Should we mine Helium 3 on the Moon?

OneOfOne (Trevor) · #1 11-09-2007, 07:42 AM

Did anyone else manage to catch "Selling the Moon" on SBS at the weekend? At first I thought it was about people selling titles for parts of the Moon, and a small part of it was. I like the way the guy picked the next area to "subdivide", "I close my eyes and put my finger on an area and if we haven't already sold it, we do that area next". They have 4 million "land holders" at the moment.

The most important part of the show was concerned with possible mining of helium 3 from the Moon for the production of fusion energy. Apparently fusion of the elements common on Earth produces large amounts on energy in the form of neutrons that degrade the walls of the containing chamber, however by using helium 3 this production is much reduced and the efficiency is much greater. Helium 3 does not occur naturally on Earth as it is shielded by our atmosphere, it is only obtained as a byproduct of current fission processes in very small quantities, while on the Moon it becomes embedded in the rocks. Helium 3 is produced from the Sun and is constantly spewed into space as part of the solar wind. As a comodity it is valued at approximately a billion dollars a ton...much more than gold. One of the Apollo astronauts (the only geologist) has set up a company with the hope of mining the material by 2020 and shipping it back to Earth and hopes that it could ultimately replace fossil fuels and current fission techniques. Makes you wonder if they "never" landed on the Moon why a person involved in the coverup would go to so much trouble doesn't it (I guess that is another nail in the conspiracy theory).

Of course this raises the quesion of should we mine the Moon? Some on the show say we should, whilst other say we should treat it like the Antarctic and leave it. Of course, if we could mine the Moon and cease to destroy our climate, would that be reason enough to justify strip mining the Moon? It's "our" Moon after all, and as far as we know, no one else is using it. Or should be learn to control our consumption here on Earth first. Of course, someone will ultimately decide to mine it, so should we start first?

So what do you think?

Gargoyle_Steve (Steve) · #2 11-09-2007, 09:27 AM

I saw the show .... I think that if we can mine helium 3 there to produce cleaner energy then I can't see why it would be a bad thing. There is no atmosphere there to pollute, we haven't found any form of life whose ecosystem we would be impacting, etc.

If we do find some form of life on the moon buried in the rocks, etc, that might change my opinion a bit, though we mine the heck out of the Earth where life is abundant every single day. Perhaps it would still be better to mine several tonnes of rock on the moon for the helium 3 instead of the equivalent hundreds of thousands of tonnes of coal, etc, here needed to provide the same amount of energy?

DJDD · #3 11-09-2007, 09:47 AM

Does this remind anyone of the Time Machine (the movie? maybe the book- cannot remember).

Mining the moon leads to a catastrophic accident that essentially leads to the destruction of civilisation...

DJDD

bojan · #4 11-09-2007, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJDD

Does this remind anyone of the Time Machine (the movie? maybe the book- cannot remember).

Mining the moon leads to a catastrophic accident that essentially leads to the destruction of civilisation...

DJDD

I would not worry about this too much...

DJDD · #5 11-09-2007, 11:05 AM

well, i will not lose sleep over it.

although, given humankind's track record of stuffing things up (politically, environmentally, socially) something is bound to go wrong.

anyway, mining on the moon is a long way off...
the children I do not yet have will not even see it in their lifetime.

DJDD

higginsdj · #6 11-09-2007, 11:16 AM

At 0.01 ppm, it might be problematic equipping or funding such an operation!

Reference:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2007/pdf/2175.pdf

Cheers

David

mickoking · #7 11-09-2007, 03:32 PM

I have no problem with mining or exploitation of the moon if its properly regulated. I am more concerned about the Earths environment than the moons.

mill (Martin) · #8 11-09-2007, 07:23 PM

Didn't we stuff up enough already?
First the planet we live on and now the moon, what next?

monoxide · #9 11-09-2007, 08:27 PM

im with mill on this one

Ric · #10 11-09-2007, 10:10 PM

I'm in two minds about this. If we can't get it right down here now then what are we going to do to the Moon.

On the other hand if it means a cleaner Earth then it's probably a good thing but no one country or company should ever be allowed to have a monopoly on this resource.

Cheers

Rattler (John) · #11 13-09-2007, 01:57 PM

I suppose you could mine on the far side of the Moon. What do 'they' say?? Out of sight....................?????

Have fun

DJDD · #12 13-09-2007, 02:19 PM

can I change my vote?

xelasnave · #13 14-09-2007, 03:13 AM

Hard way to get energy one would think given that the problem 20 years ago was 20 years off solving as it still is today... mining is the first reason to live where you should not and humans are good at that...why not.. but I still say we need battle stars to protect the trade routes in place before we start shipping anything that is"related to advanced energy..there are no doubt aliens who raid such shipments because it is valuable in their economies.

alex
alex

Ric · #14 14-09-2007, 10:44 AM

Interesting thoughts Alex

They might mine into a cavern and find a craft with green eggs and face huggers and......

Oh that's already been done hasn't it.

Cheers

robin · #15 14-09-2007, 11:24 PM

Mining helium 3 on the luna surface has long been an aspiration of Apollo 17 LMP & geologist Harrison 'Bull' Schmidt. The '..we're crazy if we dont mentality' is something that I dont subscribe to. The moon should always remain a pristine(excluding US & Russian probes, landers & rovers) environment. We can barely make it into earth orbit without NASA having kittens over pieces of foam flying off the shuttle...so imagine the logistics of full scale Helium3 strip mining & associated pollution on the luna surface, then processing then shipping it back to earth. No one nation owns the moon.Hopefully the logistics will not let this happen....my 2 cents.

ballaratdragons (Ken) · #16 15-09-2007, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robin

Mining helium 3 on the luna surface has long been an aspiration of Apollo 17 LMP & geologist Harrison 'Bull' Schmidt. The '..we're crazy if we dont mentality' is something that I dont subscribe to. The moon should always remain a pristine(excluding US & Russian probes, landers & rovers) environment. We can barely make it into earth orbit without NASA having kittens over pieces of foam flying off the shuttle...so imagine the logistics of full scale Helium3 strip mining & associated pollution on the luna surface, then processing then shipping it back to earth. No one nation owns the moon.Hopefully the logistics will not let this happen....my 2 cents.

and to continue on Robins thoughts:

There would have to be constant flights to make it viable. A shuttle Bay full every few months won't be of any use. They will have to launch rockets weekly (or even daily).

Now, if they mine Helium 3 for energy saving, what about the amount of fuel burnt to go get it, and the amount of Air pollution from all the take-offs!!!! It would be like adding millions more cars to the roads.

Have you ever seen a take-off that did not leave enormous amounts of pollution???? With Spaceflight, by thinking greener, we make it blacker.

Kal (Andrew) · #17 15-09-2007, 11:56 AM

The moon is just a dead rock. It has no environment & no life, and mining it would not have any negative impacts. As an astronomer, it would add another thing to possibly try and observe

merlin8r · #18 15-09-2007, 12:22 PM

With current technology, it would cost as much as, if not more than the value of the materials harvested as it would to get them here. The current generation of Space Shuttles have no chance of ever reaching the moon. That's not to say that one day in the future that will change. Just look at some of the ideas being floated, such as Arthur C. Clarkes space elevator, that featured prominently in the Mars Trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson. At present, I think there are treaties in place banning the exploitation of anything in space. Of course that will only remain in place as long as it's convenient.

Mr. Subatomic · #19 15-09-2007, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ric

They might mine into a cavern and find a craft with green eggs and face huggers and......

Maybe they'll uncover an ancient monolith receiving a signal from Jupiter...

Mr. Subatomic · #20 15-09-2007, 09:24 PM

I'm aware that one of the main (or the only, correct me if I'm wrong) issues with nuclear energy is radioactive waste. So how does fusion of Helium-3 compare to fusion of other elements? And if waste isn't the only issue, what else is?