Making money on the moon seen key to exploration

[techs]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060428/sc_...ANEA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-

Making money on the moon is an essential part of the U.S. plan for space exploration, NASA officials said on Friday after a four-day strategy workshop with international space officials and scientists.

Billed as the first meeting to determine what explorers would do if they return to the lunar surface after more than three decades, the gathering drew some 180 participants from more than a dozen countries, including China, Russia, Japan and the nations of the European Space Agency.

Shana Dale, NASA's deputy administrator, said one clear goal was to do business.

"The teams recognize the critical importance of space commerce -- having real companies going to the moon and making money," Dale said at a telephone news conference. "The government needs to be a trailblazer and enabler (with) a desire to see commerce take off."



Now I am sure this is not NASA speaking but wacko Bush political nonsense.
When you consider the billions it will take to get to the moon and the billions to set up a station there, ain't no "business" gonna make a cent.
Anything that can be made on the moon can be made in Earth orbit for a small fraction of the cost.
And no one is making any money renting out the International Space Station to make widgets.

 

[Moonbeam]

If humans were meant to fly God would have given them wings.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If humans were meant to fly God would have given them wings.

If god was meant to fly humans would have given him wings.

 

[sandorski]

Helium 3(?? IIRC) is an excellent energy source and is plentiful on(in) the moon. Invade it now!

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Helium 3(?? IIRC) is an excellent energy source and is plentiful on(in) the moon. Invade it now!

Yes! Let's bring freedom and democracy to the moonies!

OK, Moonbeam?

 

[OFFascist]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If humans were meant to fly God would have given them wings.

I think we were meant to do whatever it is our minds can dream up, and that is why God gave us brains and free will, both are far more useful than wings.

 

[Polish3d]

Sweet invade Moonbeam's homeland

 

[eilute]

Would it be profitable if there was plutonium ore or diamonds up there?

 

[conehead433]

We have proof that the Moon has weapons of mass destruction and that the Moon tried to obtain uranium from Africa.

 

[1EZduzit]

Well, it would make for a very exclusive resort.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: OFFascist

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If humans were meant to fly God would have given them wings.

I think we were meant to do whatever it is our minds can dream up, and that is why God gave us brains and free will, both are far more useful than wings.

Glad to see you picked up on what I was saying.

 

[zephyrprime]

In a way their right but the thing is it's just way way too expensive to go to the moon or even into orbit. Without a breakthrough propulsion system, I don't see the moon as being a money making place.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: techs
Now I am sure this is not NASA speaking but wacko Bush political nonsense.
When you consider the billions it will take to get to the moon and the billions to set up a station there, ain't no "business" gonna make a cent.
Anything that can be made on the moon can be made in Earth orbit for a small fraction of the cost.
And no one is making any money renting out the International Space Station to make widgets.

We can't even keep the International Space Station working properly, and it's right here in low Earth orbit. Launching something massive, like assemblies for a base, to the Moon will take a lot of fuel to get it that far, and then more fuel to keep it from crashing into the surface. Can't just pop out a parachute to touch down safely. And of course, just a base won't be enough - we'd need equipment to mine and process whatever valuable resources they hope to find there.

Then assemble the base and equipment and keep it all running properly, without the possibility of immediate servicing. Then figure out some solution for preventing damage to either the installation or astronauts caused by high energy cosmic radiation and micrometeorites. Then find something in sufficient quantities that actually has some value, and then expend MORE fuel to get it back to Earth safely.

Oh yeah, Moon dust - another problem. There's a dedicated research team at work now to decide how to deal with the problem of the ultra-fine lunar dust. It coats everything and damages seals, and prolonged exposure could potentially cause lung problems.

Whatever the stuff is that they find, it had better have a worth of about a billion dollars per gram.

Helium 3(?? IIRC) is an excellent energy source and is plentiful on(in) the moon. Invade it now!

Helium 3 is great - or maybe it will be in several decades. Right now, we've got no way of putting it to good use.

Would it be profitable if there was plutonium ore or diamonds up there?

Plutonium Ore? Mmmm....no, considering that there is no such thing.

Diamonds - if there were diamonds on the Moon, DeBeers would already have a base there.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If humans were meant to fly God would have given them wings.

God gave us something far more useful, and something that really reveals what he was thinking up...brains.

Hmm, somebody apparently beat me to it

 

[Acanthus]

The space elevator is a neccesary step before space exploration becomes a profitable option.

 

[Moonbeam]

If you go faster than 100 miles an hour you will die.

 

[MadRat]

We can sell all the helium-3 to the martians in exchange for their advanced space exploration technology.

It will work, I saw this once in Master of Orion...

 

[f95toli]

AFAIK Japan started talking about mining He-3 on the moon several years ago. And yes, it might be profitable since He-3 is extremely expensive (and rare) on earth. You do not need a lot of it and since the gravity on the moon is so low you could actually use cannons to fire small containers of it back to earth.

From what I understand it would be relatively easy to build a fusion reactor that uses He-3, current planned designs all use hydrogen for the simple reason that there is no good source for He-3 (there are trace elements of He-3 in natural gas, and there are also a couple of mines where He-3 is extracted) .

 

[compuwiz1]

Didn't the rest of you get in on the land grab?

I own 100 acres of prime Moon real estate.

 

[OrganizedChaos]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If humans were meant to fly God would have given them wings.

ahh, but god gave us the ability to gain the knowledge to build wings.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Didn't the rest of you get in on the land grab?

I own 100 acres of prime Moon real estate.

Hey, I got a bridge for sale. It's in Brooklyn.

 

[Stunt]

One payload of helium3 isotope (found on the moon) can give a nuclear fusion reactor enough fuel to power the whole United States for an entire year. I have advocated more moon exploration more than any other mission, it makes far more economic sense than Mars or whatever other crap space nerds want.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Stunt
One payload of helium3 isotope (found on the moon) can give a nuclear fusion reactor enough fuel to power the whole United States for an entire year. I have advocated more moon exploration more than any other mission, it makes far more economic sense than Mars or whatever other crap space nerds want.

Moon first, Mars later. I suspect Mars will have all kinds of economic opportunities, but baby steps are in order.

 

[libs0n]

Originally posted by: Stunt
One payload of helium3 isotope (found on the moon) can give a nuclear fusion reactor enough fuel to power the whole United States for an entire year. I have advocated more moon exploration more than any other mission, it makes far more economic sense than Mars or whatever other crap space nerds want.

For what reactors? A fools errand otherwise. The logistics to mine that payload would be so beyond what Nasa is currently proposing that making the economic case for it is laughable. The moon is a dead end, always has been. I was excited about He3 in the eight grade; I'm twenty one now so you can imagine how infantile I find the concept.

Two things I'd like to say: 1, that the current moon exploration program is just a way to keep the shuttle line operational and continue the corporate pork barrel that nasa has become. Any justifications for it are to serve this cause.

And 2, that in the end "making money" will be the only thing that can truly open space to mankind, although fat chance that Nasa will be leading the charge or that He3 will be the cause of it. In fact, the chicken/egg problem of cheap access to space/no payloads is quite the hurdle to it getting done at all. Currently, best odds are on space tourism and asteroid mining, although both are long odds, the latter longer than the former.

I recently read a book by a formed nasa engineer called Moon Rush about mining platinum metal groups from asteroid impacts on the moon. Not a bad book, and if you're interested in this thread I recommend it, but its all just more space dreaming, like mining He3. On the book's subject, I say just go to the source. For a space nerd like myself, apogee books is a godsend.

 

[Looney]

Well, that's idiotic. Even if we can build a craft that's much more efficient than what's been previously possible, it still wouldn't be profitable to ship things back and forth from the moon.

Why is the moon such an important target now? We should be looking at Mars.