Space

8347 readers

273 users here now

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.

Rules

Be respectful and inclusive.
No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
Engage in constructive discussions.
Share relevant content.
Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Use appropriate language and tone.
Report violations.
Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula

Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography

Other Cool Links

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Space experts foresee an “operational need” for nuclear power on the Moon (arstechnica.com)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That and solar. Have a few Small modular reactors. I think the other thing is energy storage. Batteries are heavy and wear out. Would be nice to have something that can be used long term.

[–] gravitas_deficiency 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I would bet that one of the long-term solutions are gonna be locally produced (that is, on the moon) kinetic storage devices like flywheels and weight shafts. You can store a shocking amount of energy in a big old rock lifted up on a cable by a couple hundred meters.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Kinda hard to do that when the moon is only 1/6g. You'd have to raise the same object 6 times higher to get an equivalent amount of potential energy storage than you would on Earth.

[–] gravitas_deficiency 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Or make the object 6 times heavier.

Big thing + any motion whatsoever = a surprising amount of energy. And we can capture that energy. Or use energy to move the thing to a higher potential, and thus store said energy for use later. It’s just physics.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Of course you'd need even larger equipment to be able to handle it. One way or another things have to scale. For sure solar or nuclear power are the more practical options for now.

[–] gravitas_deficiency 3 points 4 months ago

I thought we were talking about long-term energy storage.

Kinetic storage devices are WAY simpler and WAY longer lasting. A big lunar rock suspended in a vertical shaft a couple hundred meters deep is probably going to have a higher MTBF than even the most advanced batteries or capacitors.