Is this why we're really going to the moon? (He-3)

[TechBear_Seattle]

Is it the helium-3 we're really after?

Helium-3 consists of two protons and one neutron (instead of two). It's ideal for the production of fusion power because it's non-radioactive, and the single high-energy proton produced during the fusion process can be contained using electric and magnetic fields.

So this particular atom brings fusion -- which by no means is a certainty to become a practical form of electricity generation -- one step closer to reality. Problem is, there's only about 20 pounds of helium-3 on Earth. There are an estimated 1 million tons on the moon, however, enough to provide power to the United States for 40,000 years.

The article continues at http://blogs.chron.com/sciguy/archives/2006/12/is_this_why_wer.html


Added Also:

NASA's planned moon base announced last week could pave the way for deeper space exploration to Mars, but one of the biggest beneficiaries may be the terrestrial energy industry.

Nestled among the agency's 200-point mission goals is a proposal to mine the moon for fuel used in fusion reactors -- futuristic power plants that have been demonstrated in proof-of-concept but are likely decades away from commercial deployment.

Helium-3 is considered a safe, environmentally friendly fuel candidate for these generators, and while it is scarce on Earth it is plentiful on the moon.

As a result, scientists have begun to consider the practicality of mining lunar Helium-3 as a replacement for fossil fuels.

This article can be read at http://www.wired.com/news/technology/space/0,72276-0.html?tw=wn_index_1

[seemslikeadream]

1. The coming helium shortage

:shrug:


http://energybulletin.net/3135.html

The coming helium shortage
by Laura Deakin


Where will you be when the world runs out of helium?

It’s surprising how many scientists and nonscientists alike are oblivious of the pending helium shortage. But it is a fact—we will run out of helium. According to the Committee on the Impact of Selling the Federal Helium Reserve, formed from members of the Board on Physics and Astronomy and the National Materials Advisory Board of the National Research Council, the question is when, not if, this will happen. Conservative estimates of the helium remaining indicate that the U.S. private reserves may run out by 2015, assuming the rate of helium consumption stays constant at the 1998 rate (1). Obviously, a continued increase in helium demand could significantly advance the date when the world’s supply becomes critical.

[notadmblnd]

4. have we really blown up that many balloons?

nt

[NNadir]

7. This has been on my mind for some time.

Helium released into the atmosphere ultimately (though not immediately) boils off into space. Because of the Maxwell-Boltzman distribution and helium's low atomic weight, a fraction of helium molecules have speeds greater than the escape velocity.

All of the helium we now use was trapped in natural gas formations over billions of years from the alpha decay of uranium and thorium in earth's crust.

[Buzz Clik]

2. So, we'd have to harvest the entire moon for 40,000 years of energy?

[TheWraith]

6. Actually, no.

Helium-3 is produced by the sun, and distributed through the solar system by the solar wind. Luna presents a perfect collector because it has no atmosphere. However, it's basically a replenishable resource as long as the sun is still burning.

Besides which, even if you collected 1% of the lunar loadout of He-3, that's 400 years worth of energy. That's nothing to turn up your nose at.

[GeorgeGist]

3. Interesting concept...

and challenge. In the meantime, the bigger challenge will remain to find more constructive ways to expend energy than making rich people.

[Sweet Freedom]

5. Or...

From the PNAC http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

To ensure America's control of space in the near term, the minimum requirements are to develop a robust capability to transport systems to space, carry on operations once there, and service and recover space systems as needed. As outlined by Space Command, carrying out this program would include a mix of reuseable and expendable launch vehicles and vehicles that can operate within space,
including “space tugs to deploy, reconstitute, replenish, refurbish, augment, and sustain" space systems. But, over the longer term, maintaining control of space will inevitably require the application of force both in space and from space, including but not limited to antimissile defenses and defensive systems capable of protecting U.S. and allied satellites; space control cannot be sustained in any other fashion, with conventional land, sea, or airforce, or by electronic warfare. This eventuality is already recognized by official U.S. national space policy, which states that the “Department of Defense shall maintain a capability to execute the mission areas of space support, force enhancement, space control and force application.”

In sum, the ability to preserve American military preeminence in the future will rest in increasing measure on the ability to operate in space militarily; both the requirements for effective global missile defenses and projecting global conventional military power demand it. Unfortunately,neither the Clinton Administration nor past U.S. defense reviews have established a coherent policy and program for achieving this goal.