Re: Space Exploitation

From: quibbler (quibbler247_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 06/02/04 

Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2004 13:24:48 -0600

In article <anPuc.15286$Yf6.3677@bignews1.bellsouth.net>,
terry@csmgdesign.com says...
>
> I think most will agree that getting the price per pound to orbit down to
> something reasonable is the most important thing thats got to happen

OK.

> This is
> not going to happen until a space resource can be exploited and there is
> money to be made.

Perhaps that's one way to help defray the cost of launches. But it
won't actually reduce the cost of launch itself. Only better technology
will do that.

>
> My question is, what resources are there that will support space industry
> and development?

It depends on what you mean by supporting space industry. If we could
find convenient sources of water ice on the moon, for example, then
these would be very valuable for use in a lunar outpost. Otherwise we
would have to carry the water all the way from Earth which can be
expensive. Likewise, if we can get metals and other raw materials from
asteroids then we don't have to spend money orbiting them from earth.
I've seen people talk about various resources that you might
economically mine from the moon, for example, but I'm not sure that any
of the resources, including He3 or gem quality diamonds, would be worth
carrying back to earth.

One thing you might look into is selling futures in resources and real
estate that might be available when the technology improves. If you can
convince people to give you money now for resources which have yet to be
developed then you could invest that money in developing the
technologies needed to accomplish things like cheap space launch. Of
course, a lot of people would probably be rightly skeptical about
investing good money in stuff that is literally "pie in the sky".

> I know there is the telecommunication industry but it
> seems that it would be rather limited.

Yeah, if anything telecommunication satellites will probably be phased
out as the role is taken over by high altitude balloons and fiber
optics.

> I've heard of experiements in
> material science and pharmacutical developement on board ISS and the
> shuttle, but nothing has been developed that would come even close to paying
> for the development cost.

Most features of a "weightless" environment can be simulated on earth
for a fraction of the cost of doing it in space.

> We all have heard of placing solar power stations
> and such in orbit, but if electric power grows in price to justify the cost
> of that, we've got a whole lot bigger problem the power.

I'm not sure that the price of electricity would have to grow. Rather,
Space Solar Power will have to be offered at low enough costs to be
competitive with other terrestrial sources.

> Tourism and
> advertising pop up as two means of making money, at least for the Russians,
> although I suspect that it will never pay for the whole thing.

Advertising and promotionals could always pay something, though it will
pay less as space flight becomes more routine.

 
> Where should we be investing our money?

In terrestrial technologies that allow us to save money on launches.
Specifically we probably want to look at various types of accelerators,
from magnetic to electrostatic and ballistic that can cheaply contribute
delta v to orbit our payloads.

>
> Small automated laboritories to grow silicone crystals that could be
> launched from a regular booster?

Nope. We could most likely simulate the conditions on earth for less
money.

> The same with pharmacuticals?

See above. Space manufacturing is largely an urban legend invented by
the Reagan administration to justify their profligate spending on things
like SDI.

> Could titanium be mined from the moon for cheaper than produced from earth?

Probably not. It's even less likely that the titanium could be
transported to the surface of the Earth for less than the cost of mining
it here.

> Is a resort hotel in orbit a possibility?

Yeah, it's possible. Then again, look up how much the ISS cost to build.
Do you think that you could generate enough paying customers to offset
those kinds of costs? If you can come up with much cheaper ways of
building living accommodations in orbit then I'm sure NASA would love to
hear about it. Perhaps you can use lightweight, inflatable habitation
modules or other technologies that reduce the expense. BTW, please
don't tell me about converting main shuttle tanks into living
accommodations. As the song says, "That don't impress me much". 

-- 
      Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the 
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be 
made that faith is one of the world's great evils, 
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to 
eradicate."  -- Richard Dawkins