tl;dr the popularity of mine-the-moon-for-he3 meme is due to wishful thinking about sustainable moon colonies, and there's no analysis that suggests it's even remotely practical to do.
That article is bogus. Let's take the outline points:
"There are no fusion reactors."
Well, duh. Fusion power isn't that far off though. Even Lockheed has a self-funded fusion power program being run out of Skunkworks, which isn't known for ivory-tower boondoggles. Even so, part of the point is that He3 fusion is different from D-T fusion, which brings us to...
"Helium-3 fusion is even more difficult than regular fusion."
No, He3 fusion ignition temperatures are higher than D-T fusion. But in every other way aneutronic fusion reactors are easier to build and maintain than neutron-generating D-T. They can be smaller, lighter, generate less radioactive waste, permit more efficient direct electrical current generation, and require simpler electrostatic containment than Tokamak-like designs. You can literally build one in your garage.
"Helium-3 may be very difficult to locate and mine on the Moon"
This was invalidated by LRO's data on the cold traps in permanently shadowed craters on the Moon (and MESSENGER's data on Mercury), which were then validated by simulations of the Moon's exosphere and interaction with the solar wind. The regolith in these craters is as much 40% volatiles by weight, of which a economically extractable fraction is He3 from the solar wind.
The huge point against lunar 3He, even ignoring that it's two orders of magnitude less reactive than DT, is the difficulty of extracting it on the moon.
3He occurs in regolith in concentrations measured in the ppb. Even with beneficiation of fine fractions and efficient recycling of heat from the thermal extraction step, the energy requires are large, a significant fraction of the energy the 3He would produce when fused.
So to power the terrestrial economy with 3He, you need to put a significant fraction of the terrestrial energy output on the moon to get the 3He. Power plants on the moon will be much more expensive than on Earth (because labor, materials, and supply chains will be more expensive there, even with cheap space transport), so this is unlikely to pencil out.
Your information about the composition of the moon is 30 years out of date. He3 would be mined from the cold traps in permanently shadowed craters at the north and south poles of the moon. There it exists in extremely high concentrations, alongside other useful volatiles that together make up 40% of the surface material by weight.
“Refining” is a process as simple as shoveling it into a pressure container, heating it, and then letting dissipatively cool back to ambient temperature, collecting the other volatiles as they condense out. What’s left is a mix of inert gasses, including He3.
There is no data on 3He at the poles. The area there is small anyway.
The concentration of 3He on the moon in general is such that simply heating regolith without heat recycling and separation of fines would use more energy than the 3He would yield if fused.
"The helium-3 incantation" - http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2834/1
tl;dr the popularity of mine-the-moon-for-he3 meme is due to wishful thinking about sustainable moon colonies, and there's no analysis that suggests it's even remotely practical to do.