wow, need this for my NSS space settlement contest project. We had already long ago selected the usage of helium 3 for nuclear propulsion, but never found any way to elaborate its fusion. I am in grade 9th and thx for your videos.
Glad to hear that! If you want to learn more about Helium-3 propulsion check out this video from us :ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-be1D_HYu-24.html
Here's the energy density of unrefined regolith + the math. I finally did some number-crunching to find out since this bugged me for a while now. Mass of an Helium3 atom: > m_Helium3 = 3 u Molar mass constant: > M_u = 1*10^-3 (kg/mol)/u This gives: Molar mass of Helium3 > M_Helium3 = M_Helium3 * M_u = 1/(3*10^-3 kg/mol) (we need the inverse later) Density of regolith: > rho_regolith = [1350 ... 1850] kg(regolith)/m^3 Concentration of Helium3 in regolith: (reliable data?) > c_Helium3 = [1.5*10^-9 ... 50*10^-9] kg(Helium3)/kg(Regolith) INVERSE of molar mass of Helium3: > 1/M_Helium3 = 1/(3*10^-3) mol/kg Particles per mole (Avogardo constant): > 6.022*10^23 (Particles) / mol Released energy per fusion event: > E_fusionevent = 18.4*10^6 eV / (Helium3-particle) Charge per electron-charge-unit: > q_e = 1.60218*10^19 C/e SI unit conversion > id = 1J/(VAs) Multiplying everything together gives the desired unit: J(fusion-energy)/m^3(regolith). Worst case 1.2GJ/m^3 = 1.2MJ/L Best case 55GJ/m^3 = 55MJ/L Coal has [26 ... 49] MJ/L (wikipedia) Turns out regolith and coal seem to be about on the same energy density level. (Please correct me if you find some error) I did not expect it to be that high. This calculation was under the assumption that the effort for getting deuterium is in comparison negligible. Which is likely true. Also how does robotic mining of sharp powdery regolith compare in difficulty to opencast coal mining on earth? What would be the optimal form to leave the processed regolith in? Regolith is widespread but not very thick. So how much of regolith is there on the moon?
Hey I just found your channel. I love it! Your animations are really good and you speak in a very excited and enthusiastic way :) I have a channel quite similar to yours. It would be cool to work together one day in the future. I've subbed so you'll be hearing more from me for sure. Looking forward to seeing your channel grow! There is a need for Science channels out there.
+Up and Atom thank you for the compliment, I also want to say your content is great to and i'd be happy to work with you . My email is theinterestinguniverse@gmail.com if you wish to contact me
That’s great. I want to welcome you to the ScienceVerse and hope you have a great time while you’re here and learn a lot in the process. Also I’m always looking forward to working with future scientists so be sure to keep in touch :)
(Sorry - that comment was indeed meant for an other video. I've deleted it.) To give some cents to your video: I'd be interested in: * The average Helium3 mass concentration of the lunar soil. (maybe in ppm) * The average energy density in unrefined/unextracted state of lunar regolith (in Joule per kg) * How much/little radiation is to expect from the few unwanted D-D side reactions (in relation to D-T fusion and maybe absolute) * On earth: Since the triple product for Helium3 fusion is a lot harder to reach than the one for D-T fusion it seems not unlikely that D-T fusion will be done and spread quite a bit sooner than Helium3 fusion. What are your thoughts on what will happen economically? * On the moon: With all that recent asteroid mining hype it seems not unlikely that uranium and thorium become more easily accessible than Helium3. Again what is likely to happen economically? * Since there is natural radiation on the moon (solar / cosmic ...) and no weather system carrying radiation around what do you think: Is it acceptable or not to do some form of nuclear fission technology there.
+mechadense 1.the average concentration varies due to the fact different regions get different exposure but to give an approximate range it would vary from 0.0014 ppm to 0.05 ppm 2.the density of lunar soil is about 1500 kg/meter cubes and 1500kg is about 15000 j /m (couldn't convert that to kg/j) 3.D-D reactions produce anywhere from 4-7 million electron volts of energy or less than a joule of energy so probably not a lot of energy also you need temperatures of 400-500million degrees Celsius which is kinda hard to reach in contrast D-T reaction does release more however it to also produces under a joule of energy 4.Well in that case yes D-T fusion might be the more preferable and used method,however helium 3 fusion would still probably looked at as both an option and place to invest in for space exploration .Also helium 3 fusion is extremely powerful and to an extent safer than many methods used today so it wouldn't die out completely 5.Asteroids are much harder to mine than helium 3, for starters they are MUCH farther away than the moon,also uranium is radioactive and the goal is to find a SAFE alternative and while uranium isn't powerful it isn't really safe to work with as its decay can cause health problems 6. Yes , I believe it's alright to conduct nuclear fission tests on the moon since it is much less riskier and puts less lives in danger however I'm not sure if the natural radiation might interfere with the results
Daytime temperatures near the lunar equator reach a boiling 250 degrees Fahrenheit (120° C, 400 K), while nighttime temperatures get to a chilly -208 degrees Fahrenheit (-130° C, 140 K). The Moon's poles are even colder.
0:48 "many" there are only two isotope's of helium, the other being helium-4. 0:45 I believe you mean nuclear fission, as opposed to nuclear fusion, both of which would be considered nuclear energy.
Confusing. At least your video made me curious enough to go look for a video that can explaine it better. Still don’t understand if it takes a lot or very little energy to “burn”(?) it? Use it? Convert it? Huh?
The ScienceVerse I just found out something cool the White House just signed an executive order for businesses to mine the moon so helium 3 energy could be a reality by the next decade possibly www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/5124737002
Just found you and I’m enjoying this helium 3 series, being that you have multiple parts wouldn’t putting them together for algorithm purposes help you? I’ll watch interesting stuff either way and I wouldn’t say force it to larger times but if you have solid content for longer videos would it be beneficial? This comment is solely based on my want for science creators to do really well because being informed is super important for the future
Well there’s a lot to be discussed in helium 3 and if we did mash everything into one topic it would mean we’d have to skip details on important subjects in order to release a video on time. Also RU-vid’s algorithm does also favor videos made in series with each other
Wonderful video! Great science. However; Why would we need so much energy? It seems to be that we are constantly fleeing away from distress and towards a comfortable circumstance. This flee/chase approach to life has us constantly abandoning the present.
Helium heb je ook nodig voor je stem geluid kern fusion met een nukliar power plant ontwikkelt stood als we de onderdelen hergebruiken kunnen we veilig die damp omzetten naar een veilige atmosphere dat ons schone lucht bijstaat anders ... gaat die battery opladen lekker warm boil the hell out of it
Wow what an interesting subject this just became a major source for the human race for everyone 👏 and all we have to do is grab it on the moon which is the challenge. I hope the Chinese do this which in turn will make the capitalic USA want to do more exploration on the moon for ourselves what a great 👍 thing this could be. We are just coming out of the caves in terms of how far we have progressed in Sience energy we don't even realize the significance of these findings. The possibilities are endless.
So, could we just launch a load of hydrogen 2 and nitrogen 14 into orbit and let it the sun work its magic until it's produced mostly hydrogen 3 in the container? Because if that works it would be much better than going to the moon and back.
@@loturzelrestaurant the science is never settled and it is damn beautiful. Are you familiar with alcator c-mod reactors ? They're the cleanest I know of to date that are not just concepts. There's just not enough helium 3 on earth to make them viable as of today.
Yeah I remember all the stupid questions about this the funniest is the space is empty and void how come the flags moving when they planted it on the moon well that’s from the solar wins you know some people are so stupid it just boggles my mind
So we’d have to mine the moon ok. Arguably the most advanced spacecraft on earth, the Space X craft, still uses chemical rocket engines. So getting to the moon would be expensive but no prohibitively so like the asteroid belt. But here’s where I get a little “why the hell are we talking about this” when we (humanity) haven’t managed to get regular old Fusion to work (outside of a bomb of course) no one has managed to get a sustainable fusion reaction going and we’ve been at it since the 50’s. There are a lot of extremely smart people here but I constantly here them talking about irrelevant crap like going to Mars when we have no permanent infrastructure in space (the ISS is a lab not a gas station) we haven’t been back to the moon since the early 70’s. Our collective adhd needs to focused on steps 1-10 before we worry about 20-...?
@@spencerhopkinson9874 / ok I’ll say it again, we can’t make fusion work in the lab or anywhere with good old hydrogen aka the most abundant fusion fuel on earth and the universe. So if the “climate crisis” is of such dire import then let’s get a modern day Manhattan Project going to get fusion working and then worry about using different types of fuel sources
“If you remove all the helium from the moon it might become unstable, tip over and capsize into the earth “ democrat rep Hank Johnson in the future probably 😂
May i be so random and recommend you some good science-youtuber just... just because? I mean, why not? The learning never ends, duh? Would that be too random? I mean, i personally think we should help each other out more, tbh. At least with science-youtuber-recommendations.
This is what that narcissist Musk needs to be working on. Not the pipe dream to Mars where humans currently would die from radiation en route. The helium 3 problem is what everyone should be working on.
