The future of "space exploration" is a few more rockets blow up on the pad, followed by total abandonment of the whole idea.
lemonberry · 1h ago
I don't know enough about any aspect of this to make an intelligent comment, but commenting in hopes that those that do will.
PaulHoule · 1h ago
For this to work they need to have some way to land large objects on the moon, for one thing. Right now that doesn't exist.
One reason you might want one for a human settlement is that the "day" on the moon is a whole month so, in most places, you have no sunlight for 14 days so you would need at least two weeks of storage to get through the night on solar energy.
endmin · 52m ago
Just go to the other side ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.
darth_avocado · 25m ago
Maybe carry extra blankets for the night. /s
Wouldn’t having a closed loop system of hydrogen and oxygen as fuel be a more efficient way to store energy? Especially at the poles where there’s always illumination and hydrogen is abundant.
gnabgib · 1h ago
H1/title: Duffy to announce nuclear reactor on the moon
anigbrowl · 1h ago
I don't think the original headline is helpful here. While it's aimed at Politico's readership, 'Duffy' isn't a household name to most people. I would have gone with 'NASA administrator' or so.
metalman · 30m ago
might work out perfectly
starship will land 220000 lbs on the moon as a human landing craft, and will likely do twise that as a one way freighter, more if the main booster is expended as well...
put it in a convienient crater, especialy good if it went into one permanently blocking sun light
no shielding needed
run it as hot as the materials will bear
likely lots of optimisations that would be impossible on earth
and whenever it needs fuel, the used stuff can be
just pushed to the side
throw in some solar , batteries
the question is are they going big enough to start up a smelter to produce building materials on site?
One reason you might want one for a human settlement is that the "day" on the moon is a whole month so, in most places, you have no sunlight for 14 days so you would need at least two weeks of storage to get through the night on solar energy.
Wouldn’t having a closed loop system of hydrogen and oxygen as fuel be a more efficient way to store energy? Especially at the poles where there’s always illumination and hydrogen is abundant.
put it in a convienient crater, especialy good if it went into one permanently blocking sun light no shielding needed run it as hot as the materials will bear likely lots of optimisations that would be impossible on earth and whenever it needs fuel, the used stuff can be just pushed to the side throw in some solar , batteries the question is are they going big enough to start up a smelter to produce building materials on site?