Energy production on the moon

[zergnerd]

I want to get some feedback on an idea I recently had. As our public policy shifts towards more renewable energy solutions, wind and solar seem to get the most attention even though most have significant limitations currently. While nuclear energy is perhaps the cheapest long term solution, its use is stymied by concerns about pollution, long term waste storage, proliferation, a "not in my back yard" attitude and so on. There has also been a lot of talk about putting solar collectors in space (e.g. at L2) and beaming the power back to earth, though laser collimation problems could prove a deal breaker.

My idea is to place nuclear reactors on the moon and then beam the power back to earth. We already know we can send a collimated pulse that distance, courtesy of NASA ranging lasers. Proliferation will no longer be a concern, nor will long term storage of waste, since any race smart enough to go to the moon will be smart enough to understand radiation. Nor would lunar reactors need the same massive concrete shells for civilian safety reducing construction material and, in the long term, perhaps cost. The system would have the following additional advantages:
- 3rd world nations would not need to develop a massive power infrastructure. They would only need local receivers making their development much more rapid.
- More energy efficient designs could be used, since safety margins would be different
- War would no longer destroy a civilian power grid for decades, allowing hospitals to remain functional and recovery to occur more rapidly
- Such a project would generate millions of space-related jobs and provide and infrastructure for manned exploration of the solar system.
- Millions of acres slated for solar plants could be kept "wild"

I think such a system would have mush to offer us in relation to protecting our environment as well as exploring space.

What are your opinions and thoughts? Thanks

Zergnerd

 

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

The first item is an operational 24/7 power usage limitation at a single location on earth from a source on or orbiting the Moon. Since effectively a good line of sight without significant atmospheric problems only lasts for 8 hours out of every 24, this configuration would have the same problems as terrestrial solar requiring power storage as well as the added complications of operating way out at the Moon.

Second, costs for nuclear are far higher than just using in-situ regolith material for solar collectors, but solar has the same problem on the Moon (a 14 day out of 28 day cycle) as it does on earth (a 12 hour out of 24 hour cycle) unless it is placed at the poles or in a Lunar polar orbit. Even a Lunar Polar orbit is not perfect because at ¼ and ¾ phase the collector would be in the Moon shadow for up to about 25% of the orbit duration.

These and other cost and operational considerations when trying to use a power source in space to send power to a spot on earth makes GEO still the best location. Though for power to be used on the Moon L1 and L2 would be prime candidates, with a small surface nuclear reactor or power storage when the L1 or L2 is occluded, about 4 to 7 days out of every 28 days.

 

[Booban]

I love the idea of solar power stations in orbit. At the same time you can use the station for tourists, space research and all the while it beams back power to at least offset *some* of the costs. Why aren't they trying to beam back some power now for testing with the ISS? Or maybe they already tried an experiment.

Now about solar panels from in-situ-regolith being more expensive than just launching an earth built reactor to the moon...the costs of developing this new technology and transporting regolith building machinery to the moon and maintenance must be gigantic.

 

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

There has been a proposals to use the power from the ISS to do Microwave and Laser power transmission tests but the hardware to do the test would be quite large and a Microwave antenna to do a realistic test would be about 10 to 20MT would have a greater diameter than the ISS itself. A Laser Power test would be simpler and some Laser tests have been done but not sufficient power levels to determine realistic capabilities for Power transmission. Laser Power transmission may be blocked by anti-weapon treaties because of the power levels of the laser.

 

[SteveCNC]

By collecting solar energy at the poles you have access to sunlight 24/7 minus eclipses . As for nuclear power , I think we need to move into using fusion rather than fission . With He[super]3[/super] on the moon we need to develop the ability to extract it from the regolith and then store it for use , although unless the power is needed on the moon I would think exporting the He[super]3[/super] would be more likely for perhaps a base on mars or some other body
where there is less power per m[super]2[/super] of sunlight
.