Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Moon gas could meet earth's future energy demands: scientists
SpaceDaily ^ | 11/26/2004 | Agence France-Presse

Posted on 11/26/2004 10:30:35 AM PST by cogitator

Moon gas could meet earth's future energy demands: scientists

A potential gas source found on the moon's surface could hold the key to meeting future energy demands as the earth's fossil fuels dry up in the coming decades, scientists said Friday.

Mineral samples from the moon contained abundant quantities of helium 3, a variant of the gas used in lasers and refrigerators as well as to blow up balloons.

"When compared to the earth the moon has a tremendous amount of helium 3," said Lawrence Taylor, a director of the US Planetary Geosciences Institute, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences.

"When helium 3 combines with deuterium (an isotope of hydrogen) the fusion reaction proceeds at a very high temperature and it can produce awesome amounts of energy," Taylor told AFP.

"Just 25 tonnes of helium, which can be transported on a space shuttle, is enough to provide electricity for the US for one full year," said Taylor, who is in the north Indian city of Udaipur for a global conference on moon exploration.

Helium 3 is deposited on the lunar surface by solar winds and would have to be extracted from moon soil and rocks.

To extract helium 3 gas the rocks have to be heated above 1,400 degs Fdegs C). Some 200 million tonnes of lunar soil would produce one tonne of helium, Taylor said, noting that only 10 kilos of helium are available on earth.

Indian President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam told the International Conference on Exploration and Utilisation of the Moon on Wednesday that the barren planet held about one million tonnes of helium 3.

"The moon contains 10 times more energy in the form of Helium 3 than all the fossil fuels on the earth," Kalam said.

However, planetary scientist Taylor said the reactor technology for converting helium 3 to energy was still in its infancy and could take years to develop.

"The problem is that there is not yet an efficient type of reactor to process helium 3. It is currently being done mostly as a laboratory experiment. Right now at the rate which it (research) is proceeding it will take another 30 years," he said.

Other scientists said the reactor would be safe in terms of radioactive elements and could be built right in the heart of any city.

"Potentially there are large reserviours of helium 3 on the moon, said D.J. Lawrence, planetary scientist at the US Los Alamos National Laboratory.

"Just doing reconnaissance where the minerals are and to find out where helium 3 likes to hang out is the first step, so when the reactor technology gets to work we are ready and have precise information," Lawrence said.

"It really could be used as a future fuel and is safe. It is not all science fiction."

"There are visionaries out there and now the question arises where the funds come from. If people get on board to do it there is no doubt it could be done," he said.

Taylor echoed Lawrence's views adding that there were no funds available for funding non-petroleum energy projects in the United States.

He warned of the exhaustion of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas on earth.

"By 2050 the whole world will have a major problem. We need to be thinking ahead," Taylor said.

"Right now we are not thinking ahead enough. Some of us are. But then the people who make the decisions and put money on the projects are not. They think only about the next elections.

"If we set our hearts on the moon and have the money to do it, then we do it pretty fast. However, it could be done well within 10 years if the sources of finance are generated to get this (reactor) going," he said.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: energy; fusion; gas; helium; helium3; moon; space; technology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last
First you have to get past the phrase "moon gas".

Then you have to get past the capability of processing 200 million tonnes of lunar soil.

Far-fetched???

1 posted on 11/26/2004 10:30:36 AM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cogitator
First you have to get past the phrase "moon gas".

Then click Here.

2 posted on 11/26/2004 10:43:37 AM PST by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

Don't you hate it when that happens?


3 posted on 11/26/2004 10:48:41 AM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

Not to mention the costs of transportation!


4 posted on 11/26/2004 10:50:43 AM PST by OpusatFR (tagline fatigue~ check in tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

My moon has plenty of gas.

Rimshot


5 posted on 11/26/2004 10:51:30 AM PST by exile (Exile - Helen Thomas tried to lure me into her Gingerbread House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Then click here.
6 posted on 11/26/2004 10:51:43 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun

Thanks for that link to the earlier thread. I rarely read the Hindustan Times.


7 posted on 11/26/2004 10:54:34 AM PST by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
But that would belittle the name of our Moon, which is the Moon.


8 posted on 11/26/2004 10:56:44 AM PST by Libertarian4Bush (Teeee-OH, tee-OH tee-OH tee-OH.... tee-oh.... tee-ohhhh.... FLY EAGLES FLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

Then you don't know what you're missing....


9 posted on 11/26/2004 10:58:06 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


10 posted on 11/26/2004 11:06:19 AM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Taylor said, noting that only 10 kilos of helium are available on earth.

Can this statement be correct? I know that each atom of helium has a very small mass when compared to other gases, but this just doesn't sound right.

11 posted on 11/26/2004 11:16:52 AM PST by SC Swamp Fox (Aim small, miss small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

"Moon gas could meet earth's future energy demands: scientists"

Then you have to get past the awkward construction of this headline, which makes me think we'll be refining moon gas to get scientists as fuel for our power plants.


12 posted on 11/26/2004 11:21:45 AM PST by LibertarianInExile (NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

The atmosphere of Saturn has a LOT more .... and it would be easier to process it.


13 posted on 11/26/2004 11:25:02 AM PST by Centurion2000 (Truth, Justice and the Texan Way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile

LOL ... I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets a good laugh out of misplaced modifiers and poor sentence structure.


14 posted on 11/26/2004 11:26:30 AM PST by Gerasimov (John Kerry just got his SECOND dishonorable discharge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

What? No pic of Michael Moore yet?


15 posted on 11/26/2004 11:26:39 AM PST by hsrazorback1 (To get what you had, do what you did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator
Why go to the moon for gas when we have an ample supply right here on earth...


16 posted on 11/26/2004 11:29:06 AM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: billorites

One more reason that herman miller sheep pens don't have a roof !


17 posted on 11/26/2004 11:29:23 AM PST by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. ©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gerasimov

I'm not so anal that it is something up with which I will not put. :)

At least, I understand that there is such a thing as common colloquial English. But I do think that there needs to be real improvement in grammar instruction.


18 posted on 11/26/2004 11:37:16 AM PST by LibertarianInExile (NO BLOOD FOR CHOCOLATE! Get the UN-ignoring, unilateralist Frogs out of Ivory Coast!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SC Swamp Fox
Can this statement be correct?

I don't think it can be. It could mean Helium3. Helium itself is a byproduct of natural gas production. Do you know we have a Strategic Helium Reserve? It was created in 1925 and was supposed to be used to fill the Navy's dirigibles in time of war. Like all government programs it never died.

19 posted on 11/26/2004 11:38:40 AM PST by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

First is was the shrinking Ozone layer to justify NASA's budget, now we want Moon Gas. Hmmmm...


20 posted on 11/26/2004 11:43:05 AM PST by hadaclueonce (shoot low, they are riding Shetlands.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson