Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:Reactor to=20
=E2=80=9CNASA Accelerates Moon Base Plans With 100-Kilowatt Nuclear =
lumberjackOutpace China=E2=80?
=20 >>https://thelibertydaily.com/nasa-accelerates-moon-base-plans-100-kilowa= tt-nuclear/
right-wing rag.
Pie in the sky from the unqualified "interim director" (former =
and television presenter). I used to live in his district. Thinly = populated
and fairly conservative.
They'll need to design a brand new reactor which can dissipate all
the waste heat involved in power production with no atmosphere
and no nearby river or ocean.
Not an easy task, it may require significant resources just to
provide the very large radiators (and the correponding heat
transfer mechanisms/fluids); not clear that they can be produced
in-situ.
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 23:36:07 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
“NASA Accelerates Moon Base Plans With 100-Kilowatt Nuclear Reactor to
Outpace China�
https://thelibertydaily.com/nasa-accelerates-moon-base-plans-100-kilowatt-nuclear/
right-wing rag.
Pie in the sky from the unqualified "interim director" (former lumberjack
and television presenter). I used to live in his district. Thinly populated
and fairly conservative.
They'll need to design a brand new reactor which can dissipate all
the waste heat involved in power production with no atmosphere
and no nearby river or ocean.
Not an easy task, it may require significant resources just to
provide the very large radiators (and the correponding heat
transfer mechanisms/fluids); not clear that they can be produced
in-situ.
This sounds like something that might be possible after, say, 20 years
of steady industrial development on the Moon. And if not 20, perhaps
50.
IOW, something an established Moon colony could manage.
Then again, as another has noted, the output is far less than that of
a nuclear-powered submarine's reactor. So maybe it would be small
enough to fit into a suitable launch vehicle. If only in pieces, some
on-site assembly being required.
On 8/16/2025 11:50 AM, Paul S Person wrote:lumberjack
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 23:36:07 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
=20
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
=E2=80=9CNASA Accelerates Moon Base Plans With 100-Kilowatt Nuclear = Reactor to
Outpace China=E2=80?
=20
= https://thelibertydaily.com/nasa-accelerates-moon-base-plans-100-kilowatt= -nuclear/
right-wing rag.
Pie in the sky from the unqualified "interim director" (former =
and television presenter). I used to live in his district. Thinly = populated=20
and fairly conservative.
They'll need to design a brand new reactor which can dissipate all
the waste heat involved in power production with no atmosphere
and no nearby river or ocean.
Not an easy task, it may require significant resources just to
provide the very large radiators (and the correponding heat
transfer mechanisms/fluids); not clear that they can be produced
in-situ.
This sounds like something that might be possible after, say, 20 years
of steady industrial development on the Moon. And if not 20, perhaps
50.
=20
IOW, something an established Moon colony could manage.
=20
Then again, as another has noted, the output is far less than that of
a nuclear-powered submarine's reactor. So maybe it would be small
enough to fit into a suitable launch vehicle. If only in pieces, some
on-site assembly being required.
A submarine nuclear reactor has the ocean to dump heat in.
In a vacuum its a lot harder. Take a look at the ISS.
It runs at 84-120 kW, comparable to the proposed reactor,
and uses 254 sq m of radiators
Even is we have to double it since half the view of a
radiator panel is the hot lunar surface, that's still
not an unimaginable amount of area.
On Sat, 16 Aug 2025 20:33:17 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/16/2025 11:50 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 23:36:07 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> writes:
“NASA Accelerates Moon Base Plans With 100-Kilowatt Nuclear Reactor to
Outpace China�
https://thelibertydaily.com/nasa-accelerates-moon-base-plans-100-kilowatt-nuclear/
right-wing rag.
Pie in the sky from the unqualified "interim director" (former lumberjack >>>> and television presenter). I used to live in his district. Thinly populated
and fairly conservative.
They'll need to design a brand new reactor which can dissipate all
the waste heat involved in power production with no atmosphere
and no nearby river or ocean.
Not an easy task, it may require significant resources just to
provide the very large radiators (and the correponding heat
transfer mechanisms/fluids); not clear that they can be produced
in-situ.
This sounds like something that might be possible after, say, 20 years
of steady industrial development on the Moon. And if not 20, perhaps
50.
IOW, something an established Moon colony could manage.
Then again, as another has noted, the output is far less than that of
a nuclear-powered submarine's reactor. So maybe it would be small
enough to fit into a suitable launch vehicle. If only in pieces, some
on-site assembly being required.
A submarine nuclear reactor has the ocean to dump heat in.
Which misses the point: it produces a lot more electricity than
proposed here, yet surely is not as large as a land-based nuclear
power station.
In a vacuum its a lot harder. Take a look at the ISS.
It runs at 84-120 kW, comparable to the proposed reactor,
and uses 254 sq m of radiators
Even is we have to double it since half the view of a
radiator panel is the hot lunar surface, that's still
not an unimaginable amount of area.
So, you are agreeing with me: it could be packed and sent to the Moon
in peices, to be assembled there.
Well, a puny one anyway.
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 11 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 48:47:28 |
| Calls: | 166 |
| Files: | 21,502 |
| Messages: | 77,711 |