NASA to announce nuclear reactor on the moon
politico.com
politico.com
I would like to say this is inspiring, because if this dude could become head of NASA then anyone could including me. But holy hell that is low key terrifying.
- 'The first country to have a reactor could “declare a keep-out zone which would significantly inhibit the United States,” '
So it seems less of a plan for further space exploration and more in line with a territorial grab. If it's land they want to 'own' then I've got good news for them, I am selling prime Luna real estate at a discount(low hundred millions) they can buy and even get a fancy notarized paper certificate too!
Yours.truly
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?