EPTPlanetary Resources - Page 13
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
| ||
|
Areon
United States273 Posts
| ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
On June 22 2012 01:06 Areon wrote: Why don't they tell us what's so important about mining asteroids? There's obviously got to be something useful about it, and you'd think they'd include that somewhere in the article. They have told us many times. Look here: http://www.planetaryresources.com/asteroids/usage/ | ||
|
Lombard
Sweden48 Posts
Asteroid Mining: The Compelling Opportunity by Chris Lewicki The "near" asteroid overview starting at 5.40 looks really cool  Edit: Another talk here from november: SpaceVision 2012: Chris Lewicki Seems to be another general talk though longer, sound isnt the best but not bad. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
Lombard
Sweden48 Posts
On January 26 2013 10:33 Grumbels wrote: I have some sort of weird vision of going to a nearby asteroid, wrapping a cable around it and towing it to the earth. And maybe there are competing companies that are all mining the same set of asteroids so there'd be a rush who gets to 'tag' an asteroid first. Personally I think we should have peace on earth before mining asteroids, but that's me. Ah, could this be what you're looking for ?  | ||
|
DDie
Brazil2369 Posts
The good old ''We are doing this for you and not to fill our pockets/dominate the world'' speech. | ||
|
Lombard
Sweden48 Posts
On January 26 2013 10:56 DDie wrote: The trailer reminded me of the Rekall company in the original Total Recall. The good old ''We are doing this for you and not to fill our pockets/dominate the world'' speech. Yeah, the backers are billionaires after all, filling their pockets is what they do best. But if they can reduce the cost of space exploration, eventually all of mankind will benefit. I don't see any of the worlds government space agencies doing much about cost. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On the other hand, suppose that we aim to steer asteroids toward earth to bring them into an orbit where they are accessible for us. We could even develop parachute or braking systems to have them safely land on earth. Now, aren't the odds of something like this ever going wrong a lot bigger than the paltry chance of these big asteroid collisions with earth? Nuclear technology was developed and it helped to create a lot of energy, but it has also been destructive at times (Chernobyl & recent hits on Japanese reactors because of the earthquake). Wouldn't there be a chance for something similar to happen with these projects? (I'm not super informed though, I'm just wondering) | ||
|
AUFKLARUNG
Germany245 Posts
1. Are there already identified asteroids for minings? 2. Have we already accounted for all the minable resources on the Earth such that these outer space explorations are justified (meaning, there are very few left and it is time to explore already)? I ask this question because I have read something last time that we are nowhere near mining or knowing 20% of Earth minerals. It was in some science magazine I skimmed so I can't remember exactly, this could be wrong. 3. How does outer-space resource economy/politics work? Who owns what? | ||
KwarK
United States43753 Posts
| ||
|
Campitor
36 Posts
On April 20 2012 04:59 jmack wrote: Does no one else feel like we should be fixing this planet before exploring others? Hear me out, we have how many people dying from starvation by the minute? How many suicides per minute? How many people who's entire life potential is completely wasted because our social structures place favor on a select few? How about we feed and regulate our own population, by actually harnessing and distributing our knowledge and technology in EFFICIENT ways before we chase pipe dreams.... Just feels backwards... ( I'm all for space exploration, I just don't think it's our ticket out of the shit world we've created ) Actually this kind of space exploration would have direct beneficial effects regarding the conservation of resources and how to feed people with limited resources. Humans would need to be hyper efficient with energy and food resources in space - you can't just truck it in if you run out. The technology discovered to increase fuel efficiency, newer batteries, and methods of food preservation would help solve some of the "problems down here". And mining asteroids would be more efficient than mining it here on earth. Asteroids contain purer quantities of minerals because they were never incorporated into a planet. Most of the heavy metals here on earth are contained within the earth's core and the only reason it exists on the surface is a result of tectonic activity; and it's diluted with other metals and elements. The heavy metals in asteroids would be accessible since many asteroids have high purity of ore. And no need for any fancy space forges since you can smelt ore using electromagnetic energy which can be done in a vacuum - if you can extract the metal into small bricks you can easily land them on earth using some type of robotic re-entry vehicle. You can build the re-entry vehicle out of the material that is being smelted, land it on earth, then smelt it down here. The space shuttle is nothing but a giant glider that weighs several tons. Space exploration and mining is needed to help solve today's and tomorrow's issues. Forgetting space exploration is shortsighted. A lot of today's technology was a direct result of space exploration. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
Ramong
Denmark1706 Posts
On January 27 2013 01:28 Grumbels wrote: "Today's issues" apparently equals availability of metals used in cell phone production. I don't have anything against asteroid mining, but I think it's pretty obvious that it will take decades before this will solve any resource scarcity and it's mostly invested in by billionaires that happen to be space geeks. I think everyone agrees that it is gonna take a LONG time before any profit can be made from this. But don't for a second doubt that there is huge profit to be made once the technology have been somewhat refined. | ||
|
radscorpion9
Canada2252 Posts
On January 27 2013 00:58 Campitor wrote: ...Space exploration and mining is needed to help solve today's and tomorrow's issues. Forgetting space exploration is shortsighted. A lot of today's technology was a direct result of space exploration. Yes but it was mostly as a result of spin-off applications. He all-capitalized efficient, probably because he means that it would be better if we actually targeted the areas where we need to have meaningful technological advances, rather than hoping that the technology developed for space exploration can somehow be applied back on Earth. Why do you need to go into space to develop better ways to conserve resources? If anything going into space just to figure out how to make things more efficient *in space*, and then trying to find a way to translate that efficiency to systems on Earth would be a very weird, inefficient allocation of resources. | ||
|
WoodenSpider
United States85 Posts
http://deepspaceindustries.com/ On a side note, Planetary resources had the reveal for their new miniature space telescope/ laser communication reciever that they are planning to launch soon http://www.space.com/19373-planetary-resources-unveils-asteroid-hunting-arkyd-telescope-video.html | ||
|
WoodenSpider
United States85 Posts
| ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
| ||
|
Campitor
36 Posts
On January 27 2013 02:17 radscorpion9 wrote: Yes but it was mostly as a result of spin-off applications. He all-capitalized efficient, probably because he means that it would be better if we actually targeted the areas where we need to have meaningful technological advances, rather than hoping that the technology developed for space exploration can somehow be applied back on Earth. Why do you need to go into space to develop better ways to conserve resources? If anything going into space just to figure out how to make things more efficient *in space*, and then trying to find a way to translate that efficiency to systems on Earth would be a very weird, inefficient allocation of resources. It's not an inefficient allocation of resources. Because Space is such an unforgiving environment it forces you to develop technologies that can withstand the extreme environment of microgravity - technologies that can be very useful here on earth. Just look at what NASA has done in it's quest for space exploration: NASA Spin-off technologies. Just about every technology in use today was someone's attempt to do something better, faster, stronger than what was currently available. Space is very unforgiving so only proven technology will survive - space is the ultimate Darwinian frontier for developing useful and practical products. Here is another link to a PDF of the technology NASA claims to have direct benefits here on earth: NASA Exploration and Innovation Lead to New Discoveries PDF Inefficient allocation of resources - I hardly think so. NASA expenditure is only half a penny on the dollar in regards to the federal budget - I think we are getting a lot of bang for the buck - err half-penny. Just think of the information/communication revolution and how dependent it is on satellite technology. Space exploration is needed and should be a healthy part of a sensible government budget. | ||
| ||
