Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Moon base

  1. Nov 29, 2013 #1
    I thought this would be a cool kind of topic to put up for discussion.

    1)How realistic would a moon base be for mining and production of metals.

    2)How realistic would the moon be for a Rocket launch area dont know how to word that. Anyways since the moon has practically no gravity we could end up having an easier time launching stuff.

    My input for question one.

    Moonbase: This is by far the coolest thing I have been thinking about for a while now, so you could have plastic domes to protect people on the moon from radiation coming from the sun and maybe a centripetal force type of thing spinning around the plastic dome to make some sort of gravity so you dont have the loss of bone density/mass.

    The moon is in abundance of metals particularly in oxide form.

    Maria Highlands
    SiO2. 45.4%. 45.5%
    Al2O3 14.9%. 24.0%
    CaO 11.8% 15.9%
    (iron(II) FeO)14.1% 5.9%
    MgO. 9.2%. 7.5%
    TiO2 3.9% 0.6%
    Na2O 0.6% 0.6%
    Total 99.9% 100.0%

    You could split the oxygen from the metals, and then(be weary here my chemistry isn't that up to snuff) but you will be left with a metal and gas oxygen which can be used for an oxidizer for rockets and then there is water on the moon which allows for electrolysis to be split into hydrogen and more oxygen !

    Why this Is important, well you could provide the domes with air and also produce rocket fuel on the moon! I will post the second part just wanna see if I'm crazy or if the stuff I'm saying is technically feasible. Discuss ! :)
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 29, 2013 #2
    Sorry for the kinda willy nilly post. I get way to excited when talking about this stuff and I kinda just throw out a bunch of ideas and stuff haha. :)
  4. Nov 29, 2013 #3


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Do a forum search. I'm sure this has been discussed before and in practical terms, it a useless concept.

    The fundamental problem is getting in and out of Earth's gravitation well. Even if you went to the STAGGERING expense of setting up such a base and producing metals getting them back to Earth would cost more than they were worth.
  5. Nov 29, 2013 #4
    So its something to not even think about? I dont understand why people would want to go to mars when we have something a lot more feasible right in our backyard. Honestly if you think about people will always find a way to make something cost less why is this different ?
  6. Nov 29, 2013 #5


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    It is worth thinking about, if you like to think about things that are impractical for the near future. It's not different and yes, we will find ways to make it cheaper, although in terms of making it pay for itself, I'm not sure that will EVER happen. At any rate it won't happen for many decades at the very least and probably longer.

    see this thread for an extended discussion and note that it was eventually shut down for being just science fiction


    and here's another on that was only about setting up an observatory on the moon and this thread was also closed. No specified reason, but it was clearly because the whole discussion was just a wast of time.


    It's nice to think outside the box, but before you do that you should make sure you understand what's IN the box.
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2013
  7. Nov 29, 2013 #6
    Oh how it sucks to not live in a perfect world, I understand now why this isn't feasible anymore. Feels a lot like dreams being shattered hahah.
  8. Nov 29, 2013 #7


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor

    The Lunar and Planetary Institute has hosted conferences and workshops on Lunar geology and the possibility of extracting those minerals to support space exploration. NASA has conducted numerous studies regarding the necessary infrastructure and technology to make it feasible.


    In many scenarios, a lunar base would be built undeground, or in a hill or mountain, in order to shield residents from solar/cosmic radiation. Early exploration would probably be robotic until a base can be established in which an atmosphere is well established, otherwise a base of some kind would have to be 'landed' on the surface.

    Rather than using chemical rockets, magnetic (EM) launch systems have been considered, although some chemical/gas rockets may be used for orbital maneuvering.
  9. Nov 29, 2013 #8
    Interesting point. Building underground would take away the part of having to build an above ground dome like I was saying. So the technology and stuff is there but obviously one of the deciding factors is still money. Sad really, oh well hopefully in my lifetime they find a way to make it economically viable so that gives em a good 70years(assuming I'm living to 87) let's go team space.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook