The problem of Nitrogen on the Mun

[PB666]

3 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Nitrogen is not exhausted from lythosphere, it's a boiled up cryosphere. So, no reasons to search its deposits in a crust or mantle.

Venus, certainly had large amounts of Nitro — as the Earth does.
But it has dissipated due to the heat, like water (a volcanic steam) also has, being splitted by UV into Oxy and Hydro.
Nitro and Oxy have almost the same molecular mass, so they both are gone.

On the Moon you can't get domestic Nitro, you must avoid its usage as long as possible, or import it from the Earth.

From another side — imagine, you are a lunar redneck with a moon rocket tractor. Would you really want to tremble any time fueling it in your hangar with flammable toxic hyperholics? And then cleaning the fuel spots? Unlikely.
What would you want instead? Peroxide. It's a fuel for main engine, for RCS, you can drink it (→water), you can breathe it (→oxygen), it's enough stable and not so toxic.
What do you need to import for it? H.

From the third side — any handy rocket fuel mostly consists of Oxy. There is a lot of Oxy on the Moon.
What is oxidizer for hyperholics? NTO. What does it consist of? N and O. What do you need to import? N.

So, you would import large amount of hydrazine. Partially convert it into NTO (source of N). Partially — into HTP (source of H).
Then you can fly high on hydrazine+NTO, fly to your neighbors' farm on HTP.

Also you can use this hydrazine as a working body for nukes.
And if you implement in KSPI-E that aneutronic 15N-based fusion, you can get 15N-hydrazine for your fusion.

Of course, any time you can use the same hydrazine to make fertilizer.

So, all hail hydrazine, s**rew that 3He.

The moon was form from blast from earths primordial surface, the gases most of them have higher dofferentialndrag and would have fallen back to earth,mthose that were left would have dispersed in outer space. The moon is basically well cooked earth surface, don't expect evolution of free gas would be easy process. 

 

[FreeThinker]

7 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Nitrogen is not exhausted from lythosphere, it's a boiled up cryosphere. So, no reasons to search its deposits in a crust or mantle.

cryosphere ? don't you mean Athenosphere?

[kerbiloid]

8 minutes ago, PB666 said:

The moon was form from blast from earths primordial surface

Only in the impact theory. But anyway it was being molten throughout, no crysophere traces had chances to survive.

8 minutes ago, PB666 said:

the gases most of them have higher dofferentialndrag and would have fallen back to earth

When temperature is available to melt rocks, gases usually don't fall, they tend to fly away.
Again, a significant evidence against that impact theory.

5 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

cryosphere ? don't you mean Athenosphere?

I mean that the primary substance of the Solar System is dirty snow consisting of frozen water, ammonia, hydrocarbons and mineral dust.
So, of course we can (and do) call the surface/body of Pluto, Europa, etc, lythosphere. By technically as it still consists of that frozen cryogenic mix, we can also call it cryosphere.
Nitrogen appears when the primary ammonia boils and turns into atmosphere.

Edited June 29, 2016 by kerbiloid

[FreeThinker]

14 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Nitrogen is not exhausted from lythosphere, it's a boiled up cryosphere. So, no reasons to search its deposits in a crust or mantle.

Venus, certainly had large amounts of Nitro — as the Earth does.
But it has dissipated due to the heat, like water (a volcanic steam) also has, being splitted by UV into Oxy and Hydro.
Nitro and Oxy have almost the same molecular mass, so they both are gone.

On the Moon you can't get domestic Nitro, you must avoid its usage as long as possible, or import it from the Earth.

From another side — imagine, you are a lunar redneck with a moon rocket tractor. Would you really want to tremble any time fueling it in your hangar with flammable toxic hyperholics? And then cleaning the fuel spots? Unlikely.
What would you want instead? Peroxide. It's a fuel for main engine, for RCS, you can drink it (→water), you can breathe it (→oxygen), it's enough stable and not so toxic.
What do you need to import for it? H.

From the third side — any handy rocket fuel mostly consists of Oxy. There is a lot of Oxy on the Moon.
What is oxidizer for hyperholics? NTO. What does it consist of? N and O. What do you need to import? N.

So, you would import large amount of hydrazine. Partially convert it into NTO (source of N). Partially — into HTP (source of H).
Then you can fly high on hydrazine+NTO, fly to your neighbors' farm on HTP.

Also you can use this hydrazine as a working body for nukes.
And if you implement in KSPI-E that aneutronic 15N-based fusion, you can get 15N-hydrazine for your fusion.

Of course, any time you can use the same hydrazine to make fertilizer.

So, all hail hydrazine, s**rew that 3He.

Instead of transfering Nitrogen or Hydrogen to the Moon, it would be much more logical to make the Moon a Oxygen exporter and Use Aluminium/Silicoid  to get it to a Larange point between the Earth and the Moon.

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker

[PB666]

1 minute ago, kerbiloid said:

Only in the impact theory. But anyway it was being molten throughout, no crysophere traces had chances to survive.

When temperature is available to melt rocks, gases usually don't fall, they tend to fly away.
Again, a significant evidence against that impact theory.

This is ejecta, its in disequilibrium and friction drives the smallest particles to lose velocity relative to the center of system mass, this is known as coslescence, thats how the major bodies form. Some of the gas is ejected no doubt as the density of gas falls locally the solar wind radiation creates a free kick path out of the earth moon system, but whike the density is high it tends to create heat and expand the gas from the disk were it can also fall back to earth via drag forces.m

[kerbiloid]

14 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Instead of transfering Nitrogen or Hydrogen to the Moon, it would be much more logical to make the Moon a Oxygen exporter and Use Aluminium/Silicoid  to get it to a Larange point between the Earth and the Moon.

Of course you would produce large amounts of Oxygen, it's unavoidable at least because you will split the rocks (i.e. oxides) to metals.
But also it's unavoidable to use local rocket engines (and in greater amounts than mighty ones). You usually need taxi more often than a space shuttle. And if you don't want to build autobahns through the regolith hills, you will use a rocket taxi.
That means, you will need large amounts of hydrazine & peroxide anyway.

Aluminium has three disadvantages: it requires much electric energy to get it from the ore; pure aluminium rocket would be large and can't be used for local purposes; all cases of the aluminium usage in real life required either hydrazine to dissolve or rubber and nitrates, so nitrogen in any case. Hydrazine is just the easiest way to store nitrogen.

So, large cysterns of imported hydrazine are a substantial part of the lunar colony.

Of course, near Jool you can import it from the local places.

13 minutes ago, PB666 said:

This is ejecta, its in disequilibrium and friction drives the smallest particles to lose velocity relative to the center of system mass, this is known as coslescence, thats how the major bodies form. Some of the gas is ejected no doubt as the density of gas falls locally the solar wind radiation creates a free kick path out of the earth moon system, but whike the density is high it tends to create heat and expand the gas from the disk were it can also fall back to earth via drag forces.m

You can calculate molecular speeds near 2000-4000 K and compare them to the circular speed of Moon satellite.

Edited June 29, 2016 by kerbiloid

[FreeThinker]

8 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

all cases of the aluminium usage in real life required either hydrazine to dissolve or rubber and nirates, so nitrogen in any case.

So, large cysterns of imported hydrazine are a substantial part of the lunar colony.

Well this is something new, I can imagine Nitrogen is part of the production process as a catalist, but is it actualy consumed? I though for a Moon Aluminium Refenery you only needed Chlorite and Carbon to split Aluminia into Oxygen and Aluminium and a lot of Power (source: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php#aluminum) I'm I missing something here?

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker

[PB666]

5 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Of course you would produce large amounts of Oxygen, it's unavoidable at least because you will split the rocks (i.e. oxides) to metals.
But also it's unavoidable to use local rocket engines (and in greater amounts than mighty ones). You usually need taxi more often than a space shuttle. And if you don't want to build autobahns through the regolith hills, you will use a rocket taxi.
That means, you will need large amounts of hydrazine & peroxide anyway.

Aluminium has three disadvantages: it requires much electric energy to get it from the ore; pure aluminium rocket would be large and can't be used for local purposes; all cases of the aluminium usage in real life required either hydrazine to dissolve or rubber and nitrates, so nitrogen in any case. Hydrazine is just the easiest way to store nitrogen.

So, large cysterns of imported hydrazine are a substantial part of the lunar colony.

Of course, near Jool you can import it from the local places.

You can calculate molecular speeds near 2000-4000 K and compare them to the circular speed of Moon satellite.

Doesnt matter vector motion along the plane is the path of least friction, molecules with inclined orbits run into each other and radiate heat into space eventually multiple collision can dissipate most of the heat,mthe outside gases are lost,mthe internal gases loose velocity on the dark side of the Earth and fall to become atmosphere. There are computer models that demonstarte coalescence. The gases for example co2 are 44 daltons weigh 44 times that of hydrogen plasma. Dont forget that the collisions can accelerate moving away from the sun and decelerate moving toward the sun. 

[kerbiloid]

2 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

I though you only needed Chlorite and Carbon to split Aluminia into Oxygen and Aluminium (source: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist.php#aluminum) I'm I missing something here?

Afaik, the only industrial method of Alumina→Aluminium is an electrolysis of Alumina+cryolite mixture. No chemical ways give the same efficiency. And that electrolysis requires enormous amounts of electricity.

Btw, as cryolite is industrially created from fluorite, that's one more reason to mine Fluorite resource.

[FreeThinker]

3 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Afaik, the only industrial method of Alumina→Aluminium is an electrolysis of Alumina+cryolite mixture. No chemical ways give the same efficiency. And that electrolysis requires enormous amounts of electricity.

Well Power isn't realy a problem with a nuclear reactor, the heat can be generated electricly or the heat can be retrieved directly from the Nuclear Core.

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker

[p1t1o]

Electricity is not going to be scarce on the Moon/Mun/whatever.

[kerbiloid]

6 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Electricity is not going to be scarce on the Moon/Mun/whatever.

Until you start to burn the aluminium instead of kerosene.

For example: Falcon contains ~600 or so tonnes of kerosene and only ~30 t of aluminium. Imagine, you need 200-300 t of aluminium per Falcon launch.

11 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Well Power isn't realy a problem with a nuclear reactor

(the same)

Edited June 29, 2016 by kerbiloid

[FreeThinker]

12 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Btw, as cryolite is industrially created from fluorite, that's one more reason to mine Fluorite resource.

Intresting How does this Alumina+cryolite to Aluminium process work?

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker

[kerbiloid]

2 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Intresting How does this Alumina+cryolite work?

Cryolite mix decreases the Alumina melting point down to the value when you can melt Alumina rather than bath.
Don't forget, that the melting bath is also mostly made of alumina...

Edited June 29, 2016 by kerbiloid

[p1t1o]

7 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Until you start to burn the aluminium instead of kerosene.

For example: Falcon contains ~600 or so tonnes of kerosene and only ~30 t of aluminium. Imagine, you need 200-300 t of aluminium per Falcon launch.

(the same)

So what is stopping you from having a larger reactor, or more easily, a ginormous solar array? Or both. High output aluminium production during lunar day, nuclear reactor to tide you over during the night. Almost any amount of infrastructure which allows you to make aluminium fuel on a usable scale will be far more useful than having to import massive amounts of hydrazine on a regular basis.

If its not self-sustaining, there is quite a lack of point in the whole thing.

[kerbiloid]

1 minute ago, p1t1o said:

So what is stopping you from having a larger reactor, or more easily, a ginormous solar array?

Solar arrays in turn require alumina and silica (the most high-melting minerals) and aluminium for power lines.

So, the Moon will turn into Alumoon when we finish.

Reactors are of course great, but the nuclear fuel is also not found near the road.

And if you own thousands of portable thermonuke reactors, why at all you need that aluminium rockets?

[p1t1o]

Huh?

[FreeThinker]

1 hour ago, kerbiloid said:

And if you own thousands of portable thermonuke reactors, why at all you need that aluminium rockets?

Even if you have lot's of nuclear power, your still have to launch any minable resource (Titanium, Rare Earth Methals, Hydrogen, Argon, Neon Hellium4, Helium3)  into space somehow without expansive fuel  (which have to be hauled all the way from earth). Aluminium would be perfect as a cheap ISRU fuel to get into orbit. Once in orbit, you switch to Nuclear Hydrogen or electric propulsion for maximum Isp

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

Even if you have lot's of nuclear power, your still have to launch any minable resource (Titanium, Rare Earth Methals, Hydrogen, Argon, Neon Hellium4, Helium3)  into space somehow without expansive fuel  (which have to be hauled all the way from earth). Aluminium would be perfect as a cheap ISRU fuel to get into orbit. Once in orbit, you switch to Nuclear Hydrogen or electric propulsion for maximum Isp

To process those materials in industrial amounts (otherwise why to orbit them) you need much energy, i.e. nukes/thermonukes.
As you have many nukes/thermonukes for mining, it's actual to use them for launch, too. And Aluminium is not a good fuel for a nuclear engine.

So, from my pov, while you need Al, you can't; when you can - you don't need.
(As with flintstones for stone axes. Cavemen wanted it, but it was hard to get. Now we can mine it millions tons, but we don't need).

P.S.
Also: aluminium in rockets produces alumina, it condensates at falls down.
So, any alumina rocket will drop a thousand tonnes of thin alumina dust from sky.
1000 rockets - million tonnes.
Don't forget to take enough shovels to dig up KSC.

P.P.S.
(Of course, about Falcon I meant "600 tonnes of fuel")

Edited June 29, 2016 by kerbiloid

[FreeThinker]

11 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

To process those materials in industrial amounts (otherwise why to orbit them) you need much energy, i.e. nukes/thermonukes.
As you have many nukes/thermonukes for mining, it's actual to use them for launch, too. And Aluminium is not a good fuel for a nuclear engine.
So, from my pov, while you need Al, you can't; when you can - you don't need.

No, you would land a Nuclear Powered Rinery on the surface, use rovers to collect Alumnia Ore which is converted in the Refinery to Aluminium + Oxygen, The Aluminium+Oxygen Mix is used by a special moon transfer vessel to launch any valuable resources into Orbit. After delivery at a fuel station, it return back to the moon to repeat. THe Heavy Nuclear Powered Refinery of cource remains on the surface.

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker

[Green Baron]

10 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

(As with flintstones for stone axes. Cavemen wanted it, but it was hard to get. Now we can mine it millions tons, but we don't need).

 

Nonsense. Flint lies on the open ground and "Cavemen" only exist in cheap movies or comics strips.

No offence, just demanding more respect for the elder :-)

 

[kerbiloid]

8 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

No, you would land a Nuclear Powered Rinery on the surface, use rovers to collect Alumnia Ore which is converted in the Refinery to Aluminium + Oxygen, The Aluminium+Oxygen Mix is used by a special moon transfer vessel to launch any valuable resources into Orbit.

So, per 1000 tonnes of ore to be delivered as alumina, you should dig, electrolyse and then lose say 3000 tonnes more?
Why not just send unsplitted alumina by nukes and refine it on the Earth plant?

[FreeThinker]

6 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

So, per 1000 tonnes of ore to be delivered as alumina, you should dig, electrolyse and then lose say 3000 tonnes more?
Why not just send unsplitted alumina by nukes and refine it on the Earth plant?

Because the Delta V from the Mun to L1 is a whole lot cheaper than launching from Earth to LEO

 

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker

[kerbiloid]

7 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Because the Delta V from the Mun to L1 is a whole lot cheaper than launching from Earth to LEO

Then why you need L1? Just build your ship on the Moon.
And put nuke engines on it.

As in this case you need several times less Alumina, you can use the unused reactors as engines,

Edited June 29, 2016 by kerbiloid

[FreeThinker]

12 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

Then why you need L1? Just build your ship on the Moon.
And put nuke engines on it.

Well the Goal is to make long distance space travel cheaper, we can achieve this by lowering the amount of mass we have to hoal between Earth to LEO (10.000 m/s) Building an entire space ship on the moon would be a lot more difficult in comparison then a operational Mine (collecting Oxygen, Rare metals and Helium3). If I'm going to build long distance space ships, I would build the in orbit, preferably at L1, 4/5 between Earth and the Moon.

Delta V  Earth - L1 = 14.1 km/s

Delta V moon - L1 = 2.3 km/s

Edited June 29, 2016 by FreeThinker