Which object in our solar system has the most interesting resources to mine?
Neptune is too cold. Mars? Some moon? An asteroid?
(3 votes)
Loading...
(3 votes)Loading...
(3 votes)Loading...Similar Posts
What would happen if it was daytime on the way there and nighttime on the arrival?
Do you just see a black wall, so to speak?
Why is there such a blue shimmer around it?
Maybe a very stupid question, but who cares? Here are two pictures. Just asking for an explanation. (not a conspiracy theory)
Do you know why there are northern lights over Germany at night?
ByKerner
Hello, AURORA BORALIS Polar or Northern Lights appear, as the name suggests, in the far north. Suddenly they are visible all the way to the Alps. Is this a sign of imminent disaster? A natural spectacle? Or what do you think? Hansi
Interstellar question?
Hi, time travel into the future is theoretically possible. In Interstellar, they land on Miller's planet for three hours, and one guy stays behind in the spaceship. So, 21 years pass for him. Now my question: what would the image look like if they both saw each other? Let's assume the guy in the spaceship…
Right now? The Moon: Helium-3. This would be suitable as fuel for interplanetary space flights, and significantly reduce travel time to the planets. It would also be the only raw material whose degradation could be realistically possible at least in the next 50 years, because the moon is our closest companion.
In the next 50 years, too, a) would be too expensive and b) is not a drive with nuclear fusion even in view.
That’s why could be written. I also realise that this would be very ambitious. But maybe Einstein 2.0 is going to school somewhere?
The object with the most easily and economically degradable resources is the planet Earth.
From the other planets I see Mars most interesting. It is the only planet on which we can build permanently habitable habitats with relatively little effort. Here we have mainly both heavy elements (iron!) but also light elements (carbon, oxygen,…). These are more valuable than the heavy elements in most regions outside the world due to constant losses from stations of volatile substances (which can be minimized but cannot be prevented).
In the inner solar system there are only 2 moons: Phobos and Daimos. Due to their extreme proximity to Mars, frequent heavy earthquakes can be expected, making them unattractive for larger mining. The moons around the planets of the outer solar system get so little sunlight that in most cases the energy supplies would be very difficult to ensure.
Most other small bodies are farther from Earth than the Mars meteorite belt). Neither are the precious light substances available, nor can the energy supply be ensured.
And the moon? Here too there are little light substances. However, it is the only body that is so close that a use of raw materials for transport to Earth could be useful. In order to justify economically necessary landing and start operations, the substance should be extremely valuable. For pure building material (metals etc.), a maximum of a transfer into the earth’s orbit could be useful, but then in a processed state. To carry out this on the moon (or an orbit) should require very elaborate facilities that I no longer see this century.
The only valuable substance on the moon that is called more frequently is He3. The concentration is 1000 times higher than on Earth. Nevertheless, the concentration is still very low and the extraction would be very expensive. The technologies to be used for a complete dismantling chain would be so expensive and uncertain (there could be a lot of things happening that something no longer works smoothly, which is hardly to be repaired in the environment), that the economic benefits are hardly to be achieved. Of course, there are still thoughts – it is exciting to plan something like this on the tearboard. But this is also certainly not to be done economically in our lifetimes.
Asteroids because they are rich in materials, but they do not have to be shot into an orbit. Still close to the future (+50-100 years), but it will come
With gas planets, you can’t waste anything that’s gas. Asteroid mountaineering has actually been considered, because asteroids contain very many metals that are useful to us.
There is actually an asteorid named (16) Psychology, which contains a huge amount of iron and nickel. The value is estimated at 10 trillion dollars. That would be $1.3 billion per Earth’s.
However, a mission to reduce metals present on 16 psyches would probably not be worthwhile. The asteroid is located between 300 and 500 million km from Earth, which would involve immense costs for promotion.
Ahja. But if there is such a huge amount, it will be more worthless and not 10 trillion dollars? Okay, except in a massive US dollar inflation sometime in the future. 😀
That is precisely why the promotion would not be worthwhile. In addition, the whole economic system would be confused.
no one since the resources are to come more expensive than what it is, so far there has been nothing spanning.
Apart from the sun, we can catch them by solar system.
Otto Normal consumer. According to the mental gravitational law, money always flows from stupid to smart, which are resources without end.
The Moon and various asteroids