Ö÷²¥´óÐã

Would you consider buying a £10 acre's worth of Moon? Dennis Hope, the exploiter of the UN Outer Space Treaty of 1967's loop hole and the head of Lunar Real estate would hope so. These days, who owns how much of the Moon is an important business. The USA, China and Russia are all the leading players in the new Space Race to own as much of the Moon as possible. Why? Why, forty years after returning from the Moon is man suddenly so desperate to return? The answer is that the Moon could provide man with enough energy to power the planet for the next thousand years.

In answer to the Earth's increasing lack of fossil fuels, making energy by nuclear fusion has been an option. However, one of the main problems with this method is that it severely damages the chamber in which it takes place. To put a stop to this inconvenient effect, the substance helium-3 can be added to the reaction. Helium-3 can also be used as an energy resource in its own right. However, the only source of this on Earth is from decommissioned nuclear weapons; quite a limited resource. Ordinarily, helium-3 is emitted as a gas from the Sun's surface, and unfortunately it does not reach Earth is because our atmosphere blocks it. The Moon however, has no protective atmosphere, so its lunar soil is rich in helium-3; there is thought to be around one million tonnes of it.

Pioneering this idea is scientist J. Kulcinski and astronaut H. Schmitt. They plan to set up bases on the Moon from which to mine from and send back the helium-3 in liquid form. There are many benefits to this plan. To begin with, helium-3 is not radioactive and would not cause pollution. It can be converted to electricity at twice the efficiency of other energy sources. Importantly, only one metric tonne of helium-3 could power one sixth of the UK for a year.

The down side is the sheer difficulty and danger of living and working on the Moon ' with temperature swings of 250 degrees Fahrenheit to -251 degrees Fahrenheit, not to mention sudden fatal solar flares of radiation. Many scientists however are confident that these difficulties can and will be overcome.

So, should we pack in the solar panels and give up recycling? What's the point of using energy efficient light bulbs when we have another thousand years worth of energy waiting for us in the night's sky? At present, we know of no bad effects of mining the Moon for helium-3 at all. However, this ignorance may in itself may turn out to be a bad point. The fact remains that we really know very little about the Moon, let alone what the effects of suddenly starting to mine it. Should we, with so little hesitation rush to disturb our Moon that most associate with calm and placidity? Is the mining of the Moon just an irresistible temptation for us who love to try and subdue and utilise nature? It is an issue in itself, whether we need the Moon's energy. Many would instead say that we should live within our means, within the means of our own planet. Indeed, this giant step to domineer the Moon opens up a whole range of issues for discussion; would it be healthy for people to live and work on the Moon? Would we, after the Moon had yielded all it could to us, keep on going, using up the solar system to keep one small planet satisfied? And most importantly, it raises the issue of who really owns the Moon?
On a sentimental level, it seems a shame that the Moon that effects so much of life on earth ' the tides, some say even people's moods ' is to be meddled with. However, it is unlikely that those in power of making the decision as to whether to go ahead with mining the Moon would listen to arguments such as these. Perhaps they would listen to a man who has visited the Moon for himself, Edgar Mitchell; 'Frankly we in our knowledge base ' as far as we know how the Universe works, we're just barely out of the trees. So we are pretty naïve. We think we know a lot more about the Earth than we do.' Perhaps for now it would be safer to stick to energy resources that we can get a little closer to home.