---
type: source
title: "Interlune Core IP: Excavate, Sort, Extract, and Separate — Four-Step He-3 Harvesting System"
author: "Interlune"
url: https://www.interlune.space/blog/excavate-sort-extract-and-separate-interlune-core-intellectual-property
date: 2026-03-18
domain: space-development
secondary_domains: []
format: blog-post
status: unprocessed
priority: high
tags: [helium-3, interlune, lunar-isru, extraction-technology, power-requirements]
---

## Content

Interlune's technical description of their proprietary four-step helium-3 harvesting process:

**Step 1: Excavate**
- Throughput: up to 100 tonnes/hour per Harvester
- Continuous-motion technique minimizing power and tractive force
- Vision sensors + ground-penetrating radar for route planning
- Robotic arm for oversized rocks
- Extreme weight optimization: every gram matters at $1M/kg delivery cost

**Step 2: Sort**
- Centrifugal sorting (not gravity-dependent — enables Earth testing without lunar gravity simulation)
- Concentrates <100 μm particles where ~90% of He-3 is trapped (validated by Apollo 11 sample 10084)
- Processes larger volumes with fewer moving parts than terrestrial equivalents
- NSF SBIR Phase I award supporting prototype development

**Step 3: Extract**
- KEY CLAIM: "Requires ten times less power than heat-based methods"
- Releases solar-wind volatiles (He-4, hydrogen, He-3, trace gases) without heat-intensive processing
- Tested in parabolic flight experiments with vacuum-processed regolith simulants
- This is the critical differentiator addressing the power-mobility dilemma

**Step 4: Separate**
- Cryogenic distillation concentrates He-3 from mixed volatile stream
- Potential use of green hydrogen technologies for better energy efficiency
- Standard separation physics — no novel technology claims here

## Agent Notes
**Why this matters:** This is Interlune's IP disclosure and the technical foundation for their investment thesis. Step 3 (non-thermal extraction claiming 10x power reduction) is the key claim that makes their approach potentially viable vs. heat-based methods that face the power-mobility dilemma.

**What surprised me:** The 10x power reduction claim is the central differentiator, but Interlune doesn't specify the mechanism or the baseline they're comparing against. "Ten times less" than the 12 MW cited in heat-based systems would imply ~1.2 MW per harvester — which is still substantial but potentially manageable with LunaGrid-scale power infrastructure. This needs verification.

**What I expected but didn't find:** Specific power consumption in kW or MW for the full four-step system. The centrifugal sorting choice (gravity-independent) is clever engineering — but I couldn't find the total system power budget.

**KB connections:**
- power is the binding constraint on all space operations — Interlune's Step 3 claims to address this constraint specifically
- microgravity eliminates convection sedimentation and container effects producing measurably superior materials — analogous uniqueness argument: lunar solar-wind exposure creates He-3 concentrations impossible on Earth

**Extraction hints:**
- Claim: "Interlune's non-thermal He-3 extraction process claims 10x power reduction over heat-based methods, potentially resolving the power-mobility dilemma identified in prior feasibility analyses — though flight validation is required"
- Note the scope: Earth-prototype performance only, not lunar validation

## Curator Notes
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[power is the binding constraint on all space operations because every capability from ISRU to manufacturing to life support is power-limited]]
WHY ARCHIVED: Primary technical evidence for the viability case; the 10x power reduction is the central claim that determines whether the MVA critique applies to Interlune's approach
EXTRACTION HINT: Extract a claim specifically scoped to non-thermal methods. The confidence should be experimental (Earth-tested, not flight-validated). Note that the mechanism (how it achieves 10x) is proprietary and unverified externally.