>>> well-placed solar arrays will allow us almost constant power<<<
I'm not a lunar enthusiast and my knowledge may be excessively rusty regarding the Moon, but doesn't it have exceedingly long nights at least during some parts of the year? I'm told that's kind of a show-stopper for traditional plant growth in the absence of greenhouses that currently have other technological challenges (which I don't recall). Wouldn't this also seem to call into question your "constant power" assertion? Or perhaps you're thinking of orbiting solar panels? Meanwhile, as for:
>>> considering that we know there's oxygen, we know there's hydrogen, I don't consider it a deal killer.<<<
Doesn't it seem that there is a lot less hydrogen on the Moon now than we had previously hoped there would be? (at least in the form of frozen H2o, anyway)
>>>No one ever said it was going to be easy, or as "easy" as going to Mars.<<<
Actually, I've heard plenty of folks say that the Moon was the ideal stepping stone to Mars. I'm not contradicting that now, though, as its proximity to Earth is potentially very beneficial. Far more space tourists would be interested in a two week vacation than a considerably longer Martian one, after all.
Space/Science » in reply to re: The Big Whup Is Big Bucks
There's constant solar power available ON the Moon? Hydrogen, too?
The whole thread (27 posts)
- No ice tracts on the Moon
- What's new about these findings? [Known since 1998]
- re: No ice tracts on the Moon
- Another study I don't quite get (assistance please)
- Europe's ESA socialists are exploring this issue for just $122 million while NASA sits on its hands...
