4 ms·

I always wondered why Mars is first on the list for exploration. why not develop the tech to mine astroids and then use the resources for building up human pre

I always wondered why Mars is first on the list for exploration. why not develop the tech to mine astroids and then use the resources for building up human presence on Mars. Plus, the economic benefits alone would drive many private entities to jump into it

afro88 7y ago
I think it stems from environmental and doomsday concerns on Earth.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
Mars is a more interesting scientific target; cislunar space is a more interesting industrial target. Mars is where we should explore; Earth-Moon system is where we should expand to and build permanent space presence.
davedx 7y ago
> why not develop the tech to mine astroids and then use the resources for building up human presence on Mars Because we have all the resources we need on Earth to build a base on Mars, and if we make good use of ISRU ("live off the land") on Mars, we can get a lot of what we need right there. See for example synthesising methalox from Martian resources; marscrete; making glass and other chemical processes... Zubrin's "Mars Direct" book goes into many details here. Building a reusable booster capable of launching vehicles that can do the Mars transfer is much more economical than building intermediate stages like orbital gateways or asteroid mines. That's not to say mining asteroids is a bad idea though -- there are other companies looking at this too!
de_watcher 7y ago
It involves launching an untested zero-g mining and manufacturing facilities from Earth. It also needs shielding if we use people there. Mars has gravity and can use our normal mining and manufacturing, it's straightforward to dig in with shovels for shielding. Launching from Mars is easier, so it's a probable path to the belt. I don't see economical viability for the Earth in any of these scenarios. Maybe only the straight breakthrough in zero-g autonomous mining and return of precious metals from the belt to Earth.

afro88 7y ago

I think it stems from environmental and doomsday concerns on Earth.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

Mars is a more interesting scientific target; cislunar space is a more interesting industrial target. Mars is where we should explore; Earth-Moon system is where we should expand to and build permanent space presence.

davedx 7y ago

> why not develop the tech to mine astroids and then use the resources for building up human presence on Mars Because we have all the resources we need on Earth to build a base on Mars, and if we make good use of ISRU ("live off the land") on Mars, we can get a lot of what we need right there. See for example synthesising methalox from Martian resources; marscrete; making glass and other chemical processes... Zubrin's "Mars Direct" book goes into many details here. Building a reusable booster capable of launching vehicles that can do the Mars transfer is much more economical than building intermediate stages like orbital gateways or asteroid mines. That's not to say mining asteroids is a bad idea though -- there are other companies looking at this too!

de_watcher 7y ago

It involves launching an untested zero-g mining and manufacturing facilities from Earth. It also needs shielding if we use people there. Mars has gravity and can use our normal mining and manufacturing, it's straightforward to dig in with shovels for shielding. Launching from Mars is easier, so it's a probable path to the belt. I don't see economical viability for the Earth in any of these scenarios. Maybe only the straight breakthrough in zero-g autonomous mining and return of precious metals from the belt to Earth.