@Peet McKimmie

Yup, synthesizing fuel is incredibly wasteful from a thermodynamics point of view. If you have any alternatives, by all means, contact NASA about them.

Before doing so, though, please do remember that helicopters and planes don't work in a vacuum, ion engines don't generate anywhere close to enough thrust to escape even a weak gravity well, railguns would need to impart more than enough acceleration to kill the crew, and building a space elevator on the Moon would be excessively costly. When you say "a more direct method to use the energy", are you thinking of antigravity, or perhaps levitation?

@jonathan

I hear space is full of the stuff, apparently - thinly distributed, sure, but space is big - really big. You might think it's a long way to the corner shop, but that's just peanuts to space...

Water

They apparently found water on the Moon. What's the point of creating it from hydrogen, once again?

Also energy is quite plentiful on Moon. Just take solar panels with you. There are no clouds, or atmosphere for that matter so efficiency is much, much better.

The question that no one seems to have asked/answered...

"How MUCH oxygen/ice is actually there and how long will it last us if we are simply (as appears to be the plan) strip-mining it?"

The idea of using mined oxygen for breathing, rather than, say. hydroponic plant CO2 <--> O2 conversion, with chemical "oxygen generators" and/or mined oxy as emergency backups sound mire like more the way to go, to me. It might even be possible, with lunar soil as additional chemical feedstock for the plants, to generate excess O2 to be fed into the water/rocket oxidizer/reaction mass system while -- again -- keeping the Ice-Mines of Luna as emergency reserves.

huh?

You don't have to dial a electromagnetic catapult to 11, just make the runway longer. A linear motor could work from the moon just fine, w/o killing the occupants.

Er...

As Kryten might have said:

"An excellent plan sir, with just two minor problems. First, where's all that hydrogen going to come from, and second, where do you get all that hydrogen? I know that technically that's only *one* problem, but it's such a biggy I thought it worth mentioning twice."

Headline should have read: "So-Called "Scientists" Miss Point, Waste Millions. Again".

Maybe they can get the hydrogen by splitting up the water the other bunch claim to have found earlier this week. But then, you wouldn't need to cook moondirt in the first place.

More to do

There still needs to be more work done. This is still too preliminary. Large deposits of hydrogen or water need to be established for a permanent base otherwise there's no point. If your going to build a base, you have to consider the LONG term uses, not just Mars. You have the moons of Jupiter and the asteroid belt to consider also. The moon needs to be a replacement for space stations. Something that will last, unlike the ISS, which is scheduled to be scuttled in 2014.

When the cart pushes the horse

Yesterday it was either water (and)/or hydroxyl - today it's water for sure. What happened? Did the L. Reg playmobile preconstruction work so well sifting bits of sand about the office table that it was a pity not to write up the story? Or is this a deeply savage and ironic critique on the entailed lunacy in the application and limitations of models, real and virtual?

Gravity?

CENTRIFUGE

Duh

Can't wait for the day when...

...people will realise you can do on the Moon pretty much anything that you can do on Earth (and more) - you just need to go there and start digging.

RE: Sounds doable - in theory - even without H2 #

"They did put a man on the moon 40 years ago with 1960's technology..."

Haven't you herd? it was all fake those tapes they found in Australia proved it. The Easter bunny told me

re:railgun

Perhaps, but what angle would it need to be aimed at? Building a 100km plus accelerator becomes a lot more difficult if you've got to point it skyward rather than building it flat.

Producing fuel has value in itself, even with a nuke plant on the moon that power isn't really that transportable. In theory you could get it from other sources that have ice though, perhaps the asteroids might have some somewhere? Long term somehting else would be better to find, but as has already been mentioned only chemical rockets can currently lift something off a body. Even if we don't go to the moon but go other places instead we will have to get our craft off those bodies somehow.

Living on the Moon

Even if there is an alternitive to fuel for the moon, if a lunar base is supposed to expand and be sustainable without outside help, being able to produce oxygen is going to be useful. Esp. while the CO2 levels are getting up to the point where plants can reliably recycle the air for human consumption, and also to replace any oxygen that is lost due to accidents. Then there's the whole thing of being able to produce water without having to mine it.