Chris Birzer

BVW Debate

1NC Resource Advantages
(__) Helium-3 is impossible: concentration is too low, no tritium, and impossible to extract Williams '10
(Lynda, "Irrational Dreams of Space Colonization" Peace Review, a Journal of Social Justice, The New Arms Race in Outer Space (22.1, Spring 2010))

The promise of helium as an energy source on the moon to is mostly hype. Helium-3 could be used in the production of nuclear fusion energy, a process we have yet to prove viable or efficient on Earth. Mining helium would require digging dozens of meters into the lunar surface and processing hundreds of thousands of tons of soil to produce 1 ton of helium-3. (25 tons of helium-3 is required to power the US for 1 year.) Fusion also requires the very rare element tritium, which does not exist naturally on the Moon, Mars or on Earth in abundances needed to facilitate nuclear fusion energy production. There are no current means for generating the energy on the Moon to extract the helium-3 to produce the promised endless source of energy from helium-3 on the Moon. Similar
energy problems exist for using solar power on the Moon, which has the additional problem of being sunlit two weeks a month and dark for the other two weeks.

(__) Nuclear fusion technology actually loses energy—our evidence postdates Packard (James Randi Education Foundation) 11
(Steven, ―Once Again: Helium-3 From the Moon is Not Going to Solve Our Energy Problems‖, May 10, 2011,

nuclear fusion for the purpose of energy generation does not exist. The only way we can produce fusion energy that is greater than the energy necessary to initiate and contain the fusion is with an H-bomb. Fusion can also be produced in the laboratory, but it always uses more energy than it produces. Also,
Let me repeat this because it is by far the most important deal breaker on this whole issue: producing more than a relatively small amount of nuclear fusion requires extremely complex and costly equipment.Since fusion reactions do produce energy, it is possible, at least in theory, that fusion could be used as an energy source IF the technical challenges could be overcome. To this end, a great deal of research is being conducted just as it has been for decades. Will fusion power ever become a reality? Maybe. Then again, maybe not. It’s possible that tomorrow a researcher will stumble across a novel way of producing nuclear fusion cheaply and simply while generating huge amounts of energy. I wouldn’t bank on it though. There

are several methods of producing fusion which are being investigated as potential energy sources. The one that has received the most effort is magnetic confinement fusion using the tokomak design. Some tokomaks have approached ―break even‖ energy balances for short periods of time. An ambitious project is currently under way known as the International
Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor. It is expected to begin operation in 2018 with the ambitious goal of producing more energy than

Of course, a project like ITER is not going to represent any kind of major power source. In order for that to happen, fusion power systems will need to operate reliably for extended periods of time. Not only that, but they will need to be economical enough to be built by the hundreds or thousands. If the current path of fusion research is followed, we have no chance of seeing effective fusion power generation for at least many decades, if ever.
is consumer for periods of several minutes.

you can't fool Mother Nature. This cabin dust settled quickly. clinging. lymph system. The inside of the Lunar Module (LM) was temporarily ―full of dust. ―The Lunar Dust Problem: From Liability to Asset‖. although no degradation of laser reflector corner cubes after 35-40 years has been reported Some characteristics of the dust lead to significant losses of solar-wind volatile resources merely due to agitation during sample handling 11 . herein defined as <50 µm] became apparent with the first lunar excursion (EVA) by Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin during the Apollo 11 Mission and the return of the first lunar samples. according to Hoffert. knife-edge seals fail. Additionally.‖ including the atmosphere that the astronauts breathed. meaning that half of the energy collected by space solar panels would be lost in the transfer down to a co-author of this paper. Lunar dust properties that must be addressed before any commercial presence on the Moon can be fully evaluated are: 3) settling on all thermal optical surfaces. Schmit. at that time. But Solaren says that it would just require four or five heavy-lift rocket launches capable of carrying 25 metric tons. 1st Space Exploration Conference: Continuing the Voyage of Discover.] The pressurization of the lunar module used more oxygen after the initial opening of the hatch in order to offset the leaks from the poor seal on closing. a situation that was tolerated rather than solved. 2009 Hoffert estimates that Solaren could manage to get about 50 percent transmission efficiency in a best-case scenario. . http://web. Taylor was in the LRL presence of the ‗clinging‘ lunar dust had made the indium. as related by Apollo 17 astronaut Harrison II. December 2. In fact. or 20 shuttle-sized launches. W. (__) LSP loses energy Hsu (science guy) ‗9 Jeremy." Hoffert said. This extreme abrasiveness of lunar dust must be addressed by engineering design studies before there can be adequate cost analysis for ―in-situ resource utilization‖ or other activities on the Moon. and some of it is business and promotion.html. The cameras that the astronauts used suffered from lunar dust on the lens. and 4) physiological effects on humans. Masami Nakagaw. and an inefficient vacuum cleaner was employed in the Command Module. carbon dioxide filters.Chris Birzer BVW Debate (__) Lunar dust blocks use of LSP Taylor et al (planetary geoscientist at University of Tennessee) ‗5 (Lawrence A. especially with respect to the lungs. ―Controversy Flares Over Space-Based Solar Power Plans‖ Schmitt. Picture the large arrays of solar cells and reflective thermal control surfaces covered with fine layers of dust. Brushes were used before reentering the LM. resource-rich. Bearings between the suit gloves and arms and the helmet and neck were visibly scratched around their circumference (no significant increase in leak rate was noted. but was noted again when the LM became weightless after ascent from the Moon before being filtered out by lithium hydroxide (LiOH). The various rocks and soil samples were placed in ―rock boxes.A. The astronauts‘ suits had considerable dust embedded in their outer fabric.they all leaked.). fine-grained lunar dust. abrasive. "Some of it is physics and engineering. [Author L. reducing their efficiency. and heart.‖ These were sealed at 10 -12 torr on the Moon. February 1. This dust was so pervasive that no lunar rock boxes from any of the 6 Apollo missions to the Moon ever maintained their lunar vacuum -. but with little effect other than to fatigue the astronauts arms and fingers.pdf. Wet wipes were used in the Lunar Module with good effect to clean bearings and visors. 2005) All these activities on the lunar surface involve utilizing or guarding against the ever-present. Solaren would then need to launch a solar panel array capable of generating 400 megawatts. Harrison H. The total launch weight of all the equipment would be the equivalent of about 400 metric tons. This dust was responsible for wearing through portions of the outside fabric layers of gloves and lower legs of the astronauts’ suits. which could not be brushed off. David Carrier. however. The company is relying on developing more efficient photovoltaic technology for the solar panels. as well as mirrors that help focus sunlight. The presence of dust on the delicate optical instrumentation of the astronomers and astrophysicists also will need to be countered. only to be found to be at 1 atmosphere when opened in the Lunar Receiving Lab (LRL) at Johnson Space Center in Houston. after each EVA.utk. or about one fourth of Hoffert's weight estimate. the deleterious effects of the lunar dust [defn: fine portion of the lunar soil. such as solar cells. "But in the long run. Another example of the deleterious effects of lunar dust involved the friction caused by the extremely abrasive nature of the lunar soil.

" On the basis of another related study. In other words. professor in the climatology program in the School of Geographical Sciences at @ASU.. global warming would save lives. team found that for the whole population As expected. In 2006. states or counties) located in urban. The same phenomenon was seen by Laaidi et al.a message not well conveyed in the hundreds of thousands of websites on the study shows that the greater threat of human mortality lies in the cold end of the thermal spectrum rather than the warm end. ―Climate of Extremes: Global Warming Science They Don’t Want You to Know‖ pgs 178-180 There is no question that the heat wave of 2003 was a natural disaster in Europe with a substantial loss of human life. they state. examined daily temperature and mortality data from 1991-95 for six "departments" (a. .6'F] warming predicted to occur in the next half century would not increase annual mortality rates. found: " For both men and women mortality was higher at low temperatures. from a purely statistical view point. was inevitable. oceanic. They also divided the data by sex and by major causes of death including respiratory disease.a. France. Robert.k. than in the Herault. one of us (Michaels) cited work he had done with Robert Davis at the University of Virginia in which they found that heat-related mortality declined as cities get warmer. conclude: "Our findings give grounds for confidence in the near future: the relatively moderate (2'C) [3. from the Medical University at Dijon. the authors noted: The level of the thermal optimum rises in line with the warmer climatic conditions of each department. and greater than 64 years old. temperature and daily deaths exhibited a marked temporal pattern. The data also clearly showed that people adjust to their environments.. and two different Mediterranean settings (Figure 6. called the thermal optimum. In Meltdown. mean daily counts of deaths showed an asymmetrical V-like or If-like pattern with higher mortality rates at the time of the lowest temperatures experienced in the area than at the tune of the highest temperatures." Computer models for carbon dioxide-induced global warming consistently predict more warming in winter in midlatitude locations such as France and less warming in the summer. For all the departments investigated. the higher temperatures predicted for 2050 might result in nearly 9. cardiovascular disease or stroke. probably due to the urban heat island. showing less mortality there from cold waves than occurs when temperatures fall dramatically in warm climates. with or without global warming. Laaidi et al. except they added in the adjustment for cold climates. in which mortality is low. Europe was not prepared for an event that. and those from warm areas are more susceptible to cold Ones. Mohamed Laaidi and two coauthors. subject." Laaidi et al. They broke the data into three age groups including less than 1 year old. The Laaidi et al. interior. here's the shocking news: People adjust to the climate in which they reside. another article appeared in the International Journal of Biometeorology that put the 2003 disaster in perspective. and we could conclude from this and other studies that in terms of temperature-related mortality. Individuals living in cold regions experience more mortality in warm temperatures. Concerning any temperature rise for any reason. which is situated in the extreme south of France in a Mediterranean climate. suggesting a lesser ability to adapt to the cold. mountain.000 fewer winter deaths each year. Michaels and Balling ‗9 Patrick. and other diseases of the circulatory system. heart disease. There is also a range in temperature.Chris Birzer BVW Debate (__)Warming won‘t cause massive deaths—humans adapt. Higher temperatures in the winter would certainly decrease mortality. "In England and Wales. Murders and accidents were excluded. 1 to 64 years old. The Laaidi et al. which cities do with or without global warming. The thermal optimum is greater in Paris.2). professor of environmental sciences @ The University of Virginia and a senior fellow in the environmental studies at the CATO institute.

basically. plus evidence from the fossil I propose that they be tossed out. The risks emanating from nature have been around for billions of years. I propose only including natural risks in lists meant to be comprehensive.risks) To condense down Jamais' list. and adults would suffer from a weakening of muscle and bone mass.Chris Birzer BVW Debate 1NC Arc Advantage (__) Natural extinction risks are empirically denied and technology solves back—only man made disaster risks extinction Anissimov (Lifeboat Foundation Scientific Advisory Board member) 2 (Michael.end. to begin with. . lifeboat.. The End of the World and Architecture.pdf) Unlike an orbiting space colony. ―The lunar surface is at roughly 1/6g and Mars is at 1/3g of Earth. or make a point of including low-probability risks as well as high-probability risks. Classifying Extinction Risks. For example. Why? Because the probability of these risks occurring is minuscule. Colonizing other planets. and their likelihood and intensity are increasing with time. and asteroids also presents significant design challenges for architects and engineers. Meanwhile. For risk shortlists. Because the man-made risks are so much more likely because the focus is comprehensiveness. as technology improves radically over that time frame. planets would also have to be either terra-formed or self-contained biospheres would have to be constructed to provide an Earthlike atmosphere. and we have no reason to expect they'll become more probable in the next few hundred years. We know that intense gamma ray bursts are rare because of our observations of them occurring elsewhere.the. it wouldn't be here. Schmidt and Zubrin describe this terra-formation process: (__) Their volcano scenarios are all predicated off of global warming in the 6 point font which means that they have to win global warming before they get volcanoes. there really is no way (unless scientists discover gravitons) to simulate Earth-normal gravity of 1g. existential risk dialogue and preventive strategies should focus on the artificial risks. http://lifeboat. the risks of man-made apocalypse will increase. Islands in the Sky (1996). 2010) Similar to orbiting colonies.‖ (NASA.and. If nature were tossing extinction disasters at life on a regular basis. the Lifeboat Foundation's programs page includes entries for almost every risk October-November 2010. In their book. (__) Couldn‘t repopulate earth – people born on the Moon could never live on Earth Richards 10 (Michael A. An asteroid capable of killing everyone on Earth is only expected to come around every few dozen or hundred million years. Children growing up in such conditions would not be able to develop bones and muscles strong enough to return to Earth. I propose tossing out all the natural risks: asteroid impacts and gamma ray bursts.

Such a strategy is implemented by constructing only the essential components of the colony system from Earth materials. the total costs are given as: research. HEPPENHEIMER et al (Physics Department Princeton University. by using lunar raw materials as soon as possible.Chris Birzer BVW Debate (__) Lack of technology means a colony would take 25 years to build HANNAH. must come from Earth. 5 yr to build up operations on the Moon and at The overall schedule projects a 22 yr completion of the colony from the start of the project. the total cost of the system is thus $190. Here they are made operational to process lunar raw materials for the major construction of the habitat. and for power production are necessary to provide design and operations experience. $14. the schedule provides for 5 yr research on Earth. Transportation costs. the ore mass transport system. production.000 per kg. THOMAS. require extensive basic research before space colonies can be established. cost estimates are required for three categories of expenses .000 per person and $2 X 10^5 per tonne delivered to LEO. 1975 dollars Figure 6-2 also shows that the availability of oxygen in space dramatically reduces the transportation costs which are still over half of the total system costs. Materials for the total colony could come from the Earth.6 billion. Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences California Institute of Technology) ‗10 (ERIC. However. the L5 materials extraction and fabrication facility.arc.research and development through the first unit. processes.5 billion. Apollo was $14. and the construction shack . January 22. $1.000/kg. where all costs are expressed in L5. purchase price of additional units. Finally. and the rotary pellet launcher which are necessary for transporting lunar ore to L5. for fabrication in space. Pilot plants for extraction of materials. $114. such as physiological limitations of a general population and dynamics of closed ecological systems. A precise costing effort for the first two items is prohibitively complicated. and transportation. Finally.6 billion. $500/kg which is consistent with other large-scale systems. development.8 billion. In this study $5000/kg is used.are then taken to their respective positions in the system. the costs to Earth of constructing the colony are greatly reduced. However.000 people and 23-25 years. Specific details of this schedule for the space colony are given in the tables listed below: In addition. $28.the lunar mining facility. L5 colony would take 10. .3 billion. Including a 20 percent overhead charge of $31. Purchase prices are assumed to be and transportation costs.doc.html. Outward beyond LEO.nasa. must be developed early in the space colonization effort.s. costs depend upon destination. in particular the mass launcher and catcher. 2010) Critical gaps in present knowledge and experience. They decrease with increased availability of oxygen in space from processing of lunar material. and a final 4 yr for completion of the shield and the immigration of the colonists. 6 yr for habitat construction. and materials for colonization of space. During this construction phase minor construction materials and supplies. though the time required for completion of the colony is increased. Parallel engineering efforts are also needed to develop suitable techniques. are based upon a manned payload of 30 people in each shuttle and an unmanned payload of 150 t per HLLV leading to $44. ―Space Settlements: A Design Study‖ http://settlement. previous space projects have shown that research and development costs vary from $1000 to $20. These subsystems . The scheduling and costing presented here are for the establishment of the baseline colony system described in chapter 5 through the completion and population of one transportation systems. as well as crew resupply. primarily launch and propellant costs and exclusive of vehicle costs. 3 to 5 yr for development and testing in orbit near Earth.8 billion.

They include: the moon. U. freeing NASA to focus on the long-term goals of reaching beyond Earth's shadow. leadership in space is simply not in question. rather than continuing to outsource this work to foreign governments.2011 http://english. and Mars.S.S.html Although next week's final space shuttle launch means the end of the 30-year-old Space Shuttle Program. Within a year. Bolden said." "We are not ending human space flight. "Our destinations for humans beyond Earth remain ambitious.steps today to ensure America's preeminence in human spaceflight for years to come. with sufficient oversight to ensure the safety of our astronauts. but how we'll do it. (__) The US will continue to lead in space for the next half century despite the end of the Shuttle Program Xinhua 2011 Xinhua. he said industry can take over astronaut transport. freeing NASA to focus on deep space exploration and new technology development. more robots exploring other planets. (__) China and Russia Won‘t surpass the US Holdren and Bolden ‗11 John P. Bolden said. the United States will continue to lead in space exploration for at least half an century. U. "We have to get out of the business of owning and operating low. Bolden Jr.Atlantis takes off on the last shuttle mission July 8 -. Holdren is assistant to the president for science and technology and director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the President.) Charles is the administrator of NASA and a four-time former astronaut." he said. private companies can take over the process of sending cargo shipments into orbit. Marine Gen." Bolden said in a speech at the National Press Club.Chris Birzer BVW Debate 1NC Leadership (__) They have to win that another country will get to space before us for this to be a relevant advantage. or more ambitious and achievable plans for human space flight for the decades ahead—all while overseeing day-to-day operations of the ISS—an almost unimaginably complex orbiting laboratory. we are recommitting ourselves to it and taking the necessary -. By 2015. No nation has more satellites observing the Earth. NASA's shuttle program is ending due to high operating costs. NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said Friday.and difficult -. space shuttle program officially ends later this year. asteroids. I'm here to tell you that American leadership in space will continue for at least the next half. and current plans ensure that America continues to hold the high ground of the final frontier. (ret. No evidence in the 1AC says that there are any competitors.Earth orbit transportation systems and hand that off to the private sector. next week's swan song for the shuttle program -.does mark the end of an era." Bolden said. "As a former astronaut and the current NASA administrator. The debate is not if we will explore. American companies and their spacecraft should send our astronauts to the ISS (International Space Station). more spacecraft peering into the depths of the cosmos. ." However. When the the Russian space program's Soyuz capsule will be the only method for transporting astronauts to and from the station. "Some say that our final shuttle mission will mark the end of America's 50 years of dominance in human spaceflight. The Obama administration wants to spur private companies to get into the space taxi business. 7/7/11 ―NASA's new journeys‖ Some have claimed that current plans will leave the United States as a second-rate space-faring nation — allowing Russia and China to surpass us.century because we have laid the foundation for success -and failure is not an option.peopledaily. and continues to lead today.S. will keep leadership in space exploration for half century: NASA head July 2. Let’s be clear: The United States won the race to the Moon in 1969.

But it is.about politics. We're saying good-bye to something that. We know that much of what initially inspires and motivates young people to study science and to pursue careers in space is the idea that "one day. The U. To this final mission. may get to go there. It is not the end of the world. But. we need a solid commitment so that we can continue to encourage other nations to collaborate peacefully on spaceresearch.shared by so few . We are moving into a new era where more organizations. Based on this tiny slice of time. it's not fatal. A wide array of extraordinary technological devices deliver news of mind-boggling discoveries every day. We need solid direction so that commercial businesses will feel comfortable investing their resources to develop the next generation of spacecraft .unfortunately . Just a few weeks ago. epitomizes the American persona.with a goal of once again carrying U. And. we quote Sir Winston Churchill: "Now this is not the end. I submit that the rumors of the death of the U. the end of the beginning. exploration and commerce.nor require . let's keep some perspective on what's ending here: a successful. foreign and domestic – that are moving forward. Opportunity is growing to learn more.S.S. (and in many a growing list of nations). It is not even the beginning of the end. Most space activity is commercial . vehicles. There are hundreds of programs . But. we know there's nothing that can get the heart thumping with pride more than watching a magnificent rocket hurtle into space. "space program" may be just a tad exaggerated. approve and deliver budgets. We're losing albeit temporarily . the ability .human passengers.a key component of our leadership position.each of which would have been "News of the Year" stuff back when I was a kid.government and commercial. producing results and preparing us for the next level of exploration and advancement. To the Space Shuttle program. most space exploration is unmanned . while hundreds of thousands of people earn a living through space endeavors every year. has always prided itself on its space leadership. space telescopes. to many. (Is it just a coincidence that the "Welcome to America" video shown in passport control zones in many American airports features a Space Shuttle launch?) It's sad." . long-term space program that taught us so. astronauts on U.Chris Birzer BVW Debate (__) Human spaceflight isn‘t the only component of Space leadership Pulham 7/8/11 Elliot Pulham is chief executive officer of the Space Foundation. robots and rovers. new discoveries are being made and we are learning new ways to benefit from space. the impact of the final Space Shuttle launch is emotional. most of what goes on in space today does not involve .S. if we could get our act together on how we develop and sustain policy and how we build. In fact. let's remind ourselves that the global space business is growing and thriving. provide television and radio programming." And. And. collect weather data.some of it relatively routine at this point. to see more and to accomplish more. I also recognize that this country could be doing more and we could be doing it better and faster. let's face it. More than 50 nations have some sort of satellite assets and I fully expect both volume of assets and the number of nations to continue to grow. Every single day.S. So.S. I also think it's important to keep what's happening in perspective. It is the end of an era. It's the satellites that manage communications. two such items caught my eye on the same day: an extraordinary photo of a black hole gobbling a star and emitting a never-before-observed gamma ray pulse and the discovery of water ice on the planet Mercury. Because. while I am optimistic that space exploration and development will continue in the U. in the entire space age thus far. ―The End of an Era‖ 7/8/11 Today is scheduled to be the final Space Shuttle launch. I. too. In addition. facilitate put a human being into space has been a huge component of that leadership. To all who feel as passionately about space as we do. we say Godspeed. While it is true that the ultimate explorer is the human being. I'll be the first to say that I am not happy that the United States is going into a "blackout" period whereby we will not be able to launch our own astronauts into space. we say thank you for a job well done. support military operations. And. provide metrics and tracking and just help make everyday life work. In the end. more nations and more people are involved in the business of space.consisting of probes. perhaps. about space flight and . fewer than 600 people have escaped our atmosphere. so much about science. Look at your newspaper and you'll find a steady stream of "routine" announcements .

October 2005) This research gives a clear indication that the information gap exists in the literature concerning the state of technical readiness of CETs used in LB mission scenarios.Chris Birzer BVW Debate 1NC Solvency Growing food on the moon is impossible. such an amount of water would most likely not be sufficient for supporting an agricultural system in a lunar habitat. . Besides the radiation problem there is the problem of the plants needing some solar energy for photosynthesizing underground. The CET criticality-to-mission those using that information for LB mission planning. or judge feasibility. As mentioned earlier. This technical feasibility methodology can be implemented to facilitate the needs of those task of its use versus another technology may not be possible just from reading about the technologies. influences technical feasibility of that mission dependent upon the TRL values of the CETs selected for the mission. Robert Groezinger. in the technical readiness and feasibility assessment process.xisp. isdc2. perhaps the most immediate and pressing challenge to the occupants‗ survival is the maintenance of the artificial atmosphere.pdf. However. October 18.php/?link. radiation.. Although some scientists speculate that there may be sizable regions of water in the form of liquid and ice in the craters found on either of the poles. is considered to be the result of solar winds and meteor or comet Even if a significant amount of water was confirmed to be present on either of the Moon‗s poles. This research methodology helps identify which CETs are considered critical-tomission and the TRLs of all the CETs of a mission to help evaluate possible alternative technical feasibility cases of the LB mission scenario development. This presents a problem concerning how grow lights or bionic leaf would be powered during the 14 days of darkness if solar energy is to be used. or others. the majority of the water. 2002). and the analysis process that will enable assessment of criticality. The problem is magnified further when the habitat contains hundreds of people as well as plants. the identification of the CETs that affect technical feasibility. this would not be feasible for the Moon so you want a place that is usually nearly continuously lit. in addition to sustaining all of the other needs of a human population. This will only be a problem if the agricultural facility is located in a place other than the South Pole.file_id. What is of more significance is not the actual assessment outcome from this research study. impacts (Cocks. each side of the Moon only receives light for half of the time over the course of one revolution of the Moon. A further concern is the storage of energy. Lunar base not technologically feasible Magelssen (professor of astronomy) ‗5 (Trygve ―Spike‖. and define CET technical feasibility in order to find the most feasible mission scenario utilizing specific critical enabling technologies. Earth based solar systems usually rely on fossil fuel backup systems to provide power when it is dark. atmosphere and energy prevent Moody et al. ―SUSTAINING AGRICULTURE ON THE MOOn‖ http://www. like the South Pole. In any space habitat. the ability to understand the importance. It is recommended that CET criticality values and TRLs be used in literature pertaining to space endeavors to allow for better (BAs at Worchester Polytechnic Institute) ‗7 (Benjamin. but the recognition of the importance of verifying the state of technical readiness of the technologies. AIP conference. This information gap in the literature makes it difficult to evaluate mission scenarios because the technologies that are suggested for use in the mission scenarios are not given a technical readiness level (TRL) to enable the reader or mission planner to make an informed decision concerning the feasibility of using that technology.. like other trace elements on the lunar surface. technical readiness. by the readers and Technical readiness being a function of criticality allows for assessment of the technical feasibility of a mission scenario by the realization of the overall TRL values of the CETs and how they are used in a mission scenario. If the criticality of a CET to a mission is not specified.wpi. and when supplies from the Earth are few and far between. 2007) One issue of living or growing plants on the Moon is the fact that there is no atmosphere to protect its surface from solar radiation. Christopher Songer. ―Technical Feasibility Assessment of Lunar Base Mission Scenarios‖. of technical feasibility and use of the technologies.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful