Asteroid Mining?

 

Rand Simberg over at Pajamas has taken note that a second company has jumped into the asteroid-mining fray (which I confess I did not know existed until this morning). Planetary Resources (PR), which plans to remotely detect asteroids via telescopes in low earth orbit, got off the ground (so to speak) last year. Last week, Deep Space Industries (DSI) announced even more ambitious plans.

DSI intends to “send out actual small probes (called “Fireflies”) to survey and assay [asteroid targets] with flybys”. The Fireflies are to be followed by “Dragonflies”, which will bring back samples up to one hundred pounds. When suitable asteroids are confirmed, “Harvesters” will be sent out in larger spacecraft to mine the product.

DSI’s plans don’t stop there, though. Simberg writes, “They intend to be a space manufacturing company, and they have plans for what they call a ‘Microgravity Foundry’ — a 3-D printer that can process materials in weightlessness. The goal is ‘asteroid bits in, useful products out.’ The Foundry is in a conceptual phase, but they have patents, and are getting small business contracts to develop and prove it out.” Apparently it is possible to make propellant from water-based asteroids that is useful to both commercial satellite owners and to NASA.

DSI is thinking big. Its target is to become “the space equivalent of Pittsburgh or Detroit — a location for heavy manufacturing close to their source of raw materials, just as those industrial cities once relied on the Iron Range of Minnesota to feed the foundries and factories of the upper Midwest. But instead of raw steel and cars, one of their ultimate goals is to generate clean energy for use in both space and on earth.”

Well, it’s better than wind farms. What say you?

Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Members have made 54 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  1. Profile photo of Vice-Potentate Member

    Anything is better than wind farms. It brings to mind the expansion of railways across the west. To what degree should government help fund these ventures as infrastructure investments? It seems the permanent question betwixt Libertarians and Republicans. At least they’re off to a private start. I would venture to guess it won’t stay that way.

    • #1
    • January 29, 2013 at 3:59 am
  2. Profile photo of John Hanson Thatcher

    I suspect all of the players are rent-seeking from the Federal Government. Nothing will become economically viable unless there is a space based market, (not yet) or some mineral in such short supply that it can be mined in space more cheaply than recovered on earth. This MIGHT be the case with some rare earths, but one has to discover such things first. 

    I am for a private space industry to the extent it is feasible, and certainly it is now for satellite fabrication, test, launch, and operation and I expect will be feasible for low earth orbit, and space tourism soon, (which might provide a market for consumables if it proves cheaper to mine from space sources than launch into orbit from earth (not yet convincingly shown to me by models I think are viable, but show me!) We know what earth launch costs are, so just need to show realistically, what space mining costs are.

    • #2
    • January 29, 2013 at 4:33 am
  3. Profile photo of Fred Cole Member
    Judith Levy, Ed.: What say you?

    The future is amazing.

    • #3
    • January 29, 2013 at 5:42 am
  4. Profile photo of Fred Cole Member
    Vice-Potentate:

     To what degree should government help fund these ventures as infrastructure investments?

    To no degree.

    • #4
    • January 29, 2013 at 5:45 am
  5. Profile photo of Fred Cole Member
    John Hanson: 

    I am for a private space industry to the extent it is feasible, and certainly it is now for satellite fabrication, test, launch, and operation and I expect will be feasible for low earth orbit, and space tourism soon, (which might provide a market for consumables if it proves cheaper to mine from space sources than launch into orbit from earth (not yet convincingly shown to me by models I think are viable, but show me!) We know what earth launch costs are, so just need to show realistically, what space mining costs are. · 1 hour ago

    Edited 1 hour ago

    Yeah, the economics isn’t there yet. That’s why we need a space elevator. That would substantially drop costs.

    Boosting straight up with chemical rockets isn’t ever going to make space economical.

    • #5
    • January 29, 2013 at 5:46 am
  6. Profile photo of dash Inactive

    Very cool. And googling around I found the first crew selected for deep space duty:

    firefly.jpg

    • #6
    • January 29, 2013 at 5:47 am
  7. Profile photo of Foxman Inactive

     3-D printer

    Is this stereo lithography or something different. Stereo lithography takes a very long time and produces a fragile product. It’s great for prototype, but not much good for production. Am I missing something?

    • #7
    • January 29, 2013 at 6:00 am
  8. Profile photo of Pseudodionysius Inactive

    I suggest sending Al Sharpton and the head of a Wisconsin teachers’ union so they can ruin the place ahead of time, before we get all excited about doing something productive. 

    • #8
    • January 29, 2013 at 6:21 am
  9. Profile photo of Britanicus Inactive
    Pseudodionysius: I suggest sending Al Sharpton and the head of a Wisconsin teachers’ union so they can ruin the place ahead of time, before we get all excited about doing something productive. · 32 minutes ago

    Best send a UN envoy and peace keeping force in case we run into any rogue space political body that needs placating and funding.

    • #9
    • January 29, 2013 at 6:57 am
  10. Profile photo of Tim H. Member
    Foxman: 3-D printer

    Is this stereo lithography or something different. Stereo lithography takes a very long time and produces a fragile product. It’s great for prototype, but not much good for production. Am I missing something? · 57 minutes ago

    There was a proof-of-concept demonstration done recently for using lunar soil in a version of these 3-D printers. I don’t think it’s actually stereolithography, but a version of the sintering that many 3-D printers use for metal fabrication. I agree that the technology isn’t ready to go, yet, but there’s a lot of work being done to perfect it, especially given the possibility of a lucrative market.

    I agree with John Hanson that they’ve still got to get the launch costs down, but I’m not cynical about them being nothing but rent-seekers. The private space industry has been booming, ever since the launch insurance industry got established in the ’90s, and they’re not just taking on government launch contracts—most satellite launches are private, I believe.

    Still, I’ve long been skeptical that asteroid mining would be cheaper than on Earth. But maybe it is for rarities.

    • #10
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:06 am
  11. Profile photo of Fred Cole Member
    Foxman: 3-D printer

    Is this stereo lithography or something different. Stereo lithography takes a very long time and produces a fragile product. It’s great for prototype, but not much good for production. Am I missing something? · 1 hour ago

    Depends on what you’re producing. The technology is still new. It’s amazing and will only get better.

    • #11
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:09 am
  12. Profile photo of Foxman Inactive
    Britanicus
    Pseudodionysius: I suggest sending Al Sharpton and the head of a Wisconsin teachers’ union so they can ruin the place ahead of time, before we get all excited about doing something productive. · 32 minutes ago

    Best send a UN envoy and peace keeping force in case we run into any rogue space political body that needs placating and funding. · 9 minutes ago

    The Envoy

    • #12
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:10 am
  13. Profile photo of ctlaw Thatcher

    Exactly.

    Imagine a big stack of gold bars on an asteroid. Would it be economical to retrieve them? Of course not. You probably would drop several billion dollars to retrieve 100k ounces or 200 million dollars.

    Now imagine having to send up equipment do even moderate mining, refining, etc.

    John Hanson: I suspect all of the players are rent-seeking from the Federal Government.
    • #13
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:11 am
  14. Profile photo of Foxman Inactive
    Fred Cole
    Foxman: 3-D printer

    Is this stereo lithography or something different. Stereo lithography takes a very long time and produces a fragile product. It’s great for prototype, but not much good for production. Am I missing something? · 1 hour ago

    Depends on what you’re producing. The technology is still new. It’s amazing and will only get better. · 0 minutes ago

    I first worked with it in 1990. It is much improved, but will rquire orders of magnitude improvement for production.

    • #14
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:13 am
  15. Profile photo of Tim H. Member

    [cont’d] For example, I think you’d never go to an asteroid to mine iron. It’s plentiful in asteroids, but it’s still pretty cheap here, and you probably wouldn’t cover your launch costs. But there are other metals that are common in asteroids but rare on Earth. If those have commercial value, then…

    Asteroids have different abundances of elements and minerals than Earth does, because they formed in different places in the solar system, and because the Earth is so much more massive that it has a geology that processes its materials and transforms them. I looked for a figure or table giving the relative abundances between the two, but I didn’t quite find what I had in mind from the astrobiology text I taught from. Here’s a (very) detailed paper on it, though.

    • #15
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:13 am
  16. Profile photo of Barkha Herman Member
    Foxman: 3-D printer

    Is this stereo lithography or something different. Stereo lithography takes a very long time and produces a fragile product. It’s great for prototype, but not much good for production. Am I missing something? · 1 hour ago

    Guns!

    You can make guns that shoot. Assault weapons and all.

    • #16
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:15 am
  17. Profile photo of Barkha Herman Member

    Queen Isabella supporting Columbus’s voyage had no effect on the United States becoming a great nation.

    Government is a fact of life. Involvement is irrelevant, but I have high hopes for the future.

    The world’s first trillionairs will be made in the next decades due to space exploration.

    • #17
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:17 am
  18. Profile photo of Vice-Potentate Member

    I think the point is that they don’t think they’ll have to launch most of the mining equipment. Instead, they’ll start by mining a bit then using the product for the fabrication of the next actual generation of equipment to do the mining. The 3-d printer would make the launching of a massive amount of equipment unnecessary driving down costs. The technology is still a long way off though.

    • #18
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:17 am
  19. Profile photo of Fred Cole Member
    Barkha Herman
    Foxman: 3-D printer

    Is this stereo lithography or something different. Stereo lithography takes a very long time and produces a fragile product. It’s great for prototype, but not much good for production. Am I missing something? · 1 hour ago

    Guns!

    You can make guns that shoot. Assault weapons and all. · 6 minutes ago

    You can make anything banned. Which means that there’ll be severe restrictions on 3D printers and on information.

    • #19
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:23 am
  20. Profile photo of Barkha Herman Member

    They really can’t ban them – they will try to regulate them. (re: 3-D Printers).

    There are things that have not been able to be built due to various reasons that a 3-d Printer can do. Case in point this.

    3D Printed Robotic Exoskeleton Gives This Little Girl the Ability to Hug
    • #20
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:37 am
  21. Profile photo of Foxman Inactive
    Barkha Herman
    Foxman: 3-D printer

    Is this stereo lithography or something different. Stereo lithography takes a very long time and produces a fragile product. It’s great for prototype, but not much good for production. Am I missing something? · 1 hour ago

    Guns!

    You can make guns that shoot. Assault weapons and all. · 21 minutes ago

    I know you can make guns, but can you make them cheaper and faster than conventional methods? Are they durable? What materials are we talking about?

    • #21
    • January 29, 2013 at 7:39 am
  22. Profile photo of Tom Meyer, Ed. Editor
    Vice-Potentate: I think the point is that they don’t think they’ll have to launch most of the mining equipment. Instead, they’ll start by mining a bit then using the product for the fabrication of the next actual generation of equipment to do the mining. The 3-d printer would make the launching of a massive amount of equipment unnecessary driving down costs. The technology is still a long way off though.

    Exactly. And because these asteroids have such a microscopic gravities and are in near-earth orbit, shipping fees back to Earth should be minuscule.

    Humans do things in space in large numbers once we figure out how to make money doing so (a fact most liberal space-enthusiasts don’t get). We’ve known how to turn a profit in orbit around Earth for some time, and we’re now on the cusp of figuring out how to do it in orbit around near-Earth objects. The future is exciting!

    Fred is absolutely right, though: we need to build a space elevator (with, preferably, ones on Mars and the Moon as well). Not only would it be awesome, it’d make a ton of money.

    • #22
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:00 am
  23. Profile photo of Sisyphus Member

    About bloody time. Over 99% of the resources in the Solar System are outside of our gravity well. The 3-D printer resolves a lot of the issues with getting manufactured items out of the gravity well, don’t bother. This could drop the cost of making solar power satellites to chump change. The only way to stop it is to bring the UN and our own, beloved federal government into the picture.

    • #23
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:08 am
  24. Profile photo of Foxman Inactive

    How far up do you have to go to be free of earths gravity?

    • #24
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:22 am
  25. Profile photo of Fred Cole Member
    Tom Meyer

    Fred is absolutely right, though: we need to build a space elevator (with, preferably, ones on Mars and the Moon as well). Not only would it be awesome, it’d make aton of money. 

    I’m less convinced about needing ones for the Moon and Mars. They both have such low gravity and Mars has such a thin atmosphere (until we change it) that we don’t need an elevator for now.

    • #25
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:26 am
  26. Profile photo of Hartmann von Aue Member

    Larry Niven would be so proud. Heck, maybe he is. Somebody should e-mail him. 

    • #26
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:29 am
  27. Profile photo of Foxman Inactive
    Fred Cole
     

    Mars has such a thin atmosphere (until we change it) 

    How would we change it? We would need to set up polar magnatism to prevent an atmosphere from being blown awat by solar winds.

    • #27
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:35 am
  28. Profile photo of Spin Inactive

    As long as this guy is there to keep the peace.

    outland-sean-connery.jpg

    • #28
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:36 am
  29. Profile photo of Fred Cole Member
    Foxman: How far up do you have to go to be free of earths gravity? · 7 minutes ago

    You can’t. Every object in the Universe exerts a tug on every other. However, I’m sure that’s not how you meant it.

    In order to escape the Earth’s gravity you need to go something like 7 miles per second (anyone who knows this better is welcome to correct me). If you don’t go that fast you either fall back to Earth or into orbit. Something like the space shuttle didn’t escape the Earth’s gravity, it went into orbit and it fell around the Earth.

    • #29
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:37 am
  30. Profile photo of Spin Inactive

    I believe Mars is too small to hold an atmosphere. Not enough gravity, as it were.

    Foxman
    Fred Cole
     

    Mars has such a thin atmosphere (until we change it) 

    How would we change it? We would need to set up polar magnatism to prevent an atmosphere from being blown awat by solar winds. · 1 minute ago

    • #30
    • January 29, 2013 at 8:38 am
  1. 1
  2. 2