Water, Water Everywhere, on the Moon…
Email…but not a drop to drink. You'll recall NASA's LCROSS mission last fall, which crashed a spent rocket into the moon's south pole in the hope that it would kick up frozen water there. It was apparently successful.
Now, an American-made radar aboard India's Chandrayaan-1 lunar orbiter is reported to have seen evidence of ice deposits near the north pole as well. The signature of water showed up in more than 40 craters, the largest nine miles in diameter.
Paul Spudis of the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston was the principal investigator for the experiment, and he's written a an interesting explanation of how he and his colleagues deduced that they were seeing ice. You can find it HERE, at "The Once and Future Moon," the blog he keeps at the Smithsonian's Air & Space Magazine site.
The ice is probably mixed in with rock and soil in craters so deep that sunlight, coming in at a shallow angle at the poles, never hits it and causes it to vaporize.
"The quantity of water present at the lunar poles is significant," Spudis writes; "at the north pole alone, the 600 million metric tons of water there — turned into rocket fuel — is enough to launch the equivalent of one Space Shuttle (735 mT of propellant) per day for over 2000 years."
As he suggests, lunar water has been as interesting for future astronauts as for science; it could be used for fuel, air, power and sustenance for future moon bases.
But the future there has been put off for now, at least if the Obama administration has its way. Last month the White House proposed to cancel NASA's Constellation project, calling on NASA to develop new technology for space travel instead of going ahead with Bush-era "Vision for Space Exploration," which called for a moon base and Mars missions to follow.
There have been many objections, including this from Spudis:
"When they cancelled Project Constellation, the Vision was terminated as well. And what was put in its place?
"Nothing." (Image: Artist's conception of Chandrayaan-1 spacecraft, courtesy ISRO)
TechBytes (02.10.12) 
Steve Jobs' FBI File: Bomb Threat? 
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
This is a truly amazing find, and it
is one more reason to get going back to
the Moon. The need to transport every
thing that a moon base would need is
unnecessary once things get set up and
operating. We should be making the
devices and machines to extract and convert the H2O into the various components to sustain a Base.
I support the President in his adgenda to remake America, but I hope the Administration will reconsider this decision. I want to see this happen before I leave this earth.
Posted by: Blackie | March 2, 2010, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
…and now, back to your regularly scheduled program.
Posted by: Gerald | March 2, 2010, 2:21 pm 2:21 pm
How is the moon have water
Posted by: Tre | March 2, 2010, 3:11 pm 3:11 pm
The money spent on the space program is insignificant when compared to Iraq/Afghanistan war costs or Stimulus spending. Yet the return on this investment can be so much greater. Look at the development of the transistor back in the early days. Sadly even a Democrat is too short sighted to do what is best for the future of us all.
Posted by: Moon or Bust | March 2, 2010, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm
There are theories that imply the moon may have once been a part of earth. If that were true, we may find more that just water, we may find evidence to prove or disprove the theories. –
Posted by: tendergroins | March 2, 2010, 6:14 pm 6:14 pm
Waste of good money!!!
Posted by: bob house | March 2, 2010, 7:52 pm 7:52 pm
The formation of the moon is unrelated to the way in which the water got there. Look at the surface. It is covered with impact craters from asteroids and comets. Those comets deposited the ice water in the deepest crater basins that never see sunlight. There it remains.
Posted by: cicclinton | March 3, 2010, 12:48 am 12:48 am
wow cool!!!
i wan to visit moon
maybe we can live there soon in the
future
Posted by: 소연 | March 3, 2010, 2:35 am 2:35 am
If NASA has been ordered to cut its projects, the moon project seems likely a issue, then China may grab the first settlement privilege on the moon and we could be up the creek if there is Gold and Diamonds to be processed cause all we have is a Mars and maybe a Mercury Expedition probability and that takes many more years so if we are not so financially stable to handle that long term project the moon becomes our only hope to economically succeed. Does Obama know this much?
Posted by: Charles Jones | March 3, 2010, 2:45 am 2:45 am
???Water on the moon??? Can we live there?
Posted by: Jackie | March 3, 2010, 8:58 am 8:58 am
A base on the moon is where it’s at. The space station was good practice on how to do it but it is the short term vision. We need to build a base on the moon. That’s thinking for the future.
Posted by: Phil | March 3, 2010, 11:38 am 11:38 am
There is one reason that so many countries are rushing to get to the moon and it isn’t water although that will help. It’s Helium 3 which may prove to be the thing that makes fusion a viable energy source. To those claiming this is a waste of money, would you say that if we were looking at a new Saudi oil field that was just waiting for someone to claim it? Small thinking leads to nothing.
Posted by: morethanpolite | March 3, 2010, 1:52 pm 1:52 pm
Phil, Remember, if we were looking at a new Saudi oil field, there would be a bunch of environmental kooks campaining to keep us from drilling because we might harm the fragile environment. Maybe we could launch Al Gore to the moon to see if it is warming as well…
You are all looking for logic where there is only progressive liberalism..wake up and smell the revolution….
Posted by: alex | March 3, 2010, 6:25 pm 6:25 pm
Alex have you ever been around an oil field? It is aweful what is left after
they are done extracting the crude.
Destroying the environment in South Texas is one thing..I live here and have worked in the business. Alaska and some of our more fragile coastal area is something else.
Keeping corporations from ruining ground water supplies or leaving lakes of oily mud are not kooky ideas.
The moon is a place where science,
tourism, and national pride can keep
America on top, not dreaming of the
good old days, the way the Russians are
now.
Posted by: Blackie | March 4, 2010, 2:28 pm 2:28 pm
Yeah!! moon is a good destination for us to build homes there as plenty of water is there to generate energy from hydrogen and for drinking purposes as well. This is really great!!
Posted by: weider x factor | March 6, 2010, 12:24 am 12:24 am
Great! We find out where all the water on the moon is, and now we will no longer have a space vehicle to get there. I guess we can always obtain water from the moon through our Chinese friends via their space programs to the moon. Of course, the Chinese will need the moon water to get them to Mars.
Posted by: I_SupportNASA | March 8, 2010, 1:25 pm 1:25 pm
As with the “Age of Discovery”, 200 years of exploration for new trade routes from the 15th to the 17th century that ushered in the modern era, exploration of space will be driven by commercial interests, if at all. What do we want from space? What tangible commercial benefits? When those questions are answered, or even a glimmer of hope for commercial gain appears, then capital and efforts will be expended. So far, the commercial benefits of private space travel appear to be as sort of an expensive carnival ride, for bored, rich people.
Posted by: K. Daraa | March 9, 2010, 12:33 am 12:33 am
This may seem ridiculous, but what about science purely for the sake increasing the wealth of human knowledge? Not every discovery HAS to have an immediate practical financial application. Sometimes it’s pretty cool just to learn something new about the universe we live in.
Posted by: cicclinton | March 9, 2010, 10:57 pm 10:57 pm
Water on moon is really a good discovery of mankind on Earth. Now we can send human to moon on long missions as a plenty of water is there for their survival on moon. Moreover we can generate energy on moon from hydrogen obtained from water also.
Posted by: new life cleanse | March 11, 2010, 8:09 am 8:09 am
March 30, 1867. Russia sells Alaska to the United States for a purchase price of $7.2 million. That is roughly 1.9¢ per acre.
The sale was termed “Stewart’s Folly”. It was mocked as a waste of money, and it was labeled a big mistake. Possibly the US could carve-up and sell Alaska at today’s prices to finance our purchase in the moon futures market.
Through a lens of history: What is up there? And what future value may we receive from going there? Please tell me we truly know these things.
Posted by: heyRalph | March 14, 2010, 10:59 am 10:59 am