That's a solution in search of a problem if I've ever seen one.Would be far simpler to electrolyse water ice into hydrogen and oxygen for use in a fuel cell and skip the weight and expense of converting anything to hydrocarbons. As luck would have it, the conditions on the Moon that allow water to survive in frozen form are also great for storing liquid hydrogen and oxygen with low boil-off.
Sodium is 0.6% of the surface lunar surface. Sodium hydride has been seriously proposed as a medium for hydrogen storage on earth. Hydrocarbons are not efficient. Crude oil exists in liquid form and can be pumped out of the ground. Converting electrical energy into hydrocarbons and then extracting electrical energy from the hydro carbons would generate a very small percentage of the original. A combustion engine like a diesel generator needs to exhaust. Retaining an exhaust gas adds a lot of complications and machinery. The already low efficiency would be worse. Magnesium-Iron alloys will produce Hydrogen when in contact with water. Hydrogen becomes water after passing through a fuel cell membrane. With this set up you need only a small amount of hydrogen and no carbon. Iron and Magnesium are the fifth and sixth most abundant elements (O, Si, Al, Ca). Pellets of FeMg alloy have been seriously proposed as a fuel for automobiles on earth. Huge piles of FeMg or the spent pellets could be moved around with bulldozers, conveyor belts, trucks and standard cargo containers. FeMg does not leak into space. A serious permanent Lunar colony would benefit form solar panel manufacturing. That makes construction of a silane (SiH4) plant worth considering. Not a good method for regular energy storage, but in emergencies you could burn a tank of it. At high temperatures silane decomposes to silicon and hydrogen. You could react silane with water and get even more hydrogen. Carbon that is imported to the moon is expensive and will be in high demand. Scarce commodities are not a good choice for fuel.
I agree with most of your conclusions, but you forget that magnesium and iron will be locked up in oxidized states in the lunar crust. Extracting them releases a lot of oxygen. If energy storage is the only concern, then recombining the oxygen with the magnesium or iron you've extracted is much more efficient that reacting those elements with another product. By recombining, I mean combustion.
Quote from: matterbeam on 09/27/2017 10:41 pmI agree with most of your conclusions, but you forget that magnesium and iron will be locked up in oxidized states in the lunar crust. Extracting them releases a lot of oxygen. If energy storage is the only concern, then recombining the oxygen with the magnesium or iron you've extracted is much more efficient that reacting those elements with another product. By recombining, I mean combustion.Overall reaction Mg + O -> MgOMg H2O -> MgO + H22H2 + O2 -> 2H2OThe hydrogen gas can be used in a fuel cell for electricity. Direct combustion of magnesium would generate a lot of heat. The original post referred to diesel generators as a substitute for batteries.
Nuclear power is the solution for powering a Moon base. It is as simple as that. All of these elaborate solutions for trying to make solar power work are really just a giant waste of time.
Several years ago Russia developed a 20 ton nuclear power plant that could be used in space. 20 tons isn't that hard to take to the moon.
I think the title should be changed to CHEMICAL energy storage and use on the moon.
Quote from: spacenut on 10/01/2017 01:55 pmSeveral years ago Russia developed a 20 ton nuclear power plant that could be used in space. 20 tons isn't that hard to take to the moon. 20 tons could power a base but is too heavy for a rover.
Beaming power from Solar Satellites is another option. There are power transmission methods laser and microwave. Laser is less efficient around 15%, a 100kW SS would result in 15KW at lunar base. The plus side is base receiver is simple solar panels which can also be used with sunlight.Microwave is more efficient at >70%, downside is large complex rectenna for receiving power. A SS at L1 can supply power 24/7 but base has to be on earth side, L2 for darkside. A orbiting SS can supply power intermittently to multiple locations on surface, add enough SS to same orbit and power delivery is 24/7.The big plus of SS is most of mass of power system is in orbit not on surface.