Author Topic: Diamandis and Simonyi Planetary Resources Company Announcement and Notes  (Read 227306 times)

Offline RocketmanUS

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2226
  • USA
  • Liked: 71
  • Likes Given: 31
Quote from: RobotBeat
[PRI has] a realistic early business plan that doesn't rely solely on just burning capital investment and which is technically very feasible.

In all honesty, that remains to be seen.  They still might burn thru capital without return.
{snipped quote}

There is the possibility that they could see time for use of the small space telescopes.
Imagine if a person could buy minutes of time, tell the operator what area to look at and what data to collect based on what the telescope could do. How many companies, colleges, people, ect. do you think would buy time to use one or more of these telescopes. At $10m each and say no more than $10m to launch ( Falcon 1E or like ), total cost $20m plus operator and salesman cost. That would be around $600 for about 5 minutes use to brake even in one year. That time is based on only using the telescope for 8 hours a day. People are already lined up to pay big $ for sub orbital rides. $600 is less than a smart phone for a year or a few days at an amusement park. Your own personnel photo from a space telescope with data!

?
Might this project bring back the Quick Reach 1 air launcher rocket?

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10324
  • Liked: 720
  • Likes Given: 734
You are assuming US jurisdiction.  Outer Space is outside the US Territorial waters, so the 'Law of Nations' probably applies instead of the 'US Constitution'.

Planetary Resources and its machines could be arrested and tried before say a Chinese court.  The charge may be something like committing an 'Unauthorised activity in space'.

Nope.

The OST specifically mandates that nations are responsible for their nationals and their stuff in space. The Chinese could not arrest PR for space activities any more than the Chinese could arrest the captain of a US ship in the middle of the Atlantic.

Offline savuporo

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5152
  • Liked: 1004
  • Likes Given: 342
You do know that it's a little early to answer all these questions, right?
Thats not acceptable ! Everything needs to be planned out precisely 30 years in advance by a central planning committee.
Orion - the first and only manned not-too-deep-space craft

Offline aero

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3631
  • 92129
  • Liked: 1149
  • Likes Given: 361
Considerations in passing the General Mining Act of 1872 are quoted. This same consideration holds for asteroid mining today, IMO.

Quote
Western representatives successfully argued that western miners and prospectors were performing valuable services by promoting commerce and settling new territory. In 1865, Congress passed a law that instructed courts deciding questions of contested mining rights to ignore federal ownership, and defer to the miners in actual possession of the ground.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Mining_Act_of_1872

Difference is that now it needs to be an international court.

But I would counsel that we shouldn't trouble ourselves until it becomes a problem. It's easier to beg forgiveness than ask permission.
« Last Edit: 04/26/2012 06:23 am by aero »
Retired, working interesting problems

Offline QuantumG

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9275
  • Australia
  • Liked: 4498
  • Likes Given: 1133
Apparently Neil deGrasse Tyson will be talking about Planetary Resources on The Daily Show. For some reason I doubt he'll even mention how much all this proves wrong his claims that only governments do exploration.
Human spaceflight is basically just LARPing now.

Offline A_M_Swallow

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8906
  • South coast of England
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 223
You are assuming US jurisdiction.  Outer Space is outside the US Territorial waters, so the 'Law of Nations' probably applies instead of the 'US Constitution'.

Planetary Resources and its machines could be arrested and tried before say a Chinese court.  The charge may be something like committing an 'Unauthorised activity in space'.

Nope.

The OST specifically mandates that nations are responsible for their nationals and their stuff in space. The Chinese could not arrest PR for space activities any more than the Chinese could arrest the captain of a US ship in the middle of the Atlantic.


It is perfectly legal to arrest a pirate in the middle of the Atlantic, even if he is flying a US flag.

We are dealing with a company that has not paid sufficient .. er campaign contributions to get a permit/licence from the US Government.

Attacking a company with a US licence to mine would be a different matter.

Offline Diagoras

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 99
You do know that it's a little early to answer all these questions, right?
Thats not acceptable ! Everything needs to be planned out precisely 30 years in advance by a central planning committee.

savuporo wins the thread right here.
"It’s the typical binary world of 'NASA is great' or 'cancel the space program,' with no nuance or understanding of the underlying issues and pathologies of the space industrial complex."

Offline Dalhousie

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2804
  • Liked: 811
  • Likes Given: 1258
You do know that it's a little early to answer all these questions, right?

It most certainly is not.  if someone talks about new trillion $$$ industries then they ahd better have the processes and economics worked out, at least in principle.

Remember Fritz Haber?  Brilliant chemist, engineer and innovator.  Thoughts that extracting gold from seawater would be a great way to pay of German debt.  The $$$ value of gold in seawater is immense and there was a proven market and a need to generate national income.  Great idea, came unstuck because of the process issues. 

Remember the various schemes to mine Mn nodules on the seafloor?  Great in situ value, they are also rich in Ni and Co, the processing of the nodules poses no real challenges metallurgically, it is just the cost of mining them under 5 km of ocean makes them unattractive compared to on-land accumulations.

Has anyone actually tried to process iron meteorites, preferably several different types because of the differences in chemistry and mineraology, various milling techniques and then the Mond process?  The cost of buying a few 100 kg for bench top tests would be trivial for these guys.  But absolutely essential for their credibility.


Apologies in advance for any lack of civility - it's unintended

Offline JohnFornaro

  • Not an expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11052
  • Delta-t is an important metric.
  • Planet Eaarth
    • Design / Program Associates
  • Liked: 1306
  • Likes Given: 754
You do know that it's a little early to answer all these questions, right?

It most certainly is not.  if someone talks about new trillion $$$ industries then they had better have the processes and economics worked out, at least in principle.

By no means is it too early to ask all these questions.  However, Savuporo's central committee is not prepared to answer them publicly at this time.  Maybe PRI has the processes and economics worked out; maybe not.  Point is, those questions won't be answered in detail publicly any time soon.

I think scalable, vacuum based, unmanned and teleoperated, lag time com tolerant, zero-gee processing along with product return, will be the key factor for success.  But I could be wrong.  On several of the threads around here people comment without support that zero gee processing is easier more or less because there's no gravity well.  If somebody, or some business concern has proven that, it's not well known in the space fan community.

Point is, there's no motivation for them to answer the questions posed by Dalhousie.  But hey, I'll give it a try:

Strip out the other stuff using various chemical processes.

If the asteroid fragment is metallic ... then Mond process would allow pure nickel and pure iron to be stripped off the fragment ...

That will increase the PGM concentrations before dropping to Earth.

How are you going to solid [solidify?] nickel iron alloy to particulate form in zero G?

Considering the brute force attack of a large solar concentrator, the material is put in the focal point and melted.  Some kind of centrifuge spins at various rates, and the melt is separated by weight, and transported to a collection area, where I suppose it is cast into ingots, which eventually cool by radiation. They may not have to be contained, and might just keep themselves as a globule.  The iron could be dealt with magnetically, but iron doesn't seem to have a lot of market value unless you're also making steel I-beams for O'Neil cylinders or something.

Quote
How do you propose moving the process stream in zero G?

I imagine that the molten globules will have to be contained in order to move them.  Since you have a lot of rock, maybe there's a way to make thin ceramic type membranes that incorporate holding devices to move the globules.  Of course, that would insulate them and slow down their cooling, but maybe that doesn't matter.  It will take six months or longer to ship them back to Earth anyhow by some low energy trajectory.  Maybe they stay at a high temp, since they'll have to be processed into finished materials anyway.

Quote
What are the waste products and how are they disposed of?

Perhaps a stream of tailing dust is left in the asteroid belt, desined to become a ring around the Sun.  In a thousand years, the rings are visible to the naked eye on Earth.  The characteristic spectral change of the Sun, due to these rings, is broadcast to the universe at the speed of light.  Eight to ten years later, the civilization at Alpha Centauri contacts us.  In any case, SETI starts looking for those spectral characteristics as an indicator that another life form has mined their asteroid belt.

Quote
What is the likely mass of the plant (including all supporting infrastructure?

Totally huge, if there is to be an economic impact on PGM supplies on Earth.

Quote
What product rate is likely?

Say, double the Earth's current production rate?

Quote from: Bill
Many non-metallic elements and compounds could simply be boiled off with direct application of focused solar energy, again increasing PGM concentration.

Quote from: Dalhousie
What are these compounds in a nickel-iron asteroid? What temperatures are required? What happens to them after they have been "boiled off'?

That's for them to know and us to find out?
Sometimes I just flat out don't get it.

Offline mrmandias

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 504
  • US
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 34
You do know that it's a little early to answer all these questions, right?

It most certainly is not.  if someone talks about new trillion $$$ industries then they ahd better have the processes and economics worked out, at least in principle.

Remember Fritz Haber?  Brilliant chemist, engineer and innovator.  Thoughts that extracting gold from seawater would be a great way to pay of German debt.  The $$$ value of gold in seawater is immense and there was a proven market and a need to generate national income.  Great idea, came unstuck because of the process issues. 

Remember the various schemes to mine Mn nodules on the seafloor?  Great in situ value, they are also rich in Ni and Co, the processing of the nodules poses no real challenges metallurgically, it is just the cost of mining them under 5 km of ocean makes them unattractive compared to on-land accumulations.

Has anyone actually tried to process iron meteorites, preferably several different types because of the differences in chemistry and mineraology, various milling techniques and then the Mond process?  The cost of buying a few 100 kg for bench top tests would be trivial for these guys.  But absolutely essential for their credibility.




This is worse than 'Somebody on the internet is wrong!"  This is 'Somebody on the internet hasn't proven themselves right!'

I see no need for agita.  They haven't asked for an investment from you, nor have they asked for public funds on the basis that they have a working zero-g PGM refining system. 

In their model the mining and refining phase is minimum 10 years out, and at least 15 if they use the slow-boost methods outlined in the KISS report.  Its not irrational to decide that you can go ahead on phases 1, 2, and 3, which are worthwhile in themselves, without yet having a comprehensive solution to phase 4.

Its also not irrational to wait to get more information about your asteroid targets before you commit to a mining method.  The size of the asteroid could make a big difference to the approach you use, the type of ore and the percentages of the target elements, and even whether the asteroid turns out to be mostly loose rubble or mostly solid, all of those will make a difference.  Even the market in 15-20 years could make a difference in methodology.  [These are all considerations that may weigh in favor of transporting the asteroid to a central processing point instead of processing in situ, because it gives you more development time and more information before you commit to your development.]

Its also not irrational for a private company that has some hopes of making a killing to keep its cards close to its vest.

Potential methods and potential pitfalls are well worth discussing, but indignation and demands should be kept out of that discussion.

Offline mrmandias

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 504
  • US
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 34
You do know that it's a little early to answer all these questions, right?
Thats not acceptable ! Everything needs to be planned out precisely 30 years in advance by a central planning committee.

Ha!  ;)

We must labor like Stakhanovites to fulfill all targets of the 30 Year Plan of our Great Leader Dear Comrade Diamandis!

Offline Spiff

  • Veteran
  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 736
  • Utrecht - The Netherlands
  • Liked: 63
  • Likes Given: 6
My two cents on this thread that is quickly growing out of proportion. (So, my comment will most likely be lost in the mayhem... :) )

I have no clue if Diamandis, Simonyi & co. will be able to pull something of, let alone if they have a valid business case. Time will tell...

However, I do know one thing. There seems to be a new mantra among people who have more money than is good for them. It goes something like this:
"We have way more money than we will ever be able to spend on earth! Let's spend it on space."

To us, the space advocates, enthousiasts, and plain geeks, to us, this can only be good news.

Like I said, only time will tell if it will 'change the game' in any way...
I always consider space to be the FIRST frontier.

Offline Diagoras

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
  • Liked: 7
  • Likes Given: 99
Apparently Neil deGrasse Tyson will be talking about Planetary Resources on The Daily Show. For some reason I doubt he'll even mention how much all this proves wrong his claims that only governments do exploration.

Where'd you hear about this? I Googled for a link, but couldn't find one.
"It’s the typical binary world of 'NASA is great' or 'cancel the space program,' with no nuance or understanding of the underlying issues and pathologies of the space industrial complex."

Offline Jason1701

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2232
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 153
Apparently Neil deGrasse Tyson will be talking about Planetary Resources on The Daily Show. For some reason I doubt he'll even mention how much all this proves wrong his claims that only governments do exploration.

Where'd you hear about this? I Googled for a link, but couldn't find one.

It was on yesterday in the first segment of the show.

Offline BrightLight

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Northern New Mexico
  • Liked: 312
  • Likes Given: 1008
My two cents on this thread that is quickly growing out of proportion. (So, my comment will most likely be lost in the mayhem... :) )

I have no clue if Diamandis, Simonyi & co. will be able to pull something of, let alone if they have a valid business case. Time will tell...

However, I do know one thing. There seems to be a new mantra among people who have more money than is good for them. It goes something like this:
"We have way more money than we will ever be able to spend on earth! Let's spend it on space."

To us, the space advocates, enthusiasts, and plain geeks, to us, this can only be good news.

Like I said, only time will tell if it will 'change the game' in any way...
The last time a few individuals had more money then they knew what to do with (equivalent billions in today's dollars)-
they built railroads, towns, extracted mineral resources, natural resources and made North America the wealthiest, most productive continent on earth. - Release the Hounds!!

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10324
  • Liked: 720
  • Likes Given: 734
You are assuming US jurisdiction.  Outer Space is outside the US Territorial waters, so the 'Law of Nations' probably applies instead of the 'US Constitution'.

Planetary Resources and its machines could be arrested and tried before say a Chinese court.  The charge may be something like committing an 'Unauthorised activity in space'.

Nope.

The OST specifically mandates that nations are responsible for their nationals and their stuff in space. The Chinese could not arrest PR for space activities any more than the Chinese could arrest the captain of a US ship in the middle of the Atlantic.


It is perfectly legal to arrest a pirate in the middle of the Atlantic, even if he is flying a US flag.

Nope. Pirates, by definition, do not fly national flags. There is a name for engaging in pirate-like activity under a national flag, but it doesn't apply here.

We are not talking about pirates anyway, we are talked about flagged nationals engaged in economic activity in space. This would be similar to the Chinese "capturing" a functioning US communications satellite in GEO, really, really bad idea.

Offline Eer

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 659
  • Liked: 494
  • Likes Given: 1010
Anyone know if Planetary Resources, or its predicessor, are involved with the DARPA System F9 program?  F9 describes itself this way:

 The goal of the System F6 program is to develop and demonstrate the enabling technologies for fractionated spacecraft architectures. Fractionated spacecraft are a class of disaggregated satellites, wherein the functionality traditionally provided by a single, large, “monolithic” satellite is delivered by a cluster of wirelessly-interconnected satellites (modules) capable of seamlessly sharing a variety of software and hardware resources over a network with real-time, multi-level security, and fault tolerance guarantees. Such an architecture has the potential to significantly enhance the adaptability and survivability of space capabilities, while also shortening development timelines for complex space systems and reducing the barrier-to-entry for participation in the national security space industry.

This taken from their (open source) RFP available at www.fbo.gov.  The program is in its second phase, and the draft Developer kit / architecture is there, too (search for DARPA-BAA-12-18).

If you're interested in some efforts at designing an approach to building swarms of satellites flying in formation to coordinate actions, share resources, and adapt to changing populations (swarm members come and go), this gives an interesting insight.
From "The Rhetoric of Interstellar Flight", by Paul Gilster, March 10, 2011: We’ll build a future in space one dogged step at a time, and when asked how long humanity will struggle before reaching the stars, we’ll respond, “As long as it takes.”

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10324
  • Liked: 720
  • Likes Given: 734
Without taking aim at PR, my general observation is that invoking terms like "swarms" and "clouds" in business presentations is similar to aerospace projects using terms like "slush hydrogen" and "aerospike"; for those who don't know about these things, failing aerospace projects invoke these exotic technologies to confuse everyone else.

Offline mrmandias

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 504
  • US
  • Liked: 30
  • Likes Given: 34

You are assuming US jurisdiction.  Outer Space is outside the US Territorial waters, so the 'Law of Nations' probably applies instead of the 'US Constitution'.

Planetary Resources and its machines could be arrested and tried before say a Chinese court.  The charge may be something like committing an 'Unauthorised activity in space'.

Interesting speculation, but not something I would recommend that Planetary Resources worry too much about.

Legally/diplomatically I agree with the other replies to you.  The OST is set up so that citizens and nationals are invisible to other nations.  Nations only deal with nations.  So its not China's business to decide whether or not the US has given permission to a US flagged entity or not.  That's the US' business.  If China thinks the US is violating the treaty (by for instance, not adequately supervising its nationals) that's an issue for China to take up with the US using diplomatic means or threats or whatever else.  That's how the treaty is structured. 
Maritime law is not directly applicable to outer space for the most part.  Its helpful as an analogy.  But even as an analogy, there’s no way that outer space resource extraction is piracy.
The language of the Outer Space Treaty does not necessarily require a formal licensing and permitting process, IMO.
Quote
The activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty.
Perhaps “authorization” has some technical meaning in international law.  I don’t know.  But absent that, this language could simply mean that nationals can’t do space activity that is forbidden by their country’s law and the country is responsible for what its nationals do.  In other words, if US law doesn’t forbid space mining, its authorized under US law.
Practically, if China can develop the resources and the capability to go out to NEO and impound a minecraft out there, why wouldn’t China just do its own mining?  Seizing a craft and hauling it back to earth for disposition is most of the way there to having your own independent mining capability.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10324
  • Liked: 720
  • Likes Given: 734
Remember Fritz Haber?  Brilliant chemist, engineer and innovator.  Thoughts that extracting gold from seawater would be a great way to pay of German debt.  The $$$ value of gold in seawater is immense and there was a proven market and a need to generate national income.  Great idea, came unstuck because of the process issues. 

This might be a good analogy for PR. Seawater contains about 1 ppm of gold, whereas an asteroid might have 100 ppm of Platinum; on the other hand, it might 100 times more difficult to extract the platinum from an asteroid than extracting gold from seawater.

And yes, in both cases, there are other valuable materials that would be extracted as by-products.

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0