Is this a different kind of nuclear power plant that does not use a steam engine that uses a lot of water? How much water is on the moon?
This article does not explain much. It even has a picture of a cooling tower on the moon which is unrealistic and looks pretty stupid. They might as well have an airplane parked next to it. LOL!
https://yournews.com/2026/01/14/6156346/nasa-and-energy-department-move-forward-on-plan-for-nuclear/
Surely they have thought all of this through to make big plans like this. Right?
If they are not going to generate electricity with water how are they going to cool the reactor so it does not melt down? Is it going to be something different that doesn't use water like what powered the Voyager space crafts? Details would be nice.
- Joined
- 20 Sep 01
- Moves
- 161812
@Metal-Brain saidI didn't realise it was April 1st
Is this a different kind of nuclear power plant that does not use a steam engine that uses a lot of water? How much water is on the moon?
This article does not explain much. It even has a picture of a cooling tower on the moon which is unrealistic and looks pretty stupid. They might as well have an airplane parked next to it. LOL!
https://yournews.com/2026/01/14/61563 ...[text shortened]... different that doesn't use water like what powered the Voyager space crafts? Details would be nice.
1 edit
@Ponderable saidEven helium has weight. Unless you can get it on the moon or on the way it is still very expensive to carry into space. Then you have to deal with the vacuum on the moon. Solar and batteries seems to be the safer way to go.
* The picture is evidently an Ai created one and the journalist didn't think deeply, thinking that it looked nice.
* In fact you can use gas as heat carrier, so you don't need large amounts of water: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-temperature_gas-cooled_reactor
@Metal-Brain saidIn fact you can win quite a bit of Helium from moonstone at the surface.
Even helium has weight. Unless you can get it on the moon or on the way it is still very expensive to carry into space. Then you have to deal with the vacuum on the moon. Solar and batteries seems to be the safer way to go.
1 edit
@Ponderable saidAnd He3 is what physicists want for fusion reactors which throws a big monkey wrench into nuclear reactors and all the baggage they bring with them.
In fact you can win quite a bit of Helium from moonstone at the surface.
I think fusion reactors could be made on the moon with no vacuum frame needed since the atmosphere on the moon is so tenuous and the only large frame part would be the metal needed to support those 100,000 + gauss electromagnets to confine and compress the plasma and He3 is available on the moon for just the scooping up and processing the regolith there.
It would allow simpler builds for Stellarators also with their weird bends and such but still not needing a vacuum shield on the moon so it would just be an array of magnets dangling together.
@sonhouse saidFusion reactors need to be run on Earth fisrt I think 😉
And He3 is what physicists want for fusion reactors which throws a big monkey wrench into nuclear reactors and all the baggage they bring with them.
I think fusion reactors could be made on the moon with no vacuum frame needed since the atmosphere on the moon is so tenuous and the only large frame part would be the metal needed to support those 100,000 + gauss electromagnet ...[text shortened]... l not needing a vacuum shield on the moon so it would just be an array of magnets dangling together.
@Ponderable saidyes, there is that tiny problem of transporting the stuff to make reactors on the moon which will have to wait till there is significant colonization of the moon and entire industries grown up there like manufacture of metals and building material so there is that.
Fusion reactors need to be run on Earth fisrt I think 😉
And the ONLY place in the solar system developing fusion will be on Earth no doubt about that.
@sonhouse saidSome people wtih TDS can't see what Trump is doing for America, check this out. It all came about because of Trump. We will have multiple nuclear reactors critical. After 50 years of nothing, but 8 months ago Trump put it all in motion. Chew your pillow!
yes, there is that tiny problem of transporting the stuff to make reactors on the moon which will have to wait till there is significant colonization of the moon and entire industries grown up there like manufacture of metals and building material so there is that.
And the ONLY place in the solar system developing fusion will be on Earth no doubt about that.
AI Overview
The Trump administration (2025–2026) is fast-tracking a major expansion of U.S. nuclear energy, aiming for 10 new large reactors under construction by 2030 and significant deployment of advanced microreactors. Initiatives include a $80 billion deal with Westinghouse and accelerating pilot projects to have three new reactors operational by July 4, 2026.
NPR
NPR
+4
@AverageJoe1 saidSo why didn't he do that during Trump V1?
Some people wtih TDS can't see what Trump is doing for America, check this out. It all came about because of Trump. We will have multiple nuclear reactors critical. After 50 years of nothing, but 8 months ago Trump put it all in motion. Chew your pillow!
AI Overview
The Trump administration (2025–2026) is fast-tracking a major expansion of U.S. nuclear energy, aiming ...[text shortened]... accelerating pilot projects to have three new reactors operational by July 4, 2026.
NPR
NPR
+4
@sonhouse saidI don't know why, Sonhouse.
So why didn't he do that during Trump V1?
But what has that got to do wtih the issue of the day? Write llike a human. Write like you are the chaplain at your church in a discussion.
@AverageJoe1 saidYou NEVER debate, just throw out your MO, meaningless word salad. NEVER address the issues because that just might stain the reputation of your Lord Trump and that you will never allow.
I don't know why, Sonhouse.
But what has that got to do wtih the issue of the day? Write llike a human. Write like you are the chaplain at your church in a discussion.
@sonhouse saidYou start. Your issue. If it is ad hominem about Trump, that is no issue.
You NEVER debate, just throw out your MO, meaningless word salad. NEVER address the issues because that just might stain the reputation of your Lord Trump and that you will never allow.
Try policies. Try discussing if we should be 'America First ' mindset, or do you think that Rubio is doing a good job today in Europe, as he just had EVERY European give him a standing ovation, and delivered a speech that the europeans should carry their own share.
Oh, debate hint. Other people read posts, so do not bore them about your thoughts of me or Trump, we all have thoughts., no on cares, Sonhouse. I dont want anyone to care, either, i want to hear about the issues. Let us hear you.
@AverageJoe1 saidThere is no such thing as an ad hominem about Trump because he is a LIVING AD HOMINEM. POSTER BOY for ad hominem.
You start. Your issue. If it is ad hominem about Trump, that is no issue.
Try policies. Try discussing if we should be 'America First ' mindset, or do you think that Rubio is doing a good job today in Europe, as he just had EVERY European give him a standing ovation, and delivered a speech that the europeans should carry their own share.
Oh, debate hint. Other p ...[text shortened]... , Sonhouse. I dont want anyone to care, either, i want to hear about the issues. Let us hear you.