From: richard@csi.on.ca (Richard Martin)
Subject: Re: He3 Power Source
Organization: Carp Systems International, Kanata, ON
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 20:52:49 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.190624.1512@cbfsb.cb.att.com> eatlv@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (thomas.vandoren) writes:
>Subject: He3 Power Source
>Distribution: world
>Organization: AT&T
>   About 2 weeks ago I saw a series of 5 minute modern videos of great interest.
>One of them was about a proposal to use Helium3 mined from the moon as a power
>source on Earth.  One of the claims was that the value of one shuttle load
>of He3 was a couple billion dollars or something in that order when computed
>relative to the power output it would provide.
Maybe, but shuttles don't go to the moon, and even if they did, there's nowhere
for them to land.
>   Does anyone have more info, opinions on that proposal?  If it is true it
>would seem that there may be some kind of business case for lunar operations.
>My only concern or potential skepticism is how easy is it to develop an
>He3 power plant?  I mean are we talking something as hypothetical as fusion
>power, or something that does have a reasonable chance of being developed
>in the near future.
Last time I looked, He3 was only really significant in fusion power.
>   The video mentioned how He3 as exhaust from the sun doesnt make it to the
>Earth's surface due to the atmosphere or magnetosphere but does get absorbed 
>into the lunar soil.  It showed proposed lunar surface strip mining machines
>that would filter out the He3 and replace the regolith behind it thus having
>minimal environmental impact.
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I get a big kick out of this term being used to describe the moon.  It's a rock.
There is no environment.  Well, sorry, there is.  But not in the sense which
has been used down here--you don't have to worry about ecology (there is none)
nor about noise pollution (none of that, either).  Mining could make a pretty
bad mess of the place, but I don't know what proportion of the worry is simply
aesthetic.
>Other items such as oxygen and water could be
>extracted at that time as well.
Solar panels and batteries can supply water for the moon--I'd concentrate on
getting the O2 and H2O, before mucking about with stuff which is apparently
just as rare, but not necessary to life.
>  How hypothetical is this and is it practical?
>
>Lee
>
I don't really know, but it was fun heckling you.  No.  Any excuse to go to
the moon is good enough for me, actually.  Just think--if we can get He3 out
of the regolith, we've got it in situ, and we can build _massive_ tokamaks
up there.  (Sink it in the rock, power it with solar, and don't worry, the
nearest population centre is a good few light-seconds away--heck, if you can
figure out a way of harnessing the power of explosions, you could do it there!)

Oh dear, it makes me think of the _Usbourne Book of the Future_ I was given
several years ago.  Copyright 1979.  When I read it, I don't know whether to
laugh or cry.

Seriously, though...
no offence meant, and I'm getting a little tired about reading about ACRVs.
Richard. =)
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Martin               	richard@csi.on.ca
CARP Systems International	"Don't Panic!  Things are
Kanata, Ontario, CANADA		about to get much worse!"
Newsgroups: sci.space