The first fact is that super-duper-ultra-heavy lift launch vehicles are the prerequisite to accomplishing anything lasting in space. This is an extremely unpopular view due in large part to the incessant babbling of the New Space mob. The fact is that the Saturn V was just big enough to get us on the Moon and only then because of Houbolt’s LOR. The Saturn V was small. And this means the SLS is also a minimum vehicle. The over two hundred in-a-row flawless firings of the shuttle SRB’s mean that technology is what works for the lower stage and the ideal Isp number of hydrogen and oxygen mean that is what works for the upper stages. The U.S. really needs to dump New Space and go full speed ahead with the SLS while working on a vehicle with several times the lift of the SLS. I suggest 30 million pounds coming from a pair of monolithic SRB’s like those studied in the early 60’s as the goal.
http://www.astronautix.com/engines/325solid.htm

The second fact is that the wet workshop concept is the only practical way to get any kind of useful crew compartments into service and those wet workshops need to incorporate a massive water shield if human beings are actually going outside Low Earth Orbit for any length of time. That is the elephant in the room nobody will touch and the only place those thousands of tons of shielding is coming from is that place nobody will talk about- the Moon. New Space wants nothing to do with any of this because their real goal, despite the ridiculous Mars hype, is LEO tourism. Going to the Moon ruins any chance of playboy clubs for the ultra-rich supported by kerosene hobby rockets subsidized with tax dollars.

The richest person on Earth (Carlos Slim) owns most of the satellites that service Central and South America. That is a clue that a real space program will begin with making money to finance the next step- Solar Power Satellites. The way to make that money is with GEO Telecom space stations assembled out of wet workshops in lunar orbit and shielded with lunar water. So in my view this focus on replacing the RD-180 and modifying existing vehicles is all a distraction and ultimately meaningless. A huge shake-up in space policy is what is needed. Right now there is no hope of any progress.

An easy answer is at the moment there is zero demand for rocket fuel in space.
Also the price of rocket fuel would depend on supply and demand.
And at he moment there is more supply and demand of flying cars.
As a couple flying cars are being made and people can and are buying them- so that is a market. Very tiny and limited market.

The decision regarding whether any entity decides to risk billions of dollars to mine lunar water will be based
on expectation related to a future of 5 to 10 years.

So I would say that if nuclear power in space were to suddenly change, those investing billion of dollars investing in lunar mining should aware of it and should “allow” for how it could impact their investment plans.
Generally speaking any market started in space is good news for any other market in space. And would say if we get a market in space for rocket fuel, this could only help start a market for nuclear rockets in space.
Or I don’t believe gasoline used for cars, stops electrical cars from developing. Instead I would say because there is market for gasoline cars, this enables the possibility of electrical car market.

So what talking about is providing an opportunity related to starting a rocket fuel market in space- and giving a rough example of it’s feasibility. But it’s sink or swim.

But if talking of competitive market, time is important
and nuclear rocket market starting quickly doesn’t seem reasonable.

It’s one of many changes that can make Delta IV more powerful.

Other upgrades are densified propellant, RS-68 regen, RL-60 in the upper stage, propellant cross feed, and lighter alloy aluminum.

One group was looking into methane engines.

I have heard of ATK wanting to use a solid rocket to replace the Atlas CCB.
I imagine that Atlas would then resemble the Liberty or Ares 1 with such a change.

Not necessarily. You can live on low gravity bodies by using “sleeper trains” that go in a circle to provide Earth gravity for the required percentage of the day to maintain health while the rest of the time is spent in the underground or undersea environment. I would guess that would be at least half the day.The lower the gravity, the easier it is to build such circles.The only place in the solar system besides Earth that you can wander around on the surface and not get dosed with radiation is Titan. It is the need to engineer an Earth environment that convinced Gerard K. O’Neill building artificial moons made of material from the Moon was the way to go. These colonies can be positioned in a orbit around the sun the same distance as Earth- or closer or farther as needed. Solar energy is a difficult proposition on Mars and in the outer solar system.

Am I the only one that understands what damage this kind of stuff does when bearing the NASA seal? Articles like this are fed to the public and not a word about the Moon. Unbelievable.

Completely backwards: nuclear energy actually allows the massive cosmic radiation shielding required to protect space travelers (about 400 tons of water for a small capsule) to be propelled around the solar system. However, nuclear propulsion is not a good idea in the magnetosphere since any radioactive contamination will funnel into Earth’s atmosphere. This means for travel between the Earth and Moon in cislunar space chemical energy is still required. Water is necessary for anything to happen.

http://iceonthemoon.wordpress.com/water-and-bombs/

If your answer is the Asteroids, it would be a good idea to look at the difficulties being experienced by the politically ordered Asteroid Retrieval Mission (ARM). Asteroids may become a primary source at some point, but only after development of a space fairing capability that will require use of lunar resources.

If you go to use of a Liquid Oxygen Augmented Nuclear Thermal Rocket (LANTR), because you can tailor specific impulse and thrust to weight performance ratio, then both Hydrogen and Oxygen would be used.