Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

olePigeon · Nov 13, 2009, 03:02 PM

NASA'S LCROSS Impacts Confirm Water In Lunar Crater

This helps to pave the way for a permanent moon colony, launch point, and/or telescope. Pretty exciting.

richwig83 · 03:54 PM

We still havnt been on the moon yet... dont get too excited!!

*pops open a can of worms*

lexapro · Nov 13, 2009, 03:17 PM

Yum. Cheese.

The Final Dakar · Nov 13, 2009, 03:21 PM

I can wait for them to import it, bottle it and sell it.

SpaceMonkey · Nov 13, 2009, 03:21 PM

This just makes the prospect of Mooninites appear more likely. Nerds and poor spellers beware.

osiris · Nov 13, 2009, 03:31 PM

Wow, at this rate of exploration we'll have a huge moonbase by 1999!

The Final Dakar · Nov 13, 2009, 03:33 PM

And a Moonraker laser.

osiris · Nov 13, 2009, 03:36 PM

For sure.

Chuckit · Nov 13, 2009, 10:38 PM

The moon unit will be divided into two sections: Moon Unit Alpha and Moon Unit Zappa.

But no, seriously, that's pretty shocking. I doubt anybody has the interest to make a lunar colony at this point, though.

LegendaryPinkOx · Nov 13, 2009, 11:13 PM

Helium 3 anyone?

moonmonkey · Nov 13, 2009, 11:22 PM

water is boring, beer would be interesting.

imitchellg5 · Nov 13, 2009, 11:57 PM

Oh my gawd i am so there!!!!!

Andy8 · Nov 14, 2009, 08:11 AM

Anyone have a tide table for the moon handy

ebuddy · Nov 14, 2009, 08:28 AM

This is incredible. H2O = water, oxygen, fuel... provides just about everything you need for sustained visitation. Awesome discovery.

These shadowy craters are going to be the start of small colonies. We need GHGs to make it more like... home.

The Godfather · Nov 15, 2009, 01:13 AM

Originally Posted by ebuddy

This is incredible. H2O = water, oxygen, fuel... provides just about everything you need for sustained visitation. Awesome discovery.

These shadowy craters are going to be the start of small colonies. We need GHGs to make it more like... home.

Energy ain't free, and you need energy to turn that H2O into H2 and O.

Eriamjh · Nov 15, 2009, 08:28 AM

Funny. We have plenty of water here and I don't read about it being used for fuel.

residentEvil · Nov 15, 2009, 10:19 AM

they got this car, man, that runs on water, man!

[/70's show]

Doofy · Nov 15, 2009, 10:30 AM

YouTube - We Like The Moon

Spheric Harlot · Nov 15, 2009, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Funny. We have plenty of water here and I don't read about it being used for fuel.

You haven't been paying attention at all, then... unless you're just feigning ignorance for the sake of sarcasm and I'm not getting it.

Hydrogen-powered vehicles are in testing in pretty much every major city in the world (with the possible exception of anywhere within the US).

Pretty much every major auto-manufacturer has hydrogen-engine pilot programs (again, with the possible exception of Chrysler and GM - though I'm pretty sure Opel has something up and running).

Also: hydrogen and oxygen have been in use as rocket fuel for decades.

Also: Fuel cells ring a bell?

sek929 · Nov 15, 2009, 03:13 PM

Originally Posted by The Godfather

Energy ain't free, and you need energy to turn that H2O into H2 and O.

Wouldn't solar-power be the energy of choice on the moon?

Chuckit · Nov 15, 2009, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

You haven't been paying attention at all, then... unless you're just feigning ignorance for the sake of sarcasm and I'm not getting it.

Hydrogen-powered vehicles are in testing in pretty much every major city in the world (with the possible exception of anywhere within the US).

Pretty much every major auto-manufacturer has hydrogen-engine pilot programs (again, with the possible exception of Chrysler and GM - though I'm pretty sure Opel has something up and running).

Also: hydrogen and oxygen have been in use as rocket fuel for decades.

Also: Fuel cells ring a bell?

You're way off track here. The point is: Do any of those vehicles take their hydrogen and/or oxygen in the form of water?

As far as I know, water isn't an efficient fuel source.

imitchellg5 · Nov 15, 2009, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Hydrogen-powered vehicles are in testing in pretty much every major city in the world (with the possible exception of anywhere within the US).

Hey, look, the US can get in on the party.

imitchellg5 · Nov 15, 2009, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Eriamjh

Funny. We have plenty of water here and I don't read about it being used for fuel.

Besides being the fuel of humanity in its entirety?

CharlesS · 03:44 PM

Originally Posted by Chuckit

You're way off track here. The point is: Do any of those vehicles take their hydrogen and/or oxygen in the form of water?

As far as I know, water isn't an efficient fuel source.

Actually, water isn’t a fuel source at all. Sure, you can electrolyze water to separate it into hydrogen and oxygen molecules, like so:

2H20 + energy -> 2H2 + O2

But then, when you burn the hydrogen as fuel, this happens:

2H2 + O2 -> 2H20 + energy

Notice how that’s just a reverse of the process of electrolysis in the first step? You’re doing nothing but converting water to hydrogen and then back to water again. By the first law of thermodynamics, there is no way you’re going to get any more energy out than you started with. Therefore, hydrogen from water can only be used as a storage medium for energy obtained from some other method, like burning fossil fuels. The problem with that is that by the second law of thermodynamics, some energy is probably going to be lost in the electrolysis process, so actually it’s more efficient just to burn the fossil fuels directly (or at the very least, to store the energy in a battery instead à la the Prius, where at least you can recapture some of your kinetic energy back into the battery when the car stops). This is why scientists are constantly looking for other ways to obtain hydrogen other than from water, such as this. If hydrogen power ever becomes viable, water won’t have anything to do with it, other than as an exhaust.

CharlesS · Nov 15, 2009, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by imitchellg5

Besides being the fuel of humanity in its entirety?

Water isn’t the fuel of humanity. Our energy comes from carbohydrates from eating plants, or from eating animals that have eaten plants. The plants put the energy into the carbohydrates using solar power. So basically, solar is the fuel of humanity in its entirety. Water performs a lot of important roles in the body, but a fuel source is not one of them.

ebuddy · 06:35 AM

Originally Posted by sek929

Wouldn't solar-power be the energy of choice on the moon?

Yup. If they can get solar arrays approximately 1.6° over the polar horizon, it will collect perpetual sunlight. They can use the electricity produced from the solar arrays on extracted water through electrolysis, splitting the Hs from the Os. (crudely)

CharlesS makes some good points above however. To define this as an efficient process is a little optimistic at this point, but the cost of transporting water to space is downright prohibitive. Finding water at your destination is a good thing if it can be processed. The amount of fuel needed for a launch from space is much different (less) than the amount of fuel needed to escape earth's atmosphere.

Spheric Harlot · Nov 16, 2009, 08:56 AM

Bingo.

Efficiency is *very* relative when the alternative is fetching it from Earth.

Also, people kinda live off the stuff.

sek929 · Nov 16, 2009, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by ebuddy

Yup. If they can get solar arrays approximately 1.6° over the polar horizon, it will collect perpetual sunlight.

Yep, so with frozen water and unlimited sunlight there's your hydrogen production, and most likely enough energy left over to charge 'batteries' that run the moon base zappa.

CharlesS · Nov 16, 2009, 11:49 AM

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

Efficiency is *very* relative when the alternative is fetching it from Earth.

What ebuddy and sek are suggesting here is basically solar power, with the hydrogen being used only as energy storage rather than a fuel source.

Also, people kinda live off the stuff.

Not as a fuel source.

Spheric Harlot · Nov 16, 2009, 03:28 PM

Right, so the water isn't being used as fuel, but the products generated from a single step down are.

No, this is not backpedalling. This is actually what I said up above, except I didn't proof it against split hairs.

"Energy storage" is in fact the very defintion of "fuel".

I'm pretty sure we can agree on that, which means we agree on the significance of this finding.

Or were you putting the importance of water on the moon into question???

CharlesS · Nov 16, 2009, 07:31 PM

Sigh… of course not. The post I responded to was responding to a post of yours that was talking about automobiles and other terrestrial-based equipment. Of course you can use electrolysis to store energy from another source (like solar), which is why I said so in my first post. The water still isn’t “fuel” though, as it’s completely useless for energy generation — only when you put energy into it do you get anything combustible, and when you do that it’s no longer water. What the water is, is exhaust — the only reason you can get hydrogen from it by electrolysis is because you’re forcing the reaction to run backwards.

Spheric Harlot · Nov 17, 2009, 02:14 AM

Why are you splitting that hair, though? What's your point?

Were you just trying to point out that the water needs to be processed in order to be useful?

That's a given.

I was responding to a post implying that water was irrelevant as a fuel source. That's just completely wrong. That is all.