ISTM it's easier to make the case for mining in space for manufacturing in space, not back on Earth unless producing the finished product is not possible here.
But maybe nature doesn’t always know best. Claudia Turro and colleagues at the Ohio State University have now developed a rhodium catalyst that performs both of these tasks, harvesting light and then using its energy to create hydrogen gas (Nat. Chem. 2020, DOI: 10.1038/s41557-019-0397-4). The catalyst is more efficient than previous examples that combine these two functions in a single molecule, and unlike rival catalysts it can make full use of the Sun’s spectrum, including red and infrared light. “It’s easy to prepare, and it’s also stable in air and water, which is not the case for many previous systems,” Turro says.Many artificial photosynthesis systems use a mix of molecules to drive water-splitting reactions, making oxygen and hydrogen. The hydrogen side of this process generally relies on a photosensitizer that absorbs light to generate excited electrons. Those electrons are transferred to a hydrogen-evolving catalyst, which brings them together with two protons to make hydrogen gas. “But whenever you have charge transfer from the light absorber to the catalyst, there are going to be energy losses,” Turro says.Keeping the charge transfer step within the same molecule should avoid those losses. But previous complexes that act as both light absorber and catalyst for hydrogen generation have been unstable, sluggish, and unable to absorb red or infrared light.
I found this interesting:QuoteBut maybe nature doesn’t always know best. Claudia Turro and colleagues at the Ohio State University have now developed a rhodium catalyst that performs both of these tasks, harvesting light and then using its energy to create hydrogen gas (Nat. Chem. 2020, DOI: 10.1038/s41557-019-0397-4). The catalyst is more efficient than previous examples that combine these two functions in a single molecule, and unlike rival catalysts it can make full use of the Sun’s spectrum, including red and infrared light. “It’s easy to prepare, and it’s also stable in air and water, which is not the case for many previous systems,” Turro says.Many artificial photosynthesis systems use a mix of molecules to drive water-splitting reactions, making oxygen and hydrogen. The hydrogen side of this process generally relies on a photosensitizer that absorbs light to generate excited electrons. Those electrons are transferred to a hydrogen-evolving catalyst, which brings them together with two protons to make hydrogen gas. “But whenever you have charge transfer from the light absorber to the catalyst, there are going to be energy losses,” Turro says.Keeping the charge transfer step within the same molecule should avoid those losses. But previous complexes that act as both light absorber and catalyst for hydrogen generation have been unstable, sluggish, and unable to absorb red or infrared light.https://cen.acs.org/energy/renewables/Rhodium-photocatalyst-does-double-duty/98/i4Now, you can't necessarily industrialize stuff like this on a massive scale as the Rhodium supply is only about 30 t per year and some of that is recycled (and most of it is needed for catalytic converters). Who knows what applications would be found or are known but ignored because the supply just isn't there for large scale high volume commercialization. Now, imagine you increase the supply by 100x collapsing the price of rhodium from quarter million per kg down to a paltry $25,000 per kilo. 3000 t of Rhodium and $25,000 per kilo is a good $75 billion per year in revenue (more revenue than is made currently at $250,000/kilo and 30 t or $7.5 billion per year). So, I wouldn't treat mining values for some rare elements as a zero sum game (It is possible the annual revenue is constrained by the rarity even if rarity helps the unit prices).In other words, if people can find more value in mining, the share of global GDP that is mining related will increase. Finding more value in mining could be correlated with the mineral potential that you can tap. The mineral potential that you can tap is increased as you expand your resource base beyond earth based sources. For example, if you live on a water planet with just a couple of islands, you would expect mining minerals not to be a very big past time and job creator. GDP would be associated with something else like fishing or boat building. If these people were to expand to other planets that had more mineral resources, people might make the argument that mining makes no economic sense as it is a small percentage of GDP. But such a thing isn't true. They don't know what they are missing out on.
Quote from: docmordrid on 07/26/2020 05:44 pmISTM it's easier to make the case for mining in space for manufacturing in space, not back on Earth unless producing the finished product is not possible here.BINGO! Enter Mars.Warning: Arm waving and a long view. This is more about the Musk Mars Foundation or future SpaceX than the man himself.If the resources are there, asteroid resources to Mars has lower transport costs than to Earth, and a greater value on Mars. Mars has a strong incentive for native spaceflight capability even without asteroid mining and will not be lacking the talent (especially after SpaceX transfers headquarters and at least some of its engineering). SX would probably focus on space transport and infrastructure rather than asteroid mining itself.It's not that great an energy step from Mars orbit onto the asteroids. It's also reasonable to expect Mars to become a hub for automation technology because it will face a labor shortage like that faced by North America that led to 'Yankee ingenuity'. Automated survey and exploration of the asteroids will be a 'relatively' inexpensive endeavor.If worthwhile resources are found the raw ore might be processed in situ, shipped back to Mars or conceivably inserted into an elliptical orbit to bring it in closer to the Sun for a richer solar power environment. If a little bit of gravity can help, Mars has two convenient rocks orbiting it.My expectation is that if Mars is looking for an industrial export, it will be space related. If SLS is any indication, once Musk leaves Earth, Mars will build it cheaper (aww, it's only a little snark). With asteroid resources and strong orbital infrastructure, it all fits together. Interesting point: One of the first profitable products from the new world was timber to build the ships used to get to the new world. Colonial shipbuilding followed but I can't find any firm dates.Timeframe: first mars based asteroid exploration within 25 years of the first landing. After that, it depends on what they find.PhilEdit to add: while gold has a lot of cache and some practical uses, I'd get more excited if a rich titanium deposit were found. Picture the next generation SS built out of titanium.
Quote from: OTV Booster on 07/26/2020 10:40 pmQuote from: docmordrid on 07/26/2020 05:44 pmISTM it's easier to make the case for mining in space for manufacturing in space, not back on Earth unless producing the finished product is not possible here.BINGO! Enter Mars.Warning: Arm waving and a long view. This is more about the Musk Mars Foundation or future SpaceX than the man himself.If the resources are there, asteroid resources to Mars has lower transport costs than to Earth, and a greater value on Mars. Mars has a strong incentive for native spaceflight capability even without asteroid mining and will not be lacking the talent (especially after SpaceX transfers headquarters and at least some of its engineering). SX would probably focus on space transport and infrastructure rather than asteroid mining itself.It's not that great an energy step from Mars orbit onto the asteroids. It's also reasonable to expect Mars to become a hub for automation technology because it will face a labor shortage like that faced by North America that led to 'Yankee ingenuity'. Automated survey and exploration of the asteroids will be a 'relatively' inexpensive endeavor.If worthwhile resources are found the raw ore might be processed in situ, shipped back to Mars or conceivably inserted into an elliptical orbit to bring it in closer to the Sun for a richer solar power environment. If a little bit of gravity can help, Mars has two convenient rocks orbiting it.My expectation is that if Mars is looking for an industrial export, it will be space related. If SLS is any indication, once Musk leaves Earth, Mars will build it cheaper (aww, it's only a little snark). With asteroid resources and strong orbital infrastructure, it all fits together. Interesting point: One of the first profitable products from the new world was timber to build the ships used to get to the new world. Colonial shipbuilding followed but I can't find any firm dates.Timeframe: first mars based asteroid exploration within 25 years of the first landing. After that, it depends on what they find.PhilEdit to add: while gold has a lot of cache and some practical uses, I'd get more excited if a rich titanium deposit were found. Picture the next generation SS built out of titanium.There's loads of ilmenite and titanium dioxide on Mars and regolith processing for water and other materials will probably leave plenty to spare already concentrated. So the availability of titanium ore is unlikely to be an issue. As on Earth the hard part is the extraction via the Kroll process using magnesium metal, chlorine and plenty of energy and specialist kit.
Quote from: M.E.T. on 07/24/2020 11:48 pmQuote from: Robotbeat on 07/24/2020 09:37 pmTelecoms is probably the bigger space market we can hope for in our lifetimes. So unless SpaceX starts getting involved in more terrestrial markets (speculation: power-to-gas? After all, they’ll need that tech for Mars), Starlink will probably dominate their market cap.My ultimate hope for asteroid mining to be the big ticket permanent revenue source....Mining for WHAT, exactly? Don't say water. Water is a secondary market to other space industries (you're effectively promising that satellite companies won't have to spend as much on launch costs to do stuff they want to do, so you're competing against the launch market and you'll necessarily have less revenue than your customers, the satellite operators who are paying you). Earth has plenty of water.Look up the actual total market (in millions or billions CURRENT total global market revenue) for the thing you intend to mine that you think will be bigger than telecommunications.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 07/24/2020 09:37 pmTelecoms is probably the bigger space market we can hope for in our lifetimes. So unless SpaceX starts getting involved in more terrestrial markets (speculation: power-to-gas? After all, they’ll need that tech for Mars), Starlink will probably dominate their market cap.My ultimate hope for asteroid mining to be the big ticket permanent revenue source....
Telecoms is probably the bigger space market we can hope for in our lifetimes. So unless SpaceX starts getting involved in more terrestrial markets (speculation: power-to-gas? After all, they’ll need that tech for Mars), Starlink will probably dominate their market cap.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 07/25/2020 01:54 am...Look up the actual total market (in millions or billions CURRENT total global market revenue) for the thing you intend to mine that you think will be bigger than telecommunications.I think your view of the market is a bit narrow, since you seem to be basing it strictly on "current" Earth market.
...Look up the actual total market (in millions or billions CURRENT total global market revenue) for the thing you intend to mine that you think will be bigger than telecommunications.
It seems plausible to this analyst that, if an in-space economy takes of as a result of low-cost space access (ala Musk/Starship), then much material will be wanted in that economy, for many reasons not least of which the Bezosian vision of space habs. Why then would one want to source all material for such an economy at the bottom of the gravity wells of Earth and Mars?
For many answers about what can be sold to Earth by a Space economy read through the Development of a Martian export economy thread.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44411.0Note it is not a small list. And the values are quite large in total as to how much all of these exports can be.
Well I think any natural resource extraction on Mars would be, the output would be for Mars.It definitely wouldn't make sense to transport stuff 200 million miles back to Earth. You know,honestly, if you had like crack cocaine on Mars, like in pre-packaged palets, it still wouldn't make sense to transport it back here. Maybe good times for the Martians, but not back here.
Quote from: oldAtlas_Eguy on 07/31/2020 08:03 pmFor many answers about what can be sold to Earth by a Space economy read through the Development of a Martian export economy thread.https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=44411.0Note it is not a small list. And the values are quite large in total as to how much all of these exports can be.That is a 38 page discussion, and other than the list in the first post, which were only suggested as conversation starting points, you'll have to be more specific.Pretty much all the energy Mars colonists expend in the first decade or so is going to be related to survival and expansion. I just don't see that they will have excess resources that can be applied to creating products for export.As Elon Musk said in 2015:QuoteWell I think any natural resource extraction on Mars would be, the output would be for Mars.It definitely wouldn't make sense to transport stuff 200 million miles back to Earth. You know,honestly, if you had like crack cocaine on Mars, like in pre-packaged palets, it still wouldn't make sense to transport it back here. Maybe good times for the Martians, but not back here.Mars is unlikely to have any direct revenue for decades, so the initial colonization will need to be funded by people that believe that making humanity multi-planetary is a worthy cause. I know I plan to contribute.
/rantI fully expect Elon to move SX headquarters to Mars when he gets there along with an expansion of the engineering team that will already be there. When he takes SX public it will be a US corporation but it will be on Mars. Quibble on where the capital raised legally resides but it will it will in reality become a boost for the Martian economy.
I definitely think services for NASA will be the biggest Mars export for a long, long time. That's like a couple billion dollars a year or perhaps more (imagine most of whatever NASA spends for ISS and Artemis combined, perhaps also some robotic Mars stuff, too, since it'd be much simpler to teleoperate rovers from Mars than from Earth).
Quote from: OTV Booster on 08/01/2020 11:59 pm/rantI fully expect Elon to move SX headquarters to Mars when he gets there along with an expansion of the engineering team that will already be there. When he takes SX public it will be a US corporation but it will be on Mars. Quibble on where the capital raised legally resides but it will it will in reality become a boost for the Martian economy.No room for quibble under US tax law... income earned by US citizens and corporations is taxable by the US government no matter where they physically or legally reside.
Quote from: Robotbeat on 08/02/2020 12:55 amI definitely think services for NASA will be the biggest Mars export for a long, long time. That's like a couple billion dollars a year or perhaps more (imagine most of whatever NASA spends for ISS and Artemis combined, perhaps also some robotic Mars stuff, too, since it'd be much simpler to teleoperate rovers from Mars than from Earth).Mars can't depend on NASA as a long term funding source. ...
Quote from: OTV Booster on 08/02/2020 01:55 amQuote from: Robotbeat on 08/02/2020 12:55 amI definitely think services for NASA will be the biggest Mars export for a long, long time. That's like a couple billion dollars a year or perhaps more (imagine most of whatever NASA spends for ISS and Artemis combined, perhaps also some robotic Mars stuff, too, since it'd be much simpler to teleoperate rovers from Mars than from Earth).Mars can't depend on NASA as a long term funding source. ...Welp, that's too bad as that will, in fact, be their largest source of "export" capital and they'll have little choice.And it is fairly stable. Especially if NASA is able to get international partners. ISS has been super stable. If NASA has personnel on Mars, you can be sure that the mars settlement will be getting paid as no one else will be able to compete for service contracts (unless they're also on Mars).Mir survived the fall of the Iron Curtain. I actually think an active Mars program would survive a lot, as well.And beyond this, it may make sense for a Mars settlement to get into space services. As the settlement grows, their access to orbit may be cheaper than for Earth (due in part to delta-v differences), and since space tech is clearly a required core competency of a Martian settlement, they'd be specialists in this stuff.Also, environmental limitations on Earth (i.e. launch rate limits or high taxes on high altitude water emissions due to climate change action) may give a Martian civilization an additional advantage.
