-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Asteroid mining
I'm happy to be otherwise dissuaded but, with my (...rather two of my quite varied ) background in minerals exploration and in resource economics, I've been strongly of the opinion that asteroid mining quite elegantly fits the term Pie in the Sky.
You far more easily can make the case for extracting a number of elements or simple compounds from even a geologically non-homogeneous source that we can call "Mars" (in and only in the case of using such materials on Mars), but to think that you're going to identify, land on, and extract interesting metals from a non-chondritic, M-type asteroid, and make a positive ROI - no. Now, if your goal is to capture such materials for use on, say, Mars, then the economics swing vastly closer to making sense, but I urge all to consider the former as fodder for Hollywood, not Wall Street.
I'm happy to be otherwise dissuaded but, with my (...rather two of my quite varied ) background in minerals exploration and in resource economics, I've been strongly of the opinion that asteroid mining quite elegantly fits the term Pie in the Sky.
You far more easily can make the case for extracting a number of elements or simple compounds from even a geologically non-homogeneous source that we can call "Mars" (in and only in the case of using such materials on Mars), but to think that you're going to identify, land on, and extract interesting metals from a non-chondritic, M-type asteroid, and make a positive ROI - no. Now, if your goal is to capture such materials for use on, say, Mars, then the economics swing vastly closer to making sense, but I urge all to consider the former as fodder for Hollywood, not Wall Street.
cdub
OG 2011 Leaf / 2023 Model Y LR
The whole point of going to Mars is to contaminate it with lifeforms from Earth, including our species eventually.
Let's hope they don't find any Martian bacteria the next two years, so that the whole of Mars isn't declared a museum or national park. We need that planet as a backup.
Hopefully, the first SpaceX Dragon to Mars is filled with moss, lichen, potatoes, etc to be finely distributed across Mars to end the argument on life on Mars before it becomes a problem for further colonialization.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
The point of looking thoroughly for life on Mars is that if there's life there, then it would suggest life is very common in the universe. And if life is very common then we must ask ourselves if either it is very common for life to progress to what we judge "intelligent" life i.e. life that could communicate out from it's planet, or if that too is common but that the great filter is still ahead of us (not good).
I don't think I can tell Elon anything. There is probably million others trying to do that.
Question about martian life must be answered before first human lands there. Mars is similar enough that Earth bacteria can live there. It is impossible to clean humans completely. After first humans land on Mars, it will have Earth based bacterial life. One Mars base can only study very small fraction of planet. Remote controlled (from orbit) rovers can study whole planet.
I am not against Mars base or terraforming Mars in long term. Other things must be done first. I don't think SpaceX is allowed to take humans into Mars within decade. It is also impossible for safety reasons. Decade is not enough to develop and test needed tech.
One of these is true:
1 No life on Mars.
2 Mars has life transported by meteorites from Earth.
3 Life on Mars started before life on Earth and was transported to Earth by meteorites.
4 Mars has different life than Earth.
Mars is smaller so it cooled faster than Earth. In about 1000 million years into future Mars will again be better place for life than Earth.
No we don't need a planet as a backup. We need to learn to move and to live on moons and asteroids. So that when next dino-killer asteroid or comet comes we are ready to deflect it. Moons and asteroids offer more volume to live in and accessible raw materials than Mars.
palmer_md
Member
Heard this a week or so ago and it seems to fit with some of the discussion in this thread. I found it very interesting how it evolved.
New York Public Radio Popup Player
New York Public Radio Popup Player
Krugerrand
Meow
[QUOTE="ecarfan, post: 1510147, member: 16666]
I agree with you that the US government is not going to allocate the funds necessary to establish a human colony on Mars. But Elon intends to use all the resources available to him, including SpaceX profits and whatever profits he realizes from Tesla and SolarCity (both of which are likely to be substantial) to achieve his goals on Mars.[/QUOTE]
The first people going to Mars (who aren't intending on coming back to Earth, ever) will obviously liquidate everything they own and give the resultant cash to SpaceX in trust/whatever. They'll fund themselves. Other private citizens/entrepreneurs etc... will also offer to fund the mission. There will be plenty of cash and resources to go around particularly once all us earthbound people SEE our fellow man on Mars, living there. Never mind that the whole purpose is to be 'self-sustaining'. Once they are there, there's no need for 'currency', it'll be a cooperative.
I agree with you that the US government is not going to allocate the funds necessary to establish a human colony on Mars. But Elon intends to use all the resources available to him, including SpaceX profits and whatever profits he realizes from Tesla and SolarCity (both of which are likely to be substantial) to achieve his goals on Mars.[/QUOTE]
The first people going to Mars (who aren't intending on coming back to Earth, ever) will obviously liquidate everything they own and give the resultant cash to SpaceX in trust/whatever. They'll fund themselves. Other private citizens/entrepreneurs etc... will also offer to fund the mission. There will be plenty of cash and resources to go around particularly once all us earthbound people SEE our fellow man on Mars, living there. Never mind that the whole purpose is to be 'self-sustaining'. Once they are there, there's no need for 'currency', it'll be a cooperative.
Disagree. Humans have millions of years of evolution behind them that has adapted us to living on a planetary surface where we can walk around, follow the course of the sun through the sky, and have a diurnal existence. The long term goal should be to terraform Mars and give it a breathable atmosphere. I believe that is Elon's goal as well.
Living on the moon, or on an asteroid, strikes me as hellish. And we can learn to deflect asteroids without inhabiting them. In fact we already have a pretty good idea how to do it, and it doesn't involve nuclear weapons.
A permanent, sustainable human colony on Mars is an excellent and much needed back up plan in case things go really bad on Earth. That could occur because of an asteroid impact that we failed to detect in time to change its course, radical climate change (a very real possibility within a few human lifetimes), or a nuclear war (there are still thousands or nuclear weapons in existence, and the list of nations with nuclear weapons is not decreasing).
If we really want to be a civilaztion that is exploring the universe, here's something to think about long-term: Musk said we need Mars as our stepping stone to other planets, so the moon is too close to Earth. So if we want to explore the thousands of planets we have found, Mars seems to be the right spot.
3 Strange Worlds Circling A Cool Star Might Be Prime Spots To Support Life
3 Strange Worlds Circling A Cool Star Might Be Prime Spots To Support Life
There are orders of magnitude of difference between exploring our solar system and reaching even the closest star to earth, Proxima Centauri. Let's focus on getting to Mars for now.
Atmosphere of Mars does not offer very good protection against meteorites. Also if meteorite damages building on Earth, you still have air to breathe. Radiation is much stronger on Mars (thin atmosphere, no magnetic field). Because of these reasons Mars base will be underground. Walking on Mars with complex spacesuit is of course possible. It is not easy or safe. How large Mars colony must be before it can produce space suits? Almost all work outside must be done automated or remote controlled machines (safety and cost reasons). Mars or asteroids in both we will live underground. We will of course have virtual reality.
Asteroid or moon base might need rotating structures to simulate gravity. Not difficult in low gravity and vacuum. Other possibility: We have read our DNA. I'm afraid we will soon have doping that gives strong body without exercise.
We can locate all large asteroids with Earth based telescopes. Calculating orbits few 100 years into future is easy. I don't know if can find all small asteroids with Earth based telescopes. Those will not danger our civilization. Tunguska meteorite (60 - 190 m) produced 10 to 30 megatons, luckily not above a city.
We cannot find all comets with Earth based telescopes. Orbits can be 1000 years long. When comet comes close enough to be seen, it could be too late.
If incoming rock is large enough and we don't see early enough, nuclear weapons are only option left. Choice could be very simple: Use nuclear weapons or die. Hollywood did not understand this correctly. Even nukes must be used long before (perhaps years) impact.
To be useful as a back up, Mars colony must be self-sufficient. It is faster and cheaper to build self-sufficient Moon base than Mars base. Moon base could offer much more help to Earth, if needed, than Mars base.
We can launch to Mars once in 26 months. Travel time is about 8 months. So even first Mars base must have all spare parts for 3 years. Without testing we cannot be certain what and how much is needed. Realistic testing is only possible on the Moon.
First people on Mars might go there with their own money. To be successful colony needs spare parts and new experts every 26 months. If this flow is discontinued, they will die. It is not enough to survive. They need to expand base and rebuild our industry. How large base is needed for this?
timk225
Active Member
I can understand exploration, but I don't get why people are thinking of trying to colonize Mars.
1. It's a long ride.
2. It's a bit on the cold side.
3. Long term low gravity is not good for humans.
4. There's nearly no atmosphere.
Send all the probes you want, but people? I don't get how this is a good idea.
Maybe someone better informed can explain this to me and others.
1. It's a long ride.
2. It's a bit on the cold side.
3. Long term low gravity is not good for humans.
4. There's nearly no atmosphere.
Send all the probes you want, but people? I don't get how this is a good idea.
Maybe someone better informed can explain this to me and others.
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
You'd have to ask explorers circa 15th century the same question. Not everyone lives their lives the same way.
Adventure, risk, excitement, notoriety, etc...
Adventure, risk, excitement, notoriety, etc...
Similar threads
