PDA

View Full Version : Energy for the 21st Century?



Gan
05-01-2007, 10:58 AM
Researchers and space enthusiasts seehelium 3 as the perfect fuel source: extremely potent, nonpolluting, withvirtually no radioactive by-product. Proponents claim its the fuel ofthe 21st century. The trouble is, hardly any of it is found on Earth. (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/earth_from_space_000418.html)But there is plenty of it on the moon.

Society is straining to keep pace withenergy demands, expected to increase eightfold by 2050 as the world populationswells toward 12 billion. The moon (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/u.s._moon_000428.html)just may be the answer.
"Helium 3 fusion energy may be thekey to future space exploration and settlement," said Gerald Kulcinski,Director of the Fusion Technology Institute (FTI) at the University ofWisconsin at Madison.

Scientists estimate there are about1 million tons of helium 3 on the moon, enough to power the world for thousandsof years. The equivalent of a single space shuttle load or roughly 25 tonscould supply the entire United States' energy needs for a year, accordingto Apollo17 astronaut and FTI researcher Harrison Schmitt.

more...

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/helium3_000630.html

___________________________________________

This is extremely interesting in as much as encouraging.

Stanley Burrell
05-01-2007, 11:08 AM
Call me crazy, but I believe there's a reason why society doesn't encourage fusion/fission reactors in land vehicles, non-submarine boats and and almost all sky (save you supposed Area 51 atomic plane) aircraft.

Parkbandit
05-01-2007, 11:13 AM
Call me crazy, but I believe there's a reason why society doesn't encourage fusion/fission reactors in land vehicles, non-submarine boats and and almost all sky (save you supposed Area 51 atomic plane) aircraft.

Obviously you didn't bother reading the article or even the first post.

Stanley Burrell
05-01-2007, 11:18 AM
Obviously you didn't bother reading the article or even the first post.

Obviously you aren't as chemically gifted (both metaphorically and literally) as I am.

Not to sound selfish, however, most can make this comparison to your highness.

Some Rogue
05-01-2007, 11:38 AM
Welll the article does say...SPACE exploration, not exactly a land vehicle.

Stanley Burrell
05-01-2007, 11:39 AM
Yeah, but it brings into focus the idea of validating moon rock as a substitute reactor material on the home planet.

If NASA published this I'd fall out of my seat.

Parkbandit
05-01-2007, 11:44 AM
Call me crazy, but I believe there's a reason why society doesn't encourage fusion/fission reactors in land vehicles, non-submarine boats and and almost all sky (save you supposed Area 51 atomic plane) aircraft.

Give me the reason why you believe society doesn't encourage fusion/fission reactors in vehicles.


Obviously you aren't as chemically gifted (both metaphorically and literally) as I am.

Not to sound selfish, however, most can make this comparison to your highness.


You spelled chemically dependant wrong. The rest of it I just skipped over, since it made no sense.

Stanley Burrell
05-01-2007, 11:49 AM
Give me the reason why you believe society doesn't encourage fusion/fission reactors in vehicles.

Because I know more than you.


You spelled chemically dependant wrong. The rest of it I just skipped over, since it made no sense.

Obviously, you aren't aware of moon spelling, n00b. Moon culture is advanced beyond all that you can possibly comprehend with 100% of your brain.

Parkbandit
05-01-2007, 11:51 AM
LOL.
Ok, I laughed.

Asshole.

Stanley Burrell
05-01-2007, 11:53 AM
If someone over the age of 35 gets a Mooninites reference, there is hope for this planet beyond the moon.

Atlanteax
05-01-2007, 11:59 AM
LOL.
Ok, I laughed.

Asshole.

Incoherent druggies are funny!

Gan
05-01-2007, 12:38 PM
Yeah, but it brings into focus the idea of validating moon rock as a substitute reactor material on the home planet.

If NASA published this I'd fall out of my seat.



Researchers at the University of Wisconsin's Center for Space Automation and Robotics (http://wcsar.engr.wisc.edu/), one of 16 NASA Centers for the Commercial Development of Space believe the future of energy production lies with helium-3. One ton could supply the electrical needs of a city of 10 million people when combined in a fusion reactor with a form of hydrogen.
http://aerospacescholars.jsc.nasa.gov/HAS/cirr/em/6/6.cfm

Stanley Burrell
05-01-2007, 06:34 PM
http://aerospacescholars.jsc.nasa.gov/HAS/cirr/em/6/6.cfm

Oh dag. Someone better warn Tom Cruise to guard his moon crops with ray guns set on "Scientology mind numb."

Prepare, as I fall 1/16th out of my chair :roll:

Ignot
05-01-2007, 08:43 PM
The bullet is enormous!