Author Topic: Best use for the Moon?  (Read 33291 times)

Offline gbaikie

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1592
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #40 on: 10/04/2016 01:33 am »
The Moons economic value is that it is a handy close gravity well and has plenty of resource to support humanity as we move from a teck 1 civilisation to a teck 2 .

The moon has economic value if the cost to use the Moon is lowered. Currently it doesn't have economic value,
nor does Mars [or Venus or Mercury or any known asteroid]. Though it's conceivable a way could be found to lower the costs. Or many earth orbits have economic value [and are used].

The argument or debate is how or whether cost to use moon can be lowered.
I would say one needs to mine lunar water and make rocket fuel to lower the costs of using the Moon.
And this is not mostly about lowering earth launch costs, or launch costs could be twice their present costs and this could still be done. And would say lower Earth launch costs in regard to mining lunar water is largely
about lowering some kinds of economic risks [it also increases some kind risks- lowering launch lowers short term risk, lower launch cost increases some longer term risk. Short terms risks are more important/significant].
I also would say mining lunar water is mostly about the financial risk and this risk can be lowered- and is the same thing as lowering costs. Or reduce risk = lower cost.
Accordingly I think NASA can lower cost/reduce risk by exploring the Moon. Or someone needs to explore the
Moon before the Moon can be mined.
Many think NASA should explore the moon and mine the Moon and/or put a base on the Moon [presumably one builds a base in order to do more "exploration"]. And I think idea of NASA mining the Moon as dumb idea. Or it's setting NASA up to fail- it's war which they have no chance to win. Suicide. Waste of time. Etc.
And it's backwards, one explores first, before deciding to mine, anything. And particularly foolish when one considers it involves a large bureaucracy. One needs to be wildly optimistic about bureaucracies, otherwise it should scare you silly. Plus the Congress simply will not allow it [maybe, if optimistic of Congress, because they deal with bureaucracies all the time.]
Next I think NASA should explore the Moon at low cost and to do it quickly. So in terms of time, about the time taken by Apollo and a lot cheaper than Apollo. And far more exploration done.
So total cost 40 billion and finished within 10 years- or average cost of about 4 billion per year.
And part of this lunar program is the cost of making depot in LEO, operational.
And as far as adding to NASA yearly budget, somewhere around 2 billion. Or NASA has to make budget choices
in order to spend 4 billion per year on the program. Cuts of some sort- despite adding 2 billion per year.
A big part of doing it would start by getting depot made and operated cheaply. There many ways NASA might do this.
But it would start by focusing on LOX depot rather than LOX and H2 [or whatever] depot. NASA over the years has probably spent more money thinking about depots rather the amount it should cost to do it.
Next NASA needs to start making robotic missions to the Moon which will use the depot.
If does not screw up this beginning part- maybe it get more from Congress to spend on the silly stuff it wants to spend money on. But that would optimistic. Another way might be to ask for more money for ISS use. Make a plan to end ISS by 2024, and not de-orbit ISS. Spend more money to save ISS plus NASA gets out business of paying for ISS after 2024. Or Congress might like the idea of ending ISS without having to crash into the Pacific.
Anyhow explore the moon and determine if and where there is minable lunar water in lunar polar region, then by around 2025, start Mars exploration.
And while NASA starts Mars exploration program, parties can evaluate the result of NASA exploration of the Moon and decide if possible to risk the capital needed to mine the Moon.
« Last Edit: 10/04/2016 01:55 am by gbaikie »

Offline Steven Pietrobon

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39824
  • Adelaide, Australia
    • Steven Pietrobon's Space Archive
  • Liked: 33668
  • Likes Given: 10416
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #41 on: 10/04/2016 06:32 am »
Am I too far OT when I say the best moon is a full moon on a warm summer night with your girlfriend outside?

And then get her to sign up for a stay at the lunar station with you.

Instructional historical video of how this could be done.

Akin's Laws of Spacecraft Design #1:  Engineering is done with numbers.  Analysis without numbers is only an opinion.

Offline Lunadyne

  • Member
  • Posts: 57
  • EML-1. the crossroads of cislunar space
  • Liked: 50
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #42 on: 10/05/2016 01:00 am »
The question of "The Best Use for the Moon?" is not entirely apt, being comparable to asking what's the best use for a computer?

The reasons to pursue human activity on the Moon are manifold, ranging from scientific and engineering to commerce and trade, even cultural advancements.

The problem is that human activity on the Moon best makes sense in the context of an active cislunar econosphere (remember, space is 3D), one that is making much fuller use of GEO and EML-1, even the other Lagrange points.  The hideous cost of lifting matériel out of Earth's gravity well to do things like salvage GEO scrap and service Solar system probes on the Interplanetary Superhighways will quickly drive demand for lower cost supplies from the much, much less deep gravity well of the Moon.  I discuss this concept more fully over at The Space Review in my article The Cislunar Econosphere:
Part 1: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2027/1
Part 2: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2033/1



Focusing on the Moon proper, we can consider a number of the many different reasons to set up shop there.

Science
This is generally broken down into Science of the Moon, Science on the Moon, and Science from the Moon.
Science of the Moon is the study of the Moon's evolution to its current state, distribution of materials, and so forth.  Still a lot of work to do here.  One of the most important things to study is the cratering record, conducting a comprehensive census to size and date the craters of the Moon.  The reason this is important is that here on Earth the paltry impact record we have is settling into an odd 30-35 million year cycle.  So about two cycles ago was when the dinosaurs were wiped out (by a combination of factors, but a big smack didn't help), see where this is going?  This oddity can be easily discredited by studying the impact record on the Moon.  Space science that's actually directly relevant to Earth and its well-being.

Science on the Moon is generally considered as science that would take advantage of the conditions found on the Moon as variables in research.  15,000,000 square miles of really high quality vacuum, 1/6th gravity, wicked temperature swings, ultra-cold environments in the everdark craters.  Eventually researchers will be clamoring for access. 

Science from the Moon covers things like the already noted radio astronomy, with the far side of the Moon as good as it gets in the Solar system for radio astronomy with only specular reflections of Earth noise from other bodies.  The everdark craters at the poles would be excellent for IR astronomy.  Even the regolith offers up something, in that it contains the record of the Sun's output over time trapped in the soil in the form of Solar Wind Implanted Elements (SWIEs).  Coupled with the cratering record (which will provide an age structure for the different layers created by ejecta from impacts), we will be able to look back at the output of the Sun over time, and perhaps unveil longer Sun cycles than just the 11-year sunspot cycle.  Again, space science that is directly relevant to Earth and its well-being.

Engineering
The engineering standards manual for the Moon has yet to be written.  The environment is so different that it will require different thinking about how to get things done.  How tall can we build Solar Power Towers at the poles?  How do we get machinery to not lock up in 40° K everdark craters?  If you use a mirror to shine sunlight into the everdark craters will you get an explosive volatile response?  How far apart in 1/6th gravity can you put your support towers for a monorail?  How tall do the ceilings of residences need to be so that people aren't constantly beaning themselves?  How high up can you put the next step in a stair?  How thick does the sealant need to be in the lava tubes to prevents leaks and blowouts?  So many questions, so very little to work with...

Commerce and Trade
Trading, it's what people do.  We've been at it since the Stone Age, we'll be doing it well into the future.  Some folks see the market as a place to do fair and open business, others as a place to hunt and prey.  Not much is likely to change in that regard, even on the Moon

The first identified export from the Moon was Oxygen.  The Moon is 40-45% oxygen by mass, so there's plenty of it there, irrespective of the water at the poles.  Because of Earth's ridiculous gravity well (One gee!  Gaah!), some models have even shown profitable shipment to LEO as compared with from the Earth's surface.  LUNOX would play a huge role in opening up cislunar space, as you could then ship up 8x as much hydrogen from Earth for use with LUNOX.

After that, things get a bit mushy.  The slag from oxygen processing could be formed into radiation cladding for spacecraft and stations.  Metals could be extracted, potentially extruded into useful forms.  Obviously, before you do anything else you want to get the SWIEs out of the soil.  Lots of useful stuff there.

We should also pay attention to the Rare Earth Elements, as they have many uses in industry.  Stuff like Thorium and Uranium, generally found in the lava flows, should be aggregated as well.  The Moon is a great spot for advanced nuclear research, because if it goes boom, hey, just another crater on the Moon.  I'm also in favor of moving all biohazard research to the Moon as a more effective quarantine zone.

Agriculture is likely to flourish, providing a whole new source of foodstuffs for the hard-working folks of the Moon and cislunar space.  And unlike Mars, we do know that plants can grow in the lunar regolith, and even seem to like the stuff.

Small, craft  trade goods are likely to be an early export.  Lunar jewelry, glasswork, odd stuff like that.  Even raw regolith could be an export product.  Fundamentally, it will start out with low-value-added goods like raw materials and commodities, and as activities progress we'll see more and more value-added products brought to market.

Culture
The Moon has the potential to alter human culture, in a good way.  Not just in leisure activities like swimming and flying, either.  The Overview Effect is well-established as a concept, and the Moon provides an excellent contrast to the vibrancy of Earth.  Honeymooning on the Moon can be a thing, and what would be more beautiful than a Moon night bathed in Earthlight?  Music, poetry and art will find new inspirations on the Moon.

Ultimately, the Moon is our sandbox mode for the rest of the Solar sytem.  It's where we will prove out procedures and equipment for use beyond translunar space, and where we will test the mettle of those we send.  We can either use it as a step to becoming a true space-faring species, or we can keep watching it pass through the sky as what once was and is again...unobtainable.

Offline gbaikie

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1592
  • Liked: 49
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #43 on: 10/05/2016 05:32 pm »
The question of "The Best Use for the Moon?" is not entirely apt, being comparable to asking what's the best use for a computer?

The reasons to pursue human activity on the Moon are manifold, ranging from scientific and engineering to commerce and trade, even cultural advancements.

I think the reason the moon should be of interest, is because we could lower the cost of going to the Moon.
Because one could commercially mine water and make rocket fuel. Or if can't do this, there is not a reason that the Moon should be of interest, presently.
A long focus has been to lower access to space- making it cheaper to leave Earth. I think lowering the cost of going to the Moon is a separate issue from lowering the cost to get to orbit or leave earth.
Separate or independent or parallel track but obviously related, similar to sub orbital travel [joyrides to 100 km].
Another less separated track to lunar water mining is a rocket fuel market in space- depots. Or lunar water mining is more dependent or related to a rocket fuel market in space- as compared to CATS.

Offline mitresaw

  • Member
  • Posts: 17
  • so ca
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #44 on: 11/01/2016 05:06 pm »
the best use for the moon will be metal production and refinement.  solar electric furnaces and foundries can produce usable material from the first long day.  that material, pot metal or better and sintered tile, can be used to fashion deep space vehicles on a grand scale at fractions of the cost from earth.  if you really want to colonize mars, you can build an arc or two.  smaller, custom space yaugts, or bubbles of rubble, are certainly possible at economic rates.  one poster says "the moon, there's nothing there" another "the basic components of the universe in powdered form".  oh yes, and for free.  well after you pay for the ticket   

Offline gospacex

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3024
  • Liked: 543
  • Likes Given: 604
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #45 on: 11/01/2016 05:20 pm »
It's the obvious place to manufacture rockets and necessary industrial products for interplanetary civilization. For the simple reason that launching stuff from the Moon is many times cheaper than from the Earth. At some critical volume of needed cargo, it makes economic sense to produce aluminum, titanium, steel, other metals, oxygen on the Moon. (It's a pity Moon has little volatiles to manufacture fuel).

Offline turbopumpfeedback2

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 104
  • Liked: 32
  • Likes Given: 29
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #46 on: 11/01/2016 09:46 pm »
This is a very nice video that really gives a feeling how life at lunar base at poles will look like:



Imagine for example a base at 10 o'clock at the rim of this crater.

My take on the best use of the moon for the next 100 years:
International lunar base studying the feasibility of human settlement.


« Last Edit: 11/01/2016 09:50 pm by turbopumpfeedback2 »

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
Re: Best use for the Moon?
« Reply #47 on: 11/01/2016 11:42 pm »
Moon has a tremendous potential as a very economic source of energy. I propose we use it.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0