"The highest concentrations are in the lunar maria; about half the He3 is deposited in the 20% of the lunar surface covered by the maria."

http://www.asi.org/adb/02/09/he3-intro.html
"To extract He3 from the lunar soil, we heat the dust to about 600 degrees C. We get most of the other volatiles out at the same time, so we'll be heating up the rocks anyway. (To get the oxgyen out, we'll turn up the furnace to about 900 deg C and do some other nasty stuff; but that's a different story.)"

The Energy:
"That 1 million metric tonnes of He3, reacted with deuterium, would generate about 20,000 terrawatt-years of thermal energy. The units alone are awesome: a terrawatt-year is one trillion (10 to 12th power) watt-years. To put this into perspective, one 100-watt light bulb will use 100 watt-years of energy in one year."

It's rather interesting how so much R&D has been created by folks such as these of THE ARTEMIS PROJECT, though there's essentially no mention nor specifics of their working environment of what this lunar surface represents to robotics, much less humans. It's as though via scorching and thoroughly TBI dosage worth of direct sunlight, nor via cool but sufficiently illuminating earthshine, is there even the slightest factor of working environment risk assessment. Perhaps these folks know of and/or share their cloned radiation-proof DNA with the likes of Jay Windley, suggesting that the moon offers a mere "walk in the park" sort of exposure to the likes of solar and cosmic rays, whereas mere synthetic moon suits more than sufficiently allude to all those secondary reactions of their clumping moon dirt that supposedly contains so much of that nifty He3, not to mention whatsoever of their being any of those pesky micro-meteorite either. How nice it must be, mining away and gathering up marina on a anti-gravity moon that neither attracts nor accelerates anything towards itself.

I'll suppose this phase could use another one of those "what's the difference" salutations. However, it seems rather crystal clear that of most any free space environment that's 100% solar irradiated, of this raw exposure that's otherwise clear of any Van Allen zone of death, as well as nowhere near any moon is worth at least 3.64e4 Sv (3.64e6 rem) per year, as opposed to residing here on Earth being worth less than 0.365 rem/year (1e7:1). Lo and behold, when we toss in the secondary reaction of what the sun and cosmic influx has to throw at the lunar surface and, guess what folks, it's NOT better off. In fact, if any number of micro-meteorites doesn't manage to get you first, then at least another 10% worth of hard x-ray dosage well. I hate being the messenger of such bad news but, that's on average a whopping 11,000 rads/day (458 rads/hr), so you'd better hope to Christ that there's none of those sunspots anywhere in sight on the days you're out and about collecting any of that maria having deposits of He3. And BTW; I wasn't even suggesting upon anything as lethal as for late October/November 2003, as those solar deliveries were entirely off the scale of moon-suit surviving while in earthshine, as in order to survive those you'll be needing my 50t LM-1 bus.

In spite of whatever lunar environment risk, at least it seems like, in order for mankind to proficiently goto places like Mars or Venus, for that task we'll need darn good shielding, among many other things such as energy, initially quite a good deal of said energy and, if I'm being the least bit weird about thinking that Earth is becoming somewhat tapped out, and otherwise thinking that we're being CO2 gassed into a fairly certain premature death via greenhouse global warming, if not otherwise blown to bits by those stealth and thereby invisible WMD class donkey-carts, then perhaps before it's too late, we should have ourselves another look-see, as well as a go at obtaining some of that lunar He3, before the likes of Japan, China, Russia or those nice Arabs, or perhaps someone worse off, like Salem Laden (Osama's older brother) decides it's past due to collect on an old association with our resident warlord, that perhaps he should grab onto those He3 rings while the getting is still reasonably good, then sit back and proceed to rule upon the future of our global energy demise, while turning a hefty profit either way.

Human physiology is highly adaptable to pressure. Under such pressure, many things are not nearly as intolerably hot as you've been told and, you wont even need but a fraction of a percent of O2. Of course, that degree of adaptation to pressure might have to be accommodated at a rate of a few bars per day, say over a month we humans could become fully pressurized, and as such good for go, though due to our inferior DNA, we'll still most likely be in need of a good CO2-->CO/O2 converter plus ample air conditioning in order to suit our deficient physiology, unless of course those Venus Cathar lizard folks are nice about accommodating such on our behalf.
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/venus-air.htm
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/radio-maybe.htm
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

Of course, though most of us are not about to officially start telling ourselves the truth at this late point in the game, although of discussing a few worthy *not such half bad* ideas on behalf of Venus, Mars or of pertaining to our moon should be taken seriously before others do, even though spending whatever (including expending whatever human lives) has nothing whatsoever to do with anything associated with the recent tactics of our resident warlord, and that's a fact, although I believe the likes of JFK would have been damn proud of what I'm offering, though still thoroughly dead because of the cold-war moon-race was everything (as in all or nothing), even if that ment pulling off a sting/ruse of the century in order to snooker the entire world. We also need to remind ourselves that, in spite of what you might like to think, or of what our government wants you to think, there's still in an ongoing cold-war that's actually not been all that cold over energy resources, and/or of the distributions thereof (that's including any redistributions of whatever associated wealth thereof), as well as for our moderating over the likes of whomever is tapping into whatever energy alternatives.

Seems our official energy policy has been and continues that we don't actually want other folks, much less poor folks, getting their grubby little mits on any sort of affordable energy, as they might actually accomplish things like surviving, or much worse is that they could potentially benefit humanity by their creating competitive services and products and, we simply can't have that sort of stuff going unchecked and/or untaxed to death.

Perhaps you'll have to agree that our infamous NASA certainly needs an over-dosage worth of electro-shock therapy, and/or some rather significant kicks in their already sore butts, firstly upon delivering honesty, such as truth of history and of what's been accomplished, as well as otherwise promoting upon whatever is affordably obtainable, without further creating excessive CO2 contributions nor carnage or otherwise busting the bank. As long as we're out and about fixing things, scientific as well as political infomercials and disinformation ott to be made punishable by death. I mean, what's worse off than a lie that's being promoted as truth by your own government, because if that's tolerable, then there's absolutely no limits as to what's possible, as to what other lies there are, and as to how much damage has been and will continue until there's nothing left to destroy.

Even though the lunar environment simply wasn't then and isn't now the sort of Apollo "walk in the park" as most folks would like to think, such as most snookered Americans and the likes of wizard Jay Windley would suggest. Good grief, it seems we first need to get ourselves unplugged from their Borg collective, then get into an actual life as well as an education, then to stop lying to ourselves and everyone else. Even for the act of obtaining a better understanding for H2 should be worth having, though most Americans have become afraid of their own shadow as much as any stray donkey-cart, much less for their contemplating the benefits of H2 that far outweigh the risk (the same goes for H2O2).

I honestly believe, as well as do many others, that the moon offers our best ever pitstop and/or gateway as to going places, especially with all the lunar stash of He3 made easily accessible via the LSE-CM/ISS. Though our NASA Borgs seem to remain opposed to absolutely anything lunar (why is that?).

The GMDE (Guth Moon Dirt Express) beats Brad Edwards ESE in just about every category, especially the one pertaining to accomplishing this LSE within the limitations and lifetimes of what we've already got to work with, and at not 10% the ESE fiasco expense at that. Is this the sort of thing what our resident warlord was insisting that we "achieve more from less, and of accomplishing everything faster", or is this another one of his "what's the difference" or what?

Just in case you've missed out on some of my previously warm and fuzzy timeline of the JFK demise rant, I've included some further thoughts as to the morals of our moon-race, of the all or nothing "cold-war" aspects of the JFK demise, placing some of my most recent thoughts into this following document/page. Hopefully I've managed to share by reintroducing a little aspect of cold-war fun and games into the following page, as life is simply too freaking short for being serious about everything. In other words, perhaps this is darn good place to apply another one of those "so what's the difference" criteria, because we all know that's exactly what the Pope did after exterminating all those Cathars, same goes for those 6-Day war prisoners.
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm

I can't be all that sure about yourself, but in spite of all the incoming flak, I'm certainly understanding a bit more of why the likes of Dr. Zubrin and of Brad Edwards want nothing whatsoever to do with anything lunar, even though our moon offers not only the most He3 bang for the buck, but of likely affording the one and only viable alternative pitstop/gateway worthy of getting folks to/from places like Mars or Venus. Though as for folks touching anything lunar, is certain death for whatever funding, and that includes publications that enjoy millions of dollars for their business as long as they only print what NASA specifies and/or moderates.

Perhaps this following topic should place some new meaning to the moon being either too hot or too damn cold to humanly touch without getting yourself seriously slapped down by our resident warlord, as otherwise our moon seems to be offering way more than it's fair share of He3 energy, along with whatever a good tether dipole energy extraction that might be worth only a few terawatts. As such, here's a little more of my tit for tat favor returning, as an update that's going thermal nuclear upon lunar He3.

This energy topic may become a bit premature for the likes of myself. However, if there's already been decades worth of talk, as well as so much in-depth R&D as to our obtaining and then utilizing sufficient amounts of He3 from the moon, and that there's absolutely nothing that's energy usage insurmountable other than for our physically obtaining said He3, then perhaps the LSE-CM/ISS is just the He3 ticket to ride.

Of course, if we wait around for the likes of China, Japan, India, other middle Easterns like Salem Laden or even Osama bin Laden, or simply allowing those poor Russian bastards that seem to truly have every incentive you can possibly think of to being the firstest with the mostest of their establishing this LSE-CM/ISS, as for established such prior to ours. Well damn, this one could become a wee bit of another button pushing problem, seeing that only one of these LSE suckers can exist (coexist isn't even an option), and of whomever has the first LSE key will thereby rule the energy wealth of the future, and perhaps rule upon a whole lot more if push comes to down to shove.

According to a few too many respected folks; apparently this He3 energy tap offers more than just a viable alternative, of which our moon has way more than it's fair share of He3.

So, I'm thinking it's time if not past due that we go back into another moon-race or flat out world class war, though this time not anything cold, but as hot and nasty as to whatever it takes because, if we don't they will, it's that simple. If all else fails, we can probably get away with nuking and/or of ABL UV/c laser beam chopping up DNA within whomever is annoying us and then apply our "so what's the difference" warlord qualifier as for exterminating whomever gets in our way (at least the Pope will have to be on our side). Stealth donkey-carts or not, the stuff on the moon belongs to us because, we've made everyone think that we've already been there and done that (so it's all ours, period!).

Be certain to take the above paragraph out of context, as well as out of jest because, for all we know it could be more truth than not.

It sort of sounds like He3 is even offering somewhat of an ideal spacecraft propulsion solution, that'll kick serious butt.

No wonder our incest clones of esteemed astrophysics and astronomy Borgs are keeping "mum's the word" about the moon, supposedly wanting nothing whatsoever to do with our going back, and will do almost anything as to keeping others from attempting. It's all about energy again, just like the previous three significant wars, actually a forth being the 6-Day war and I'm fairly certain there are many smaller energy tit for tats in between, plus there was certainly an undertow of WW-II having to do with energy agendas, namely Hitler having more than his fair share, but also as for the likes of Japan becoming an energy Czar and thereby export capable, by way of their conquering other peoples land and of taking resources (oddly sounds rather familiar to Iraq, among many others we've economically as well as politically conquered).

It also seems, that as long as others don't presently have capability of extracting lunar He3, then we're sufficiently happy campers, as it's never been for an actual shortage of Earthly energy resources, as much as it's been an orchestrated agenda of keeping others from acquiring anything that offers affordable potential, as that way we don't have to actually try to accomplish efficient and worthy goals for humanity, just as long as the rest of our world remains in sufficient conflict or without an affordable energy resource, while we continue to profit from their demise. As then we rule by way of default and/or via world class (shock and awe) WMD if need be, then merely invoke our "so what's the difference" ruling if and when we're caught administering another one of those Pope/Cathar atrocities.

Although, I believe there's certainly another down-to-Earth energy alternative that I have a few recent improvements as for utilizing H2O2/C12H26:
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-irrce.htm
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-h2o2-irrce.htm
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-hybrid-irc.htm
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-01.htm
https://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lm-1.htm

The last page listed above, on the GV-LM-1, is pertaining to the lunar metro bus that's track driven and I believe capable of circumnavigating that moon, along with fending off those pesky micro-meteorites and of whatever radiation. This robust lunar basalt composite bus, LM-1 of 25 to 50 tonnes worth and H2O2/C12H26 fueled, operating off the energy efficient IRRC engine that's a rather happy camper in space as it is under water, as well as on Mars or even Venus. If we're ever going to have the LSE-Lobby, by all means we'll be needing just such a good long-range capable transporter that'll survive, and for doing such in good style.

This He3 energy potential via the LSE-CM/ISS and/or GMDE that offers a means/gateway to many ends, is actually all about our affordably and safely going places, such as off to visit those frozen and irradiated to death Mars microbes, or otherwise off to visit those nice Venus Cathar lizard folk, or of our at least doing such from the outpost or vantage of VL2, where we'll likely deploy the likes of TRACE-II as providing our first interplanetary communications platform, or sort of laser-packet transponder of accommodating truly high-speed interplanetary smut (as in terabytes/ms if using quantum packet mode). If nothing else, just the benefit of our utilizing the moon as for the VLA-SAR aperture outpost of the SAR receiving module placement is worth more than nearly all of the other Earthly astronomy attributes combined, at not one cent on the dollar at that because, we already have those Earth stations of radar transmitters just sitting around, doing almost nothing worth squat because we still don't have any stinking receiving aperture situated on the moon.

Here are just a few of those extracts from others discussing the lunar He3, as suggesting a holy grail of fuel/energy that'll save our butts once we've used up and/or destroyed all the affordable energy resources of Earth. As far as I've learned, there's apparently no CO2 produced and damn little if any radiation created from burning He3.

From: Xaonon (xaonon@aol.comQ)
 Subject: Re: Does the Moon have nuclear fuel?
Helium 3 is very rare on Earth, but it is available in large quantities on the moon. The solar wind has been depositing He3 on the moon's surface for billions of years, and all we have to do is go and scoop up the lunar regolith to retrieve it.

From: itaytslin@hhcc.com (itaytslin@hhcc.com)
 Subject: Economics of Helium-3 fusion??
Helium-3 fusion is HARDER than deuterium fusion - temperature * density required to achieve breakeven point is about twice as high. He-3's appeal is that it produces no neutron radiation. A deuterium fusion reactor eventually becomes too "hot" and has to be disposed of; a helium fusion reactor does not. Still, the amount of radioactive waste per unit of energy (assuming controlled fusion ever gets off the ground) is tiny compared to fission reactors.

From: John Logajan (logajan@ns.network.com)
 Subject: Re: Helium 3 abundance
Mr. ROWBERG: Helium-3 is not a naturally occurring element on the planet. But there are enormous quantities of it on the moon.

GEORGE: [voice-over] A scientist who has studied the idea of mining the moon for helium-3 says it isn't as far fetched as it might sound.

Mr. KULCINSKI: If we wanted to provide all the electricity in the United States for the year 1992, it would take about 25 tons of helium-3, and if that was liquefied, it would fit in the cargo bay of the U.S. shuttle, so one spaceship a year full of helium-3 would provide all of the electricity in the United States.

From: Dave Stephenson (stephens@geod.emr.ca)
 Subject: Re: Helium 3 abundance
Helium three mining of the Moon has been extensively studied and criticized over the past decade. It should be feasible, but massive undertaking. The crunch point , like for so many space activities, is to reduce the cost to orbit. The Shuttle costs about 10,000 dollars to put a pound into orbit, we need to get that down by at least a factor ten or better to start thinking seriously about lunar mining. See all the postings on DCX on sci.space for further (too much!) information. John Lewis has suggested that mining the atmosphere of Uranus is a better proposition for obtaining large masses of He3. I had a paper on manufacturing He3 on the Moon. Fuse D-D and extract the He3 from the reactor, any tritium not burnt can be allowed to decay to He3 on the Moon before shipment. Alternatively use accelerators or high neutron flux reactors to transmute Li to tritium and allow to decay. Lots of ways of skinning the cat once there is cheap, reliable, commercial access to space!

Without any doubt, we need to go back to the moon, this time for keeps, as well as for finders keepers because, if we don't, those having the right stuff (that stuff being money) are not going to keep sitting on their butts while other's are intent upon ripping the world off.

If in fact the moon is even half as nasty as I can determine, then the lunar task becomes a wee but more difficult. Although, with motivation, ingenuity and a focus upon the task at hand, it's entirely possible to initially establish a base camp of mostly robotics, then eventually a few of us humans and so forth (the rest becomes honest history).

The LSE-CM/ISS, having the dynamics of the CCM in order to regulate the ME/L-1.1 stationkeeping of the CM/ISS, and of those massive counter-rotating energy storing flywheels, situated at ME-L1 that's between the CM and CCM, further enables the process of exporting whatever is mined, making it possible for those exports as for being released from the ME-L1.1 depot as to either being tethered towards Earth and/or freely floated off towards Earth where presumably some Earthly shuttle will recapture and finish off the transport of substances to the surface of Earth.

Although, once the LSE-CM/ISS infrastructure of a lunar outpost is capable of obtaining the lunar He3, of then independently packaging such into reentry modules that'll utilize conventional parachutes for their final decent, there's obviously not all that much for astronauts to do, much less needlessly risking their lives for.

The significant benefit being; If we can keep from having to launch any shuttle like mission in the first place, the 100:1 ratio of artificial CO2 that's created per tonne of what's having to be launched for any lunar related function is entirely eliminated. Obviously a few thousand jobs are also eliminated, thus no CO2 created by all of their grid-lock of commute traffic, nor loads of so many other associated infrastructure activities that the entire shuttle program proceeds to create further CO2 emissions as a result. All we'll have are those relatively small packages of He3 safely arriving each and every month, having no transport crew and damn little ground support, of perhaps little more than what we currently employ for recovering those shuttle SBR and hydrogen tanks, taking place nearly every time anything significant needs to be launched (nearly every time meaning, that sometimes there's been nothing much to recover).

Obviously, if anything needs to specifically land on the lunar surface, as opposed to utilizing those tethered LSE transport pods, the lunar gravity pull of 1.6 m/s is not going to be all that easy to deal with, as obviously we currently have no working solution for any reliable fly-by-wire decent that's purely via rocket engine(s), at least NASA hasn't got squat worth of anything you'd trust your life with.

In order to place this 1.6 m/s as an ever increasing SOA task into a little perspective;
Because there's no aerobreaking whatsoever, even if the incoming ship were to somehow accurately retrothrust so as to stop entirely at the altitude of one kilometer, the free-fall from 1 km would be impacting at 1.6 km/s. Unless this incoming transport ship was merely a large balloon of H2, say having a grand total mass of merely 1 kg, chances are that whatever fell from 1 km wouldn't survive the impact, much less if that was even a tiny spaceship of 1000 kg (6000 kg Earth), of which wouldn't even accommodate a single astronaut. The same fiasco goes for being as little as 10 meters off touchdown, as free falling from merely 10 meters is still worth 16 m/s times all of the lander mass, of which even a relatively small lander may have to be at least 5 lunar tonnes worth, whereas more than likely we're having to consider 15+ tonnes. 15 tonnes impacting at even 16 m/s is obviously not an option.

Seems like any good commercial lunar lander, having a sufficient composite structural as for micro-meteorites abatement and thereby of sufficient radiation density shielding, providing transport for a viable workforce crew of perhaps 10+, would have to amount to as much as 100 tonnes, which obviously computes into a 17 tonne worth of lunar touchdown. If this were a tri-rocket sort of helicopter, having those modulated rocket engines spread out in the triangle of perhaps 15 meters per side, where each rocket engine would require the modulated thrust of 1t < 10+t each, yielding < 30+ tonnes worth of inbound delivery retrothrust. Having this thrusting triangle situated above the main crew sphere, thereby well above the center of gravity regardless of the variable fuel payload, and if situated in the center of this thrust lifting triangle, such as within the top portion of this crew sphere, were at least a couple of sufficiently massive flywheels, say offering their driven mass at the radious offset of one meter and possibly a rotating mass of 100 kg each, spinning along at 10,000 rpm (a pair of 100 kg @1046 m/s) would enable those three primary engines as well as for whatever maneouvering thrusters to work against something. Obviously having a second pair of these flywheels operating within the base of the crew sphere would only further improve their maneouvering stability as well as reliability aspects.

Surely there are flywheel wizards out there that'll conjure up all sorts of compact, as well as lighter weight and of sufficiently powerful kinetic energy/force solutions better than I can, whereas r=0.25 meter, spinning 10 kg each flywheel, as operating at 30,000 rpm might even be sufficient for this application; so what the hell are you waiting for?

BTW; the auxiliary generator for powering this GLV-22 lander could be driven by the IRRCE that's running on h2o2/c12h26, since per pound as well as per volume of valuable space, this package would yield the most bang for our buck, as well as per kg of the h2o2/c12h26.

GLV-22, as in Guth LV-22 Osprey lunar lander.
I'm thinking along the lines of accommodating an 8 meter diameter, or possibly even a 10 meter version, as offering a central 8+meter crew pod/sphere, along with those three main engines placed overhead and outboard at 15 meters apart would quite nicely accommodate a crew of 10, plus ample provisions of vodka and pizza, and obviously of all those necessary attributes of additional spheres of fuel and oxidiser, plus of whatever extra O2, as all those being safely accommodated external to the crew sphere. Their tripod landing would be of the usual energy absorbing telescopic, computer moderated in order to suit just about any "what if".

Obviously, if there's just a pilot/copilot onboard, then this GLV-22 could be subsequently utilized for all sorts of go-fetch and/or deploy whatever, having a surplus hauling capacity of nearly 15+lunar tonnes (90 Earthly tonnes) and a working to/from range of at least several hundred km depending on fuel load and task at hand. Whereas obviously a one-way exit would get the GLV-22 with a maximum capacity of perhaps 24 folks to the safety of the LSE-CM/ISS within one hour. Being that the CM/ISS could be 70,000 km above, clearly means the GLV-22 needs to average nearly 20 km/s, though with a 30+t thrust, 20+km/s shouldn't be all that difficult, especially if those thrusters employed a little of that He3 and/or EMPD.

I'll try to offer a 2D sketch of this GLV-22, along with a 3D view of the LSE-CM/ISS and perhaps something of the LM-1 buss, as I fully realize a few pictures are worth a thousand words (in my case that's more likely 100,000 words), as that way you don't even have to think anymore, just pretend that you already knew everything there was to know by pointing out whatever design compromises, or of simply being your critical self upon whatever anyone other has to offer, as much out of spite as for any legitimate reason. God forbid, you wouldn't want to contribute squat worth of anything original or even share in what you've learned (mostly at taxpayers expense) from others on behalf of humanity, as that might get you expelled from your favorite "nondisclosure cult".

As always; your input, as well as whatever spare medication, is much needed. As far as I'm concerned, your ideas and expertise will be given all the credit it deserves, and then some.