4 ms·

If we go grab a moon sized ball of gold, gold will lose most of its value. It'll be the next Aluminium.

labster 9y ago
That much gold would still be worth it for electronic and spaceflight applications. Gold's like a better copper or silver there. And let's not forget the most important application, stereo plug connectors. For platinum or iridium, making it cheaper there would enable all sorts of catalytic chemical processes that are prohibitively expensive now. If abundant enough, new demand will keep the bottom of the market from falling out.
- dnautics 9y ago
  Gold is already not a major expense in electronics. Platinum is currently cheaper than gold. Most pgm catalysts are capable of ~< .1% catalyst loading (e.g. monsanto and cativa processes), and the catalytic metals are easily recovered.
  - labster 9y ago
    I'd like to believe you about Pt and Ir catalysts, but I just had a chemistry PhD student complaining to me that some paper's processes were too uneconomical because of needing too many platinum atoms in the catalyst. The point was about new processes being viable, not existing techniques.
- russdill 9y ago
  They actually just plate connectors typically, I think with around 7µm of gold. And no, gold is not a better copper or silver. Both silver and copper are more conductive than gold (then followed by aluminum). Gold is excellent for contact points though as it does not tarnish. Silver conducts heat and electricity the best of the three, but tarnishes the most easily, so it can have issues with high frequency signals as most of the signal travels on the outer surface. If both silver and copper were the same price as copper, it'd probably be silver that would see the most increase in use in electrical applications. During the Manhattan project, there was a shortage of copper and cost was not an option. 430 million troy ounces of silver from the West Point Bullion Depository was melted down and used to make magnetic coils. At the end of the project, it was all returned, minus 120 oz. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calutron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calutron
  - labster 9y ago
    The stereo plug thing was a joke, but thanks for educating me on the Calutron. Very cool.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
WalterBright 9y ago
I got a chuckle out of the Hobbit movie, where Smaug's gold treasure was so enormous the dwarves would be rendered penniless if they tried to spend it :-) There is precedent. When the Spanish extracted all that gold and silver from South America and shipped it back to Spain, all they got was inflation.
- db48x 9y ago
  And a very large fleet of ships.
mrfusion 9y ago
I never bought that argument. World gold production is about 100-200 billion per year. Just hold onto your meteor and sell 50 billion worth per year for the next 200 years.
- Gravityloss 9y ago
  You would need to do it in secret. Plot for the next James Bond movie?
kamaal 9y ago
1. Firstly they won't be sending it down a gravity well, unless of course there is need for it. And if they really do send it they will likely strictly control its supply. Economics today is quite well done. Even blood diamond miners restrict supply to ensure demands. 2. They will likely be using mined material from asteroids to build space stations and bases. 3. They will only mine as much as they need, given an how much of it is available. Its like expansion of human cities you extract/mine as much as you need and when you need it. Space economics is a crazy thing, once you start thinking about it. The first people to start building in space will ponder the vastness and almost a infinite space full of resources and real estate to occupy. Of course the concept of ownership will look ridiculous. This is at least until there is a rapidly growing and spreading population in space. Beyond that its really how quickly you can spread out. And the economics of that is not money. But trading energy for longevity. I can assure you we are a very long time away from spreading to the last inch of the universe.
dalbasal 9y ago
Gold is peculiar in this sense, but generally speaking I think it’s worth separating value from price If we doubled oil supply tomorrow, the price would drop drastically, probably to less than half. The total price of all the oil would be less than yesterday. But, that doesn’t mean we’re deriving less value from the oil. We’ll have more energy and materials, that’s more value. It probably isn’t twice the value (we’d probably be less energy efficient, for example) but it would definitely be more value.
BurningFrog 9y ago
Maybe if you do it. If I do it, I don't think it's in my best interest to announce it like that.

That much gold would still be worth it for electronic and spaceflight applications. Gold's like a better copper or silver there. And let's not forget the most important application, stereo plug connectors. For platinum or iridium, making it cheaper there would enable all sorts of catalytic chemical processes that are prohibitively expensive now. If abundant enough, new demand will keep the bottom of the market from falling out.

dnautics 9y ago
Gold is already not a major expense in electronics. Platinum is currently cheaper than gold. Most pgm catalysts are capable of ~< .1% catalyst loading (e.g. monsanto and cativa processes), and the catalytic metals are easily recovered.
- labster 9y ago
  I'd like to believe you about Pt and Ir catalysts, but I just had a chemistry PhD student complaining to me that some paper's processes were too uneconomical because of needing too many platinum atoms in the catalyst. The point was about new processes being viable, not existing techniques.
russdill 9y ago
They actually just plate connectors typically, I think with around 7µm of gold. And no, gold is not a better copper or silver. Both silver and copper are more conductive than gold (then followed by aluminum). Gold is excellent for contact points though as it does not tarnish. Silver conducts heat and electricity the best of the three, but tarnishes the most easily, so it can have issues with high frequency signals as most of the signal travels on the outer surface. If both silver and copper were the same price as copper, it'd probably be silver that would see the most increase in use in electrical applications. During the Manhattan project, there was a shortage of copper and cost was not an option. 430 million troy ounces of silver from the West Point Bullion Depository was melted down and used to make magnetic coils. At the end of the project, it was all returned, minus 120 oz. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calutron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calutron
- labster 9y ago
  The stereo plug thing was a joke, but thanks for educating me on the Calutron. Very cool.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

WalterBright 9y ago

I got a chuckle out of the Hobbit movie, where Smaug's gold treasure was so enormous the dwarves would be rendered penniless if they tried to spend it :-) There is precedent. When the Spanish extracted all that gold and silver from South America and shipped it back to Spain, all they got was inflation.

db48x 9y ago
And a very large fleet of ships.

mrfusion 9y ago

I never bought that argument. World gold production is about 100-200 billion per year. Just hold onto your meteor and sell 50 billion worth per year for the next 200 years.

Gravityloss 9y ago
You would need to do it in secret. Plot for the next James Bond movie?

kamaal 9y ago

1. Firstly they won't be sending it down a gravity well, unless of course there is need for it. And if they really do send it they will likely strictly control its supply. Economics today is quite well done. Even blood diamond miners restrict supply to ensure demands. 2. They will likely be using mined material from asteroids to build space stations and bases. 3. They will only mine as much as they need, given an how much of it is available. Its like expansion of human cities you extract/mine as much as you need and when you need it. Space economics is a crazy thing, once you start thinking about it. The first people to start building in space will ponder the vastness and almost a infinite space full of resources and real estate to occupy. Of course the concept of ownership will look ridiculous. This is at least until there is a rapidly growing and spreading population in space. Beyond that its really how quickly you can spread out. And the economics of that is not money. But trading energy for longevity. I can assure you we are a very long time away from spreading to the last inch of the universe.

dalbasal 9y ago

Gold is peculiar in this sense, but generally speaking I think it’s worth separating value from price If we doubled oil supply tomorrow, the price would drop drastically, probably to less than half. The total price of all the oil would be less than yesterday. But, that doesn’t mean we’re deriving less value from the oil. We’ll have more energy and materials, that’s more value. It probably isn’t twice the value (we’d probably be less energy efficient, for example) but it would definitely be more value.

BurningFrog 9y ago

Maybe if you do it. If I do it, I don't think it's in my best interest to announce it like that.