iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Ayodele Faiyetole

GET UPDATES FROM Ayodele Faiyetole
 

Space Merchants and Planetary Mining

Posted: 05/ 2/2012 1:55 pm

The world's fossil fuels are in limited reserves and are also in quick depletion. In 2004 Lawrence A. Taylor, director of the U.S. Planetary Geosciences Institute, told the AFP, "Just 25 tonnes of helium, which can be transported on a space shuttle, is enough to provide electricity for the U.S. for one full year," noting that only 10 kilos of helium 3 are available on Earth. He added, "By 2050 the whole world will have a major problem. We need to be thinking ahead." Helium 3 is a potential pollution-free nuclear fuel. It is believed that the Moon contains 10 times more energy (in the form of helium 3) than all the fossil fuels on Earth.

The exhaustibility of mineral resources on Earth and their almost infinite deposits on other planetary bodies in our solar system are fast leading to the development of a whole new industry spearheaded by exploratory-entrepreneurial visionaries. These space merchants, like the British who prospected North America for tobacco plantations, believe that space holds the best prospects for finding valuable minerals that could be exploited for usage here on Earth and beyond.

Asteroid Mining

On April 24 at the Museum of Flight in Seattle, Planetary Resources, Inc. made public its plan to mine near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) for resources. Series of robotic probes and unmanned spacecraft are to be launched, starting with their Arkyd-100 Earth-orbiting telescopes, to prospect candidate NEAs. Subsequently, they plan to launch new spacecraft to mine precious metals and extract water, which can be used for fuel and life-support systems for onward space exploration by humans.

Considering the array of various industry leaders backing this endeavor, it might as well be termed feasible and a done deal even before the start. Financiers of the asteroid-mining venture include Ross Perot, Jr. (chairman of Perot Systems) and Larry Page (CEO of Google). Planetary Resources was founded in 2009 by Peter Diamandis and Eric Anderson, who launched the phenomenon of "tourist astronauts" by pioneering the space tourism business with their company, Space Adventure. Backers of Planetary Resources include tourist astronaut Charles Simonyi, Google executives Eric Schmitt and Ram Shriram, and billionaire filmmaker James Cameron.

Diamandis said Planetary Resources "is establishing a new paradigm for resource utilization that will bring the solar system within humanity's economic sphere of influence by enabling low-cost robotic exploration and eventual commercial development of asteroids." This is certainly not the first time entrepreneurs are actively looking toward space with bold plans to prospect, exploit, and utilize its resources.

Moon Mining

Moon Express, Inc. which Forbes selected in 2011 as one of the 15 "Names You Need to Know," has made known its interest in prospecting space for resources. On April 23 in Mountain View, Calif., MoonEx, the leading contender for the Google Lunar X Prize, announced that it had successfully delivered its Preliminary Design Checkpoint Technical Package to NASA under its $10-million Innovative Lunar Demonstration Data (ILDD) contract, providing NASA continuing data on the development of the company's commercial lunar robotic missions and plans to mine the Moon for precious resources. MoonEx was selected in 2010 for this contract, which is granted only after technology is demonstrated, at the company's own risk. Technology luminaries Naveen Jain (called the greatest entrepreneur on the planet) and Barney Pell teamed up with space visionary Robert Richards to form MoonEx in 2010. It is based at NASA Research Park in Silicon Valley.

In answering my question regarding what similarities or distinctions exist between these planetary mining companies, Richards said, "Basically, Moon Express plans to mine asteroids too. The main difference is that MoonEx is planning to mine asteroidal material on the Moon." He further expatiated on the rationale for the Moon, listing reasons that included "proximity, shorter horizon, less risk, existing technology, known destination sampling, and distributed materials." Asteroids, he said, "are far, far away, longer horizon, high-risk, no existing technology, no destination sampling, and concentrated materials." From Richards' analysis, the Moon has clear advantages from both business and technical perspectives.

Under a special partnership agreement with NASA, MoonEx in a way has hired NASA to help create a small, high-performance lunar lander system. "This will be launched starting from as early as 2014," Richards said. If this launch date is accomplished, it will be the first time a commercial company will travel out of the Earth's orbit to another world.

The Gains to Humanity

No matter how difficult mining these planetary objects might get, our corporate entities here on Earth are bound to benefit hugely from this new space industry when it succeeds. As I stated earlier, mineral resources are exhaustible, such that reserves here on Earth are fast being depleted by continuous exploitation, causing a lot of resource concerns. A new window to the infinite reserve of such minerals and more will do humanity much good in terms of abundance and prosperity.

New direct industries will be created and developed as a result of this planetary mining. In the past, space activities relied heavily on measuring "spin-offs" when counting the gains from space exploration, but this is bound to change. There is a huge prospect of new metals to be mined, which may lead to whole new industries and products and the driving down of product costs thanks to abundant supplies of primary resources. As a result, new hands and skills will be needed and developed, creating jobs for the entire economy.

Consciously or unconsciously, the activities of these planetary miners may further open up the final frontier and will enable human spaceflight. Planetary Resources already noted that "water-rich NEAs will serve as 'stepping stones' for deep space exploration, providing space-sourced fuel and water to orbiting depots. Accessing water resources in space will revolutionize exploration and make space travel dramatically more economical."

In essence, mining planetary bodies has both short- and long-term, known and unknown economic potential to meet humanity's needs on Earth and for the development of outer space.

Ad astra.

 

Follow Ayodele Faiyetole on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Faiyetole

FOLLOW SCIENCE
 
 
  • Comments
  • 16
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
02:12 AM on 05/10/2012
Thank you for the well written article and the update on the plans to harvest the richness the near earth objects contain.
Bellla
Trans & Proud
08:35 AM on 05/05/2012
About time. The only salvation for Earth is in space. If we cannot breach the high frontier we will be trapped on this planet till we choke on our own wastes and corrupt the biosphere.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ronald Malaney
02:54 AM on 05/05/2012
Columbus, the Wright bros, Bill Gates, Edison, Franklin,Pasteur,Bell, and many more come to mind as discussion here proceed. I picture Wilbur next to x-15, 747, or Apollo 11 for a comparison. I see Gates talking to Bell with 2 cans on a wire through Morse code, and people doubting them with all sorts of comments.
photo
BluePhantom2
The Blacksmith & the Artist reflected in their art
09:31 PM on 05/03/2012
NASA has been planet bound by our election cycle leaders so go, get there first and do it. I'd sit back one night and read or hopefully re-read "The moon is a harsh mistress" first because the GOV will become the biggest hurdle to be overcome. If man has a destiny it is the stars, if we are just a long list of random events that stars are just as plausable so again go!
05:43 PM on 05/03/2012
It will be interesting to see the results of the first line of drones from Planetary resources. If they meet their 24 month launch date, that'll clear a bit of pessimism, but I haven't met a single geologist who is convinced as of yet, as to the practicality of the matter.

Personally, I hope they succeed. Where there is a dollar to be made, people will be there. My largest concern, though, is that the volume of platinum group elements specifically (Which is one of the focuses of Planetary Resources, according to the speech by Peter Diamondias in the public offering of the company), will not be sufficient to justify recovery, without somehow safely delivering the asteroids back to earth. I say this only because of the scarcity of said elements in the earth. Simply put, things near earth will have similar compositions to things actually present on our planet.

Still, as I said, I really hope I'm wrong to be concerned.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bccmeteorites
Don't believe everything NASA says.
11:00 AM on 05/03/2012
gutenmorgen wrote

I was one of several scientists who were given samples of the Apollo 11 regolith fines to determine their concentration of He-3. I assure you that mining of He-3 on the Moon is nonsense because here are the numbers. 1 gram of the Apollo 11 fines contains about 0.00009 mL of He-3 or 0.00000000-4 mol of He-3. To obtain 1 mol or 3 gram of He-3 you must heat 25 billion gram or 25 million metric tons of Apollo 11 fines. I leave it to you to calculate how many tons of Apollo 11 fines must be heated to extract 20 metric tons of He-3. Quite aside from the work that must be done to mine, transport, and sieve the lunar regolith to obtain the more gas-rich fines, the amount of energy required to heat these fines to release the He-3 is exorbitant. If that is to be done with the energy from He-3 fusion you must also maintain a sizable workforce on the Moon. You must then calculate the energy for transporting the 20 tons of He-3 to Earth, preferably in the liquid form. Transporting the required mass of lunar fines to Earth is totally out of the question. Anyone who believes that He-3 can be profitably mined on the Moon has his/her head screwed on wrong.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BLinCincinnati
I think I am, therefore, I am. I think.
08:45 AM on 05/04/2012
I'm not discounting his facts on the regolith he tested, but the assumption in his conclusion is that the entire Moon shares this same concentration of He-3 found in the regolith aquired from the Apollo 11 landing site. That would be akin to me going out and taking 10 samples of dirt from a few spots in my neighborhood on Earth, then coming to the conclusion that because the amount of Gold found in those samples was so small that "anyone who believes that Gold can be profitably mined on the Earth has his/her head screwed on wrong."
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bccmeteorites
Don't believe everything NASA says.
12:16 PM on 05/04/2012
There is a big difference between a gas and a metal.
12:22 PM on 05/04/2012
If you go back to the study I linked to below, you'll see the estimates for different areas of the Moon: in an area about the size of Spain, concentrations are roughly 15 ppb. For the rest of the Moon (where 87% of He3 is thought to be), it's about 3 ppb. Not good for miners.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bccmeteorites
Don't believe everything NASA says.
10:20 AM on 05/03/2012
Unless they can control everything, government establishment scientists are always looking for new ways to stifle, suppress, censor and marginalize new innovative valid discoveries.

http://members.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewUserPage&userid=bccmeteorites
04:45 PM on 05/02/2012
Only 25 tons of He3 a year! According to this 2007 study (http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2007/pdf/2175.pdf), He3 is present in concentrations of 3-15 parts per billion in lunar regolith. That means you'd need to process at least 170 million and possibly up to 850 million tons (I assume we're talking metric here) of regolith every single year. How does Moon Express or Planetary Resources plan to make this viable? What will the Moon look like when they're done?

He3 isn't a renewable resource, either -- it has taken 4.5 billion years for what little there is on the Moon to accumulate -- and these plans would use it up in just a few hundred years, exactly like we've done with fossil fuels. Finally all of this assumes we can do He3 fusion, which has never been demonstrated on a net-positive power generation basis. Pipe dreams fueling the short-term destruction of the cosmic environment...

The engineers and scientists working for these entrepreneurs ought to be devoting their time and efforts towards figuring out how we can just simply use less, not how we can go on using more and more and more.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BLinCincinnati
I think I am, therefore, I am. I think.
09:19 AM on 05/04/2012
If you were talking about mining He3 on Earth I'd agree with you. But the moon is just a giant ball of rock, and would be a giant ball of rock after mining all the He3. "Pipe dreams fueling the short-term destruction of the cosmic environment". Nonsense. There is no ecosystem there, no atmosphere, no life, no environment. It would still be a ball of rock, but would have provided a few hundred years worth of energy, during which time our civilization should have advanced significantly to where we have better power sources.

Mining on the Moon will also create a space based infrastructure that could be used to extend human civilization to other planets. It's extremely unlikely that corporations will just mine He3 once on the moon. They'll mine other materials as well including: oxygen, silicon, iron, magnesium, aluminium, manganese and titanium. Among the more abundant are oxygen, iron and silicon. Transporting elements other than titanium back to Earth just wouldn't be economically feasible, but instead could be used to build space based infrastructure as well as future transport ships. Launching the amount of iron, aluminum, and silicon (glass) from Earth to create this space based infrastructure would not be feasible, but it would be feasible to launch from the Moon due to the much lower escape velocity.
12:27 PM on 05/04/2012
A couple of points here: first, your position is predicated on the technologizing paradigm which insists that new technology will solve all our problems. But while new technology may solve some problems, it also always introduces new ones.

Second, it has yet to be proven that there is no life on (or in) the Moon, or Mars, or anywhere else that's not Earth. In addition, we have hardly any understanding of the Moon's climate or geology at the moment, so the consequences of development are far from clear. Acting as if the Moon is not an environment does not prove that it isn't one -- in fact, there is little doubt that the Moon (and Mars, etc.) are environments, even if they're of a different kind from Earth's. Since we know well the deleterious effect man's actions can have on a planetary environment, doesn't it behoove us to learn our lessons, rather than to continue to make the same kinds of mistakes?