Russia plans to put a mine on the Moon to help boost energy supply

[emad]

By Andrew Osborn in Moscow
Published: 27 January 2006


Russia has staked out plans to recapture its Soviet-era space-race glory and start mining the Moon for a promising energy resource that scientists say could meet the Earth's power needs for more than a thousand years.

Nikolai Sevastyanov, head of Russia's giant Energia Space Corporation, has unveiled plans to build a permanent base on the Moon within a decade and to start mining the planet for helium 3, a sought-after isotope, by 2020.

The idea would be to use helium 3 to power thermo-nuclear power stations, harnessing its potency to achieve nuclear fusion.

The technology to exploit helium 3 is still under development, but it has been touted by a significant academic school of thought as "the ideal fuel of the future" with several countries expressing interest. The race is now on to be the first to make it work.

http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article341273.ece

[Ready4Change]

1. Anyone know anything about Helium3?

?

[Emperor_Norton_II]

4. Helium-3

aka 3He, is an isotope of helium that has only one neutron, as opposed to the more common helium-4 (which is what we commoners like to stick in our party balloons). The terrestrial supply is incredibly scarce, resulting mainly as a result of decay emissions from the nuclear arsenal. The Moon, however, has been picking up tons of 3He over the years from the solar wind, one atom at a time.

"Well, great," you say, "what's that got to do with anything?"

Well. It's useful for fusion reactors. In fact, it's the best possible fuel for fusion reactors available.

The fuel we're using for our test reactors now is deuterium (aka "heavy water", a hydrogen isotope) and tritium. We use the D/T mix because the components are abundant on Earth and thus fairly cheap to refine. Now, D/T works fine and provides lots of energy, but there's a catch. The way the reaction works, every D/T fusion that happens lets loose a stray neutron. These neutrons hit the walls of the reactor chamber, and bit by bit the whole apparatus slowly becomes irradiated. So every few years, you'd have to replace your main reactor and store the old one in the approrpiate place. Not very practical.

A reaction with deuterium and 3He, on the other hand, produces no spare neutrons. It's clean, almost perfectly so. All it produces is beautiful, radiant energy. That's what makes 3He such a prize catch. We don't have commercial reactors yet, but when we do (we're getting there btw, at this point the threshold isn't breakeven, it's ignition) whoever's got the fuel is going to get to dictate prices - like how OPEC controls oil prices.

And that's why the Russians are looking at the Moon. It's the closest source (though not the most abundant; whoever figures out how to mine the upper atmosphere of Saturn is going to make the Saudis look like stone pikers. But I digress.) and the one most likely to be developed.

[Bonhomme Richard]

2. It would have to be a joint Russia/US venture.

There is no way that the US military would give up the "high ground" to another country for any reason except if we had equal total access to all that was going on up there.

[emad]

3. UN Security Council has consistently vetoed ANY calims to

prospecting or land ownership on the moon.

[BushOut06]

10. Maybe so, but who's going to enforce it?

I don't see anyone lobbying for sanctions against Russia if they choose to do this. It's only a matter of time before space starts becoming colonized and exploited, as we run out of room and resources here on Earth.

[benburch]

9. With what money?

We're bankrupt.

[Orsino]

11. We can barely make Earthbound mines profitable.

What makes anyone think that mining the Moon would be anything more than a money pit?

[NNadir]

5. This is not a particularly brilliant idea.

It is, frankly, a pork idea.

[qazplm]

6. minor annoyance

pretty sure the moon isnt a planet lol

[Up2Late]

7. Right you are, and this article is written in very vague terms...

...without specifics or actual names of the people involved.

Looks and sounds bogus to me. I'll get excited when I see it in some respected science journals with more specific info and facts.

[Meldread]

8. Heh. It isn't likely going to happen.

I of course support almost any space venturing exploration as even if it is unsuccessful we always end up learning at least something. I don't believe you can put a price on knowledge.

However, this isn't likely going to happen. Not yet at least. We will need to develop better technology in order for this to be successful for the simple fact the start up cost would be enormous. Anyone have any idea how much money it costs to setup a permanent base, let alone an entire mining operation, on the Moon? Anyone have any idea how much money it would cost to actually ship the H3 back to Earth? H3 is worth roughly what...? 3 Billion US Dollars per ton? It's something like that. Anyway, over the long term - if successful - you could certainly recoup your losses. However, there is a large chance that you won't be successful, at least not until you run out of start up capital.

The only way we are going to get at the H3 on the Moon will be when countries decide to work together and do it jointly. Otherwise it ain't gonna happen. This line of thinking doesn't even factor in how other countries would view such an operation and the political ramifications. The United Nations has been clear that no one can lay claim to the Moon. If anyone actually managed to accomplish this without the aid of other nations you can pretty much expect WWIII.