Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

PretentiousPickle t1_jcmu5sa wrote

Reply to comment by Reddragonking4 in Rolls-Royce go-ahead to build a nuclear reactor on Moon - Scientists and engineers are working on the micro-reactor programme that will help humans to live and work on Earth's natural satellite by Gari_305

Tell me you don't know anything about the moon without telling me you don't know anything about the moon

−3

Reddragonking4 t1_jcmuv2l wrote

Okay assuming your not a troll, what is it that you’re saying? Since the moon is smaller than the earth that solar panels don’t make sense? Nobody is suggesting covering the entirety of the surface of the moon in panels. I was talking about the efficiency of panels that are the same size on the moon vs earth

2

PretentiousPickle t1_jcmvj8l wrote

It's not the panels at all. The panel is the same if it's on earth and the moon. The reason it's dumb is because the moon has significantly less light than earth. It's further away and half the time it's covered by earth. Earth is way bigger as well so less percentage of it is covered by the moon. Yea nuclear reactor makes more sense

Also why the downvotes. You can just move on

−3

Reddragonking4 t1_jcmx3wi wrote

The moon is not necessarily further away from the sun as the earth. Half the time it’s closer half the time it’s further

The earth also spends about half the time without the sun in the sky.

If you built the panels on the far side of the moon, the earth would never interfere with the sun while the panel is facing the sun

If you built the panels on the face of the moon we can see, the earth would only block during a lunar eclipse which is rather rare.

And what is your source for the moon receiving less light than the earth? They receive essentially the same amount

3