6 ms·
I think what holds it back is that our space infrastructure sucks. To mine stuff - even really expensive stuff - and still turn a profit, it has to be sufficien
by rmtech 7y ago
I think what holds it back is that our space infrastructure sucks. To mine stuff - even really expensive stuff - and still turn a profit, it has to be sufficiently cheap to do all the mundane things like get the equipment into space, repair the equipment when it breaks, get the product back to earth.
All of that stuff is currently so eye-wateringly expensive that you could park a big pile of gold bullion on the moon and it would be safe from thieves because it would cost more to go and get it (per kg) than the gold is worth. Someone on Quora estimated that sample return from Mars costs about $1,000,000/kg using current tech[1], another estimate says $1,200,000/kg to the lunar surface[2]. No bulk material that I know of is that expensive. Platinum is $25,000/kg for example.
Another issue is that if you mined a small amount of gold/platinum/whatever in space, you might make a profit per kg, but you wouldn't cover the huge fixed costs of operating a company in space. If you mine a very large amount (tens of thousands of tons), you would negatively impact the price of expensive materials, reducing your profit per kg (perhaps enough that you were making a slight loss per kg). Even news of a serious effort to mine stuff in space would dent the prices of what was going to be mined. I think this latter argument is sometimes overplayed though. At some price level the price would stabilise even with greater production because these materials are quite useful as well as being visually attractive and traditional stores of value.
Better space infrastructure around earth could be as simple as SpaceX making reusable rockets work properly and reducing the cost per kg to get into low earth orbit. That could kickstart a lot of other developments like LEO (low earth orbit) space hotels, spinning space stations, in-orbit assembly. This would actually provide a nice market for asteroid mining - materials like water and metals could be put to use in space without coming back down to earth. We could have a thriving economy in LEO and MEO, supplied both from the surface and from trips to asteroids (some of which are not very far in delta-v terms from LEO)
1: https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-landing-and-returning-one-kilogram-of-payload-on-from-the-surface-of-Mars-cost https://www.quora.com/How-much-would-landing-and-returning-o...
2: https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/4720/what-is-the-marginal-cost-of-landing-on-the-moon https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/4720/what-is-the-m...
- ryacko 7y agoI've read that for every order of magnitude increase in price, available reserves of minerals triples. It seems more likely that space colonies will export intellectual property than mineral wealth, especially since even if we get space elevators, Earth has all we need, especially as mines become automated.
- rmtech 7y agoAt some point it will be worth it to mine asteroids and bring the stuff back down to earth. I think that point will be when the scale of the mining is absolutely huge, and the infrastructure is amazing, and the price of the stuff we're mining (gold, platinum, etc) is substantially lower than what it is today. It all comes down to whether you can get stuff from LEO to earth and earth to LEO really cheaply. If you can do that, then our economy will go grab this stuff and someone will make a lot of money doing it. > space colonies will export intellectual property Not for a long time though. Earth will have an advantage at making IP for a very long time. People will do research in nice places on earth rather than in cramped & dangerous conditions in space. The exception is microgravity research, but that's already a thing. Of course as the cost to LEO goes down we will do more of it. Eventually someone will commoditize it and you will be able to ship a container of a certain size with your low-gravity experiment to LEO for a fixed fee.
- ryacko 7y agoSpace is only cramped to minimize surface area, if inflatable habitats or some other form of assembly was used, structures can and will be much larger. Sending materials to Earth will cost as much as sending them into space, as the materials must land safely and be recovered as efficiently as possible.
- rmtech 7y ago> Sending materials to Earth will cost as much as sending them into space, as the materials must land safely and be recovered as efficiently as possible. that's not true because the journey from space to earth has an aerobrake option, but the journey up requires a rocket with a certain amount of energy per kg you want to send. In a large scale operation I think you could send stuff down relatively cheaply. A lot of effort would go into making a really mass-efficient reentry vehicle. Another thing that would probably end up happening is a reentry bolo - a spinning tether that would subtract a huge amount of velocity from things going down.