Will Russia Build a Nuclear-Powered Moon Base by 2015?

  • Thread starter rachmaninoff
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Moon
In summary, the head of Energia, Nikolay Sevastyanov, plans to build a nuclear-powered moon base by 2015 to extract lunar ^3He and send it back to Earth. The base is expected to be permanent and will begin industrial-scale delivery of ^3He by 2020. The importance of ^3He is its use in fusion and cryogenics. There are also speculations of using it for nuclear power generation. The idea of a moon base as a trading post has been debunked, as it would be more efficient to send goods directly from point A to point B. There are doubts about the feasibility and cost of lunar mining, but if the plans do go through, it could create job
  • #1
rachmaninoff
[SOLVED] Russkies are going to the moon!

The head of Energia, Nikolay Sevastyanov, is planning to build a nuclear-powered moon base by 2015, so that they can extract lunar [tex]^3He[/tex] and send it back to earth.

"We are planning to build a permanent base on the Moon by 2015 and by 2020 we can begin the industrial-scale delivery ... of the rare isotope Helium-3," Nikolai Sevastyanov, head of the Energia space corporation, was quoted by ITAR-TASS news agency as saying at an academic conference on Wednesday.

http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/379/16403_moon.html
http://en.rian.ru/science/20050727/40986242.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/65F240F9-CC80-4677-93D6-EBCACE8E7A45.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitali_SevastyanovCan you say "space race"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt...

-Wayne
 
  • #3
Why is Helium 3 so important? I know it can be used for fusion but isn't the temperature required for helium 3 fusion WAY higher than for the experimental reactors we have now? Wouldnt it be a lot harder to make fusion work with helium 3? Or
 
  • #4
He-3 is also very useful for cryogenics. It becomes inordinately costly (in terms of pumping capability) to get much lower than 1K using He-4. With He-3 you can get down to about 0.25K.
 
  • #5
By 2015? Good luck with that, Nikolai.

And a permanent moonbase? They're going to spend billions and billions and billions, just to set up a site which will run out of product in a few years? And then they need to spend more billions to keep it supplied? How much do they think this is going to net them?
 
  • #6
they don't have billions and billions and billions, last I heard
 
  • #7
I'm surprised 3-He can't somehow be manufactured down here on Earth with particle accelerators. Anyone have any comments about (perhaps theoretical) technology that could achieve this?

And what else is 3-He used for beyond cryogenics? Surely that's too small a market to support a colony on the moon!

- Warren
 
  • #8
chroot said:
I'm surprised 3-He can't somehow be manufactured down here on Earth with particle accelerators.
If I'm not mistaken, most He3 is produced as a decay product of tritium (which is made by any country that has H-bomb technology)

And what else is 3-He used for beyond cryogenics? Surely that's too small a market to support a colony on the moon!

- Warren
On this I'm less sure, but I believe the speculation is that He3 based nuclear power generation (from a fusion reactor, no less) could become a reality.
 
  • #9
There are other things that they can use the moon base for.They can use it as outpost/trade center (if we ever build a colony form the moon) we could use it so we can manufacter stuff that would needed for other colonies which can be easily transported to other colonies becaues of lower gravity and no atmosphere.
But I still don't think any they will have the money to build anything in space.I don't think they even what kind of spacecraft there going to use to transport the stuff(A shuttle a russian rocket whould not be effective enough for transporting 3-he back from the moon)
I wonder what polticans are going say about this.I wonder whoose tax since the U.N. said that space is property of all mankind(I think there's a treaty that said that)Or whoose going be the Law enfrocment.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Actually, scott1, the advantage of a "trading post" on the Moon has been pretty thoroughly debunked. It would be energetically preferrable to send goods directly from point A to point B, rather than routing them through a Moon base. Keep in mind that you're dealing with gravity and gravitational potential energy, not just distance.

- Warren
 
  • #11
Well, manufacturing would be much easier on the moon than in zero-g. Still, we'd need something _to_ manufacture up there to justify the delta-V needed to land the raw materials and launch the finished products.
 
  • #12
The impression that I got from Scott's post was of a depot for other moonbases, not orbital ones, in which case it wouldn't be a bad idea at all. As for the landing of raw materials, isn't lunar mining supposed to be the source?
 
  • #13
Wow, that’s an even dumber statement than bush saying he wants to send men to mars. <Claps for Russia> congratulations, you just out did our outlandish space goals!


Yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my butt...

-Wayne

I was wondering what kept flying out of my butt too.
 
  • #14
Danger said:
The impression that I got from Scott's post was of a depot for other moonbases, not orbital ones, in which case it wouldn't be a bad idea at all. As for the landing of raw materials, isn't lunar mining supposed to be the source?

Well, there isn't that much there... plus it would be extremely costly and dangerous.

Just look what happened in the US in the last month or two. Can you imagine trying to mine in a full spacesuit where the slightest puncture would be game over?

What would you do when your equipment breaks down? You can't exactly call in a repairman.
 
  • #15
What's up with all the negative comments?

If actually plans on doing this, LET HIM!

Who is he going to hire? Well, scientist and engineers found on this website and around the world.

If he's going to create jobs for us, shut the hell up.
 
  • #16
enigma said:
Well, there isn't that much there... plus it would be extremely costly and dangerous.

Just look what happened in the US in the last month or two. Can you imagine trying to mine in a full spacesuit where the slightest puncture would be game over?

What would you do when your equipment breaks down? You can't exactly call in a repairman.
I actually think it would be less dangeous.The 3-He that there looking for is from the suns cosmic waves which would mean that it's closer to the surface and They are already craters on the moon which would make it easier to stirp mine which probally be the safiest way of mining on the moon.What would do instead wearing spacesuit when stirp mining is that build somthing like those things that use to clean window on tall buildings with make so that you can have oxygen in that would be a lot easier to move with then a spacesuit.
 
  • #17
enigma said:
Well, there isn't that much there... plus it would be extremely costly and dangerous.

Just look what happened in the US in the last month or two. Can you imagine trying to mine in a full spacesuit where the slightest puncture would be game over?/QUOTE]


Why do you assume they would use humans?
 
  • #18
JasonRox said:
What's up with all the negative comments?

If actually plans on doing this, LET HIM!

Who is he going to hire? Well, scientist and engineers found on this website and around the world.

If he's going to create jobs for us, shut the hell up.


...if you want to go to russia and be owned by the company and the mob be my guest.
 
  • #19
moose said:
enigma said:
Well, there isn't that much there... plus it would be extremely costly and dangerous.

Just look what happened in the US in the last month or two. Can you imagine trying to mine in a full spacesuit where the slightest puncture would be game over?


Why do you assume they would use humans?

Because of the date listed. Even if humans don't do the digging, they'd still need to do the maintanence.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
scott1 said:
I actually think it would be less dangeous.

There are mine accidents even in strip mines. They're just not typically fatal.

On the moon, things get a lot trickier.
 
  • #21
enigma said:
There are mine accidents even in strip mines. They're just not typically fatal.

On the moon, things get a lot trickier.
The miners on the moon whould be a lot better trained then the ones here.The miners in west virgina were guys who had only a few weeks of training and probally they didn't a collage degree.The miners on the moon would probally be a lot better trained(Astronuts have about two years of training) and they would probally have a collage degree.The company would probally spend a lot more money keeping there miners.There investors in stock market are porbally thinking right now that this is very crazy and stupid idea to go mine on the moon.if a mine accident happens on the moon there probally be lawsuits and more government regulations on luner mining which make the companys stocks go down and if they do need workers to work in the mine so there going to have to make sure that miners are safe inorder get them to work(I wonder what stirke would be like in space)
But I don't think would safer and if it is safer won't be too much.
 
  • #22
do we have a spell checker on this site? we should really think about getting one if not.
 

Related to Will Russia Build a Nuclear-Powered Moon Base by 2015?

1. Will Russia be the first country to send humans to the moon?

No, the United States was the first country to successfully send humans to the moon in 1969 with the Apollo 11 mission. However, Russia (then known as the Soviet Union) did send unmanned spacecrafts to the moon in 1959.

2. How is Russia planning to get to the moon?

Russia is planning to use its new spacecraft, the Federatsiya, to send humans to the moon. This spacecraft is designed to carry up to four astronauts and will use a combination of a rocket booster and a space shuttle to reach the moon.

3. When is Russia planning to send humans to the moon?

Russia has set a goal to send humans to the moon by 2029. They plan to do this in three stages: first, sending an unmanned spacecraft to the moon by 2021, then sending a spacecraft with a human crew by 2023, and finally, sending a manned spacecraft to the moon by 2029.

4. How will Russia's moon mission differ from the Apollo missions?

Russia's moon mission will differ from the Apollo missions in several ways. Firstly, the Apollo missions were focused on landing and walking on the moon, while Russia's mission will focus on orbiting and conducting experiments on the moon's surface. Additionally, Russia's spacecraft, the Federatsiya, will use different technology and a different launch system than the Apollo spacecrafts.

5. What are the potential benefits of Russia's moon mission?

There are several potential benefits of Russia's moon mission. Firstly, it could lead to advancements in space technology and exploration, which could also have practical applications on Earth. Secondly, it could foster international collaboration and cooperation in space. Finally, it could inspire future generations to pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top