Planetary Resources

[Solman]

Danderman wrote:

It still is.

Prospecting asteroids might have some reality to it, but the actual extraction and return of valuable materials is a long way in the future.

In that world where you are talking about mining asteroids, you might as well invoke return of He-3 to fuel all the nuclear fusion reactors that will built.

 Seems overly pessimistic to me.
The tech required is hardly a giant leap.
Extraction of valuable resource can be as simple as heating regolith up in a solar furnace.
Tele-operation was recently demonstrated on the ISS by MDA when sat refueling tech was demonstrated and controlled by engineers on the ground.
Aerocapture (which is a great way to get the stuff back) has not been demonstrated and neither has an insitu manufactured heat shield but it sure seems doable - to me anyway.
Actual return of regolith or a small asteroid seems doable as well.
What show-stoppers do you see? Fund raising perhaps?

[Danderman]

Extraction of valuable resource can be as simple as heating regolith up in a solar furnace.

This is the heart of the disagreement.

From my perspective, it is really really hard to send a probe to land on an asteroid. It is an order of magnitude more difficult to send a probe that has the power to gather significant amounts of regolith plus heat it up. Note that the Japanese are thrilled that Hayabusa was able to obtain a few grains of regolith in a fairly heroic mission.

Apart from the space engineering issues, there is the "heat up to refine" canard, since reduction of most materials is more complicated than that.

In other words, if hand waving is allowed, PR and its competitors seem like a good idea. On the other hand, if you analyze their obstacles on an engineering and accounting basis, there is big trouble ahead.

[Solman]

From my perspective, it is really really hard to send a probe to land on an asteroid. It is an order of magnitude more difficult to send a probe that has the power to gather significant amounts of regolith plus heat it up. Note that the Japanese are thrilled that Hayabusa was able to obtain a few grains of regolith in a fairly heroic mission.

Apart from the space engineering issues, there is the "heat up to refine" canard, since reduction of most materials is more complicated than that.

 Samples have been returned from the Moon by the Luna spacecraft so I really don't understand the difficulty of operating off a much smaller gravity well to do the same thing (albeit on a much larger scale for economical mining). For instance bringing a big bucket to gobble a 7 ft. asteroid and return it seems a whole lot easier than what the Luna probes had to do.
 Heating up regolith via solar furnace will produce volatiles won't it?
The AFRL solar furnace has achieved 8000 deg.F IIRC.
 Another tech has been demonstrated that uses cerium oxide to absorb oxygen at high temp. Applied to ISRU this produces metals oxygen etc. in a few easy steps. Vacuum pyrolysis is another tech that can work with a solar furnace.
 As for power, a 17KW thermal per kg. solar concentrator for space use has been prototyped. This, coupled with triple junction or other type PV for use with hundreds of Sun's concentration and high 40$ plus efficiency and very high specific power means potentially 5KW electric/kg. or better. The concentrator can also power a solar furnace given a mechanism to move equip. into and out of the focus.
 Yes its my "hobby horse" but at any rate I think there are many potential engineering solutions to the problem of economical asteroid mining.

[QuantumG]

Samples have been returned from the Moon by the Luna spacecraft so I really don't understand the difficulty of operating off a much smaller gravity well to do the same thing

Go read up then. The story of Hayabusa is not a pretty one. Kawaguchi himself described it as a miracle that it returned anything at all.

[Danderman]

Samples have been returned from the Moon by the Luna spacecraft so I really don't understand the difficulty of operating off a much smaller gravity well to do the same thing (albeit on a much larger scale for economical mining). For instance bringing a big bucket to gobble a 7 ft. asteroid and return it seems a whole lot easier than what the Luna probes had to do.

Note that the Soviets invested the equivalent of billions of dollars to return 100 milligram samples from the Moon. Each 100 milligram sample required a Proton launch vehicle.

Why is this an indicator that private companies can economically return large quantities of processed materials from asteroids?

[xanmarus]

Why is this an indicator that private companies can economically return large quantities of processed materials from asteroids?

What about 40+ years of technical progress?

[QuantumG]

Why is this an indicator that private companies can economically return large quantities of processed materials from asteroids?

What about 40+ years of technical progress?

Where? In the space industry? lol.

[Danderman]

 Yes its my "hobby horse" but at any rate I think there are many potential engineering solutions to the problem of economical asteroid mining.

To demonstrate that this is more than an engineering problem, let me invite you and everyone else to answer these two questions:

How much $$ has to be invested in the short term to get to revenue from asteroid mining?

When does the operation generate significant revenues?

The answer to the first question should be in dollars, and the answer to the second question should be a number of years.

[Solman]

 

How much $$ has to be invested in the short term to get to revenue from asteroid mining?

When does the operation generate significant revenues?

The answer to the first question should be in dollars, and the answer to the second question should be a number of years.

 If limited to mining itself and therefore not the plan PR has outlined, the investment might be as low as their competition's 20 million dollars and the payoff as soon as five years or so which I guess is the time it would take at minimum to build, launch, land and return.
 As in any business a first success could lead to increased investment and tech improvement.
 The amount brought back can be many times the mass of the mining vehicle since the delta V required for ore return and this is especially true if aerocapture can be used. The mining vehicle can be reusable as well.
 The target that has been mentioned by PR would have the potential for hundreds of billions in payoff.

[Robotbeat]

Why is this an indicator that private companies can economically return large quantities of processed materials from asteroids?

What about 40+ years of technical progress?

Where? In the space industry? lol.

Manufacturing, automation, sensing, electronics, imaging, communication, algorithms, software engineering, reliability engineering, autonomy, materials science. Yes there have been lots of advances in relevant fields. The fact that the electronics used on cubesats seems cute compared to what is already in everyone's pockets is not an accident. Miniaturization and improvements in electronics and sensors in the last 40 years has been tremendous, and these are some of the most important things for initial missions using small spacecraft platforms. Not all of these innovations have been applied or become commonplace in the space industry, but they are slowly filtering in. Electronics (including space electronics) are FAR better now than 40 years ago. Solar power is more than an order of magnitude higher specific power than 40 years ago and two orders of magnitude cheaper (relevant for propulsion).

[Danderman]

How much $$ has to be invested in the short term to get to revenue from asteroid mining?

When does the operation generate significant revenues?

The answer to the first question should be in dollars, and the answer to the second question should be a number of years.

 If limited to mining itself and therefore not the plan PR has outlined, the investment might be as low as their competition's 20 million dollars and the payoff as soon as five years or so which I guess is the time it would take at minimum to build, launch, land and return.
 As in any business a first success could lead to increased investment and tech improvement.
 The amount brought back can be many times the mass of the mining vehicle since the delta V required for ore return and this is especially true if aerocapture can be used. The mining vehicle can be reusable as well.
 The target that has been mentioned by PR would have the potential for hundreds of billions in payoff.

PR could get to revenue in 5 years via investment of $20 million?

Why not inform us by showing the largest cost items in that $20 million?

And where exactly would the revenue be generated?

If this involves buying boatloads of lottery tickets, I will be disappointed.

[Lar]

How much $$ has to be invested in the short term to get to revenue from asteroid mining?

When does the operation generate significant revenues?

The answer to the first question should be in dollars, and the answer to the second question should be a number of years.

 If limited to mining itself and therefore not the plan PR has outlined, the investment might be as low as their competition's 20 million dollars and the payoff as soon as five years or so which I guess is the time it would take at minimum to build, launch, land and return.
 As in any business a first success could lead to increased investment and tech improvement.
 The amount brought back can be many times the mass of the mining vehicle since the delta V required for ore return and this is especially true if aerocapture can be used. The mining vehicle can be reusable as well.
 The target that has been mentioned by PR would have the potential for hundreds of billions in payoff.

PR could get to revenue in 5 years via investment of $20 million?

Why not inform us by showing the largest cost items in that $20 million?

And where exactly would the revenue be generated?

If this involves buying boatloads of lottery tickets, I will be disappointed.

I'm gung-ho re PRI  but either the number or the time period seem low.

I could possibly see a plan that starts with one Arkyd 100 and bootstraps that MIGHT be doable for 20M but it would take longer than 5 years to get to mining...  and I can see a plan that gets to mining and revenues within 5 years but it would be highly aggressive and take more than 20M initial.

[Solman]

 The 20 mil reference was to the Deep Space Industries plan and the return is data in that case.
 The five years is what I guessed was the minimum time for an effort to actually mine given high funding level.

[Danderman]

The 20 mil reference was to the Deep Space Industries plan and the return is data in that case.
 The five years is what I guessed was the minimum time for an effort to actually mine given high funding level.

Plans for commercial space data acquisition and sales probably have a little more plausibility than mining asteroids, but my questions concerning investment costs and time to generate revenue for asteroid mining remain unanswered.

[sheltonjr]

I have hopes that PR will succeed, but in the near term, mining asteroids will not generate any profit for a long time.  I am currently re-reading "Mining the Sky".

Only Platinum & Gold have enough value to bring back to earth, and to mine asteroids for enough of each even at their higher concentrations would be enormously difficult and expensive that I doubt it would be profitable.

The real money is in having the resources in space. Fuel depots for LOX/H2/Methane, and metals to build structures with.

Unfortunately Fuel depots are probably 10 years away, and serious building of space structures with space materials is probably 50 years away. I hope I am wrong.

Its a Catch 22, Can PR build the mining infrastructure before there is a market and stay in business? Fuel depots are the only resource that I see near term that may provide some income if one is built by somebody.

[go4mars]

my questions concerning investment costs and time to generate revenue for asteroid mining remain unanswered.

Are you being rhetorical?  There are obviously far too many unknowns to reasonably constrain the estimates at this time.  It's a gamble imo.  For example, if you think the possibility exists for a resuable BFR to come along in the next decade or so, and you want to be well positioned just in case, then you might do it.  It's like producing oil in Venezuela or Russia.  You might make money before your assets get 'nationalized', or you might not.  Various people will apply various risk-reward assumptions. 

I am currently re-reading "Mining the Sky".

Great book.  Needs an update.

[Danderman]

Are you being rhetorical?

No, there is someone here who maintains that all of this is well understood.

[Robert Thompson]

Local news bit riffs on rare earth elements and uses.

http://azstarnet.com/business/local/arizona-is-new-frontier-in-search-for-vital-rare-earth/article_49af6907-e412-5737-a1ea-00a80c9db124.html

[JohnFornaro]

In other words, if hand waving is allowed, PR and its competitors seem like a good idea. On the other hand, if you analyze their obstacles on an engineering and accounting basis, there is big trouble ahead.

Well put.

[JohnFornaro]

Not much new on the PRI Website.  They're still talking about the Russian meteor.

I did notice that their asteroid bucket is similar in design to my UDH:  Unpressurized Deployable Hangar, an invention of mine which I've previously published on the Internet.