3 ms·
The risk isn't "running out", it's that the cost of extraction becomes prohibitive. As a rule of thumb, asteroids are generally much richer with heavy metals t
by jessriedel 9y ago
The risk isn't "running out", it's that the cost of extraction becomes prohibitive. As a rule of thumb, asteroids are generally much richer with heavy metals than the Earth's crust because heavy things sink on Earth but they have no where to go on asteroids. These metals persist in small quantities in the crust mostly when they are bound to light elements. So the density and types of ores on asteroids are completely different, vastly changing extraction costs.
Whether the benefits of asteroid composition outweigh the costs of space mining is complicated and time-/tech-dependent, and cannot be guessed by just noting that in principle there are sufficient atoms in the Earth's crust.
- bryanlarsen 9y ago"the cost of extraction becomes prohibitive" You're implying that the cost of extraction is going up. It's not, it's going down quite steadily because it's tech-limited, not resource limited.
- jessriedel 9y agoI'm not implying that at all. Everything is on a supply and demand curve, and the claim is that the extraction price increases, not with time, but with amount extracted at a fixed time. So the question is if we hit a point where the 1st ton of asteroid platinum is cheaper than the millionth ton of terrestrial platinum.
- nradov 9y agoThere is no actual evidence that the extraction price of precious metals will increase with the amount extracted at a fixed time. This is entirely speculative, and it seems more likely that extraction prices will decline as extraction technology improves faster than demand increases.