The first nuclear power plant for settlements on Moon, Mars
137 replies, posted
[quote]A fission power system on the Moon could generate 40 kilowatts or more of electric power, approximately the same amount of energy needed to power eight houses on Earth.[/quote]
Well that's not very much at all
[QUOTE=Aerkhan;32009445]Then why waste money placing shit in space.[/QUOTE]
Quit trolling, you are bad at it.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32010914]Well that's not very much at all[/QUOTE]
But it's the size of a suitcase. I doubt early moon colonies are going to be very big :v:
Optimistiiiic
I want one for my house
So when I said FPSI head to mars, now we have motivation to do so! Please donate, i wont steal your money i promise
[QUOTE=InsanePyro;32002547]Yeah lets fuck up the moon too!
(my first thought was "Fuck yeah this is awesome!" but then I remembered we kinda suck at nuclear power)[/QUOTE] Yea if we mess up all the moon people will get sick.
aeiou
[QUOTE=InsanePyro;32002547]Yeah lets fuck up the moon too!
(my first thought was "Fuck yeah this is awesome!" but then I remembered we kinda suck at nuclear power)[/QUOTE]
Because earthquakes and Tsunamis and hurricanes on the moon. Oh and Radiation in space.
Fook.
[QUOTE=petieng;32011088]
But it's the size of a suitcase. I doubt early moon colonies are going to be very big :v:[/QUOTE]
True.
Put them in caaarrrsss
[QUOTE=d00msdaydan;32003366]Reactors take complete idiots to fuck up with people and it takes an obsolete, flawed design and an earthquake followed by a tsunami for nature to destroy it
[/QUOTE]
Sadly there are alot of idiots around...even in NASA I'm sure. Or even a mistake or miscommunication. Thats all it would take.
[QUOTE=Aerkhan;32009025]So how do we transport the energy to Earth?[/QUOTE]Reactor charges fucktons of batteries, which are then loaded into an automatic battery gun which constantly lays down concentrated suppressing fire on the earth. Then small Mexican children with straw hats and baskets wander around picking up the batteries as they fall from the sky.
Of course with gloves, since the batteries would be warm and toasty from their special voyage and we don't want our little workers getting burned hands. :(
duracell makes factory on the moon
batteries cost less than a cent per ton
John Madden.
[QUOTE=InsanePyro;32014327]Sadly there are alot of idiots around...even in NASA I'm sure. Or even a mistake or miscommunication. Thats all it would take.[/QUOTE]
And then a few astronauts would die.
It happens.
What do with the waste?
Load it into containers and launch them at the sun.
it'd take very little energy considering the low amount of gravity on the moon.
So the pages are full of yeah and fuck. Shit.
[editline]30th August 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zoran;32012572]aeiou[/QUOTE]
john madden.
[QUOTE=InsanePyro;32014327]Sadly there are alot of idiots around...even in NASA I'm sure. Or even a mistake or miscommunication. Thats all it would take.[/QUOTE]
The radiation levels on the Moon, especially in sunlight are extreme and make any of the nuclear disaster on Earth insignificant. Over 4 Sv a day on the surface of the Moon, 4-5 times what you'd experience standing next to the Chernobyl sarcophagus and hundreds or thousands of times what you'd experience most places in the exclusion zone. The lack of an atmosphere means you wouldn't get fallout over large areas even if a disaster did happen and raised very localised radiaiton levels insignificantly.
And how exactly does NASA plan on paying for this lunar power plant with their next to nothing budget?
[QUOTE=abcpea3;32017518]we should have nuclear cars[/QUOTE]
They tried making those in the 50s if I remember correctly.
They didn't work too well :v:
Plus if they did work well then you've given every person in the entire country easy access to materials that can be used to make a dirty bomb.
Nuclear meltdown on the moon.
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;32016935]What do with the waste?
Load it into containers and launch them at the sun.
it'd take very little energy considering the low amount of gravity on the moon.[/QUOTE]Could just leave it where it is, anyone near it is going to need protective gear to stop the sun giving them a very nice tan in about a quarter second anyway.
Also, wouldn't it be quite the fucking disaster if the space shuttle containing the power plant exploded/crashed during the launch (Challanger style) ?
[QUOTE=booster;32022514]Also, wouldn't it be quite the fucking disaster if the space shuttle containing the power plant exploded/crashed during the launch (Challanger style) ?[/QUOTE]
They just need better safety standards.
The Challenger Disaster easily could've been avoided if NASA was willing to wait until it was warmer before launching.
(it failed because the shuttle was only tested at 40 degrees but they decided to launch the Challenger despite knowing it was 18 degrees)
[QUOTE=booster;32022514]Also, wouldn't it be quite the fucking disaster if the space shuttle containing the power plant exploded/crashed during the launch (Challanger style) ?[/QUOTE]
Extremely unlikely if you follow protocol.
All the Engineers at NASA advised not to launch Challenger because it was way too cold (there was even ice on the launch tower), but the guys at the top didn't want to delay it further.
[editline]30th August 2011[/editline]
Fucking ninjas.
fornication
under
consent (of the)
king
Yeah!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.