What about asteroid mining as discussed by Lewis in 'Mining the sky'. When launch costs begin to drop and automated or teleoperated robotics become more dextrous like Robonaut-2 then people like Peter Diamandis & Elon Musk will capitalize on M type near earth asteroids.
@marmaladekamikaze The are still huge untapped mineral resources in the almost unpopulated areas of Asia/North/South-America/Australia, ecc..., in Antarctica, in the sea-floor. These resources are MUCH more accessible and cheap to exploit than mineral resources in space: therefore mankind will need to move its mining activities outside our planet, only centuries from now.
You may be right, but there are space based resources that are very rare on earth, for example Rhodium and He-3. The economics for safely moving 10-15 metre wide meteoroids into the relative safety of say, the Sahara desert, will become attractive in coming years. Asteroids and Meteoroids high in Rhodium like the Cape York meteorite for example. and He-3 prospecting missions Will probably begin in the next 50 years, all things going well. What do you think?
@marmaladekamikaze You may be right about very rare minerals although I'm not sure politicians would have the guts to allow attempts to controlled crashes of meteroids on Earth's surface (If they crash on inhabited areas....).
Regarding He3 I don't think that that kind of nuclear fusion will be adopted since it is far easier to use the deuterium-tritium reaction which are in unlimited amount in the sea water and shield the reactors than building mines on the moon and transport it on Earth.
He-3 Fusion is almost aneutronic, H3 + H2 fusion is certainly going to be the first fusion fuel in ITER & NIF, but the neutrons are going to plague material selection due to neutron embrittlement and Wigner stress energy building up over time in the neutron environment. I don't think building lunar mines & shipping He-3 back is a good idea either, but controlled crashes of meteroids in the 10 meter diameter range would be perfect as they naturally burn up on entry.
@marmaladekamikaze H3 + H2 fusion needs good shielding against neutrons and periodic replacing of the material but since is much cheaper to take it from the sea and most nations will not have access to space and will prefer energetic indipendence rather than dependance from few space monopolists, then I think that H3 fusion will not have much success.
Regarding controlled crashes of small meteroids if they burn up then their ore content is going to get lost.
He was spot on regarding the lack of economic productivity of space activities (besides satellites).
JulianGardna 3 weeks ago
@JulianGardna
What about asteroid mining as discussed by Lewis in 'Mining the sky'. When launch costs begin to drop and automated or teleoperated robotics become more dextrous like Robonaut-2 then people like Peter Diamandis & Elon Musk will capitalize on M type near earth asteroids.
marmaladekamikaze 1 week ago
@marmaladekamikaze The are still huge untapped mineral resources in the almost unpopulated areas of Asia/North/South-America/Australia, ecc..., in Antarctica, in the sea-floor. These resources are MUCH more accessible and cheap to exploit than mineral resources in space: therefore mankind will need to move its mining activities outside our planet, only centuries from now.
JulianGardna 1 week ago
@JulianGardna
You may be right, but there are space based resources that are very rare on earth, for example Rhodium and He-3. The economics for safely moving 10-15 metre wide meteoroids into the relative safety of say, the Sahara desert, will become attractive in coming years. Asteroids and Meteoroids high in Rhodium like the Cape York meteorite for example. and He-3 prospecting missions Will probably begin in the next 50 years, all things going well. What do you think?
marmaladekamikaze 1 week ago
@marmaladekamikaze You may be right about very rare minerals although I'm not sure politicians would have the guts to allow attempts to controlled crashes of meteroids on Earth's surface (If they crash on inhabited areas....).
Regarding He3 I don't think that that kind of nuclear fusion will be adopted since it is far easier to use the deuterium-tritium reaction which are in unlimited amount in the sea water and shield the reactors than building mines on the moon and transport it on Earth.
JulianGardna 6 days ago
@JulianGardna
He-3 Fusion is almost aneutronic, H3 + H2 fusion is certainly going to be the first fusion fuel in ITER & NIF, but the neutrons are going to plague material selection due to neutron embrittlement and Wigner stress energy building up over time in the neutron environment. I don't think building lunar mines & shipping He-3 back is a good idea either, but controlled crashes of meteroids in the 10 meter diameter range would be perfect as they naturally burn up on entry.
marmaladekamikaze 6 days ago
@marmaladekamikaze H3 + H2 fusion needs good shielding against neutrons and periodic replacing of the material but since is much cheaper to take it from the sea and most nations will not have access to space and will prefer energetic indipendence rather than dependance from few space monopolists, then I think that H3 fusion will not have much success.
Regarding controlled crashes of small meteroids if they burn up then their ore content is going to get lost.
JulianGardna 6 days ago
@JulianGardna I meant He3 fusion will not have much success.
JulianGardna 6 days ago