Selling Mines for Fun and Profit

[Boxy]

Suppose that the mission to retrieve an asteroid and tow it to LEO is successful. Assume, for the sake of argument, that the act of manipulating that much mass for specifically commercial purposes empowers a legal claim to that asteroid as a whole. Our venture, though eager and adventurous, could not possibly hope to exploit all of the resources on that asteroid all by ourselves. One possible means of recouping our losses, short of selling minerals ourselves, is to sell plots of land to mining consortiums so that they can exploit it and develop space alongside us.

What think you, gentle Earthlings?

[Rhyshaelkan]

Personally I am still iffy about moving an object of that size so close to home.

But for the sake of argument.

Moving an asteroid for such easy access of others might have other boons. If other organizations did not want to use tele-operated mining robots and sent a manned mission. Then we could sell them volatiles(primarily water) to help support their mining efforts.

What do you do if they do not respect mining rights?

Legal battles to impose sanctions against governments, companies, organizations that violate said claims.

Could revert to the wild west of space. But there were 'shootin's and claim-jumpings. :D

Could get messy, and not in a good way.

[Sam Fraser]

Yes, I agree with Rhyshaelkan about the "iffy" factor. I don't think towing the entire rock is necessary and that would take many years for even minor course corrections. Even a 100m asteroid is a heck of a lot of mass! Processing and fabricating on site and sending off products/materials periodically makes more sense to me. Of course, there's nothing to stop us doing both, I suppose: in-situ processing and orbital adjustment.

[Rhyshaelkan]

Well I got to thinking. If you could find an asteroid of the correct type. One that has the materials we want to sell, selling is chief for the start. One that has materials that can be turned into some sort of fuel. Then perhaps bringing it to LEO or EML1 might not be a terrible idea.

NASA makes rendezvous today within a second of estimated time. Those are good estimates in my book. However calculating the true weight of an asteroid might prove more daunting. If you could though, then I do not see why it should not work.

The problem I do see with mining asteroids as opposed to mining Luna. Is the length of transmission. It would not be cost effective to send a manned mission to mine. Paying greats costs in mass, for radiation shielding as well as life-support. That leaves you with two choices. Automated miners. Or bringing the mine closer to Terra so one could use tele-operated miners from the safety of an office.

[joertexas]

Well I got to thinking. If you could find an asteroid of the correct type. One that has the materials we want to sell, selling is chief for the start. One that has materials that can be turned into some sort of fuel. Then perhaps bringing it to LEO or EML1 might not be a terrible idea.

NASA makes rendezvous today within a second of estimated time. Those are good estimates in my book. However calculating the true weight of an asteroid might prove more daunting. If you could though, then I do not see why it should not work.

The problem I do see with mining asteroids as opposed to mining Luna. Is the length of transmission. It would not be cost effective to send a manned mission to mine. Paying greats costs in mass, for radiation shielding as well as life-support. That leaves you with two choices. Automated miners. Or bringing the mine closer to Terra so one could use tele-operated miners from the safety of an office.

The overall plan is for people to live in space, so remote operation is neither necessary nor desirable.

JR

[Rhyshaelkan]

The overall plan is for people to live in space,
JR

This is entirely true. And something to which I greatly look forward. However on the first few missions I would not agree that a human presence is a forgone conclusion. We will have to weight the costs, benefits, and risks involved.

[joertexas]

This is entirely true. And something to which I greatly look forward. However on the first few missions I would not agree that a human presence is a forgone conclusion. We will have to weight the costs, benefits, and risks involved.

The main argument in favor of human explorers is that they can do so much more than an automated craft. Look at Spirit, the Mars Rover that's stuck in the sand. It's a capable craft, but it's been stymied by a simple obstacle.

JR