Quoted By:
The DEFENSE LOBBYIST proposes a solution: perhaps if you were to initiate a campaign that weakened global norms of nuclear non-proliferation, using geopolitical tensions such as Ukraine or the Korean peninsula to encourage nuclear latent powers / threshold countries such as Poland, Turkey, Japan, Australia, etc to develop their own nuclear weapons programmes, in response to an ambiguous US defense posture, the ensuing atomic research momentum would accelerate economic viability of nuclear technologies in space?
>(Reject Proposal, reply) the surface area of the Moon is approximately the size of Africa; I don't see a lot of people rushing to visit there, or say Antarctica, both locations being far more pleasant and survivable than the Moon. House price to median income affordability ratios exceed 10x in California, New York. Remind me why billionaires are rushing to build space habitats on the Moon again?
>(Agree to DEFENSE LOBBYIST proposal) To conquer space we need a NUCLEAR ROCKET. The issue with fission NTRs is the substantial bulk of mass from fuel rods, cooling. There exists research since the 1980s for nuclear rockets powered by Americium from Pu-241 beta decay, Am-242m, which can be formed into thin films, with a half-life of 141 years, and possesses the highest number of neutrons by thermal fission cross section. Americium is incredibly rare currently, it can only be produced in very low concentrations from nuclear reactors. Atomic weapons for everyone, if we burn Americium we could reach Mars in just two weeks!
You gain DEFENSE FUNDING and NUCLEAR ROCKET prototype. Funds +50, TRL +1
>Reply: nuclear reactors on the moon would necessitate a large radiation safety zone. How will countries handle permissions by lunar vehicles to cross competing territorial claims? Will there be SPACE PIRATES? Perhaps we need to develop some means for international coordination?
Funds -5, Institutions +20
>write in...
