Mining the Moon - Good or Bad?

LordSplodge · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:19

Mark A said:
I have a feeling it wouldn't be cost effective.

Initially no. But once you have mass driver to launch the ore (Helium 3 mostly) then it runs itself. Capture the loads in earth orbit and drop them down. The ships to load ore onto could be built on the moon herself using local resources so no need for the expense of getting stuff there. The initial investment to get this going is, of course, massive.

Mining asteroids makes more sense though because they're more resource heavy and cheaper to mine. However the Helium 3 on the moon could power earth for millions of years.

So the answer to the OPs son is yes, and it is their generation that should be doing it.

Freefaller · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:22

Glaucus said:
Good luck removing any significant amount. The moon is absolutely massive at roughly 7.3477×10^22 kilograms
In more normal terms.
73.5 million million million metric tonnes.

Okay, but the UK alone has mined over 200 million metric tonnes. However pretty much all of that stays on earth. Add to that the whole world's mining, that is 10s of thousands of million metric tonnes.

The numbers start to clock up - but as you say it will take a while. However, I don't think it is:

a) economically viable
b) ethical
c) causes political issues (who owns the moon?! How are the resources shared?)
d) we should be using our efforts to find alternative ways of recycling minerals and materials
e) sets a dark precedent on how we behave across the galaxy.

I think what would be more sensible would be asteroids I guess - but I also can't help but think what cause/effect scenarios interfering with inter planetary bodies may have?

porushinobu · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:22

LordSplodge said:
Initially no. But once you have mass driver to launch the ore (Helium 3 mostly) then it runs itself. Capture the loads in earth orbit and drop them down. The ships to load ore onto could be built on the moon herself using local resources so no need for the expense of getting stuff there. The initial investment to get this going is, of course, massive.

Mining asteroids makes more sense though because they're more resource heavy and cheaper to mine. However the Helium 3 on the moon could power earth for millions of years.

So the answer to the OPs son is yes, and it is their generation that should be doing it.

could be done with probes i guess, as long as the machines can fashion replacement mining tools etc

LordSplodge · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:23

nkata said:
Deep sea mining is more likely in the shorter time scale.

I'd prefer we didn't mess with our oceans. Also; probably cheaper to mine the moon...there's a reason we have been there more times than the bottom of the ocean.

LordSplodge · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:24

NoNameNoNumber said:
Whats wrong with Earth cheese?

Hard working Earth cheese, none of that immigrant Moon cheese...

NickK · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:26

So the mass of the earth keeps the earth in a stable orbit around the sun.

The mass of the moon keeps the moon in a stable orbit (actually it's slowly moving away) that governs the tides which a lot of nature needs.

So taking mass from the moon and putting it on the earth is probably not a good idea. Same with other solar mining.

Glaucus · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:27

Freefaller said:
Okay, but the UK alone has mined over 200 million metric tonnes. However pretty much all of that stays on earth. Add to that the whole world's mining, that is 10s of thousands of million metric tonnes.

The numbers start to clock up - but as you say it will take a while. However, I don't think it is:

a) economically viable
b) ethical
c) causes political issues (who owns the moon?! How are the resources shared?)
d) we should be using our efforts to find alternative ways of recycling minerals and materials
e) sets a dark precedent on how we behave across the galaxy.

I think what would be more sensible would be asteroids I guess - but I also can't help but think what cause/effect scenarios interfering with inter planetary bodies may have?

It will become economical viable. Most people in this thread are focusing about bringing the resources back to earth, that isn't what is going to happen to start with. It only has to be economical compared to launching it from earth. Which is why several companies are already set up and in development. Although most skip the moon and go straight for asteroids.

It's only a medium term solution we may skip altogether. As asteroids are far better, however they need their orbits relocating, which makes it harder than the moon.
So although mining on earth has mounted up, it is unlikely to be the same on the moon, at least to transport it off. If we build colonise their then we could do large mining, but most would stay on the moon anyway.

I can't see what ethical reason you could purpose for not doing it.

We are focusing on how to recycle, it makes little sense to bring most minerals back to space, it's not one or the other, it's not even we have to use space resources on earth.

I don't see how it's a bad precedent.

markweatherill · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:36

Formula 1 has a lot of money, as does Sky TV. Forget mining or whatever, I suggest a round of the F1 season could be staged on the moon.

LordSplodge · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:36

Freefaller said:
a) economically viable
b) ethical
c) causes political issues (who owns the moon?! How are the resources shared?)
d) we should be using our efforts to find alternative ways of recycling minerals and materials
e) sets a dark precedent on how we behave across the galaxy.

A: Not now but will soon be...
B: Nobody lives there. If it is used for the good of all then it is ethically fine in my eyes.
C: This would be an issue.
D: We should be using resources to find a way of living off-world.
E: All these worlds are ours (well except Europa, attempt no landings there) so why shouldn't we use them?

Freefaller · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:37

Stripping resources from other planets?

Besides people are greedy and will start to exploit the mining opportunities.

I see the future as having very little mining at all, and most minerals/materials are able to be created. Of course a long way down the future.

I understand the interest in mining in terms of understand the make up of planets and other astral bodies, that's a bit different.

MooMoo444 · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:37

markweatherill said:
Formula 1 has a lot of money, as does Sky TV. Forget mining or whatever, I suggest a round of the F1 season could be staged on the moon.

Getting there would still be easier than getting to Silverstone.

Freefaller · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:38

markweatherill said:
Formula 1 has a lot of money, as does Sky TV. Forget mining or whatever, I suggest a round of the F1 season could be staged on the moon.

Low G racing! How awesome would that be? Or can you imagine golf? 3000 yard drive!

Glaucus · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:38

What is unethethical about removing resources from other planets?

LordSplodge · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:41

Freefaller said:
Stripping resources from other planets?

Besides people are greedy and will start to exploit the mining opportunities.

There's enough resources out there that we could do it without stripping planets clean. Mankind's greed is a issue we need to grow out of, but our current Capitalist mantra says greed is good.

Freefaller said:
Low G racing! How awesome would that be? Or can you imagine golf? 3000 yard drive!

Wouldn't work on the moon though unless you used electric cars.

Glaucus · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:43

LordSplodge said:
Wouldn't work on the moon though unless you used electric cars.

Just replace turbo with a large bottle of liquid oxygen and upgrade injectors to cope with it.

Freefaller · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:43

LordSplodge said:
A: Not now but will soon be...
B: Nobody lives there. If it is used for the good of all then it is ethically fine in my eyes.
C: This would be an issue.
D: We should be using resources to find a way of living off-world.
E: All these worlds are ours (well except Europa, attempt no landings there) so why shouldn't we use them?

I understand things will become more viable in time form an economic point of view, but what does mining the moon actually provide? I agree if we have a colony there then the resources can be used for that colony.

Agreed about being used for the right reasons I have no issues with that. But humans aren't all decent, and people get greedy.

D) I agree entirely about developing the next leap in human off world living. We've got a way to go for the tech to do this but I think it is the correct next step. And I guess mining within a colony to make itself self sustaining is sensible - however we don't know what mining another planet may do? That said, it is important to do SOME mining to discover more about those planets.

E) none of the worlds are ours. Earth is shared by everyone, but we're so bad at sharing we've created "countries" to make the sharing official. The other planets around the solar system or the universe aren't ours. Sure we've identified them and they are "ours" from our perception, but they aren't really ours are they?

Freefaller · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:45

LordSplodge said:
There's enough resources out there that we could do it without stripping planets clean. Mankind's greed is a issue we need to grow out of, but our current Capitalist mantra says greed is good.

If we can do ethically and sensibly - yes. Unfortunately we're pretty selfish beings

Wouldn't work on the moon though unless you used electric cars.

I didn't say they had to be petrol powered

Glaucus · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:47

Whos are they then? Of course they are ours. There's no other live in the solar system that we know off. If we find life, even basic life, then yes I would agree massive ethical issues, but moon/mars etc, there is no issue. They are no less ours than the rest of the world where, when we were confined to Africa.

And mining it isn't going to do anything, the weight change is non existence, there's no ecosystems, no life nothing to put an ethical objection forward.

And it's more than just a colony on the surface. Mining can open up entire space resources for use in space.
As said refuelling satellites, space stations, building solar power plants that beam energy down.

Build massive craft capable of going to closest stars within a human lifespan (robotic)

mid_gen · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:51

The biggest issue is international cooperation. I'm not familiar with the current state of the law regarding mineral rights on extra-terrestrial bodies. I suspect the China moon rover wasn't just a publicity stunt in that regard!

Glaucus · 5 Mar 2015 at 12:52

mid_gen said:
The biggest issue is international cooperation. I'm not familiar with the current state of the law regarding mineral rights on extra-terrestrial bodies. I suspect the China moon rover wasn't just a publicity stunt in that regard!

Basically there isn't any.
If you want to go mine the moon or something else go do it. You'll only be constrained by the law of the country you launch from and Inexpert most won't care, unless they think other countries will put them under sanctions. But there's no treaties to implement such sanctions.