The prospect of people settling away from Earth has been a topic for dreamers and visionaries for some time. But if it’s ever to happen for real, there needs to be more than starry-eyed optimism. There needs to be a business model, and ways of supporting the colonists.
The business model exists, and it’s one we’ve tried before. When Europe colonised the Americas (from 1492 onwards), it was the potential for mining which drew the colonists. Hernán Cortés’ conquest of Mexico and Francisco Pizarro’s of the Inca empire were partially about land they were annexing for Spain, but more important was the gold and other riches that could be extracted from that land. A similar opportunity exists in space, without the bloodshed of those conquests.
In 2012, the US-based company Planetary Resources was set up as a new venture to mine asteroids for water, rare minerals and other high-value materials. The gold we use on Earth is believed to have come from asteroids and was not on the earth when it was molten, and objects the size of planets have been discovered which are mainly diamond.
A rival to Planetary Resources, Deep Space Industries, is due to launch next week, looking for platinum.
On the moon, it is possible to mine water, but possibly the most useful resource is Helium-3, very rare on Earth but comparatively abundant on the moon. It can be used in fusion reactors.
The first uses for these mining applications would in fact not be to return them to Earth for exploitation, but to aid in other space activities, such as “refuelling” satellites or missions going further afield, such as to Mars. The colonists will need oxygen and water – not as dazzling as gold and diamonds, but more valuable. Oxygen and water can be extracted by mining and chemically processing the dust.
Of course, there are many barriers to setting up a mining operation in space. Machinery must be designed to work with different types of soils, in zero or low gravity. Automation of that equipment must be such that it needs little intervention from Earth. That automated equipment must be able to position itself without GPS. And it all must work first time, after exhaustive simulation on Earth.
Further, there are the legal issues – who owns those resources? Are existing treaties robust enough? How do you secure your mine? And there are the economics: how well has the geology been studied? Are you mining in the right place? Can a return be guaranteed?
These and many other related issues will be discussed at the Off-Earth Mining Forum, hosted by the Australian Centre for Space Engineering Research (of which I’m the director) at the University of New South Wales on February 20 and 21.
This is the first forum of its type in Australia, and possibly the world. The forum will allow the blue (black?) sky researchers to test their ideas with hard-headed miners. The extreme needs of space may well produce useful outcomes for terrestrial mining, particularly in the area of automation. There is also a logic to its being held in Australia.
It allows an industry where Australia is a world leader – mining – to assist in developing an area where Australia is weak – upstream space systems development. At a time when the Federal Government is preparing to release a national space policy, bold new initiatives like this can bring partnerships and business opportunities.
The Australia in the Asian Century white paper set the goal of lifting Australia’s productivity into the global top ten by 2025. A recent report from the UK has shown that mining and space are numbers one and three in terms of productivity by sector.
Mining is already well-developed in Australia, but improving its productivity has been a subject for recent debate. Australia developing upstream space capability will also be a strong driver to delivering the higher productivity the government seeks.
There are various estimates of when the first off-Earth mine will be established. Some say within a decade.
Whenever it is, it is highly likely it will be the next significant step in our colonisation of space.
Jeremy Bradley
Farmer
The main objection that I have to space exploration (or exploitation), via the current technology, is that it consumes huge amounts of time, effort and non renewable resource. And what about the potential damage to the atmosphere that is the common property of all living things. Let's learn to live on earth first.
Stephen John Ralph
carer
Oh sure - let's wreck another planet or two..................we need to fill in a few holes before we dig some more.
Tee Kay
Conservationist, Author, Children's Edutainer
What an absolutely ridiculous concept!
Have we not learned anything from the exploitation of Earth? If industry cannot get it right here where we can, supposedly, police them how can we expect any better of them once they leave Earth's atmosphere?
It only takes a look at the photo on this page titled "NASA crashes space junk into the moon to save lunar heritage sites" to see an example that humans would much rather spread a debris field, containing who knows what contaminants, across the Moon's surface rather than accept responsibility in cleaning up after themselves properly. If NASA feel that they can get away with such things imagine what mining companies will try.
Forth Sadler
logged in via Facebook
I'm wondering whay the actual issue here is. Debris fields containing "contaminants" are generally considered to be a problem because of their impact on the local biosphere. Unless you know something the rest of us don't, that's unlikely to be an issue on the moon. Why should we actually be concerned about lunar mining tailings?
Sean Lamb
Science Denier
I think we will be exploiting the golfing opportunities on the moon before we begin exploiting the mining.
Sean Manning
Physicist
WOW! I am staggered at the short sightedness by the commenters so far. I am fairly certain that they have none of the required background info required to even hold a valid opinion. So I don't despair, too much.
I think it is fantastic that there are people such as you pushing for Australia to participate in space mining. The need is obvious, the benefits are enormous and the prospect is exciting.
Thank you.
Michael Lardelli
logged in via Facebook
Yet another energy-blind article about exploiting space. The author lists a host of barriers to be overcome before we are mining rocks in space but misses the biggest barrier of all, the energy barrier! Any space mining activities become ridiculously uneconomic if the energy cost is considered. Take mining Helium-3 for example. If we had fusion power reactors (which we dont) it is difficult to believe that there would be any energy profit in flying to the moon and back (with associated embodied energy…
Read moreDelete this account as requested!
logged in via email @iinet.net.au
Michael, simple answer is to build your first hypothetical fusion reactor on the moon and use it to power a base, mining operations and a linear accelerator firing the payload back down to an energy starved earth.
You don't need to move everything, every time. More realistically you simply move asteroids into a lagrange point in orbit and mine them close earth. Or even longer term simply build space habitats.
It's just large scale engineering and we can do this, everything we need is there.
Not all of us believe it's necessary to stay at the bottom of a single gravity well for the entire of humanity's existence.
Space expansion is a long term goal we *have to have*!
Without it our decline and extinction (and that of the many more species we take with us) is guaranteed from what we currently know.
Michael Lardelli
logged in via Facebook
"Simply" this and "simply" that. Anything is "simple" with enough energy but that is just the point. I would like to see humanity expand into space as well but we simply cannot until we solve our energy, population and other resource issues down here in the gravity well. That's the simple, (if unpleasant) truth. Anytthing else is simply a daydream....
Delete this account as requested!
logged in via email @iinet.net.au
I agree, we can't solve them just here. Too many people, too few resources. Expansion outwards until we find a better way of doing things.
Once you're at the top of the gravity well, with established colonies, you can drop resources back down to the stay at homes. We know the resources are out there, we know how to find and move them where we need them.
Break the problem down into small chunks and it is 'simply'. It's just having the will to do it. That's why I'm grateful for people like…
Read moreColin Samundsett
retired BSurv
Space-mining? Another out-of-body experience! Instead of dreaming, it would be more productive to learn to live within the renewable resources on our planet. As a stepping-stone to extra-terrestrial colonization - what a wonderful idea:
Read moreWith a load of 7 billion people the Earth is groaning and its resources, which underpin human civilization ,are being ever-more rapidly depleted with the current load. If current civilization is to survive, the pressure has to be eased.
Being bonked by an asteroid…
Nigel Catchlove
logged in via Facebook
Positioning without GPS - easy. See Locata http://www.locatacorp.com/ an Australian invention. Unique and more accurate than GPS
Andrew Dempster
Professor, School of Surveying & Spatial Information Systems at University of New South Wales
As you can find out at the forum (see speaker 11: http://www.acser.unsw.edu.au/oemf/presentations.html)
George Naumovski
Online Political Activist
It is not the same as “colonising” other parts of the Earth. First of all there is air, water and food which we need to survive; secondly we did not need special protective clothing!
If we were ever going to colonise space or other planets, it would need to be done by the people/governments because if it’s up to the businesses elites they would only do it if there is a massive profit to be made. I love this space and scifi stuff but I think we need to fix where we are now instead of looking elsewhere!
Delete this account as requested!
logged in via email @iinet.net.au
All of these things are simply engineering problems to be solved, most of which there are already suggested solutions in existence. All the elements are out there in abundance.
If we focus purely on the now then we never solve anything, just react to problems beyond our control.
There is no such thing as renewable, the 2nd law of thermodynamics knocks that into a cocked hat. It's wishful thinking and marketing. Staying earth-bound is simply dooming humanity in the long run, all those resources are finite. To those of use with a spirit/desire/genetic predilection to adventure it's hardly an ethical or moral choice to chain us to your sides.
Non est ad astra mollis e terris via - but it's still worth trying!
Tim Scanlon
Debunker
I'm struggling to see how this could ever be cost and energy efficient.
Recycling near Earth debris and on Earth waste would make more sense.
That said, if we are to journey amongst the stars, mining will have to be part of what drives us outward from our planet.
Mat Hardy
Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University
The business model of colonising and exploiting the Americas depended on two renewable resources:
1) Wind power to drive ships in each direction.
2) Slave or near-slave labour.
Bronislaw Tabaczynski
Senior Travel Consultant
And today :
1) For energy you have solar panels that would provide energy for a space processing plant and,
2) You have remote controlled robots that would do the mining.
The US Dep of Energy has also commenced research into a small "suitcase sized nuclear plant" with a power output of 40 killowatts. I am not sure though if this is the thermal or electrical output, but a link is shown below : http://www.space.com/12769-nuclear-reactors-mars-moon-colonies.html
Bronislaw Tabaczynski
Senior Travel Consultant
One of the critical factors in allowing any such mining and colonization process to be profitable is the cost of entry into space. At 20,000 to 30,000 USD per kg to geostationary orbit the costs are currently prohibitive. There have however been recent advances in producing carbon nanotube fibers by a team at Rice University in the US that may allow, if they prove to be sufficiently strong to be used, to finally commence work on the almost mythical "Space Elevator". A very good book was written on…
Read moreMichael Buet
VP of Engineering
GREAT ARTICLE!!!
Read moreAs for the comments I saw, please remember that if the dinosaurs had had a Space Program, they would still be here... And that the Earth has been hit MANY TIMES with "Planet Killer" asteroids: Staying at the bottom of our little gravity well is not an option if we want our children's children to survive!!! And by the way, that 7 Billion people of today is growing asymptotically as we speak...Check this website and many others on the same topic to verify: http://www.susps.org…
Grant Musgrove
Director
Is the rate of use of finite resources here a moral issue than climate change. Can we adapt to one, but not the other? By recovering existing resources we might be much more efficient and sustainable.
Michael Buet
VP of Engineering
Of course it is a moral issue, you are correct: Read The Free Rider Theory - It covers the subject quite well - And consider that a "planet killer" asteroid is far from the only very likely event that can eliminate all species on Earth: Think volcanic eruptions of the size of Iceland or just Yellowstone's super volcanos!!! And also think about this: We are pumping over 90,000,000 barrels of oil EVERYDAY out of the Earth, plus I don't know how much natural gas and other "goodies" we "need…
Read more