Construction of a lunar settlement has been the subject of intense research since the 90's. Engineers from all backgrounds, but notably Civil and Chemical engineering, have been involved all along.
The moon presents a strategic waypoint between Mars. It's a good refueling point, due to its location and low escape velocity. It's a vast mineral resource, rich in Oxygen and Iron and Titanium - all of which can be extracted from the soil and processed for use. The moon is also rich in Deuterium, which can be used to produce clean nuclear energy.
Current technological challenges seem more mundane than extraordinary. With no water, what can we use instead of concrete? The soil compact as it is - and it is extremely compact - how can we dig and drill, and build foundations? With the incredibly fine lunar dust, how can we protect machinery everytime a shuttle lands or takes off?
So, the question is, given our current condition, should we construct on the moon?
2007-08-07 19:33:19 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
Long term it would be more economical to build a station at a La Grange point between the earth and moon. A smaller automated mining station on the moon could be built to provide raw materials. A station at an L point could then be used as a base for launching a Mars mission. There has been a number of articles written about this possibility as well.
2007-08-07 20:27:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The difficulty with settling on the moon is that its temperature dring the day is aprox 250 degree. And a day on the moon is 28 Earth days.
2007-08-08 02:46:06 · answer #2 · answered by goring 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, i'm sure we'll figure out how to deal with all the problems.
2007-08-08 02:38:02 · answer #3 · answered by brandon 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋