get power from fusion, that's why the Hadron Collider has been built to see if we can get more power from fusion than what we put in.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

We can't even get power from fusion, that's why the Hadron Collider has been built to see if we can get more power from fusion than what we put in.

Ehem, I believe that would be facilities such as ITER (http://www.iter.org/) or KSTAR (http://www.nfri.re.kr/english/index1.html), not the LHC.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

It's up to you, Taccy... build us one!!






When you get over your initial "I'm not gonna do that!" reaction, you'll see why we don't. Because you (or anyone else) hasn't done it yet.

This would be an excellent project to work on AFTER YOU FINISH YOUR OPPOSING MAGNETS PROJECT. (nope, haven't forgotten about it! LOL)

So add it to the cue, grab your shovel, rivet gun, and presure suit and put them all on standby!

 

[Arrqh]

We can't even get power from fusion, that's why the Hadron Collider has been built to see if we can get more power from fusion than what we put in.

The LHC has nothing to do with fusion or fusion research.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

We can't even get power from fusion, that's why the Hadron Collider has been built to see if we can get more power from fusion than what we put in.

The LHC has nothing to do with fusion or fusion research.

It's to do with many things like seeing what it was like during the big bang and fusion.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

We can't even get power from fusion, that's why the Hadron Collider has been built to see if we can get more power from fusion than what we put in.

The LHC has nothing to do with fusion or fusion research.

It's to do with many things like seeing what it was like during the big bang and fusion.

Not really, I believe the applicable research areas are searching for the Higgs boson, quark flavour violation, matter-antimatter symmety violation, supersymmetry, dark energy, dark matter, quark-gluon plasma, and extra dimensions. Colliding two protons (or heavier nuclei, eventually) at 14TeV is about a million times more energetic than a fusion reaction, and results in the creation of a host of short-lived particles from the energy of the collision. There's no investigative program for extracting useful energy from the collisions as there wouldn't be any.

 

[Arrqh]

We can't even get power from fusion, that's why the Hadron Collider has been built to see if we can get more power from fusion than what we put in.

The LHC has nothing to do with fusion or fusion research.

It's to do with many things like seeing what it was like during the big bang and fusion.

No, that is not correct at all.

The LHC's purpose is to investigate very high energy particle collisions, MUCH higher energy then during fusion, for the purpose of testing various predictions such as the existence of the Higgs Boson. This does not have anything to do with fusion. The things that Deuterostome linked to, however, do.

 

[PurpleBuddha]

but nothing that's cheap, easy to build, easy to keep up, and easy to get there in the first place.

I find that hard to believe. With the capabilities, designers and industry we have on this planet you're telling me they can't build some air tight capsules with the necessary electronics and equipment and a space craft to get them there with? if they can build such things as submarines that can spend months at a time under the oceans i'm sure they can build a few capsules for a moon base.

I could build a moon base capsule myself from scrap metal from the scrap yard if I had the time and motivation to do it.

Money.

We certainly have the capability to do it on a design and technology level, but the resources needed are too great. And it is expensive enough to have to go the International Space Station for maintenance from time to time, much less maintenance missions to the moon.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for it. I am simply answering your questions as to why it hasn't been done yet.

 

[scotthm]

Can someone explain in detail why we don't have a Moon base right now?

I could build a moon base capsule myself from scrap metal from the scrap yard if I had the time and motivation to do it.

Does anything more need to be said?

---------------

 

[MANT!]

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/14apr_Moonwater.htm

Possible base structures
http://www.primidi.com/2007/03/01.html
And..a privately developed space station prototype that is orbiting NOW...
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/080509-bigelow-genesis1-milestone.html

 

[Zachary Smith]

Can someone explain in detail why we don't have a Moon base right now?

All that needs to be done is the design and construction of a space vehicle capable of transporting capsules to the Moon and then releasing them to the surface. The capsule can then be fitted together to create something not unlike the International space station. Russia could design and build a few capsules, the ESA could design and build a few capsules, NASA could design and build a few capsules and just send them to the moon.

Yes, I suspect we could build a moon base if we have the motivation and sufficient funds. But there are significant challenges.

For example:

Temperature. The Moon's surface is 100C (~200 F) during the day and -150C (-250 F) during the night. No building or machine on Earth can stand up to those temperatures for a long period of time. Even the Apollo landers and the space suits the astronauts used were thrown away after a few days use. It would take significant technological research to overcome these problems. Vacuum damage and brittleness due to extreme temperature would become very serious problems.

Meteorites. The Moon is constantly pelted by small rocks (and sometimes, larger ones) moving at high velocity. How are you going to make your habitat sufficiently durable and repairable and how are you going to cope with losing pressurization when such an event occurs?

Radiation. The Moon lacks the protective magnetic shield the Earth has. How do you protect your Moon Base occupants against long term exposure to higher background radiation without significantly increased risks of cancers, leukemia, etc.?

Resupply. Humans need a lot. Water, Air, Food. How do you keep even a dozen astronauts resupplied when the Moon is so incredibly barren it possesses none of these supplies for us to use? Are you going to launch a Saturn V sized booster every single week with these things on board? There may be water on the Moon at the icecaps -- but locating this and extracting it will require technology, time, and hard work.

The Base Itself. Either we mine the materials on the Moon and build the base from these or bring them from Earth. Either choice is expensive. We don't know how to Mine in climates without air and most of our building tools won't work. Alternatively, we're going to need many, many large rockets with our Moon Base components on them -- we're talking things far larger and heavier than the flimsy Apollo landers that we used to land on the Moon in 1969.

To give you some ideas about building with no air -- blasting (i.e. using explosives to clear an area) would be incredibly hazardous, with no atmosphere to slow down shards of Moon rock. Moon dust is pervasive, The Apollo astronauts reported it got *everywhere*, under their fingertips, they could taste it when they ate, etc. Can you imagine months and months of breathing that in?

Sure we could do it.

But the cost of addressing all these issues would need significant money to pay for research, prototypes, experiment, etc. Not to mention building of mining equipment, capsules, rockets, etc.

We're talking billions upon billions of dollars. Money that no-one's prepared to spend, quite frankly.

Money and lack of sufficient motivating forces is why we have no moon-base.

That said, except for the resupplying problems (which are, admittedly, major) most all of your issues can be solved by simply "building" the base below the surface. Tunnel down, hollow out, check for leaks and viola!. Moon-base.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

One might also ask "Why have research bases in Antartica?" Cynically, I believe that long-term economic interest rather than scientific curiosity drives the funding. When technology advances to the point that access to space is sufficiently cheap, and makes establishing a claim to the resouces on the Moon, Mars and asteroids even slightly profitable, I'd expect to see the biggest land grab in history -- but I doubt I'll live that long. My guess is a hundred to two hundred years.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

One might also ask "Why have research bases in Antartica?"

To search for Nibiru.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

One might also ask "Why have research bases in Antartica?"

To search for Nibiru.

When you find him, please ask him why he didn't show up in May 2003.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

One might also ask "Why have research bases in Antartica?"

To search for Nibiru.

When you find him, please ask him why he didn't show up in May 2003.

because that was a date given by a single woman who is so mental that she believes she's talking to aliens from zeta reticuli.
The correct date is and always has been since the time of the Mayans... December 21st 2012.

 

[Deckerd]

You're going to have such a red face on December 22 2012.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

You're going to have such a red face on December 22 2012.

Im not surprised, the temperatures on the Earth are going to skyrocket.

 

[MANT!]

To search for Nibiru.

When you find him, please ask him why he didn't show up in May 2003.

because that was a date given by a single woman who is so mental that she believes she's talking to aliens from zeta reticuli.
The correct date is and always has been since the time of the Mayans... December 21st 2012.

On Dec 22 2012, I'm going down to the Mayan Calender Store and buying a new one..

 

[msbae]

Can someone explain in detail why we don't have a Moon base right now?

All that needs to be done is the design and construction of a space vehicle capable of transporting capsules to the Moon and then releasing them to the surface. The capsule can then be fitted together to create something not unlike the International space station. Russia could design and build a few capsules, the ESA could design and build a few capsules, NASA could design and build a few capsules and just send them to the moon.

What's the hold up? Even if each space agency only built 3 capsules each that's 6 capsules for an initial Moon base.

I can answer that with 3 questions:

1.) What justifies the tremendous expense?

2.) What purpose would this moon base even serve?

3.) Is there something that can be done on the moon that can't be done on Earth or in Earth Orbit?