So is Helium3 going to solve our problems then?

Question

If we are willing to pay the price of going to the the moon to get it:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/tx/moonsale/

it will be fusion reactors all round won't it?

Or will we have World War III squabbling over who has right to what?

Isn't it worth getting it right this time, because fusion power will give clean and virtually limitless energy to everybody - 'we can have our cake and eat it' - can't we?

Surely the balance of power is going to be a lot more interesting this time round, because the Russians have got clout and now so also do the Chinese - wouldn't you say?

For once the Americans are going to have to learn the meaning of the word HUMILITY - that's assuming they can spell it! Probably be more like HOOMILETY or some such rubbish!

Answer 1

Helium-3 was being touted as a miracle energy source 20+ years ago, but we still can't make it work. Pretty foolish to go to the moon to mine stuff we can't use yet.

Answer 2

There are no working fusion reactors in the world. Many billions of dollars and many decades of work have been expended to try to make one and there is still no working fusion power reactor in the world. Also, all the fusion research is on reactors that use deuterium and tritium because helium3 is 10 times harder to fuse than deuterium and tritium. So why do people keep saying helium3 will save us? Because IF we could make such a reactor, it would be clean. However, there are other possible fusion reactions that are just as clean as helium3, but they use other fuels that are easily obtained on Earth. So it is a total waste of time and money to try to get helium3 from the Moon.

Answer 3

He3 will not make fusion power easier. It just produces less radioactive waste as the other fuels, hydrogen, deuterium and tritium. These produce highenergy neutrons that slam into the reactor walls making it radioactive after a while. But since there are no fusion reactors that can maintain fusion for more than a few seconds at a time going to the moon to harvest He3 is kind off like going to antarctica just to buy a microwave burrito. Only you don´t have a microwave oven.

Answer 4

Why bother. The world is full of it and most of it is in or around these countries, India Italy Japan Malaysia Mexico Philippines Singapore South Korea Spain Taiwan ...especially on the sea bed near the Philippines. All we need to do is invent a fusion process which probably won't happen for 40 or 50 years and we''l be all set. No need to go to the moon.

Answer 5

Dude ,we pulled your British asses out the fire ww1 and ww2 so don't be so f*cking cocky.By the way we are in ww3,haven't you seen the body bags?Then again why would you,your contribution was minuscule.We are not worried about Russia,you should be.China,they are too busy making $ with us.Why kill 300 million consumers.We are developing a new source of power to replace the oil.Huge managed termite farms that produce methane for fuel.Better known as fart gas.Also we will breed more cattle and sheep to give the termites a break.You should pay more attention to your muslim population than trying teach us how to spell.Try spelling HOME GROWN TERRORISTS! Sleep well.

Answer 6

Don't you mean Hydrogen3...? Tritium?

It's hard to fuse Hydrogen in the first place; Helium would require 8 times the pressure & temperature.

Answer 7

I personally feel that mining the moon would be disastrous. Changing the mass of the moon could cause it to become unstable in its orbit.

Answer 8

Clean up your grammar before you make fun of my spelling.