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

11–20 of 185 posts

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

#11

Post by krasin »

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…

Heat will be an asset, not a problem: the Moon sub-surface temperature is around -20C ([1]), which means there's an easy way to dissipate power. And if we have any humans living on the moon, that heat will very much be appreciated around all livable areas.

https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/19906/constant-lun...

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

#12

Post by djmips »

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…

Other liquid coolants could be used and recirculated.

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

#14

Post by m4rtink »

krasin wrote: post #11
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…

Heat will be an asset, not a problem: the Moon sub-surface temperature is around -20C ([1]), which means there's an easy way to dissipate power. And if we have any humans living on the moon, that heat will very much be appreciated around all livable areas. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/19906/constant-lun...

Interesting!l, havent ever thought about that!

What is the heat conductivity though ? If it is low, you might have to sink too many heat transfer channels, not to mention with possibly ending up with a hot "bubble" that would no longer provide a temperature gradient.

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

#15

Post by kube-system »

mixdup wrote: post #13

We can't even reliably build them for anything approaching a sane cost on Earth. I hope they're going to build a bankruptcy court up there, too

The cost on earth is mostly due to the regulatory environment. The moon doesn’t yet have the same regulatory environment.

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

#16

Post by textninja »

ChatGPT had fun with this one. Pretty soon YouTube will be replaced with ITube and we’ll have blockbusters on demand.

> In the pulse-pounding sci-fi blockbuster, Lunar Armageddon, the British government enlists Rolls-Royce to construct a series of nuclear reactors on the moon as the last hope for saving Earth from an imminent energy crisis. When legendary pinstriping artist Mark "Marksman" Court is recruited for his unique skills, he joins forces with the fearless commander, Emily "Em" Walker, to assemble an elite team of astronauts and experts. As they race against time to complete the high-stakes mission, Court and Em must navigate political intrigue and life-threatening challenges on the treacherous lunar landscape.

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

#17

Post by krasin »

m4rtink wrote: post #14
krasin wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heat will be an asset, not a problem: the Moon sub-surface temperature is around -20C ([1]), which means there's an easy way to dissipate power. And if we have any humans living on the moon, that heat will very much be appreciated around all livable areas. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/19906/constant-lun...

Interesting!l, havent ever thought about that! What is the heat conductivity though ? If it is low, you might have to sink too many heat transfer channels, not to mention with possibly ending up with a hot "bubble" that would no longer provide a temperature gradient.

Under the layer of regolith, Moon crust is mostly basalt ([1]), which has about 1.6 W/mK thermal conductivity ([2]). Not great, not terrible.

We all know how cold it is to stand on a stone floor - unlike wood or plastics, it keeps sucking that heat off.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_structure_of_the_Moon

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_thermal_conductivities

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

#18

Post by FridayoLeary »

mixdup wrote: post #13

We can't even reliably build them for anything approaching a sane cost on Earth. I hope they're going to build a bankruptcy court up there, too

The current nuclear station program in the UK seems to be struggling to keep up. I'm not sure how we will cope on the moon. Also, wasting money on a vanity project.

As for extra terrestrial law, research online reveals there to be a highly developed and powerful judicial system throught the whole galaxy. i have no doubt it is can hear lunar bankruptcy cases too.

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

#19

Post by mLuby »

ianai wrote: post #4

Is there somewhere someone’s done the numbers on bootstrapping industry off world? Like what would make most sense very first, etc. It strikes me that at some point it makes a lot more sense to build the stuff to build more stuff out there.

NASA did a study in the 1980's. For something more recent, I suggest checking out Dr. Casey Handmer.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19830007081/downloads/19...

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

#20

Post by textninja »

I wonder which endgame is more probable: satellite, or space ship? We have people perfectly willing to shroud earth in sulphur to “protect” us from the sun, so who’s to say those same types won’t repurpose the moon into a luxury spacecraft and take it on a joyride to distant stars?
Post reply on HN