Gold mining in space…? Can’t eat it, can’t drink it, can’t breathe it… So what good is it?Robert
Quote from: Rocket Science on 10/02/2011 10:44 pmGold mining in space…? Can’t eat it, can’t drink it, can’t breathe it… So what good is it?RobertGold has its uses but the main reason for mining it is for profit. As for my posts, the speculation is that maybe the profit would justify the expenses. That only works if we know a location where it is plentiful and can be extracted. Regarding the moon, do we have any idea where the lodes of precious metals are located or will we need an army of prospectors to find them? The only thing I know for sure is that the moon is virgin territory.
If spaceX will succeed with fully reusable Falcon9 rocket that could drop LEO cargo transport price down to <100-150$ kg then some first real moon exploration/mining permanent space base projects could begin. specially if after building reusable F9 they will make H9 heavy also reusable with >50 ton LEO payload some heavy mining machine equipment could then be transported to moon for first mining operations (that would be water that will be mined first, for life support and propellant then will fallow everything else for to build larger moon base infrastructure and also main market will be LEO space station building, which will be more cheap if built by moon mined metals, and supplied by moon propellant.first step is of course need for cheap reusable heavy lift LEO transport >50 tons that could fly more than 1 time a weak.basically if reusable falcon 9 will succeed it will fast takeover all non government rocket transport market. and with lowering transportation cost, lot of new private corporations space builders will emerge expanding space transportation market really fast, after 10 years demand will rise to such levels that there will be market for more high tech launch systems with larger infrastructure, like mountain slope reusable maglev electrical/chemical propulsion combos that could reduce energy consumption by 2/3 compared to F9 rocket so cost of Leo Kg will be 2x cheaper, because now fuel cost will be significant part of transport cost, so most fuel efficient LEO transport will be the cheapest one. on the other side in LEO some orbital Skyhook could be also developed by the time to even further lower LEO transport cost.
Quote from: JohnFornaro on 09/30/2011 02:02 pmAll we have is chemical rocketry. It's not too expensive to use.You can go pretty much anywhere on the globe for a few thousand. Right now the cheapest flight into LEO is around $50 million. Seems chemical rocketry is expensive to me.
All we have is chemical rocketry. It's not too expensive to use.
How large a cargo will a single drop contain? Maybe one armored car's worth, maximum, so what is the cargo limit on an armored car? What is a minimum economically feasible payload mass? I know not!
Historically mining has involved breaking solid rock into loose pieces, picking up those loose pieces and putting them into a crusher to male smaller pieces but putting them into some kind of smelter/ extractor. Every step of the process relies on gravity.
I had an interesting image of the asteroid belt being turned into a dust belt of small ground up particles. Probably turn into a ring around the Sun. If JWST could find such a dust belt surrounding a distant star, it could suggest an intelligent life form has mined their asteroid belt. I don't know how common asteroid belts are, however.
If prices get that low then it opens up the massive market of space based solar power unicorns.
Hey aero,You might call it speculation, but it still falls under “science fiction”, since there is no infrastructure in place to find it, extract it or return it. There is no business model for it and no need for it on Earth. Currency left the gold standard decades ago and the only value is emotional. Bringing more of it only reduces its value. With famine here on Earth we still need the same resources you would need to live on the Moon. Challenges are still safe and plentiful food, clean drinking water and unpolluted air. We have enough greed and profiteers here on Wall Street who create nothing of “real value”. Solve these problems and you will surely profit …“Can’t eat it, can’t drink it, can’t breathe it”… RegardsRoberthttp://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm
Quote from: Rocket Science on 10/03/2011 12:01 pmHey aero,You might call it speculation, but it still falls under “science fiction”, since there is no infrastructure in place to find it, extract it or return it. There is no business model for it and no need for it on Earth. Currency left the gold standard decades ago and the only value is emotional. Bringing more of it only reduces its value. With famine here on Earth we still need the same resources you would need to live on the Moon. Challenges are still safe and plentiful food, clean drinking water and unpolluted air. We have enough greed and profiteers here on Wall Street who create nothing of “real value”. Solve these problems and you will surely profit …“Can’t eat it, can’t drink it, can’t breathe it”… RegardsRoberthttp://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htmFirst of all, many of that you speak of are political and economic, not technical. Secondly, the greater abundance of resources that can be made available by space travel can go along way to improving conditions here. Think about it. Think of all the problems created by mining and extracting resources. Practically all the ones related to pollution can be eliminated if mining is done on another planet.
Quote from: DarkenedOne on 10/03/2011 04:12 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 10/03/2011 12:01 pmHey aero,You might call it speculation, but it still falls under “science fiction”, since there is no infrastructure in place to find it, extract it or return it. There is no business model for it and no need for it on Earth. Currency left the gold standard decades ago and the only value is emotional. Bringing more of it only reduces its value. With famine here on Earth we still need the same resources you would need to live on the Moon. Challenges are still safe and plentiful food, clean drinking water and unpolluted air. We have enough greed and profiteers here on Wall Street who create nothing of “real value”. Solve these problems and you will surely profit …“Can’t eat it, can’t drink it, can’t breathe it”… RegardsRoberthttp://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htmFirst of all, many of that you speak of are political and economic, not technical. Secondly, the greater abundance of resources that can be made available by space travel can go along way to improving conditions here. Think about it. Think of all the problems created by mining and extracting resources. Practically all the ones related to pollution can be eliminated if mining is done on another planet.1) Where is this infrastructure (technology)?2) How? Please explain…3) So its ok to destroy a “pristine” celestial body, have we not done enough damage here?
Quote from: Rocket Science on 10/03/2011 04:36 pmQuote from: DarkenedOne on 10/03/2011 04:12 pmQuote from: Rocket Science on 10/03/2011 12:01 pmHey aero,You might call it speculation, but it still falls under “science fiction”, since there is no infrastructure in place to find it, extract it or return it. There is no business model for it and no need for it on Earth. Currency left the gold standard decades ago and the only value is emotional. Bringing more of it only reduces its value. With famine here on Earth we still need the same resources you would need to live on the Moon. Challenges are still safe and plentiful food, clean drinking water and unpolluted air. We have enough greed and profiteers here on Wall Street who create nothing of “real value”. Solve these problems and you will surely profit …“Can’t eat it, can’t drink it, can’t breathe it”… RegardsRoberthttp://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htmFirst of all, many of that you speak of are political and economic, not technical. Secondly, the greater abundance of resources that can be made available by space travel can go along way to improving conditions here. Think about it. Think of all the problems created by mining and extracting resources. Practically all the ones related to pollution can be eliminated if mining is done on another planet.1) Where is this infrastructure (technology)?2) How? Please explain…3) So its ok to destroy a “pristine” celestial body, have we not done enough damage here?1. We will develop it as we have with all infrastructure and technology that exists today.2. Control over resources has always been one of if not the greatest driver for warfare. 3. Rocket Science I care about preserving and protecting lifeforms. I do not care about protecting rock. If mining operations could be conducted in a place where it cannot negatively affect life then that is best.Your objections sound terribly misanthropic.
The other thing about the gold standard is that in some ways you don't need it. Let's say NASA could pull an Alaska: Everybody in the country gets ten one ounce gold coins at the end of the year. Shuttle brings 'em down in 20 ton chunks. Children's share goes to the parents or guardians. The way income is distributed these days, it would make a lotta people happy with that administration. Realizing of course, that you don't need a gold standard to this; you sell gold like any other commodity on an open market.As to the idea of a "pristine" celestial body. To me a perchlorate ecosystem on Mars is a more "pristine" kind of thing than the Moon. The Moon ends up being an industrial based economy based on mining. If nuclear energy, or a continuous equatorial PV array is available, perhaps rocket manufacture. Otherwise, if it is thought that the Moon is disfigured enough with the artifacts now on it, then staying on planet will be more a condemnation than a choice.