It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Moon Gas May Save Earth From The Coming Energy Crisis.

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
reply to post by mikesingh
 


I read that, but no where does it mention the cost to launch the shuttle. It is said that it costs $450 million per mission to launch.

If a shuttle happens to be destroyed during a mission, it will cost 1.7 billion to replace the shuttle.



not only that,but if i remember correctly,isn't the shuttle program due for retirement within the next decade or something like that?
so even before we can attempt to send a mining colony up there,we have to replace the shuttles with something better,faster,more expensive...

first of all,at the rates governments around the world usually work,this will take ages
secondly,there's the pricetag

think about that




posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 03:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spoodily
I don't believe there is any energy crisis. The supply and demand element of fuel leads to money and if people think the supply is running low the price will go up. 'UFO' technology is real. If the time ever comes when we no longer have these poisons we use today for fuel (hopefully soon) we will just use what powers the UFOs (No, I am not kidding).


I think you are partly right. It is a scam, but because there are only a few original scammers around, the scam has become our reality and we are depending on it. We can't get out in a second, it will take time.

But the interesting thing is that when the world is in need all these countries are trying to get to the bag of "gold" on the moon on their own. Partly because the US do not want to share the mission....why? Normally you would suspect that this will take a lot of highly classified personel and it is cheaper and faster to do it together.

The other thing is that of course this would keep the energyprices up and the meter running.

Another tough question is indeed, why do this after 35 years of "absence" on the moon. The moon was "not valuable in itself", but we could use it a a base to start other space missions.
And suddenly it is the solution to all our problems?? I do not believe it.
HOW do they know that there are 100 million tons of He3 there (source: russian news article)? Is there a scientific method that enables us to do that kind of math from a few rocks that they brought?

Maybe someone with geological background can answer this. I thought that to know what is in the ground or soil you had to do a lot of research on the spot itself.



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 04:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Pjotr
 


We know what's on the moon because we've been going there since before the 1969 moon landing. UFOs are *REAL*, they can get to the moon in a matter of hours. China wants to go and that's a problem, so we're going too.

I personally think they built that rickety piece of space trash they 'landed' on the moon with out of aluminum foil and steel tubing...while on the moon.

We can't get to the moon with what they claimed to have done it with. Footage filmed in a studio was spliced with actual moon footage to create the complete moon hoax. We went to the moon AND we faked it. UFOs get us there.



posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spoodily
reply to post by Pjotr
 


We know what's on the moon because we've been going there since before the 1969 moon landing. UFOs are *REAL*, they can get to the moon in a matter of hours. China wants to go and that's a problem, so we're going too.

I personally think they built that rickety piece of space trash they 'landed' on the moon with out of aluminum foil and steel tubing...while on the moon.

We can't get to the moon with what they claimed to have done it with. Footage filmed in a studio was spliced with actual moon footage to create the complete moon hoax. We went to the moon AND we faked it. UFOs get us there.



I know these stories and I can buy them for the most of it, but is doesn't shed light on the situation at hand. Based on what you say, one would see the moon as US property (like some say it is ET property).

The question now is: Why is the moon free for grabs all of a sudden? Everybody wants to go and obviously think nobody is going to stop them. As I said earlier this opens all questions and suspicions about the moon that you can find on internet. I'm curious what John Lear has to say about it. Becuase we can come up any moonstory as long as nobody officially goes there, but in 2013-20 with 7 countries circling the old lady the cat must be out of the bag, doesn't it?

Now Japan also wants to go. McDonald can open a franchise up there.

Japan confirms her Moon ambitions



posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Firstly im confused how this thread hasnt been closed, theres already atleast 3 other threads, two closed and one left open, any way. This is my post from 2 others.

Infact if you look at my signuture you'll see Helium-3 writian in it at the end, thats one of many He3 topics.

o well, this is what i had.



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

[edit on 14-9-2007 by Vixion]



posted on Oct, 3 2007 @ 06:19 AM
link   
Absolute scam. Fusion reactors have been "just a few decades away" for decades. And even if you get one running on say, deuterium and tritium, the easiest fuel, there's no guarantee you'll get it to run on helium-3 and deuterium. And even if you get it to run on that fuel, if not mistaking deuterium-deuterium only is just as hard to fuse. The only advantage D-He3 fusion would give you over D-D fusion is 10 times less neutrons but neutrons would still be produced anyway so it is doubtful whether the humongous cost of He-3 would outweigh the cost of more neutron production (which weakens the materials in a fusion reactor and creates more radioactive waste that's expensive).





top topics
 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join