[Closed] Mining Asteroids WTFF

this has been a staple of sci-fi books for donkeys years.

can't see why findign sources of minerals and metals that will allow all people to have an improved standard of livign is a bad thing? Resources on Earth are finite surely finding alternative supplies is a 'good thing'?

Would the intention be to mine, then destroy? I can't help feeling that mining an asteroid (and so reducing it's mass) would have some effect on it's orbit and then who knows what might happen! I guess just landing on the thing would have some impact on it's path through space.

I'm sure cleverer folk than me will have thought about that though 🙂

I'd agree if it were to filter down. Listening to BBC World Service interviews last night made it seem a purely profit driven scheme.

Fair enough entrepreneurs create jobs but then billionaires wouldn't be billionaires if they were sole traders.

Listening to BBC World Service interviews last night made it seem a purely profit driven scheme.

name anything other than charity and public services that [i]aren't[/i] purely profit driven?

if they can get the tech to do it (costly...) then I've no problem with them benefiting from it.

Just me then

Currently we have a finite stock of minerals and a growing demand for them.
Expand our search to the stars and we have, in effect, an inexhaustible supply of minerals and whatever else is out there. I'm thinking Hydrogen, Helium and hydrocarbons for a start.

Notwithstanding the huge leaps in technological advancement that would necessarily have to be made in order to do this, and their likely application in other more humanitarian uses, I totally agree. Why bother, eh?

I was thinking this morning that I would actually rather like to work for a company like that. The pure technical challenge of doing something that dangerous, that far away from home, would be amazing and is the sort of challenge that I would really enjoy.

Of course, I don't know the first thing about mining, or about space flight, apart from that documentary I saw once about the steroid heading toward earth that Bruce Willis destroyed.

a growing demand for them

I'd attend to this first

When will these greedy barstards have made 'enough' money? Maybe there can never be an 'enough'.

Have you considered that perhaps it goes beyond money?

Mining asteroids may lead to us being able to build stuff from scratch in space, and fuel it, which opens the way to further exploration of our universe.

Whats not to love? There's robots! there's space travel! there's adventure!

Large scale commercial investment in space travel and exploration will increase our chances of populating space within the next 5 generations, wether or not this is a good thing I don't know, but as a child I dreamed of being a space police man, who rode a star bike, chasing galactic pirates, and I for one think that that sounds a fair bit more rewarding than being an inner city paramedic in rainy england.

Also I'd rather be eaten by aliens than fall asleep at the wheel of an ambulance when I'm 70 and still working 12 hour shifts with no breaks, but that's a different argument!

I can see them knocking it slightly off their original trajectory and we all know what that means:

[img] [/img]

Like everything there's an economy of scale, aside from the cost of launching things into orbit, there's no reason why it can't be done relatively cheaply at a per unit cost.

Personally, I have less of a problem with robots mining asteroids than I do with the existing arrangement ofdigging up large swathes of land, exploiting cheap human labour and polluting ground water with mining runoff.

OK, I may be missing something.

Water from asteroids could be broken down in space to liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen for rocket fuel.

I think it's ace - Salvage One and all that.

Also, in the not too distant future: "We've found huge amounts of diamonds and gold and it will be arriving on earth in about 15 minutes."
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(the bottom falling out of the diamond and gold market).

can't see why findign sources of minerals and metals that will allow all people to have an improved standard of livign is a bad thing?

We could improve the standard of living for more people, and more sustainably, if a less prejudicial socio-economic system(s) were developed and money was spent improving the physical environments that people currently live in. Also, learning to use less mineral resources and/or using more efficiently the ones we have, would be prudent. As already said above, it makes greater sense to deal first with the ever-growing demand.

Why can't we do the same here?

We can, but the point is that the fuel would be in space, lifting anything that weighs a significant amount out of Earth's gravity well is very expensive.

Have you considered that perhaps it goes beyond money?

Mining asteroids may lead to us being able to build stuff from scratch in space, and fuel it, which opens the way to further exploration of our universe

This would be a positive product. I'm no luddite. I realise this kind of venture drives technological advance.

Hearing interviews on the topic last night not one of them spoke of this. It was all about how much financial reward the best asteroids could yield.

I can't help feeling that mining an asteroid (and so reducing it's mass) would have some effect on it's orbit

There's a good post (as ever) over at badscience.net

Only woth mining if they are inhabited by a race of clone Katie Meluas.

Is it April 1st? Because they are talking pish!!!

Hearing interviews on the topic last night not one of them spoke of this. It was all about how much financial reward the best asteroids could yield.

That's how you attract investors.

I'd much rather have philanthropists pushing the space race onwards than the military and politicians.
I'm in, so tell me how can I procure some shares in G-Mine?

We can, but the point is that the fuel would be in space, lifting anything that weighs a significant amount out of Earth's gravity well is very expensive.

Just me then

Baffled as to what's causing you a problem to be honest.

You've lost me. Why can't we break down water on earth into liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen and use it as fuel here on earth? You know for cars and motorbikes and that.

We can and we do, for filling rockets and shizzle, but this involves some energy used in electrolysis, which comes from the wall socket so there's no net energy gain.

However, in space where no-one can hear you scream, solar power is a much more efficient means of generating electricity because a solar panel can be aimed at the sun 24-7 and doesn't have clouds and atmosphere getting in the way. Also, because you're in space you're going to need smaller amounts of hydrogen and oxygen to propel a given mass from one place to another as on Earth you're working against gravity.

Also, it's possible that we could harvest helium3 that's plentiful on the surface of the moon to use as fuel in fusion reactors, which in turn generates electricity.

We can and we do, for filling rockets and shizzle, but this involves some energy used in electrolysis, which comes from the wall socket so there's no net energy gain.

Yup, at around ~1% efficiency IIRC.

Baffled as to what's causing you a problem to be honest

Greed.

I'm over it now.

Space is ace.

When will these greedy barstards have made 'enough' money?

Hang on - they want to create a multi billion dollar industry and create thousands of jobs, produce raw materials more or less pollution free that can be used to grow earthbound industries (possibly reducing pollution on earth) employing untold numbers of people, and give a serious boost to both space travel and robotics - and this is all a bad thing?

Seems no less harmless than opencast mining on earth. Up there (no-one can hear you scream) you're not going to cause any problems.

Unless there's life on the asterioids, or they're actually part of a complex program by some other form of alien life. Then the s@*t wil hit the fan...

Yes it'll be expensive, but the rewards will justify it.

There's a list of things I was promised as a kid...mining in space, a base on the moon, holidays in orbit and massive rotaing space stations that could grow plentiful amounts of food free from pests using hydroponics.

In fact, please give me the holidays in orbit right now, while I'm still young enough to be able to appreciate mindblowing zero gee sex.

Yes it'll beexpensive, but the rewards will justify it.

They struggle to see how it could be cost-effective, even with platinum and gold worth nearly £35 per gram ($1,600 an ounce). An upcoming Nasa mission to return just 60g (two ounces) of material from an asteroid to Earth will cost about $1bn.

they want to create ..... thousands of jobs

I don't believe this. It's a useful by-product of said greed, PR justification. Suppose whether you think it's a reasonable trade is personal opinion.

Oh and without wanting to be categorized, Three Fish FTW

Hang on...

Politicians just adore folk like you.

Eh? Wtf?

Our entire economy is based on people trying to make money. That's how it works. The alternatives have been proven to be problematic.

Why's it any different to any other industry?

They struggle to see how it could be cost-effective, even with platinum and gold worth nearly £35 per gram ($1,600 an ounce). An upcoming Nasa mission to return just 60g (two ounces) of material from an asteroid to Earth will cost about $1bn.

Economies of scale innit...one probe costs $1bn to launch. Several probes which can self replicate mining asteroids over the course of years will give better returns.

You really think Gottelieb Daimler's first car would sell at £9k if he built it today?

You really think Gottelieb Daimler's first car would sell at £9k if he built it today?

No but I bet it would have a better return than 0.000032% At that rate not counting the future value of money how long would it take for this venture to become profitable?

The economies of scale must be reasonable to justify a capital expenditure like that.

I'm not sure greed is the whole story as this has got to be pretty much the worst way to turn a profit ever. I reckon a large part of it is because they'd just like to see it happen and they're in a position to have a go. Same sort of way that Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk have probably sunk far more into Blue Origin and SpaceX than they'll ever see back.

Not that they'd turn down any money that comes out of it, but they're probably mostly driven by being space geeks.

It's all because Americans are too lazy to recycle, and still believe in a Jetsons future.

Wake me up when NASA have found somewhere BETTER than earth.

I'm with the don't really see the problem brigade. Sadly it won't improve life for the ordinary Joe, when has massive profit ever really been about spreading the love and not "look how big my bank account is".

If "we" want to keep making iPad 3/4/5s etc ad infinitum then the rare earths needed for chips are going to have to come from somewhere. Bit like the Tungsten for that bloke who was bemoaning the death of the incandescent light bulb yesterday.

I'm a child of the 60's so for me space exploration is in my blood. To my mind far too much of the last 20/30 years has been spent developing virtual reality (computers/TVs/3D films) there has certainly seemed to be a loss of interest in exploring and exploring the universe we live in.

(ignoring the prohibitive cost)

(ignoring the technical difficulties)

it seems like a good idea to me.

If "we" want to keep making iPad 3/4/5s etc ad infinitum then the rare earths needed for chips are going to have to come from somewhere

Or...make stuff that lasts.

But I know ipads & asteroid mining both appeal to the shinyshinywantitnow mindset

I don't believe this. It's a useful by-product of said greed, PR justification. Suppose whether you think it's a reasonable trade is personal opinion.

I don't quite see your problem, still. What you dislike is that someone wants to get more money. You don't care that they'll potentially create thousands of jobs on the way (after all the knowledge, skills and hardware don't exist at the moment) because you don't like the fact that someone might make a lot of cash? Staggering.

@portlyone:

If we get rid of Paris as well, sign me up!

[img] [/img]