You must log in or register to comment.

Shadowtirs t1_je07zz1 wrote

So the beads were formed from the heat of the impact? They said they were found around craters.


dirtballmagnet t1_je0rp8r wrote

This is how I would tell it to myself:

After the impact, the vaporized surface material would begin to cool and condense, pretty much like raindrops form in clouds. And there would be a cloud of volatiles and other stuff that wasn't yet condensing.

We can imagine that just before the rock cooled off enough to start changing phase, the water was freely intermixed with it. Then as it crystallized it would push out the liquids and gases, but sometimes the lattice would form like a tent around that pocket of gas, and trap it. Some of the trapped stuff would be water.

It seems a no-brainer to set up a giant magnifying class and start sintering lunar regolith. Focus sunlight, melt the rock, open the lattice holes, cook off and capture the volatiles and water, now you have a little water, tons of oxygen, and a stupid amount of titanium-rich slag that you might be able to use as feedstock for a 3d printing system.

Now you don't have to monkey around with the poles and their finite-over-human timescale-water supply. Just sinter layer after layer of rock that you've already excavated for your construction.

... Is my relatively uninformed opinion.


deathputt4birdie t1_je1heiu wrote

Don't forget to capture the Helium-3 for aneutronic fusion. These guys will probably be interested in buying some


flamenode t1_je1nb6j wrote

Thanks for the link, I applied for a graphic designer role.


No-Inspector9085 t1_je264m5 wrote

I thought this was an insult and was surprised when I clicked the link it wasn’t a page stuck in the early 90s


cjameshuff t1_je1p9n6 wrote

Helion doesn't need He-3, their reactors are supposed to produce their own by D-D fusion. And at any rate, the glassy beads of the regolith apparently contain up to about 2 parts per thousand of water. The He-3 content is more like 15 parts per billion.


_Jam_Solo_ t1_je2i8wc wrote

What's weird about the moon, is there is no atmosphere, so, it's like having no water for things to float in. Things that might normally float here, like water vapour, would just fall to the ground on the moon, and only float over whatever else happens to be down there from the explosion.

I'm not sure how useful your system would be though. I feel like the amount of time and energy you'd need to spend melting the regolith and collecting the gasses and whatnot, might be excessive in comparison to the amount of water you'd get. Also, I'd imagine you'd get different results from different impacts. Some impacts might be quite water rich, and others no water at all. But even the water rich ones, might not be rich enough for this to be a viable method of collecting enough water for anything.


Fit-Capital1526 t1_je1m567 wrote

Maybe not melt, but heat and force the release of water rich volatiles. Then it is time for fractional distillation to separate the volatiles. Water might not be the only thing we would want


IAMA_Printer_AMA t1_je1oxw4 wrote

Lunar polar ice is finite on human timescales? How quickly could we burn through it?


ErikGoesBoomski t1_je2v4x1 wrote

I mean, look how quickly we burned through the earth's bountiful resources.


afraid_of_zombies t1_je4oht0 wrote

Pretty sure they are still there


ErikGoesBoomski t1_je6cxt2 wrote

Just in forms that cannot be used.


afraid_of_zombies t1_je6y3fd wrote

Well I do industrial waste processing. Can you tell me what resource we can't yet recover so I can tell marketing?


ErikGoesBoomski t1_je76vyl wrote

Can industrial waste processing bring back the flora and fauna that have been removed by humans? How about removing the mercury from our air and waterways? Or all the radioactive particles we have been pumping into the world for the past few decades? I guess it isn't so much about squandering the natural resources of the planet, more along the lines of rapidly making it into an inhospitable wasteland.


afraid_of_zombies t1_je7h86n wrote

I cant see the goalposts you have moved them so far.

Continue to scream on the internet, tomorrow I will go to work and make the world that much cleaner.

Oh, and air scrubbers as well as ground water remediation. To answer your flippant question.


ErikGoesBoomski t1_je7piju wrote

Seriously guy? Go ahead and deploy them. Prove me wrong.


afraid_of_zombies t1_jea1z2n wrote

Deploy what? Maybe spend more than 3 seconds formulating a response.


ErikGoesBoomski t1_jea29m5 wrote

Deploy your magic scrubbers that are going to undo all the damage done to the planet. Go ahead and tackle pfas while you're at it.


afraid_of_zombies t1_jea2l43 wrote

Tell me what a wet-dry scrubber is, the purpose of blowoff and a recirculation line right now and I will answer your question.

Since you clearly know about this stuff you should be able to answer.


willun t1_je2xhs2 wrote

600 billion litres. By the time we use that we will be able to reposition a comet for resupply.


flovell3 t1_je1g6do wrote

This opinion seems pretty informed to me!


maulinrouge t1_je1tcyf wrote

What the f*** did I just walk in to. This seems incredible but I understand nothing towards the end. Do you have a tldr?


greatstarguy t1_je28kfp wrote

Imagine crushing a Snickers bar in your hand. Your body heat makes it softer, and when you squeeze it, the filling comes out.

That’s basically what they’re proposing. Heat and compress moon rocks to get the water and oxygen out of them, and you can use those for life support and the leftover slag for building things. If it’s all solar-powered, it’s a lot more convenient than other methods.

The sticking point here is how much we’ll be able to get out of these rocks, and how useful the leftover slag is.


Singular_Crowbar t1_je2x944 wrote

Thank you for humbling me.

I have no idea what over half of the terms you used mean, and I used to think I was smart.

Appreciate the lesson lol


thezenfisherman t1_je41bcn wrote

According to NASA "Between 1969 and 1972 six Apollo missions brought back 382 kilograms (842 pounds) of lunar rocks, core samples, pebbles, sand and dust from the lunar surface."

Why didn't we know this since these landings?


k-laz t1_je0k9r2 wrote

So..... are we doing a good thing by locking up clean water in half-drunk water bottles buried in landfills around the world?


PuppetryOfThePenis t1_je0nb5f wrote

That way when our species is dead and gone for a millenia and then aliens come to visit they'll see there was water on our planet!

What if our species originated from Mars, and we flew to Earth because we wrecked our environment. Then we had a massive war with each other and practically all but died out, then we started to slowly build back up and now we're looking at Mars like maybe it's something we could explore. Like it's calling back to us. Maybe that's why we can't find the exact link between us and primates? lol that would be a trip.


VikingSlayer t1_je0rqid wrote

We are primates lol

And it's impossible to find the one "exact link" where we branched off from, say, chimpanzees, the odds that that individual was fossilised and we can extract DNA are just so incredibly tiny.


CoffeeWithMoreBleach t1_je19yxm wrote

It’s a possibility if aliens looked like squirrels millions of years ago, but yeah bigger chance there’s Bigfoot out there then us not being true primates.


k-laz t1_je0nqy6 wrote

Did we leave ourselves water on Mars? How many times did we perform this dance? We have been to Mars twice and this is our third time on Earth?


Politirotica t1_je3fu6x wrote

We started on Mars and somehow stripped away most of the atmosphere. Then we went to Venus and caused runaway global warming. Then we came here and, well, you know. /s


russmbiz t1_je0vq9t wrote

We have all the links between us and our ancestors. You can't find a link between you and your cousin unless you count your grandparents.


arshesney t1_je1ln5g wrote

Mars was too cold and atmosphere didn't really stuck. Venus was much better, but look at how that turned out and that's just for a bit of much needed AC.
Good thing that in the mentime that hellish third planet turned out pretty nice, they say third time the charm, no..?


Dark_Seraphim_ t1_je1bm1m wrote

Venus* we came from Venus, Mars is next when we've depleted Earth/it can no longer sustain humans.

Speculative, and yet saddening


NotYetSoonEnough t1_je0rfoa wrote

I’ve thought about this. Has there ever been a realistic estimation on whether or not there’s water being held captive inside of plastic bottles in landfills?


k-laz t1_je0yesl wrote

I found this source suggesting 22 million gallons annually.

It's on the internet, so it must be true.


lolwutpear t1_je1xgkp wrote

>22 million gallons annually

Or about 67 acre-feet. For comparison, California's reservoirs have a capacity of slightly over 40 million acre-feet.

Obviously we should try to conserve fresh water everywhere, but I think we've got bigger fish to fry.


Orffen t1_je2doz3 wrote

This is the first time I’ve heard of acre-feet. Why can’t we just use OSI measurements like football fields?!


Neonvaporeon t1_je2g4lv wrote

Acre-feet is an agricultural term so that's probably why you haven't heard of it. Feet of water is generally used to describe how much water a plant needs, acre-feet are how much water a crop needs (almonds need 4 acre-feet of water annually in California.)


Orffen t1_je2hoak wrote

But a foot is a measurement of length isn’t it? Why would you describe a volume of water using feet?


Neonvaporeon t1_je2ivgw wrote

Plants generally capture water through their roots which typically spread evenly in all directions, water travels down through the soil until it hits a ledge then travels along its path (called percolation.) That means a rough measure of the amount of water is plenty to guage requirements for shallow rooted plants, like most food crops. An acre is a measure of area and a foot is a measure of length, combined those give the 3 dimensions to make volume. Water is sold by volume, and for agricultural purposes that is the measure it is sold by to farms (typically.)


CaptainKink t1_je2j8ac wrote

One acre of land covered with water one foot deep. One step short of just calculating total volume. Much simpler to work with for the farmers.


warthog0869 t1_je2u2px wrote

Plus, if you don't build it within the acreage confines of the well-watered cornfields, Ray Liotta and them won't come.


Kapitan_eXtreme t1_je2z3se wrote

The hell is an acre-foot?


cratermoon t1_je31dgs wrote

The volume of water it would take to cover an area of acre to a depth of 1 foot. That's 43560 cubic feet, 325,851 gallons, or 1,233,481.8 liters


EightballTV t1_je1lcm6 wrote

"Very real problem"

I mean, it's real, it's not a problem though, lmao.

"Oh no, this water doesn't go back into the water cycle"

As if we don't have a planet with 90% oceans and issues with global warming and rising sea levels, soon it will be 95% lol. Maybe we should be putting MORE in bottles, fuck me, what a non issue.

Infact, the more I read that article, the more I realise how much bullshit it actually is. They seem to think water in bottles is no longer in our atmosphere. No, it's still in our atmosphere. Plastic doesn't last forever. We aren't launching it into the sun ffs.

"While nearly 70% of the world is covered by water, only 2.5% of it is fresh. The rest is saline and ocean-based. Even then, just 1% of our freshwater is easily accessible, with much of it trapped in glaciers and snowfields."

They do know how rain works, yeah? That the 2.5% fresh water is taken from the oceans, then dropped onto the mountains as rain, where the mountains filter it? Have they even heard of clouds before? I mean, I was taught that at like 8 years old or less.

And if you wanna talk about droughts, and the effect of droughts, then I can guarantee you the droughts were not caused by some water being in a bottle, lmao. Maybe they should take up a new cause that actually matters, like global warming.


Fit-Capital1526 t1_je1nhfm wrote

An awful lot of water is locked in the ground anyway. This has very little affect overall. It barely touches what is entering the short term water cycle from the melting of Greenland (which was declared doomed a few years ago)


ThatLeetGuy t1_je3467a wrote

I actually think about this every time I throw away a water bottle, because I do use them often. I always dump liquid contents from bottles before I throw them out. I don't do a lot for environment conservation, but not littering and not throwing water into landfills are the two mounds I'll die on.


NotYetSoonEnough t1_je36cdd wrote

I know this doesn’t sound like much but I appreciate that you do these things.


[deleted] t1_je17kna wrote



[deleted] t1_je1fec0 wrote



alematt t1_je1o534 wrote

Can't wait to crush me some beads on the moon for full hydration. I can see the commercials now


farmdve t1_je2axx4 wrote

Are you all subscribed to WSJ? I saw no one mentioning the cut off article and the big sign saying I need to pay.


Wolventec t1_je3mo3d wrote

their are a few work arounds the easiest is to just google search the article followed by wsj, they dont block the article from google search for some reason


i-kno-nothing t1_je1dwjr wrote

  1. build a magnetic satellite network shield around the moon.
  2. strategically place massive nuclear bombs around the entire moon, evenly spaced.
  3. explode said nukes.
  4. wait 10 years for radiation to dissipate.
  5. terraforming complete.

WarrenPuff_It t1_je1g5zt wrote

The moon is already radiated.

Solar winds will yeet any atmosphere away.


i-kno-nothing t1_je1hce7 wrote

That's what the artificial magnetic field is for


PatFluke t1_je1j12h wrote

Or! Hollow it out and spin it really fast! Now we can walk on the inside and keep the oxygen inside!

Not the just a hat rack my friends.


mooimafish33 t1_je2lw6j wrote

I too have read the expanse


PatFluke t1_je2nfqi wrote

Really? I haven’t read it but have been told I should. They spin the moon?


mooimafish33 t1_je2oev3 wrote

They spin Ceres actually, but it's pretty much exactly your idea. Millions of people live in tunnels they have dug all throughout it, and it was spun up enough for the people to experience like .7G


i-kno-nothing t1_je2p2t5 wrote

how do you spin a planet? O_O


PatFluke t1_je2qlm4 wrote

Smash a big rock into it? Massive engines pointing 45 degrees up from the surface with fusion reactors powering them throwing particles out of orbit circling the equator? Magic? I dunno I was being dumb when I wrote my comment lol. Sounds like a cool ideaz

Edit: I’m not cool enough for ideaz.


i-kno-nothing t1_je2un6f wrote

this is all sci-fi. no such thing as a stupid idea! only limit is current technology. but from a physics p.o.v. all could work xD


Asraia t1_je1dwr3 wrote

That video was more about China's energy independence.


Volerra t1_je2048i wrote

If I could just hitch a ride to the moon, I'd make a killing on Etsy


thaisin t1_je1y2h9 wrote

I can see the signage clearly in my mind "Break glass to drink"


Joeva8me t1_je278gm wrote

Is this the shit that’s supposed to help me lose weight?


stewartm0205 t1_je21jmb wrote

There is also the possibility of water underground. We should drill and see.


CroiDubh t1_je1n109 wrote

Well with all that pulling and dragging of the tides it had to happen at some stage


johnsilverfox t1_je5e0nq wrote

I read this the other day this is sooo cool, I think the Chinese discovered this finding?


NoYouAreABot t1_je7brol wrote

Someone call Douglas Voght of the Diehold Institute. Sounds like a micronova to me.


Funkyduck8 t1_je1g6ml wrote

Is it not worrisome that countries will be trying to mine and extract minerals from the moon? If something goes wrong and the moon cracks, or fractures, wouldn't that spell absolute disaster for Earth? I may be fearful but as humans are destroying Earth with mining, imagine what could happen on something smaller.

Edit: downvoted for not wanting the moon to become another polluted, capitalistic cash grab. Lol


arshesney t1_je1nfsn wrote

Crack or fracture? Have you seen how many craters there are on the Moon? Do you think anything man-made can get close to that scale?
No, you can throw the global nuclear arsenal to the Moon and it won't budge, and it'll still be there long after we are gone.


MonkeyTigerCrazy t1_je1majt wrote

No, it’s not because even if we cut the moon in half nothing would really happen other than it just reshaping into another sphere, and there’s no incredibly valuable environment to destroy there so it doesn’t really matter


aba-i t1_je2hdu1 wrote

Do our ocean tides not completely depend on the moons gravity?


Kantrh t1_je2vz90 wrote

We couldn't mine the moon fast enough to affect the tides in any appreciable timescale


MonkeyTigerCrazy t1_je2oq7b wrote

Would be a problem if the moon got closer because tides would be more extreme but not if the moon shattered, that would just get rid of tides if it eventually turned into a ring


[deleted] t1_je1xfsw wrote



MonkeyTigerCrazy t1_je22wbe wrote

How would anything happen if the moon gets holes drilled in it? It’s not losing any noticeable energy like the mass that gets sent back to earth so nothing would happen


[deleted] t1_je1gmuo wrote



SpoilsOfTour t1_je23vse wrote

When I was a kid I had a physics teacher who tried to get us excited with this theory. His argument was that the moon is

  1. Perfectly spherical

  2. Locked with one side that always faces Earth

  3. Placed at such a distance that it appears exactly the same size as our sun in the sky.

I doubt that he truly believed it, I think he just wanted to make the subject more interesting for kids, but I've always been fascinated by astronomy, and the idea that things aren't what they seem is always cool.


Kantrh t1_je2w6r5 wrote

The moon isn't perfectly spherical


Eye-tactics t1_je357jb wrote

The moon is a fragment of an ancient planet named Theia. It collided with earth and the molten remnants formed into a sphere by gravity. I'm pretty sure there isn't anything weird about the moon being circular like that. There are literally remnants of the planet sticking out of our crust and core of the planet recently mapped. The animation in this article show what I'm talking about.