Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Lunar Mining: The Artemis pacts
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:57 am 
Quote:
The Trump administration is drafting a legal blueprint for mining on the moon under a new U.S.-sponsored international agreement called the Artemis Accords, people familiar with the proposed pact told Reuters. The agreement would be the latest effort to cultivate allies around NASA’s plan to put humans and space stations on the moon within the next decade, and comes as the civilian space agency plays a growing role in implementing American foreign policy. The draft pact has not been formally shared with U.S. allies yet. The Trump administration and other spacefaring countries see the moon as a key strategic asset in outer space. The moon also has value for long-term scientific research that could enable future missions to Mars - activities that fall under a regime of international space law widely viewed as outdated. The Artemis Accords, named after the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s new Artemis moon program, propose “safety zones” that would surround future moon bases to prevent damage or interference from rival countries or companies operating in close proximity. The pact also aims to provide a framework under international law for companies to own the resources they mine, the sources said. In the coming weeks, U.S. officials plan to formally negotiate the accords with space partners such as Canada, Japan, and European countries, as well as the United Arab Emirates, opening talks with countries the Trump administration sees as having “like-minded” interests in lunar mining.
Good moves towards obtaining resources on site for lunar habitations, and perhaps a long term way to reduce mining impacts on Earth. Nothing alive, pollution stays put (no air, wind, water, rivers, etc). Good idea.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker



Joined: 16 Dec 2001
Posts: 23956 | TRs | Pics
Location: Cle Elum
Backpacker Joe
Blind Hiker
PostTue May 12, 2020 5:07 am 
Lunar Leisure Living. Dont people learn anything from Hollywood? https://timemachine.fandom.com/wiki/Great_Lunar_CataclysmTime Machine 2002

"If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen we must live through all time or die by suicide." — Abraham Lincoln
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 8:39 am 
MtnGoat wrote:
Nothing alive, pollution stays put (no air, wind, water, rivers, etc). Good idea.
The Apollo mission returned 842 pounds of lunar material to earth at a program cost of 25.4 billion dollars. Even with a million fold efficiency improvement that works out to $235,000 per pound in today's dollars. Is this some sort of new math?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 9:29 am 
Who knows? That's the interesting part here, amazing things come from trying new approaches and never come from not giving it a shot. Maybe the million fold reduction is too much or too little. Basing cost estimates on govt program cost efficiency for doing highly technical things never done before is likely not the best approach.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 10:25 am 
MtnGoat wrote:
Basing cost estimates on govt program cost efficiency for doing highly technical things never done before is likely not the best approach.
If you want to sign up to be an angel investor in "Trump moon mining" go for it.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
neek
Member
Member


Joined: 12 Sep 2011
Posts: 2329 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle, WA
neek
Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 10:32 am 
This JPL graphic is hilarious: Phase 1: Go to the moon Phase 2: ? Phase 3: Minerals! How do you convert water into rocket fuel - or rather, where does the energy come from? Those vast fossil fuel reserves under the lunar surface? I can't help but think energy will be the limiting factor with any such endeavor. And you'd have to get so much stuff up there to set up any sort of self-sustainnig infrastructure...someone must have done a rough calculation somewhere. Not mocking the idea; I'd love to see it work out, but am highly skeptical. IMO it does make more sense to focus on the moon rather than Mars - walk before you run.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Malachai Constant
Member
Member


Joined: 13 Jan 2002
Posts: 16088 | TRs | Pics
Location: Back Again Like A Bad Penny
Malachai Constant
Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 10:50 am 
If the moon were solid plutonium it might be worthwhile but of course the earth would not exist flammable.gif

"You do not laugh when you look at the mountains, or when you look at the sea." Lafcadio Hearn
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 11:33 am 
neek wrote:
This JPL graphic is hilarious: Phase 1: Go to the moon Phase 2: ? Phase 3: Minerals! How do you convert water into rocket fuel - or rather, where does the energy come from? Those vast fossil fuel reserves under the lunar surface? I can't help but think energy will be the limiting factor with any such endeavor. And you'd have to get so much stuff up there to set up any sort of self-sustainnig infrastructure...someone must have done a rough calculation somewhere. Not mocking the idea; I'd love to see it work out, but am highly skeptical. IMO it does make more sense to focus on the moon rather than Mars - walk before you run.
Often the go to approach for these plans involves the poles where you can find permanent sunshine for solar, which eliminates the intermittency issues found on earth. For non polar locations, the precise timing of the interruptions ameliorates a lot of the issues found on earth as well. There is also the nuclear option which is probably a good one given the lack of an earth environment and thus a lot of the concerns surrounding that issue go away. There are parallel efforts going on for asteroid mining.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 1:01 pm 
More details on opening space mining in general.. https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3932/1

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RodF
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 2593 | TRs | Pics
Location: Sequim WA
RodF
Member
PostTue May 12, 2020 11:52 pm 
neek wrote:
How do you convert water into rocket fuel - or rather, where does the energy come from?
Solar power, to split water either by electrolysis or solar thermal.
neek wrote:
And you'd have to get so much stuff up there to set up any sort of self-sustaining infrastructure...
To transport a self-sustaining manned colony from Earth, sure. But to merely deliver nanobots, which in turn build such an infrastructure in situ from lunar resources, perhaps not?

"of all the paths you take in life, make sure a few of them are dirt" - John Muir "the wild is not the opposite of cultivated. It is the opposite of the captivated” - Vandana Shiva
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11992 | TRs | Pics
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
Member
PostWed May 13, 2020 9:56 am 
Nanobots! I think that will be a while. Getting the legal framework set up will probably predate nanobot delivery by decades. I'll be very interested to see what kind of mining techniques they come up with while overcoming all the challenges like vacuum, the nasty sharp highly abrasive dust (but at least it's super sticky due to static charge), and just plain getting the hardware in place.

Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 7694 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
Faster than light
PostWed May 13, 2020 10:50 am 
neek wrote:
Phase 1: Go to the moon Phase 2: ? Phase 3: Minerals!
I just told my boss I'm working on an underpants gnomes bug and described the fix in exactly those terms.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
forest gnome
Forest nut...



Joined: 24 Apr 2003
Posts: 3518 | TRs | Pics
Location: north cascades!!
forest gnome
Forest nut...
PostFri May 29, 2020 11:00 pm 
What's that crack about my underpants? I'm usually going commando...well on hot days anyway.....tmi?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > Lunar Mining: The Artemis pacts
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum