Moon article

[Glom]

Working on the moon

They have a very negative impression of the consequences of going to the moon.

[Sparks]

Hmmm. The moon is a difficult and dangerous place to work in, and the people who went there with the Apollo programme were deeply affected by the experience.

How is that considered news? Sheesh, the Beeb's standards are slipping...

[Diamond]

Working on the moon

They have a very negative impression of the consequences of going to the moon.

I'd go for realistic rather than negative.

Question: Once there, what is a moon base for?

[Sparks]

Question: Once there, what is a moon base for?

Mining Ilmenite for ultra-high-purity Iron, Oxygen and Rutile.
To start with, at any rate....

[Diamond]

Question: Once there, what is a moon base for?

Mining Ilmenite for ultra-high-purity Iron, Oxygen and Rutile.
To start with, at any rate....

Just what the world needs: more Rutile. :roll:

[Sparks]

Just what the world needs: more Rutile. :roll:

Given that it can be easily sintered into heatshields, which would let you aerobrake in earth's atmosphere and thus save lots of fuel on the moon-earth trip, I'd say that the moon needs more rutile

[TinFoilHat]

Question: Once there, what is a moon base for?

Mining Ilmenite for ultra-high-purity Iron, Oxygen and Rutile.
To start with, at any rate....

All of which are things we can get easier on the earth.

If you want to mine things in space to bring back here, the asteroids are by far the better target. The resources on the moon are only of value if you're using them to build things on the moon, which we're pretty far away from doing. There's really not much mineral wealth there - mostly low-grade light element ores.

[Sparks]

All of which are things we can get easier on the earth.

But they'd be on earth, which is the problem. (BTW, it's easier to mine ilmenite on the moon, there's more titanium in the rocks there than there is here (20-30% compared to 10% or so)).

If you want to mine things in space to bring back here, the asteroids are by far the better target.

Yes, but we have more experience working on the moon and you can bury a habitat on the moon more easily (to shield from radiation and for thermal insulation). Plus, the lower gravity on the moon is less damaging than microgravity, so far as we know.

The resources on the moon are only of value if you're using them to build things on the moon

Or in lunar orbit, or in LEO.

which we're pretty far away from doing. There's really not much mineral wealth there - mostly low-grade light element ores.

And there's the usual Helium3 argument - at $4 billion per ton, once we can use it.
And there's a lot of titanium, aluminium, iron and oxygen up there - all bloody useful for working in space with in situ resources.