- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
28 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadOk well according to their estimates [ http://www.planetaryresources.com/asteroids/composition/ ]
No, I am not convinced. Just telling me how big the asteroid is tells me nothing.
What I want to know is if we chopped off one metric ton of the asteroid, could it be brought down to earth and what would it cost to do so? What percentage of that chunk would be valuable material and what would it be worth? What would refining it in space cost and what wou y to bring the whole asteroid back to earth, so the total size of the asteroid is not relevant.
they expect that "In space, a single platinum-rich 500 meter wide asteroid contains about 174 times the
yearly world output of platinum, and 1.5 times the known world-reserves of platinum group metals
(ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, osmium, iridium, and platinum). This amount is enough to fill a basketball
court to four times the height of the rim."
Using the materiel here http://www.indexmundi.com/minerals/?product=platinum&graph=production
I estimate that the annual Platinum production is 192,428 kg worldwide.
Multiplied by the stated factor of 174 that's 33,482,472 kg in a 500m Platinum rich asteroid.
Assuming that it has a comparable density to the 270 m asteroid I talked about in my previous post that
works out at a percentage of platinum of about 0.0195%.
So your 1 metric ton of roid would contain about 0.2 Kg of platinum.
Which values at less than $10k USD http://www.dendritics.com/scales/metal-calc.asp?WeightU=0.195&Units=kg&Metal=Pt&PurityC=1.000&Purity=1&PrOzt=&Markup=0
So you have a platinum value of optimistically $8k per ton asteroid.
So your maths needs to factor in the cost of dropping the 999.8 Kg of other stuff (a lot of which is water/ice ore iron and silicon)
Now of course there are other precious metals in their other than platinum, but in pretty much equally titchy quantities.
The cost per Kg put into LEO atm is over the $10k mark.
Unless you are building the heat shields out of the materiel the roid is made from which would require refining it anyway you
are faced with the bill for lifting all that shielding into space.
Do you think you can make a heat shield capable of withstanding re-entry for less than 1 kg per ton payload?
If not then it's going to cost you more to launch the heatsheilds than you are likely to make out of the asteroid minerals.
And I remind you again that the stuff you leave in space is incredibly useful and valuable.
That same $10K cost per kg lifting mass into space makes the mass left in space intrinsically valuable because its materiel
you can build stuff out of that you don't have to haul up into space.
The ice you can use for drinking water, and split into hydrogen and oxygen for breathing air, heat, power, and propulsion.
The rest can be used for construction.
Assuming that a generous 1% of the asteroid is valuable rare earth/platinum metals that leaves about 170 million tons left
in orbit [based on a 500m asteroid of similar density to the 270m one in my last post] which would cost around 2 trillion USD
to put into LEO if you had to launch it from the earth.
So refining in orbit is definitely the way to go.
28 Apr 12
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThe difference would be the amount of rare earths and platinum, palladium, gold and such that accumulates in very large concentrations in asteroids, light gravity means such heavy metals don't get drawn down to the center of the planet or planetoid so the top layers of the asteroid would be heavy metal rich. It is said there is more platinum in a single asteroid than all the mines in the world produce.
When I read about the project it seemed utterly pointless to me (well, apart from doing it just for the technological challenge). How can mining on an asteroid possibly be more efficient than mining on Earth?
It's a great prize if we can get there, preferably with robots.
29 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by googlefudgeThis assumes that the platinum in the asteroid is evenly distributed with all of the other materials, which I highly doubt would be the case in reality.
I estimate that the annual Platinum production is 192,428 kg worldwide.
Multiplied by the stated factor of 174 that's 33,482,472 kg in a 500m Platinum rich asteroid.
Assuming that it has a comparable density to the 270 m asteroid I talked about in my previous post that
works out at a percentage of platinum of about 0.0195%.
So your 1 metric ton of roid would contain about 0.2 Kg of platinum.
I would think you could find the platinum-rich portions of the asteroid, hack those out, and just send that down to earth. That would limit the total mass needing to be taken out of orbit, and allow a fairly complex refining process to be performed in the safely of earth atmosphere.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
30 Apr 12
Originally posted by forkedknightHmmm, see the trouble with this is that while it is certainly true that the element distribution
This assumes that the platinum in the asteroid is evenly distributed with all of the other materials, which I highly doubt would be the case in reality.
I would think you could find the platinum-rich portions of the asteroid, hack those out, and just send that down to earth. That would limit the total mass needing to be taken out of orbit, and allow a fairly complex refining process to be performed in the safely of earth atmosphere.
will not be completely even, It is not true that it will be significant concentrated either.
All the elements in the solar system heavier than hydrogen and possibly helium come from the
remnants of a supernova explosion.
This explosion will have left a giant cloud of gas which slowly cooled contracted and condensed
and formed this solar system.
The elements in this solar system will have started off being pretty well evenly mixed.
Here on earth we don't see an even mix of materials because of a whole host of processes that
separate them out.
First off the earth is big enough that the release of gravitational potential energy from it's formation
melted it which allowed heavy elements and chemical compounds to sink and the light ones rise to the
surface thus stratifying the elements.
So much so that in fact some elements became so rare that they are only found in anything vaguely
like mineable quantities in asteroid craters.
You also then have things like water action where high temp and pressure water seeping through rocks
concentrates various chemicals in cracks and crevices creating seems of concentrated ore.
None of which apply to small asteroids which have no liquid water and never have and have not got enough
gravity to have ever liquefied and stratified.
So they will in fact have a fairly even distribution of elements throughout it's volume.
Also once you start 'hacking it about' in space you are already most of the way to refining it in space.
30 Apr 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeMy understanding is that asteroids that have fallen to earth have been of various varieties with different compositions. If a large asteroid is a result of multiple asteroids coming together, I see no reason why they should be uniform in content.
The elements in this solar system will have started off being pretty well evenly mixed.
30 Apr 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeThanks for the analysis. I didn't realise it was such a tiny percentage of valuable material that we wanted.
So refining in orbit is definitely the way to go.
I still think that the mining would be done best by robots. It would probably be a case of dig out a big chunk, put it in the 'refinery' which just melts it all down and then separates the various materials.
If water is a significant proportion of the material, then once could just melt that off and send what remains to earth.
I guess it would be more complicate if blasting is required.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
30 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by twhitehead
My understanding is that asteroids that have fallen to earth have been of various varieties with different compositions. If a large asteroid is a result of multiple asteroids coming together, I see no reason why they should be uniform in content.
_____________________________________________
Thanks for the analysis. I didn't realise it was such a d send what remains to earth.
I guess it would be more complicate if blasting is required.
Originally posted by twhitehead
My understanding is that asteroids that have fallen to earth have been of various varieties with different compositions. If a large asteroid is a result of multiple asteroids coming together, I see no reason why they should be uniform in content.
_____________________________________________
Thanks for the analysis. I didn't realise it was such a tiny percentage of valuable material that we wanted.
I still think that the mining would be done best by robots. It would probably be a case of dig out a big chunk, put it in the 'refinery' which just melts it all down and then separates the various materials.
If water is a significant proportion of the material, then once could just melt that off and send what remains to earth.
I guess it would be more complicate if blasting is required.
Yes indeed asteroids do come in varying compositions and the asteroid mining people were talking about a certain class of asteroid
M or metal rich asteroids.
The different types of asteroids reflect their varying histories and formations.
For example asteroids that formed closer in to the solar system tend to be water poor relative to those in the outer system (comets
frankly) because when the sun turned on it blew allot of the light gasses out of the inner solar system.
Also there is a difference between asteroids that slowly built up by dust accretion and those formed by planetoids colliding and blasting
themselves apart.
And many/most/some asteroids are probably conglomerations of bits formed many different ways and are really just loose piles of rubble
coated in dust and held together by it's weak gravity.
However my point was that unlike on earth where you often find veins of concentrated minerals that you follow and mine,
what you get is bulk materials with varying concentrations of desirable mineral in them.
Because the various mechanisms that concentrate the minerals on the earth (water and volcanic action) don't exist on asteroids.
So you might well have icy bits with low concentrations and rocky bits with higher concentrations, but that still doesn't get you very far
in terms of reducing the amount you need to send down to earth if you don't refine in orbit.
I agree that the mining should/will be done by robots.
However I still think that the mining operations would probably be monitored and overseen by people on-site in a nearby space station.
That can maintain 24/7 near instantaneous communication with the asteroid being mined and in the event that something breaks down
that can't be repaired remotely can be dealt with by a human without having to launch them from earth.
I also think this is desirable because you are not just mining the asteroid you are also then taking the stuff you don't want to bring down to
earth and constructing things (spaceships and habitats) out of it.
Which is a complex process that is not yet fully automateable.
And don't be so hasty to evaporate off that water.
It's not very valuable on earth but in space it values like platinum.
We use it to make breathable air and rocket fuel/propellent.
01 May 12
If this correct:-
Ok well according to their estimates [ http://www.planetaryresources.com/asteroids/composition/ ]
they expect that "In space, a single platinum-rich 500 meter wide asteroid contains about 174 times the
yearly world output of platinum, and 1.5 times the known world-reserves of platinum group metals
(ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, osmium, iridium, and platinum). This amount is enough to fill a basketball
court to four times the height of the rim." #
Then as soon as you realize this project the price of these now not so rare earth metals is going to plummet.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
01 May 12
Originally posted by kevcvs57Actually no there is a sneaky way around that.
If this correct:-
Ok well according to their estimates [ http://www.planetaryresources.com/asteroids/composition/ ]
they expect that "In space, a single platinum-rich 500 meter wide asteroid contains about 174 times the
yearly world output of platinum, and 1.5 times the known world-reserves of platinum group metals
(ruthenium, rhodium, palladium, ...[text shortened]... you realize this project the price of these now not so rare earth metals is going to plummet.
You land the minerals but you don't dump them all on the market.
You declare that you have the minerals which get valued at umpteen trillion $ but you
only supply a small proportion of those minerals to the market to avoid dropping their value.
However you get to borrow from the banks against the value of the minerals you hold
so you are in effect as rich as the value of the minerals.
They were discussing just this issue in one of the news bits I have seen on this.
01 May 12
Originally posted by googlefudgeI doubt they could borrow a tril that way though. There is only so much platinum needed for cars and such, and if the supply went up even by double the price would start to plummet. It would become another commodity market and the price would go down to something like 100 dollars an ounce or so, 15 times cheaper than it is now.
Actually no there is a sneaky way around that.
You land the minerals but you don't dump them all on the market.
You declare that you have the minerals which get valued at umpteen trillion $ but you
only supply a small proportion of those minerals to the market to avoid dropping their value.
However you get to borrow from the banks against th ...[text shortened]... inerals.
They were discussing just this issue in one of the news bits I have seen on this.
There is nothing that can be done if asteroid mining started pumping in platinum by the ton.
01 May 12
Originally posted by kevcvs57Assuming it is all landed at once - which is highly unlikely. It would more likely be like any other mining operation if not slower and would continue as long as its profitable, then be cut back if the price drops. Also, since there are various elements involved as well as the potential to mine some for use in space, the focus could be changed as prices vary.
Then as soon as you realize this project the price of these now not so rare earth metals is going to plummet.
Does anyone know what a large modern mine costs to get to production? How does it compare to this project?
01 May 12
2 edits
Originally posted by googlefudgeSo the banks. who are probably going to finance the project in the first place will then control the rate at which these rare metals are lowered into the market.
Actually no there is a sneaky way around that.
You land the minerals but you don't dump them all on the market.
You declare that you have the minerals which get valued at umpteen trillion $ but you
only supply a small proportion of those minerals to the market to avoid dropping their value.
However you get to borrow from the banks against th ...[text shortened]... inerals.
They were discussing just this issue in one of the news bits I have seen on this.
Sounds about right, but still worth doing, not only for the boost it would give our space exploration technologies, but it may also forestall a future rare metals war between the manufacturing super powers.