[ExI] Mining the Sky SL Talk I gave today

[David Lubkin]

Samantha wrote:

>We already sorta have this ability.  See Project Thor from the 60s 
>for a simple but deadly lesser application.  Hooking some thrusters 
>to a rock after despinning it and aiming reasonably well aren't that 
>hard.  Of course reasonably well for something like this may be in a 
>radius of miles where Thor was from very low orbiting satellites and 
>the spears had tail fins and some primitive control structures.  So 
>it isn't a terribly deadly weapon compared to nukes and a rather 
>pricey way to get that much effect.  At least for now.  Now big mass 
>drivers on the moon slinging well designed hunks of material along 
>known trajectories (Moon is a Harsh Mistress) may be another 
>story.  Dunno.  It is something to think about but the payoff and 
>the need is much much greater than this danger.

You assume rationality. The perception of threat might be greater than
even Adrian and Stuart have imagined.

(There's been some interesting work on the gulfs (as much as factors
of 10^6) between actual risk and perception of risk. I could post refs if
anyone cares about the subject.)

I discussed asteroid mining with a friend once, who was convinced that
anyone seriously attempting to redirect an asteroidal mass to our
vicinity (e.g., within a light-second) would be killed. That governments
would treat it as a terrorist action, without regard to the payoff or
negligible risks.

On the other hand, we have aspects of genetic engineering, the Large
Hadron Collider, etc., that were able to proceed, in spite of trumpeting
of nightmare scenarios.

*I've* found asteroid mining obvious and compelling since the space
industrialization work of the 70's, but I find all sorts of things obvious
and compelling that most people find loony.

(Thankfully I have so many fellow nutters, especially here.)

I guess the answer lies in being able to adapt the development plan
to a range of values for political or legal constraints.

The kick-start idea as we've been discussing it assumes that an
inbound package of bulk materials includes only components that
can be fabricated with space-derived materials by tele-operation or
autonomous robotics (e.g., a stone or iron shell, a deposited reflective
coating) or that were brought up from Earth but are small, sturdy,
and light (e.g., some form of transponder).

What if material descent must adhere to existing norms for human
flight return? Does that kill the idea? What if nothing can be brought
closer than the lunar radius, or only by powered (or even manned)
flight?

Conversely, if constraints are loosened, can the business smoothly
adapt to take advantage? (If not, a second mover might be the
winner, by avoiding the costs sunk by the first up.)


-- David.