What would we be mining for that could possibly necessitate and justify the costs of transport (equipment and materials) there and back? Almost any resource would be cheaper to mine on Earth, and the only exceptions would still be so rare as to require gigantic energy inputs.
Maybe, but only if a lunar space elevator were built first. That could hypothetically be built with current technology.
Similarly, a terrestrial elevator to orbit would change things, but that requires further technological advancement.
Current propellant based escape technologies would prevent economic feasibility.
Orbiting or landing on the moon seems like an unnecessary delta-v tollbooth if the eventual target is asteroid mining. Why would you slow down to get to the moon if you eventually have to speed back up to get out to the asteroid belt?
The advantage to any space-based mining is not to directly benefit industry on Earth, but to help real manufacturing and other industrial scale operations in space. Doing that could lead to massive benefits for ground-based society, especially if we can automate so scaling to use resources beyond the Earth-Moon system became practical.
“Materials on the Moon’s surface contain helium-3 at concentrations estimated between 1.4 and 15 parts per billion (ppb) in sunlit areas,[1][61][62] and may contain concentrations as much as 50 ppb in permanently shadowed regions.[63] For comparison, helium-3 in the Earth’s atmosphere occurs at 7.2 parts per trillion (ppt).”
Stretching the use of the word copious here… Helium 3 is specifically what I was thinking of when I said “the only exceptions would still be so rare as to require gigantic energy inputs.”… Also, utilizing it would require fusion technology we don’t have yet.
Listen, going to the moon and space travel is neat and all… There’s just no way space mining makes money with current tech.
Thereare several institutes that differ from your opinion on abundance and profitability. There is an estimated millions of tons of helium-3 in the lunar surface at just a few meters down and it’s estimated that just 25 tons would suffice to fuel the US power consumption for a year, and 200 ton for global needs.
Regardless of helium-3, establishing the infrastructure will allow for other mining as well. Platinum and other rare earth metals. Whoever does it first is going to make a butt load of money.
Hopefully one of these firms is correct… I suspect these companies are mostly looking to make money from their investors and not for their investors. But hey, that’s how our economy works at this point; mostly speculation, less so results.
I hope so too. I just want to see some space faring progress in my lifetime. I missed the boat and am too dumb to contribute, but I can hope greed can bridge the gap where basic human progress fails to meet expansionist ideals. If it has to begin on the backs of investor money, at least it gets the ball rolling.
There’s just no way space mining makes money with current tech.
AstroForge thinks they can make asteroid mining work with existing technology. Their CEO did a podcast with Payload a few weeks ago (link, but it’s also on Spotify and elsewhere).
They have a demo sat testing their forge and will launch a 2nd sat later this year to do an asteroid flyby. They think they can launch 20+ satellites on a Falcon 9 that could each return $100 million in platinum to the Earth.
AstroForge is starting to make the case for mining a few thousand kg / $100 million worth of platinum at a time from asteroids to bring home on about a 2-year roundtrip. It seems like the business case there is close to working because of reduced costs for launch and spacecraft construction.
I haven’t heard anyone make a compelling case for Lunar mining yet, though.
Why fusion ? A portable fission reactor could do the job.
What would we be mining for that could possibly necessitate and justify the costs of transport (equipment and materials) there and back? Almost any resource would be cheaper to mine on Earth, and the only exceptions would still be so rare as to require gigantic energy inputs.
@uphillbothways Couldn’t it be a staging ground, not just for lunar mining, but also asteroid mining?
@BastingChemina
Maybe, but only if a lunar space elevator were built first. That could hypothetically be built with current technology.
Similarly, a terrestrial elevator to orbit would change things, but that requires further technological advancement.
Current propellant based escape technologies would prevent economic feasibility.
Orbiting or landing on the moon seems like an unnecessary delta-v tollbooth if the eventual target is asteroid mining. Why would you slow down to get to the moon if you eventually have to speed back up to get out to the asteroid belt?
Why would you “slow down to get to the moon” when you started there?
The advantage to any space-based mining is not to directly benefit industry on Earth, but to help real manufacturing and other industrial scale operations in space. Doing that could lead to massive benefits for ground-based society, especially if we can automate so scaling to use resources beyond the Earth-Moon system became practical.
Sounds a little like starting a pot for chicken stock because you got an invite to an easter egg hunt.
Resource extraction on earth is super dirty and exploitative, so I’m all for automating it and moving it to space as soon as it’s commercially viable.
Helium-3; copious amounts in the lunar crust - but it’s filtered out by our atmosphere.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_resources#Helium-3
“Materials on the Moon’s surface contain helium-3 at concentrations estimated between 1.4 and 15 parts per billion (ppb) in sunlit areas,[1][61][62] and may contain concentrations as much as 50 ppb in permanently shadowed regions.[63] For comparison, helium-3 in the Earth’s atmosphere occurs at 7.2 parts per trillion (ppt).”
Stretching the use of the word copious here… Helium 3 is specifically what I was thinking of when I said “the only exceptions would still be so rare as to require gigantic energy inputs.”… Also, utilizing it would require fusion technology we don’t have yet.
Listen, going to the moon and space travel is neat and all… There’s just no way space mining makes money with current tech.
There are several institutes that differ from your opinion on abundance and profitability. There is an estimated millions of tons of helium-3 in the lunar surface at just a few meters down and it’s estimated that just 25 tons would suffice to fuel the US power consumption for a year, and 200 ton for global needs.
Regardless of helium-3, establishing the infrastructure will allow for other mining as well. Platinum and other rare earth metals. Whoever does it first is going to make a butt load of money.
@zhunk
@McBinary
Hopefully one of these firms is correct… I suspect these companies are mostly looking to make money from their investors and not for their investors. But hey, that’s how our economy works at this point; mostly speculation, less so results.
I hope so too. I just want to see some space faring progress in my lifetime. I missed the boat and am too dumb to contribute, but I can hope greed can bridge the gap where basic human progress fails to meet expansionist ideals. If it has to begin on the backs of investor money, at least it gets the ball rolling.
AstroForge thinks they can make asteroid mining work with existing technology. Their CEO did a podcast with Payload a few weeks ago (link, but it’s also on Spotify and elsewhere).
They have a demo sat testing their forge and will launch a 2nd sat later this year to do an asteroid flyby. They think they can launch 20+ satellites on a Falcon 9 that could each return $100 million in platinum to the Earth.
AstroForge is starting to make the case for mining a few thousand kg / $100 million worth of platinum at a time from asteroids to bring home on about a 2-year roundtrip. It seems like the business case there is close to working because of reduced costs for launch and spacecraft construction.
I haven’t heard anyone make a compelling case for Lunar mining yet, though.