Asteroid/Near Earth object mining

[1oldman2]

Forgetting all the speculation on practicality, I'm wondering about the real plans at the present.
http://www.nasa.gov/content/what-is-nasa-s-asteroid-redirect-mission

 

[russ_watters]

Assuming the first study's $2.6 billion to retrieve a 500 metric ton asteroid was roughly correct and assuming that costs scale linearly with mass, bringing back a 20,000 ton object would cost about $100 billion. (Note: This is a bad assumption. There are significant diseconomies of scale when it comes to large-scale space exploration.)

Because of the scaling issue, let's close the loop from the other direction: Assuming $2.6 billion to bring back the 500 metric ton asteroid is correct (and noting it doesn't include the cost to mine the asteroid!), it would hold (at 3%) 15 tons or $500 million worth of platinum.

Well, I'm ready to invest! Who's with me?!

 

[mfb]

It's fine, just assume -2.1 billion mining operation costs.

 

[1oldman2]

Hi everyone,
While NASA's A.R.M. seems primarily geared towards developmental testing of tech that will be used in the upcoming Mars missions, as well as redirecting potentially Earth threatening asteroids, they do mention future asteroid mining as benefiting also. Considering NASA as well as Caltec/Keck, DSI, Planetary resources as well as many other "less than crackpot" entities are actively promoting the concept of mining asteroids I assume its going to happen. One thing for certain here is we are discussing events that not many of us will be alive to witness, (Hoophy just may be an exception ). The mining of asteroids in the current context of economics and technology may seem a lot like Sci-Fi however anyone with a little historical perspective will note that what's common today was Sci-Fi not long ago. While investing in the start up of asteroid mining isn't likely to be a quick turn around on your buck, your grandchildren would be very happy to inherit your stock once the infrastructure is in place.
I'm glad to see this thread eliciting such spirited banter
Now I'll return to my current research project which involves the effects of high gravity beer on micro-gravity viewing at Live-ISS-Stream. Cheers !

 

[BiGyElLoWhAt]

I mean, here's the thing with these price estimates:
With the presumed (relatively) high availability of volatiles on asteroids/comets, the investment would be all in the initial costs. After that, any fuel should be able to be extracted on site, and after the initial investment (which will be verrry high), it should be mostly profit. You don't have to send a new miner into space every asteroid. You just send the old one to a new asteroid when it's done. Fuel it up with the stuff you've gotten off of other asteroids, and keep going. 1 investment, infinity profits. ;)

 

[anorlunda]

I mean, here's the thing with these price estimates:
With the presumed (relatively) high availability of volatiles on asteroids/comets, the investment would be all in the initial costs. After that, any fuel should be able to be extracted on site, and after the initial investment (which will be verrry high), it should be mostly profit. You don't have to send a new miner into space every asteroid. You just send the old one to a new asteroid when it's done. Fuel it up with the stuff you've gotten off of other asteroids, and keep going. 1 investment, infinity profits. ;)

Come on. You are visualizing autonomous, robust, long lived, self reparing robotic mining/refining/manufacturing machines. I challenge you to make such a machine even on Earth. As a pilot project, build a machine to bore a tunnel under the Atlantic from America to Europe, and to do it fully automated and self powered and without the assistance of human hands. When you have achieved something comparable to that, I'll be more receptive to doing it in space.

 

[BiGyElLoWhAt]

They don't necessarily have to be 100% autonomous, we can still communicate with them and tell them what to do, where to drill, where to go, what to keep, what to pitch. It just takes a bit to get the message there.
We're obviously not going to be able to send people to the asteroid belt. So it's either going to happen by a) autonomous robots, or b) human controlled, highly automated robots. If you can think of a 3rd option, let me know. I guess we could just send all the asteroids to the moon and then mine them there, if that's what you're thinking? That would allow us to use humans to mine them.

The concept of automated mining is already in development.
http://ade.sagepub.com/content/7/2/504861.abstract

I'm not claiming that it will be easy, but it's definitely feasible.

 

[anorlunda]

The concept of automated mining is already in development.

Automated mining is not mining plus refining plus manufacturing, nor is it self-repairing or self-powered. Have you thought of the energy required to pulverize 100 tons of ore?

The article you linked is very far from sufficient basis to claim "definitely feasible."

 

[BiGyElLoWhAt]

Well, self-repairing is also a stretch. I really doubt one machine will do all of these things. I bet we could make an automining bot, and I bet we could make an auto refining bot, and I bet we could make (probably several) bots that could repair things. It's not anywhere near, but I have no doubt that it can be done. At that point, the only problem is getting it into space.
As for pulverizing 100 tons of ore, that's not necessarily necessary. Drilling is also a possible option, depending on whether or not the ores run in veins. I'm not sure how much energy it would require, but I'm sure it would be a lot.

 

[mfb]

At that point, the only problem is getting it into space.

Where is the point in putting it into space if you can use it on Earth? A cubic kilometer of randomly sampled soil on Earth has gold with a current market price of $1 billion, and tens of billions if you look in the right places. Unless access to space gets massively cheaper and robots get much more flexible and intelligent, mining on Earth will stay cheaper for quite some time.

 

[BiGyElLoWhAt]

Yes, but that will eventually run out, albeit probably long after I'm dead. We keep growing, which warrants a higher demand for resources, which means that the rate of consumption will also go up. Eventually, it won't be sustainable to keep mining the earth.

 

[russ_watters]

I mean, here's the thing with these price estimates:
With the presumed (relatively) high availability of volatiles on asteroids/comets, the investment would be all in the initial costs. [Snip], and after the initial investment (which will be verrry high), it should be mostly profit.

If that sort of PPM (Perpetual Profit Machine) were possible, people would already be doing it on earth.

After that, any fuel should be able to be extracted on site.

So asteroids have fuel on them now too?! Awesome!

 

[russ_watters]

Yes, but that will eventually run out, albeit probably long after I'm dead. We keep growing, which warrants a higher demand for resources, which means that the rate of consumption will also go up. Eventually, it won't be sustainable to keep mining the earth.

"Eventually". Great. So let's table this issue for now and check back on it in 100 years, when autonomous space mining is technically possible and gold costs a million dollars an ounce.

 

[Hoophy]

So asteroids have fuel on them now too?! Awesome!

Russ Watters, I believe BiGyElLoWhAt was referring to the water ice available on asteroids, he may have meant that some asteroids contain the ingredients (water) for bi-propellant (LOx/LH as I am sure you know) rocket fuel. I understand that it would have been more appropriate for BiGyElLoWhAt to say that some asteroids have suitable reaction mass for spacecraft to refuel with (after the water has been split) I assume (correct me if I am wrong) that rather then calling him out on the statement that some asteroids contain water you were instead calling him out for calling water 'fuel'. I think I understand where BiGyElLoWhAt was coming from, he probably just meant the 'ingredients for rocket fuel'. :)

If that sort of PPM (Perpetual Profit Machine) were possible, people would already be doing it on earth.

I agree, in my opinion bringing resources back to Earth is NOT yet, or soon to be feasible, or even making spacecraft in space for that matter. Luckily water is a bit easier to refine into rocket fuel than trying to process ore into usable building materials.

Edit: In fact, it is my understanding that refueling spacecraft with rocket fuel manufactured IN SPACE is the MAIN draw of interest toward (serious/(maybe) feasible) asteroids mining, Imagine a probe being able to stop and refuel at a 'gas station' on its way to explore the solar system! It would sure cut back on unreasonably large launch stages in some scenarios. (opinion alert) Now to ME that sounds like a sound investment ONCE the technology gets there! Defiantly not mining platinum group metals. :D

 

[lpetrich]

Why LH2/LOX as a rocket propellant?

LH2 has a boiling point of 20 K at 1 bar, and a critical point of 33 K and 13 bar, so it is hard to keep it liquid.
LOX has a boiling point of 90 K at 1 bar, and a critical point of 155 K and 50 bar, so it's easier.
The critical point is where the liquid-gas phase transition disappears. Above its temperature, a substance cannot be liquefied.

Also, the best exhaust velocity that one can do with it is about 4.5 km/s (RD-0146 rocket engine; the Space Shuttle Main Engine and other LH2/LOX engines have similar values). From Tsiolkovsky's rocket equation, one can reduce one's propellant consumption by increasing one's exhaust velocity. That can be done by using an electric rocket engine. The Dawn spacecraft 's NSTAR ion engines can do 30 km/s. A kind of coilgun called a mass driver may be capable of at least 20 km/s.

 

[Hoophy]

Why LH2/LOX as a rocket propellant?

LH2 has a boiling point of 20 K at 1 bar, and a critical point of 33 K and 13 bar, so it is hard to keep it liquid.
LOX has a boiling point of 90 K at 1 bar, and a critical point of 155 K and 50 bar, so it's easier.
The critical point is where the liquid-gas phase transition disappears. Above its temperature, a substance cannot be liquefied.

Also, the best exhaust velocity that one can do with it is about 4.5 km/s (RD-0146 rocket engine; the Space Shuttle Main Engine and other LH2/LOX engines have similar values). From Tsiolkovsky's rocket equation, one can reduce one's propellant consumption by increasing one's exhaust velocity. That can be done by using an electric rocket engine. The Dawn spacecraft 's NSTAR ion engines can do 30 km/s. A kind of coilgun called a mass driver may be capable of at least 20 km/s.

That's a really interesting point! I am now very curious whether or not some asteroids have suitable noble gasses for use in an Ion engine, surely they do, are they easy to extract and purify? Could you use non-noble gas reaction mass in an ion engine as well? I do however have trouble understanding how a rail gun could be used in this situation though because the way I see it (liable to be incorrect of course) you have to manufacture projectiles, which would bring us back to the problem of refining metals in situ... How scalable are ion engines for hypothetical 'large' future space craft? I (unfoundedly) just assumed that ion engines came in small sizes. Now I see the error in my ways. Are ion engines good for moving large payloads with short burns? Is a draw to LOX/LH2 bipropellant the short thrust times? If not why do we still use bipropellant (on probes that is)? Thanks Lpetrich! :)

 

[lpetrich]

About mining robots, I concede that a self-repairing one may be too farfetched. But a community of robots that can repair each other may well be feasible.

But I'd like to see that demonstrated under conditions similar to an asteroid mine. Conditions like having no human assistance outside of communications with about an hour of round-trip time.

 

[lpetrich]

I did some more checking. Dawn has three NSTAR ion engines, and each one has a thrust of 90 milliNewtons. That's enough to lift 9 grams off of the Earth's surface. Dawn's ion engines were run for much of the spacecraft 's mission, going from the Earth first to Vesta, and then to Ceres. The engines also got the spacecraft into orbit around Vesta, out of Vesta orbit, and then into Ceres orbit. However, Dawn was sent into space on a Delta II, a typical chemical-propulsion booster rocket.

As to xenon, it is *not* a very common element in the Solar System: Abundances of the elements (data page) - Wikipedia and my previous links on overall composition. It is also relatively volatile, so the best place to look would likely be in comets. Argon is even more volatile, but there is enough of it in comets to be detected.

As to making projectiles, the solution hit on by Gerard K. O'Neill and others is to use buckets that would interact with the gun coils. These would be filled with material, accelerated, and then decelerated and returned. The material would keep going.

 

[lpetrich]

Variable Specific Impulse Magnetoplasma Rocket - Wikipedia (VASIMR). The most recent model of it is expected to do 50 km/s of exhaust velocity and 5 Newtons of thrust with argon, enough to lift 500 g off the Earth's surface. It has been tested in vacuum chambers on the ground, but still not in space.

 

[mfb]

Why LH2/LOX as a rocket propellant?

LH2/LOx works without needing (significant) additional energy sources. Ion thrusters need some power source - typically photovoltaics - and they produce extremely small thrust limited by that power source.

 

[D H]

So asteroids have fuel on them now too?! Awesome!

Yes. I hinted at that back in post #24 where I wrote "What might be viable in the near-term future is harvesting volatiles such as water and methane from those asteroids and then finding a way to use those volatiles in space." One obvious use is as fuel.

In fact, it's the volatiles rather than the metals that are the low hanging fruit with regard to asteroid mining -- assuming we can find a way to use those volatiles. The mining and refining capabilities aren't near as extensive as would be needed for mining metals. However, In order for those materials to be useful they need to be used in space, and that requires an already existing infrastructure in space. This is a bit of a chicken and egg problem. Those volatiles possibly could be used to bootstrap that infrastructure.

 

[1oldman2]

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-osiris-rex-gears-up-for-3-d-mapping-on-the-fly
And so it begins.

 

[BiGyElLoWhAt]

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-osiris-rex-gears-up-for-3-d-mapping-on-the-fly
And so it begins.

Hey! That's my birthday! Awesome.

 

[1oldman2]

Hey! That's my birthday! Awesome.

Enjoy! (we only get a limited quantity of b-days)

 

[jack476]

Useful for what? Are you proposing that we make spacecraft factories in space? , Electronic chip foundries in space? Suppose you had 100 tons of iron ore in lunar orbit. How would you refine it? What would you do with the refined steel?

I don't know that it would be more cost-effective to set up an entire assembly tower in orbit, but being able to set up some basic infrastructure in space to make simple yet heavy things like structural components might help to greatly reduce the cost of construction in space.

I don't think it's iron & silicon we're after... Those are abundant "useless" minerals. What we want are the moon-sized diamonds floating around out there & the asteroids made of solid platinum.

The point isn't that they're rare, it's that they're heavy and needed in large quantities. The cost of a launch increases exponentially with payload weight, so it might be far more efficient to send up, say, 5 tons of extraction and refining equipment than 100 tons of refined iron and silicon.

As for moons and asteroids made entirely out of diamond and platinum, I don't really know that that would actually be as profitable as it sounds, since the sudden change from being in precious supply to being in effectively infinite supply would crash the price of those minerals to near nothing.

 

[mfb]

The cost of a launch increases exponentially with payload weight

It is not exponential, it is not even linear - it is slower than that. Sending up twice the amount does not cost twice as much.

As for moons and asteroids made entirely out of diamond and platinum, I don't really know that that would actually be as profitable as it sounds, since the sudden change from being in precious supply to being in effectively infinite supply would crash the price of those minerals to near nothing.

It would set the price to the costs to extract the materials. Business as usual - if those costs are below the market prices that we have without asteroid mining.

 

[1oldman2]

I recently came across this, couldn't resist. The links and info available are fascinating.
http://asteroidsathome.net/boinc/

 

[1oldman2]

So here are a few more links involving the topic, I threw in the arXiv link as a demonstration that not everyone agrees with the projections, but there are a lot of optimists doing R&D.
http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2015/11/new-detector-perfect-for-asteroid-mining/
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2016/06/06/luxembourg-mine-asteroids/#.V4B-5DWo3nN


http://arxiv.org/abs/1312.4450

 

[1oldman2]

And another look from a different perspective.

 

[1oldman2]

From, http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-to-map-the-surface-of-an-asteroid

This should be an interesting project to follow.

 

[1oldman2]

It seems as if while others are out chasing asteroids, someone will be digging up Earth's backyard. This should be an interesting test of just how well humans are going to do at sharing extraterrestrial resources.
From, http://www.space.com/33632-moon-express-private-lunar-landing-approval.html

"We're still shooting for the end of 2017," Richards said of the maiden MX-1
moon mission. "A lot has to go right, but at least we have a shot at our moon
shot, given this regulatory approval."

If all goes according to plan, future Moon Express missions will help assess,
extract and exploit lunar resources such as water ice, helping to launch a new
era in space exploration, company representatives have said.

"Space travel is our only path forward to ensure our survival and create a
limitless future for our children," Moon Express co-founder and Chairman
Naveen Jain said in a statement today. "In the immediate future, we envision
bringing precious resources, metals and moon rocks back to Earth. In 15
years, the moon will be an important part of Earth’s economy, and potentially
our second home."

 

[1oldman2]

It's interesting to see this project develop, once it gets into the private sector investor funded stage I expect the pace of tech advancement is going to surprise a lot of people.

I often see references to ARM as being a technology mainly focused on Mars mission preparation and training, While It's obvious some of the tasks would be good experience on a Mars mission, the use of a captured boulder plus the spacecraft s mass to "tractor" a much larger asteroids mass with its gravity is going to be very useful for transporting and processing asteroids etc.

From, http://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasas-asteroid-redirect-mission-completes-robotic-design-milestone
The robotic ARM will demonstrate advanced, high-power,
high-throughput solar electric propulsion; advanced
autonomous high-speed proximity operations at a
low-gravity planetary body; controlled touchdown and liftoff
with a multi-ton mass from a low-gravity planetary body,
astronaut spacewalk activities for sample selection,
extraction, containment and return; and mission operations
of integrated robotic and crewed vehicle stack;all key
components of future in-space operations for human
missions to Mars.

A target asteroid such as 2008 EV5 is particularly
appealing to the scientific, exploration, and industrial
communities because it is a primitive, C-type
(carbonaceous) asteroid, believed to be rich in volatiles,
water, and organic compounds. The ability to extract core
samples from the captured boulder will allow us to evaluate
how its composition varies with depth and could unlock
clues to the origins of our solar system. Astronaut sampling
and potential commercial activities could indicate the value
of C-type asteroids for commercial mining purposes,
which in turn could have significant impacts on how deep
space missions are designed in the future.

 

[Recycler]

I am in no way predicting disaster.I am advocating a lot of caution in these solar-system exploits,especially with for-profit enterprises.Some past examples on Earth of environmental effects:The Columbian Exchange of life between America and Europe;effects of fracking for oil;widespread mercury contamination;unexplained rapid rise of CO2 in the atmosphere.In the Solar System,a shifting dynamic balance based on orbits and gravitational interaction between masses already exists..Shifting enough mass,or bringing significant amounts of water to earth,or bringing enough mined material to have large economic effects,would all change the balance,or status quo,if you wish,The possible results should be carefully considered BEFORE we do it.Just following the profit motive is not very prudent if one wants to be safe.Yes,let's explore,and colonize cautiously-it's a glorious human adventure.Just keep in mind what we've learned,and be wiser than in the past.

 

[Astronuc]

So here are a few more links involving the topic, I threw in the arXiv link as a demonstration that not everyone agrees with the projections, but there are a lot of optimists doing R&D.

With respect to the video by Planetary Resources, "Lewicki’s team has been working on developing a fleet of low-cost spacecraft named Arkyd, equipped with advanced spectral sensors and new technologies for onboard computing. Planetary Resources—which last year deployed a demonstration vehicle into low-Earth orbit to test core avionics, navigation, and computing systems—is soon to deploy another vehicle to test remote sensing capacities. A first prospective mission is planned to take place in a couple of years. The company has also been working on getting its transformative technologies into more immediate markets on Earth through the deployment of Ceres, an orbiting infrared and hyperspectral sensor system that aims to provide information to the oil, gas, and agriculture industries to better manage the natural resources on this planet."
Ref: http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2016/07/looking-space-asteroid-miner
http://www.planetaryresources.com/#home-asteroids

http://www.planetaryresources.com/2015/07/planetary-resources-first- spacecraft -deployed/
http://www.planetaryresources.com/2...nveils-advanced-earth-observation-capability/

There are a lot of paper studies on mining the moon and asteroids. There has been interest for a number of decades, and there is a long way to go.

 

[russ_watters]

With respect to the video by Planetary Resources, "Lewicki’s team has been working on developing a fleet of low-cost spacecraft named Arkyd, equipped with advanced spectral sensors and new technologies for onboard computing. Planetary Resources—which last year deployed a demonstration vehicle into low-Earth orbit to test core avionics, navigation, and computing systems—is soon to deploy another vehicle to test remote sensing capacities...

As a reminder, that "vehicle" is a cubesat, and given the meaningless technobabble description could well have been an iPhone...which I think would fit if you mount it in the cube at an angle (half serious). At that level of commitment, this cannot be considered a real commercial project. It is about at the level of a college project. For example:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAUSAT-II