New SpaceRace for MoonFuel Helium-3

page: 1
6

log in

join

posted on May, 2 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Ever heard of Helium-3? It is an Isotope which could provide humanity with endless fusion fuel. The catch is that it is only in abundance on the moon. This discovery is sparking off a new spacerace. Not just Russia and the USA are going to try to mine Helium-3 from the moon. Most nations are interested in this superfuel which could eliminate our energy needs and cut pollution from common fuel use.

Check out this article.
www.rawstory.com...

This is by far the most amazing story I have come across in a long time.
Simply incredible.



[edit on 2-5-2007 by AllSeeingI]




posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 12:17 AM
link   
The article link has changed. Here is the updated link for the news article:
HELIUM 3 MOONRACE ARTICLE

[edit on (9/4/07) by AllSeeingI]

[edit on (9/4/07) by AllSeeingI]

[edit on (9/4/07) by AllSeeingI]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I hardly consider a fuel mined on the moon as something which will eliminate our fuel issues. I wonder what the going rate of helium-3 fuel would be?
Actually, before I condemn it, I have no idea what it actually does...

[edit on 4-9-2007 by 3_Libras]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 01:16 AM
link   
Ive been doing a bit of research on Helium-3, and this is a bit of what i got.

The life of Helium starts off at the sun, from here it passes through space, and then cosmic rays hit it and turn Helium into what we knwo as Helium-3. Our Magnetic Feild and our Atmosphere repel Helium-3 and it goes to the Moon.

The reason we need Helium-3 is because we carnt make our Fusion reactors keep up with the required power to create fusion power, Helium-3 is not a vast mineral on the Moon, helium-3 is in many places but Helium-4 covers alot more ground than -3, so finding -3 and leaving -4 will be harder than people think.

Space race may be a good way to put this for finacial Values, 220 pounds of Helium-3 would have a value of around $141 million.

Because the concentration of helium-3 is extremely low, it would be necessary to process large amounts of rock and soil to isolate the material, but wouldnt decreasing the mass of the Moon directly effect our tides ? With the rising levels of the Oceans due to global warming effecting the Moons gravitional pull may be the final straw and cause flooding on Earth on a massive scale.

Since Helium-3 is getting repelled by us does that mean that, Mars, Saturn, Titan and other Moon's, Planets and astroids could have this precious mineral on it ?

The idea of bases and mining sites on the Moon are not werid for this site, go to John Lears section of ATS to read about them. Helium-3 could be our saviour, or Helium-3 could finsh us off, i can see many wars happening for this ore or mineral, what ever term is used for helium-3.

Couple of little facts about Helium-3: Helium-3 contains two protons and one neutron. Helium-3 do NOT last long, it gets turned into ultrastable helium-4.

Eqation for the creation and reaction inside a Fusion Reactor:

D -- He3 -- He4 -- H -- ~18MeV

Key:

D - Deuterium
He3 - Helium 3
He4 - Helium 4
H - Helium
18MeV - Energy created or needed.

As i mentioned in the above, digging out the Moon could alter its gravitaional pull on our tides and create mayhem. I honestly do not know the mass on the Moon in tonnes, but i do know that America needs 6.7 tonnes of helium-3 just for that segment of one country's energy demand, and from what ive been reading that number is far far under the real amount, the most of what im reading is saying around 12 tonnes a year.

The US has around 107 million house holds, so lets say there is 700 million homes on the planet. That is about 12 tonnes for 107 million so how about 65-ish tonnes a year, maybe alittle more or less. So 65 tonnes a year, lets say we mine it for one decade, thats 650 tonnes of the Mass of a Moon that has a MASSIVE effect on our gravitional pull. Starting to sound unsafe you think ?

Misconception of Helium-3 only being on the moon: Helium-3 is on Earth, it is a common misconception that it is only at the Moon. A long time ago before Earth had such a good atmosphere we were constantly bombarded by Helium-3 from the sun. this raises the question, Why dont we just mine our own ? simple answer, our own -3 is located deep within the magma of our planets mantle, i think thats the right way of putting it, hey i got a D in geography so dont hold your breath


The diference of Helium-4 and Helium-3 and its facts. Im going to have to put this simply for two reasons. 1) There may be people on ATS who arnt great at Fusion Nuclear Reactors
2) I dont know alot about science.

Helium-3 and Helium-4 that we find on the Moon are created in the sun, that weve been through. What we didnt go through are some ratios and changes. for every 10,000 -4 particals there is 1 -3 partical created. So the chances of finding -3 mines on the Moon are around 10,000 - 1.

Helium-3 pocesses 2 protons and 1 neutron, that we know. Helium-4 contains 2 protons and 2 neutrons. This sounds lieka little differnce, but on a chemical level this is far too big to even conside usign -4 in place of -3.

Part of the reaction is a massivly important bit revolved around the -3, it is missing one neutron to make it -4, as soon as -3 relised that deuterium is in the area it will reach out and grab the deuterium's neatron. This creates a massive reaction and that is what is desiered by sciences for Fusion reaction.

I was just thinking about a more conspriracy style side of this, i was thinking that global warming started a few years ago apparently. We just relised now appreantly, ming from Moon and taking He3 for simple practise runs and some mines for further study, COULD alter the Moons gravitational pull and cause see levels to rise, but thats justa little part of me ranting at the end, so ignore that.


Thats what i got right now, hope it helps. Ill look up more infomation


Take Care, Vix

(Edits: 1st edit, Added chemical set up and He3 not lasting very long. 2nd edit, added some more paragraphs. 3rd edit, added last 4 paragraphs. 4th edit, added in misconception of no He3 on Earth. 5th edit, added in eqation of fusion reactors He3 into energy. 6th edit, me ranting on at end.)

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Vixion]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Vixion]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Vixion]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Vixion]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Vixion]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Vixion]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Vxion, right on about the research


I'm curious as to your opinion on a few questions.

How large of a mining operation (and how long) would there have to be for it to 'hypothetically' affect the gravitational pull of the Moon to subsequently cause some drastic affects on Earth's tides and/or seal levels?

Which of the industrial power houses in the world would be able to, or within a reasonably short timespan, be able to start such a mining operation? That is, on the Moon.

Is Hel-3 a realistic fuel source?, compared to the other alternative sources that are being researched/in development.

If Hel-3 is created by the Sun, and repelled by our atmosphere (or whichever you said was doing the repelling), is there a hypothetical means of simply extracting it from space itself? Like through some kind of space net :p between our planets and the Sun.

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cloak and Dagger
Vxion, right on about the research



Firstly, thanks about the thumbs up on the research, took me hours upon hours ot get all of that infomation and put in my views and cram it full of facts at the same time.

So your questions from the above quote are... How large and long would the mining to have been going on for it to effect the tides on Earth ?

When it comes to how long, as in how many years, i dont belive that it matters. If you have 1 team going for 2 years and 10 teams going for a year you'll get diferent amounts.

So how long has it been going on ? Turns into how large is this project ? I think to mine the required amount of fuel for the US alone (which is 12 tonnes a year), i think you may be able to get 12 tonnes back ibut i honestly could not say how long it would take or how hard it would be. Im no expert on space travel, i try to fill in what to do at the distination.

Lets say you can do 1 trip a year with-out making any one surpicous, thats one years He3 mineing, or is it ? i honestly carnt think or how much you could get back. So how long ? I think it would have started 10 -15 years after they brough back smaples from the moon landing. It wasnt till around the 1970's that Helium-3 was discovered, so the timing works out right. When you think about the actual mineing site constructions up there, planning and so on and forth.

As for how much to change the Earths tides ? i honestly couldnt tell you, im not sure. That was simply some thing that poped into my head when i was typing. Makes sence i think. Ill do more research tommorow but i really dont have much more time on ATS, going away for a couple of weeks tommorrow. But ill have a look about.

For the Industrial Power houses of Industry.
Well do you mean power houses as in indivivual companys, or countrys. Because i doubt that the companys of the world have the resources and funds to lanuch Lunar missions and make them work. But country wise, US at the top of the chain, then Russia. After that im not sure at all, wont be long till China are eating this sweet piece of Helium pie i would think.

Helium-3 is created by the Sun, and repelled by our Atmosphere AND magnetic force. As for a realistic fuel source ? i think its more as a tempory more as perminent.

As i said in my big post, there is 1 He3 partical to every 10,000 He4 particals, so its not easy to find, and cost effective ? not sure in short run, it would be very very long term. I was thinking about the idea of a inter-galatic sheild caputring He3 and we harvest it. But thats not truely realistic lol.

I guess to put it simply, my views are.

How long has it been going on ? - Time is unnessercery, its all about the size of the project.

How big is the project ? - I woudl say massive, if you want pictures go to the genius that is John Lear, his part of ATS has great pictures and so on.

Who is leading the way in Helium-3 ? - US with-out a doubt in my mind.

Realistic fuel source ? Yes for a short time, i carnt see some thing liek thsi that takes sooo much effert being made out to be easy, we go to any other Moons there shoudl be He3 there, so we dont have to put every thing into our Moon, lets look at others aswell.

Simple way of removing it ? - I carnt see there being a simple way, another hitch is the Van Alan belt (splet wrong, maybe), its a belt of high radiation, taking that much helium-3 past a volitile radiation belt, doesnt seem wise to me, btu not sure of effects.

As i know, ive still got to do alot more research on this before i can give good answers, so sorry for the vauge answers, and some of them, poor answers. ill try to get on and step them up a notch.

Take Care, Vix



[edit on 4-9-2007 by Vixion]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
How much and How long ? Referign to Cloak& Daggers post.

Ive done a little bit of very fast reading, and two thigns really 1) How come nearly every one trys to sound clever and talks poop ? 2) After much translating of the poop.... no one knows, no one knows how much is getting mined.

How long ? Same as above, people using big words and science eqations, trying to sound clever. After reading through it you relise, they know nothing. So ill go to sleep now and look more when i get up.

As i said, John Lear is worth a look when it comes to Lunar any thing really, that guy has inspired me to do so much research.

Take Care, Vix



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 05:36 AM
link   
I carnt seem to eidt, so ill start another post.

The Moon does NOT effect the tides 100%, some thing that i over looked has a big effect on tides, the Sun. Admitantly there were be more werid tides, for example if your tide rises 10 foot a night, get ready for it too raise 25 foot. So if we altered the Moon the effects would not be absoluty desvestating, now it would just be mass panic


My original thought that US was leading in He3 and then Russia was correct, from what im reading alot of people are saying, if Russia is laying claim t the North pole the US will lay claim to the Moon. Sounds abit funny to me.

So the power houese are, in order. United States of America, Russia, China and then all ive found is "Other wealthy nations", that could mean any of the G8.

From what ive seen on Mr lears posts and my own views i say that were mining He already, alot of other people are sayign that we wont/carnt start for another 50 years. I tink there wrong, but thats up too you.

or how much to alter the Moons effect ? I personly think as soon as we hit past 1% mass gone, thats when little effects will start happening, tides up by 1mm, and it will rise and rise.

If what ive posted in my last..4 posts now, contradict any one, or youjust think im plain wrong, please come out and say for i wont be on ats for a week, leaving in about 7 hours. So hurry !

Take Care, Vix



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 07:56 AM
link   
Helium -3 would be good, but ive done some more research, and the ratios are hard to get. We would have to travel very far around our solar system to make this be a working resource.

ProTo



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Hiya Vixion,

I happened to be perusing your post and I saw something that I think is way off base, so I'm going to throw out some science.



The US has around 107 million house holds, so lets say there is 700 million homes on the planet. That is about 12 tonnes for 107 million so how about 65-ish tonnes a year, maybe alittle more or less. So 65 tonnes a year, lets say we mine it for one decade, thats 650 tonnes of the Mass of a Moon that has a MASSIVE effect on our gravitional pull. Starting to sound unsafe you think ?


Taking 650 tons away from the moon would certainly not have a massive effect. The moon is a very large object.

Mass of the moon: 7.36 x 10^22 kgs (1.63 x 10^23 pds)

You're talking about removing 650 tons over the course of a decade. That translates to 5.89 x 10^5 kgs (1.3 x 10^6 pds). So, removing 650 tons from the moon would change the overall mass by .000000000000000797%. Pretty insignificant really.

Something else to consider is that the moon is constantly being barraged with microscopic meteorites (and occasionally larger ones) that increase it's mass on a daily basis. I did a little bit of web research and found out that scientists estimate the earth's mass increases by a few million tons per year by this process (this is equivalent to about a shoebox full of "dust" per acre). They estimate that the moon gets about 1/4 of this due to a weaker gravitational field and smaller size. So, using the low end of that estimate, we can safely say that the moon is bombarded with small meteorites and the like that increase it's mass by 250,000 tons per year.

Given, I used the US ton for these calculations and it seems that you're using the UK tonne. However, the difference between the two is negligible when we're dealing with quantities as large as the mass of the moon.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Im Vixion, well im ProTo Fire Fox, had to make this account after Vixion was unable to post and send U2U's.

there are a few floors in what iw as saying i am aware of them, im currently getting more and mroe info and if i think ive got anough im going to apply to do another research project, would you be willing to give a hand ?

Vix / ProTo



posted on Feb, 3 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Why is barack abandoning the moon project? Is there something in mars that is more promising? Mars has no known helium 3. But if the US reaches mars first, it'll be the only one there, hence any resources that the US can gather, perhaps the US can keep everything for itself.

The Economic Viability of Mars Colonization


Robert Zubrin
Lockheed Martin Astronautics
PO Box 179
Denver, CO 80201, USA (Originally found as badly formatted text at www.magick.net... a part of Mars Direct Manned Mars Mission Home Page)
Abstract

The economic viability of colonizing Mars is examined. It is shown, that of all bodies in the solar system other than Earth, Mars is unique in that it has the resources required to support a population of sufficient size to create locally a new branch of human civilization. It is also shown that while Mars may lack any cash material directly exportable to Earth, Mars' orbital elements and other physical parameters gives a unique positional advantage that will allow it to act as a keystone supporting extractive activities in the asteroid belt and elsewhere in the solar system. The potential of relatively near-term types of interplanetary transportation systems is examined, and it is shown that with very modest advances on a historical scale, systems can be put in place that will allow individuals and families to emigrate to Mars at their own discretion. Their motives for doing so will parallel in many ways the historical motives for Europeans and others to come to America, including higher pay rates in a labor-short economy, escape from tradition and oppression, as well as freedom to exercise their drive to create in an untamed and undefined world. Under conditions of such large scale immigration, sale of real-estate will add a significant source of income to the planet's economy. Potential increases in real-estate values after terraforming will provide a sufficient financial incentive to do so. In analogy to frontier America, social conditions on Mars will make it a pressure cooker for invention. These inventions, licensed on Earth, will raise both Terrestrial and Martian living standards and contribute large amounts of income to support the development of the colony.



posted on Jun, 12 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Giving this thread a well deserved bump.

There is a method to my madness stay tune





new topics
top topics
 
6

log in

join