David Bray wrote: > The latest missions suggest water is all over the Moon and not that rare - > https://dailygalaxy.com/2024/09/scientists-confirm-water-all-over-the-moon/ 'not that rare' is still along the lines of 12 oz of water per m^3 of rock yes there is a lot of rock, but it takes a lot of energy to extract the rock, heat it to extract the water, cool the water, and dispose of the rock. David Lang > Unfortunately we cancelled the VIPER effort > https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/nasa-ends-viper-project-continues-moon-exploration/ > ... and Athena crashed > https://www.yahoo.com/news/intuitive-machines-athena-space-craft-declared-dead-after-landing-sideways-in-a-crater-on-the-moon-153443232.html > > ... so stay tuned. > > > On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 1:03 PM David Lang wrote: > >> David Bray wrote: >> >>> I'd go for burning hydrogen - not hydrogen fusion - if we can extract >> water >>> from the Moon with solar power as the initial kick-starter. We will need >>> the hydrogen for future rockets launched from the Moon's lower gravity to >>> Mars and beyond too... >> >> I think water is better used for people than for burning. There isn't that >> much >> of it out there. >> >> There are times you need the high thrust, but if you can use electricity >> instead, it's better in the long run (and on the moon, with 14 day >> 'nights' I >> think nuclear will win >> >> burning hycrogen may be needed for landings and maneuvering, but use >> magnetics >> for launching. >> >> David Lang_______________________________________________ >> Nnagain mailing list >> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain >> >