1
$\begingroup$

Should we not build a superconductor facility on the moon ? We find a spot where the rays of the sun don’t provide heat. This should enable a superconductivity facility to operate due to the low temperature on the moon.

We then produce energy on the moon ie via solar energy, Helium 3 extraction, store the generated energy in a “super conductor” battery, and can then beam the generated energy into space, ie via a HAARP like facility. This could be used to power satellites, maybe even space shuttles, and possibly also to deal with asteroid threats, ie the proposed DE-Star lasers?

$\endgroup$

closed as off-topic by John Rennie, JMac, StephenG, tpg2114 May 11 at 7:15

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question appears to be about engineering, which is the application of scientific knowledge to construct a solution to solve a specific problem. As such, it is off topic for this site, which deals with the science, whether theoretical or experimental, of how the natural world works. For more information, see this meta post." – John Rennie, JMac, StephenG, tpg2114
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand your idea. For one, the moon doesn't have a permanently dark side (the same side (mostly) faces the earth, but that side is sometimes dark and somitimes sunlit). But even if it had, you would have a cold spot where is would be (comparatively) simple to keep a superconducting wire cool. How would that generate energy? $\endgroup$ – Toffomat May 9 at 11:28
  • $\begingroup$ @Toffomat I thought so too, but apparently you can find such a spot on the moon: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crater_of_eternal_darkness (at)OP: No offense, but this sounds like science fiction and is imho better placed at worldbuilding.stackexchange. $\endgroup$ – infinitezero May 9 at 11:30
  • $\begingroup$ @infinitezero Ah, OK, I didn't know that. Agree with you on the fiction part. $\endgroup$ – Toffomat May 9 at 11:35
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah you need to clear up how you would expect this to generate energy. $\endgroup$ – JMac May 9 at 11:41
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think OP is asking whether it would make sense to have a giant superconducting battery storing energy on the moon. Then beam out energy as needed. If this is the correct understanding, then I recommend rewriting the question, because that certainly is not science fiction. $\endgroup$ – KF Gauss May 9 at 12:24
1
$\begingroup$

Superconduction only means that the material at hand will have an electrical resisitance approaching 0. That does not mean that there is any energy being produced, only that you could channel existing current through it without -losses-. It is somewhat possible to induce a current in a superconductor, which then will hold the current going because there is no loss. Thats where some cool experiments stem from where you can float a magnet or a mini train over a circle of supercoductors. There is no energy being produced there too!

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.