Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 185 posts

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#31

Post by zoklet-enjoyer »

dogma1138 wrote: post #8
stephc_int13 wrote: post #2

"The UKSA will now provide £2.9 million (around $3.52 million) of funding for the project." A nuclear reactor on the moon? I don't get it. Meta spent north of $30 Billions to build a "metaverse" that I would not even consider to be alpha-level quality, and some people at Rolls-Royce think they can build a nuclear reactor for how much?

FAANG spending isn’t the norm, the total program cost of the Mars 2020 rover was $2.7 billion. Meta spent $30 billion on something that looks like SecondLife on the Wii… But also this ain’t the total cost just how much money the UK government is funding the project for right now.

Did they seriously spend that much money on it??? How???

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#32

Post by jliptzin »

credit_guy wrote: post #6

There's a problem with nuclear power on the Moon. How do you get rid of the heat? Here on Earth, we just use water, of which we have plenty. But on Moon water is extremely scarce. It would make the sci-fi novel Dune look like an oasis. When we'll have some type of an economy on the Moon, it's very likely that water will be more expensive than gold. One thing is absolutely certain: we will not be able to afford to vap…

I feel like it would be easier to build underwater cities via a network of watertight buildings than colonize the moon. At least with underwater cities we can essentially have flying cars (personal submarines), no adverse weather, plus cool creatures to watch swimming around outside your window.

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#33

Post by psychphysic »

credit_guy wrote: post #6

There's a problem with nuclear power on the Moon. How do you get rid of the heat? Here on Earth, we just use water, of which we have plenty. But on Moon water is extremely scarce. It would make the sci-fi novel Dune look like an oasis. When we'll have some type of an economy on the Moon, it's very likely that water will be more expensive than gold. One thing is absolutely certain: we will not be able to afford to vap…

My mind was blown when I first heard that heat dissipation would likely be the key shaping factor in space battles.

I think this was the video https://youtu.be/9Xs3mGhQGxM

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#34

Post by switch007 »

kjellsbells wrote: post #29

Is it me, or is the UK government launching an unusually large number of boondoggles lately? Nuclear reactors on the moon. Attempts to become a major player in battery technology. It feels to my jaundiced eye like the UK is trying just a little too hard to remind the world that they still matter. Some Brexit insecurity might explain this, perhaps, but that was over five years ago.

Local elections in May and general election (likely) next year. And we’ve just had the Budget

I think there’s plenty of Brexit insecurity still lol

The Tory party has a trashed reputation currently so they’re trying to reclaim some ground

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#35

Post by rozal »

kjellsbells wrote: post #29

Is it me, or is the UK government launching an unusually large number of boondoggles lately? Nuclear reactors on the moon. Attempts to become a major player in battery technology. It feels to my jaundiced eye like the UK is trying just a little too hard to remind the world that they still matter. Some Brexit insecurity might explain this, perhaps, but that was over five years ago.

USA has secretly gotten ahead of the quantum race.

Part of their disclosure plan is it work with allies on multiple needs.

With fusion on the horizon, we will need batteries.

With electromagnetic craft, moon trips will be easy.

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#37

Post by retrac »

credit_guy wrote: post #6

There's a problem with nuclear power on the Moon. How do you get rid of the heat? Here on Earth, we just use water, of which we have plenty. But on Moon water is extremely scarce. It would make the sci-fi novel Dune look like an oasis. When we'll have some type of an economy on the Moon, it's very likely that water will be more expensive than gold. One thing is absolutely certain: we will not be able to afford to vap…

A hot object will radiate heat as infrared. The hotter it is, the more heat it will radiate. So, a sufficiently large heatsink designed to exploit that, can cool even in a vacuum. (Theoretically, this could even be used for reactionless propulsion.)

In the 70s and 80s, the USSR launched a whole series of radar satellites that were powered by several generations of nuclear reactors: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RORSAT

Liquid metal coolant, as you suggested. Also, direct thermionic conversion to electricity -- no heat engine cycle. No control rods either -- control reflectors outside the core. Very different kind of nuclear engineering than is needed down here on Earth. No shielding!

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#38

Post by AYBABTME »

kjellsbells wrote: post #29

Is it me, or is the UK government launching an unusually large number of boondoggles lately? Nuclear reactors on the moon. Attempts to become a major player in battery technology. It feels to my jaundiced eye like the UK is trying just a little too hard to remind the world that they still matter. Some Brexit insecurity might explain this, perhaps, but that was over five years ago.

Their economy is in decline, they need to do something to change the trajectory.

Re: UK backs Rolls-Royce project to build a nuclear reactor on the moon

#39

Post by whatshisface »

AYBABTME wrote: post #38
kjellsbells wrote: post #29

Is it me, or is the UK government launching an unusually large number of boondoggles lately? Nuclear reactors on the moon. Attempts to become a major player in battery technology. It feels to my jaundiced eye like the UK is trying just a little too hard to remind the world that they still matter. Some Brexit insecurity might explain this, perhaps, but that was over five years ago.

Their economy is in decline, they need to do something to change the trajectory.

"Something must be done. This is something. Therefore, it must be done." - Yes, Minister.
Post reply on HN