How asteroid mining can allow us to travel to space | Nina Hooper | TEDxHarvardCollege
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ธ.ค. 2015
- Imagine a world with ubiquitous, affordable space travel, where getting in a spaceship is no stranger than getting in an airplane. Harvard undergraduate Nina Hooper, an astrophysics student, shows how mining asteroids for platinum could be the way to make space travel cheap and accessible to civilians.
Nina Hooper is a Harvard College student from Melbourne, Australia studying astrophysics. She loves traveling and adventure and
is working towards what she believes is the ultimate adventure - going to space. She is also a private pilot, a songwriter and a major foodie. Nina intends to pursue a graduate degree in aerospace and astrospace engineering either in the US or UK.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at ted.com/tedx
Never thought asteroid mining would be so interesting! beautifully presented x
Cinzia Cozzolino As a space geek this talk and loads of others tend to be what keep me and my imagination going through the week. So much so that if i was ruler of the world id have my own route to space and making mankind a multi-planetary species. Something like you have on the TV show the Expanse, but even exploring our nearest stars (which is totally possible, taking Project Orion and lunching them from the moon and not Earth. Theres a good wiki on it, vehicles estimated to get between 8-12% speed of light)
Going to space has always been a great dream of mine.
I wish everyone on Earth was as obsessed with this topic as I am....We would be traveling through worm holes to Andromeda by now. Great presentation by the way, and good luck in your hard work.😀
Had we made this priority mission in the 80's we would have so many jobs so many resources. I've always wanted to see asteroid mining. I don't know why NASA didn't do manned asteroid exploration after appolo. The mars talk is fine but the next logical step should have been the asteroids
The reason why it didn't happen in the 1970s and '80s is because most of congress is made up of lawyers, leeches on society who typically consider 'the next election cycle' to be long-term thinking.
Darin Loveland the use won the race to the moon it wasn’t profitable to them n it wasn’t a competition anymore so the US stopped funding NASA for these kinds of things
It's up to commerce to have the imagination and the money to develop space, like Space X and Blue Origin because governments don't have any imagination at all. Worst still is that most of the population which holds majority vote also don't have the imagination and are poor so spending money on something that doesn't immediately translate to jobs and money doesn't win you votes and therefore doesn't get funding.
It's rumored that once we landed on the Moon LBJ said, "Good, now we can stop this space nonsense" and Nixon was too embroiled in the Vietnam war to do a proper followthrough. The cost was just too high and we've never had any plan for success. In other words, what is our final goal in space (other than communication satellites)?
With the current environmental concerns, we should be talking about factories on the Moon, asteroid mining for all types of metals and minerals (such as REE - rare earth elements), and separation & processing plants in the asteroid belt.
Thousands of documents have been produced proposing utilization techniques and how humans could live and prosper in space, yet nothing of real substance. NASA is too slow, and filled with far too many bureaucrats and not enough dreamers willing to take risks. Its now up to the private sector to take over.
@@danieldvs100 but it was profitable. One just had to have a wider mind than most government types are capable of. PC's calculators, LED lights and thousands of other products and services that expanded the U.S and western economies by large factors. And that's without *any* kind of resource retrieval. Creating the LEO or LLO infrastructure to mine asteroid resources will yield an exponential expansion of our economy.
As an old 'L-5er,' I'm delighted and reassured that this young lady is keeping the dream alive!!!
Content starts at 2:56 . You're welcome.
Thanks. :)
Thank you so much. I learned watching this video. Keep up your studies and the good work.
We have projected that humans will reach 11 billion by the end of the century, given we doubled just a few decades ago, we will be close to 4 or 5 times that by the end of next century.
So we need a paradigm shift. We need to stop asking what the carrying capacity of the Earth is, but what the carrying capacity of the Solar System is. With innovation, cooperation and technology we can reach a true golden age.
We're projected to reach 11 billion by 2050. Then by 2100, our population will drop back down to around 9 billion, then stabilize around 6 billion by 2200. UN research.
That's much like describing the orbit of the moon around Earth without gravity; it would shoot off into deep space. Tremendously qualified and respected Statisticians working for the United Nations demonstrate that population will reach this number, yes, but will level out, (and potentially decline!) through the combined work of education in Lesser Economically Developed Countries (LEDCs) and greater access to contraception through government programs. I love your latter point though, as we absolutely do [need a paradigm shift].
Colonizing other worlds is not a reason for exploring space. A population of 11 billion needn't be inevitable. Condoms and birth control pills are readily available technologies that are far cheaper and safer than shuffling people off to the other very inhospitable worlds of our solar system.
Thank you Nina, for having vision enough to see the way forward.
Great talk!
Well done Nina - I'll show my son who is very excited about this subject!
+Nina Hooper do you know of any non ivy league schools that have programs that cover these kind of things. i would love to study this.
Thank you so much!
+Nina Hooper if you ever come back to Australia we can get married okay! Thanks
Asteroid mining would stimulate creating self-replicating machines that can be good
on earth too. Instead of sending landing and take off modules to Mars it is better to send same mass of miniature self-replicating machines to a big asteroid with a few people to assist them by communicating with earth to update software. Self-replicating machines can build big space launch equipment on earth too because of considerable cost
reduction due to automation.
One of the qualifications to be an astronaut: ability to keep huge secrets
couple this with the invention of the space elevator is going to be amazing!
I want a movie about this now!
Thank you Nina, hope you enjoyed Monument Valley! What is a realistic timeline for our first commercial mission?
Before you analyze the technical feasibility of asteroid mining, just check what our limits are based on thermodynamic efficiency (the rocket equation and how it dictates 1. the cost of a ticket to space, and 2. the payload mass fraction). I've done the math in detail, and it's a really hard sell. Here's why:
Let's say it takes you $1 to mine platinum and $1 for fuel (return journey). Half the usable mass is fuel and half is platinum. Then you need to sell the platinum at $2 just to break even.
If 2/3 of the usable payload mass os fuel, you need to sell your platinum for $3 just to break even. 1/3 platinum payload is ~33% utility, which is amazing! In reality, rockets have 2-4% useful payload capacity, so you'd need to sell a 1kg of Pt at $30 (corresponding to 3% - dictated by the rocket equation). Between making a profit that keeps you, the miner, willing to participate, and accounting for other cost sinks, you could be looking at 100X the cost of fuel. That doesn't sound too bad ey?
That's because we assumed $1 of fuel and $1 Pt per flight. In practice, it's $1 fuel and $x Pt, so the multiple is 100x. Still doesn't sound bad?
A typical rocket flight requires $200k for fuel (basically nothing, the flight itself can cost ~$65M). Let's say your platinum operation in space required $1000/kg in steady state. That's your x. Then the multiple is 100*1000 = 100k. Thus you're selling at $(2*10^5*10^5) = $20B. Say you mined 1 metric tonne, that puts your resource at $20B/tonne = $20M/kg. That 100x multiple on the cost of fuel hurts!
For comparison, today's Pt rates are on the order of $30,000/kg, which is a big difference. To get to numbers in that range, our operation would need to be 2*10^7/(3*10^4) = ~330X better.
@$100/kg to mine Pt, and delivering 30tonnes (lol okay😂) per trip, then you're at $30,000/kg. Even if you found a way to pull this off, the world supply of Pt is like 6M ounces (=~170tonnes) so you're adding about 17% to the global supply. That actually reduces demand, so you have to sell for less. This is a textbook example of "flooding the market".
My point is that, before you even take technology into account, the economics of asteroid mining are really hard to justify.
The main variable influencing the economics is the necessary multiple on the cost of fuel at 100x, which in turn depends on the tiny useful payload fraction of 3%. But that fraction is a "feature" of rockets, which have already been engineered to astonishing extremes. What this analysis is really suggesting is that we'll never mine the asteroids with rockets. It's not economically feasible, the risk is too high. We need something else. Not a rocket.
You know how back in the day we had those massive, building-sized mainframe supercomputers, the ones based on vacuum tubes. They were big, energy hungry, mechanically complex. You'd be forgiven for thinking I was talking about rockets: Their descriptions are near-interchangeable.
Then transistors came along: tiny silicon chips that could fit on a finger tip, consuming almost no energy, requiring no maintenance, and where a big mainframe could do several thousands of calculations per second, transistors could do several million. Well, we know that transistors brought us into the information age.
If asteroid mining is to work out, a simple economic analysis says rockets imply a painful, risky solution. Rockets are mainframes. What we need is the "transistor of space travel", the transit technology that will bring us all into the space age.
Hopefully you agree or have constructive criticism. Best wishes, and here's to the hope that someone invents the "transistor of space travel".
there is a treaty in place.. lets see how thats going to turn out
I see a lot of comments about expensive materials on earth dropping in price. It probably will drop, but once we enter the real space age, the need for them will also increase as thousands or millions of space ships and their components will require these materials. We will move our civilization to moon bases, space stations and even other planets. There will always be a demand for more materials.
12:52 that meteorite is at Fresno state I pick it up it was 160+ pounds (80kg) I try to lift if for like 5 minute
Im a high pressure miner this would be awesome to operate.
16 Psyche we are coming for you!
Two big Problems: 1. If we could really mine that amount of Pt (or whatever noble metal) - the price would just drop heavily. Only reason noble metals are expensive is that they are rare. And I guess 75% decrease is largely underestimating this effect.
2. It takes quite some work to getting anything down to earth (we basically need to move alle the Pt etc. back to earth and its heavy.....
BUT: It would be much more sensible to use asteroids to set up self sustaining infrastructure in space. Not launching rockets to space but build them from materials availible in space. A moon base could be a great starting point for this endeavour.
dats g00d
Problem 1. Yes. Price would drop. Then, the lower price would allow more diverse uses of Pt that are now struggling to compete with present uses of Pt which can pay the higher price (zum Beispiel: phone manufacturing). As more uses for Pt are feasible, due to lower Pt price, demand for Pt rises. As demand rises, so does price and availability from asteroid mining.
Exactly. And my prediction is that most of the resources in space will stay in space or be used for space settlements on other asteroids or lunar surface. Mars might have enough resources itself to keep its settlements going without extra help. But asteroid mining will help drive the price down for maintaining interplanetary travel, as refueling will occur at a fraction of todays prices. And also propel even more ventures in deeper space beyond Jupiter.
I think that the real export market to earth will be in its manufactured medicine or other space spin off industries. Either way, driving the prices down of materials won't be as detrimental as you would think. It will actually be a facilitator of better things to come and more worthy projects and ventures.
price drops are what we want. platinum has many valuable uses in electronics and as a chemical catalyst. the only problem we have now is finding a cost-effective way of importing these resources on an industrial scale--atm its not feasible, but hopefully this will change in the distant future.
While humans have not found a way to shield the intense radiation of space effectively, because the earths magnetic field is so large and so strong, we have to rely on robots to do the mining in space. But they are up to the challenge. And if we want a space adventure we should be living under the oceans and appreciating the planet which we have.
More than just the cost to get to these asteroids, the actual mining costs and transportation of materials to earth will be huge. Though I'm highly confident that even without Platinum, the great majority of asteroids will have materials that we would find quite valuable
3.8 kk subscribers and only 4k views on video where girl is talking how to get billions in gold or platinum and create a way to space exploration for everybody. What is wrong with this channel? Space colonies would be so much easier with asteroid mining, prices of electronics, satellites, cars so much lower. NASA could pay for it's budget by itself. Even increase it to create new technologies that they have no many to develop today. Love this video. Is good someone is working on this technology.
Exactly! :D
I agree. They should have made this priority over wasted mars haggling. I think this is the step to take first before any mars talk. I'm no PHD but it just makes logical sense. It's a further step into cosmos and brings us closer to a more realistic goal of a manned mars mission. Why skip the asteroids when they can fuel our advancement?
I largely agree with statement about the video. But the hauling all that back to earth is unrealistic, With that i mean the conventional way of carrying fuel from earth. It is after an infrastructure in space has been made, and "fuel" that can create trust, is the key enabler. And in the start, the fuel itself, is the platinum mine.
Very true.
@Sooty
Not entirely true.
If you are the only one that actually has that gold you can still sell it to whatever price you want.
The huge collapse would only occur, when you FORCED all of it into the market at once.
You might not be able to sell it all at once at 80% of current market value.
But you could sell it easily at 50% market value, if you stretch the time scale to a few years, while forcing every conventional gold mining company to stop mining or go bankrupt in the process.
Once asteroid mining is a big thing and many companies do it you lose the abilty of dominating the market like that so the price will then balance out at the cost of asteroid mining.
But thats the advantage of the innovator I guess.
This was a great presentation. Asteroid mining is a good idea for gathering resources - but the focus on paying for it with Platinum isn't needed as a motivating force.
The mere idea of staging several resources in Earth orbit via an asteroid is incentive enough for immense funding. And the cost to do it is continually going down as the feasibility is continually going up. It's just a matter of time now with various fields developing in their own right and the trend toward interdisciplinary study.
One thing she doesn’t account for when talking about the profitability of space mining is that when something has ample supply, in this case she used platinum, it falls in market value and becomes cheaper (the same logic she uses when talking about the development of space infrastructure making access to space cheaper and widely available). With such abundance in space, rear earth metals would fall to around the same price as iron and other more common metals within a decade of operations. So you’re hundred billion dollar asteroid would only be worth a fraction of that.
At 8:30 she throws a 75% drop in market value into the mix.
Maybe, but the worth of the currency of the nation that runs these operations will increase drastically and though they may get less currency, they will be able to afford more with an even smaller amount.
yes but the first loads of gold and platinum will still be worth hundreds of millions
really nice presentation
amazing talk..
Excellent
funny thing Vesta is being mined by someone. The video the space agency has on You-tube shows it right on the middle. Check it out. Use your cell phone to zoom in on. My finds are on video.
There are so many problems with mining asteroids.
1. The effects of zero G on our bodies
2. All the dust and rubble that will contaminate the surroundings of the mined asteroid.
3. Getting the mined resource to earth
4. These asteroids are lumps of iron! Machines are not going to hold up very well
etc...
But Yes, eventually we need to mine asteroids if we want to keep evolving and thrive.
A course in the economics of resource and commodity pricing might be more important than aerospace engineering. There is a limit to demand. Price for the last ounce over the then current demand will be ZERO (or close to it).
@xkguy you're totally right - economics is very important! In this talk, I didn't go into much details about all the arguments against asteroid mining because the point is to "share big ideas". There are many more factors, especially economics, that need to be considered. Thanks for watching!
Better to discuss to the ethics of classifying natural resources, like asteroids as property. For the right to mine asteroids, an auction should be held for each and everyone. The proceeds of which can be equally distributed between each and every country on a per capita basis.
I guess that would then make it more of a government job.
Cost of rockets and technology needs to come down otherwise this is only science fiction
It is so unimaginative to start Asteroid mining with platin.
And how does the mined material get back to Earth?
could we build incentive by by mining a near earth object/
Solving the problem of making the vast distance between here and the asteroid belt is going to be no small task.
YES!
if we manufacture satellites on the moon we won't have to launch them from earth.
What if you took the science of electric boiler water heaters (electric kettle), And made a large deployable attache to drop from a plane, containing an impact errupting supply of fast boiling water, to the effect of shattering ice in the artic; for the purpose of, but not limited to: mining, redirecting of currents and re-routing and building of new ice shelves
Nvm. Came back to the video after reading onlu comments. Been dong that a lot lately it seems.. still, how different is the mineral from asteroids than earths? Can you make a cpt america shield only ten times tougher?
So these new elements from asteroids that apollo brought back, do they have superpowers? Can we turn em into superior military amos? What use is it?
it is cheaper to stay in space than the return to earth....
ResidualSelfImage dam ctfu
returning to earth is cheap you just need to do aerobreaking manouvers, what is costly is going to space from the earth.
Random guy No. It is cheap to go back if you are already in Earth Orbit, but not if you are out there in the Asteroid belt. Before we see any platinum from the asteroids back here (meaning that it has to be cheaper to go there, mine it there and bring it back), we will need some way, way cheaper way of propelling probes around the solar system. The one good thing is that time does not necessarily matter. You could possibly use something as slow as Ion propulsion if you don't care that your mined platinum takes a couple of years back to earth.
But even then, with this mining industry in space it is likely we will also have factories in earth orbit. It likely would be beneficial to use the platinum there for new ships, stations etc. than to throw it down the gravity well.
Returning to Earth is DANGEROUS. For people, that is. For raw materials, less so-assuming you can keep it from hitting someone below.
I should have said manufactured goods, not raw materials. It seems highly unlikely we would choose to bring many raw materials from space to Earth. Factories in space would make more sense. Very automated, it goes without saying.
actually, i think asteroid mining is the future. hope we can make it happen. well not me, but young smart people like you. go girl.
I wonder if changing the mass of asteroids and possibly their orbits would affect, say, earth's orbit. And, would that be good for us.
Gordon Adams No. and no
Play at 1.5x playback speed. ;)
thank you
Not sure why ya'll saying that
2x all the way
Lol thanks guys :P I usually speak super quickly so I'm glad I actually managed to keep it slow hahaha
+ Nina Hooper In your talk you alluded to the fact that the needed tech is about 30 years out. What can be done to accelerate this time frame?
Problem is if you bring in that much platinum the market shits its pants, but nice presentation. Still a worthy idea.
Worth noting, at 7:05 she calculates an asteroid with 4.5k tonnes of platinum. The global supply of platinum today is ~0.17k tonnes. Point being, said mining operation would crash the platinum market. If you have 25x the world supply of platinum, it becomes common and no-one will pay $30k/kg, maybe $1k/kg. That puts her valuation closer to $(4.5*10^6*10^3) = $4.5B. Still a big number, just nowhere near her figure......
My uncommon view is we should actually flood the platinum market: imagine $100/kg or something, maybe less! We could make all sorts of interesting new technologies possible. I view metals as worthless, except for their utility. So maybe start a company that builds technologies that require platinum and make it your mission to crash the market while remaining profitable, so your technologies can reach the masses.
Can you tell I spend a lot of time thinking about these things lol? 😂
Anyway, best wishes to all of you.
mine for everything. iron, tungsten, copper, make stock metals in space, build everything. no more dam robots.
I dream of Nina!
$130,000,000,000 of Platinum? That is when the metal is in space, not with "value added" by it being on earth and ready for sale. However this is an occasion when adding value drives the value of it down.
The value of Platinum on Earth is based on the finite number of total amount of it on Earth - does not include what is outside the Earth's Atmosphere. With mining in space the substance will have to be controlled for sale like deBeers. Otherwise Platinum would several screw-up the value of this Element trading at 1/100th what it does today.
We could use synthetic people, call them Replicants, or better yet because they slavishly work for humanity out there in the Khyber belt we'll call them "Repli-Cans"! :)
Correct me if I'm wrong. But isn't Oxygen an even more important rocket fuel than Hydrogen?
Though I may seem like a detractor to this idea. I find it extraordinarily fascinating. I just have a habit of playing the part of Devil's Advocate when trying to learn more. Basically being a theoretical scientist. Throwing out a theory and working to shoot it down
At min 10.45 is this an asteroid has debris lava?
It's cool seeing that other people did a presentation on asteroid mining also. Lmao
Aren't these asteroids highly radioactive?
When will we start asteroid mining.
20-30 years
met een inleg per miljadair een miljard dan zijn jullie er al mijne heren waarschijnlijk 2 of 3 honderd procent winst mijne heren
I'm not interested in going to space personally. I just want to see the private sector space industry vision happen. Puts lots of land-loving geeks and squints to work here on Earth, for one thing. Lots of high-tech aerospace employment! -That I would hope would be quality jobs. Too many college grads (biologists, math majors) driving for UPS, etc.
It's inevitable that humans will expand into space seems foolish to have all our eggs in one basket
+Clayton Malarkey well to me it seems even more foolish to put your eggs (humans) on a pan for safety reasons... Space is extremely hostile to life. If your concerns are survival why not build underground cities as some kind of havens? A few ones all around the globe.
+Mondiani Joli That's a good idea. Here in the States there's a large area stretching diagonally from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico referred to as "tornado alley". Every year tornados manage to kill a few people and do vast amounts of property damage. Having their communities underground would give people tornado protection.
Apart from mining, curiosity, vacation, doing science, military purposes and perhaps creating a place human can survive if something happened to the earth, there is no reason for large scale colonies in space or on other planets and moons unless the life style and opportunities are better there than on Earth. Until this occurs, don't expect people to want to live off world in the tens of thousands, never mind in the millions. Mining asteroids could start the process of living off world, but people won't be taking their families to mine just as they don't take their families to live on oil rigs.
Could we mine near earth asteroids to raise money?
meid van mij part was een miljoen al als een miljard alleen wij zijn zo niet geworden
OK we have a plan, we have rockets ,where are the investors? can we start with cube SATs?
I hope this happens in my life time
+Clayton Malarkey Stage 1 won't be too exciting. -The stuff will be done robotically, not a lot of human presence involved. However, after the successes begin to occur, and the windfalls begin to hit, stage 2 will begin to kick-in. Stage 2 is several decades out, is my guess. That's where private sector has bankrolled itself, working close in (near Earth), and begins to set sights on working farther out. At that point a human presence will probably be needed at significant distance mainly due to time delays in signals control of robotics which will be working much further out. Here, private sector would be best served with a large rotating wheel station. Such stations are extremely pricey, but would accommodate a staff for many months, maybe a year or so, without physical health issues. Staff would rotate back and forth to Earth. A savvy mining co. would work on developing wheel stations, even operate a few, in advance. Revenue could be earned from such stations from other private sector activities, public sector research, space tourism, etc. For instance, an independent space fuel developing co. may be interested in leasing some station space. So yea. Stage 2 is where things really start cracking, big station assembly projects, fuel production plant assembly projects. Projects will get bigger and more diverse, to include water production plants, maybe large radiation shield assembly projects. So there will probably need some human accommodation for long term work (months), best served with the old rotating wheel concept.
+Carl Lelandt thanks for the reply well won't those robots mostly be poilets on earth and maybe we could Capture a container ship sized rock chalk full of precious metals to get the influx of capital for more abitious endevors
front row seats sold out immediately
How many kilos of ores did the 130 billions Apollo missions bring back to earth? And how many machines did it land on the moon?
Nina are you proposing we bring back platinium ores or that we process them on the asteroids? Either way it will raise the costs. Space mining is a good idea... unless you intend to bring back the metals on earth.
Apollo brought back 380.96kg of samples over its 6 landings. I'm sure that early on similarly small samples of asteroid material will be brought back for research and to develop ways to process it, but ultimately you're right that the vast majority of it would be better served on construction projects in orbit. It's waaaay to valuable having a strong heavy metal like steel already up there to waste bringing it down to Earth. I do want to buy a medallion of platinum when the price drops though. It'd be cool.
It could be viable, but you must stop thinking Earthcentric system.
You need really a lot of delta V to get to Earth orbit, so much delta V, that if you get to orbit, you are half way anywhere.
So if you get to asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter and you "catch" an asteroid with water, you can create fuel and some life support (water and oxygen) for your mining station and you can refuel shuttles that will bring material to earth orbit. Moreover, if you can build some crude shuttle by the station, then you can send loaded shuttle to Earth, use aerobraking to save fuel and land in one go.
Building entire infrastructure in space would decrease cost of shipping material back to Earth.
Staremperor if you can build anything in space then you'll have your space civilization started. Bringing back anything on earth would be pointless. Unless it's something entirely absent (not rare) from earth ...
A 100 billion space mining investment needs to retrieve 3,000,000 kg of (pure) platinium at 32000 dollars per kg (Hooper expects a 75% price drop...).
I rest my case.
Planetary Resources is shooting to do exactly this. They want to Flood the Earth's economy with Platinum group metals, crashing the price. They compare this to Aluminum being extremely rare in the past to completely ubiquitous. The value of past Aluminum crashing did little to hurt the economy, it actually bolstered it by enabling the development of hundreds of new material uses. Platinum Group Metals will very likely do the same thing, once abundant.
Flooding earth with outer space platinum, that's a good one. I got a chuckle out of it.
The cost of Rosetta mission to just land and scratch the surface of an asteroid (so without even coming back to earth) 1 billion euros. Question: how much pure platinum do you need to bring back to earth for it to be cost effective. You'll need to break even 30.000 kg at the current price of platinum.(Rosetta weights 3000 kg)
1 billion euros to just land there, not even mining the asteroid nor even processing the ores (in near zero gravity), not even sending them back on earth.
I'm pretty sure deep mining combined with geothermal energy although incredibly hard and expensive will be a safer road to travel.
But a new problem will also arise. Countries will fight for their rights to mine. So, before mining some rules and regulations related to mining rights will be a matter of consideration. Then again, countries that will develop their space technology later may ask for ' a reservation' kind of a thing to mine in future.
Amit Chatterjee In space, it’s already established that everyone owns it. And there’s Enough.
USG Ishimura anyone?
If there was gold in asteroids, that would enable us to have more gold just for worth, and for faster computer parts
_ Sh0cKwavE There is more gold than platinum. Gold won’t make computers any faster. Better silicon solutions will or quantum chips.
2x all the way👍
Sure, some are loaded with gold and platinum, what happens if you suddenly dump a bunch of new material in the market... the price drops. and it becomes unprofitable.
Soft disclosures abound... Can you spot them?
Im hoping to invest in asteroid mining. Or rather companies that want to asteroid mine. And i dont care if they fail. If they fail another company will come along, buy all their tech on the cheap, and hopefully succeed themselves (so the risk of me losing all my money is minimum). Its not going to space but contributing to man in space. However shitty regulations you have in all countries to "protect" me and others from high risk businesses (but high profit) means id have to have at least 1 million in the bank and be an active investor so i could be considered an accredited investor. Its total bullshit but id still love to do it. Its my money and if idiots can waste their entire wage on gambling where you will eventually lose all your money, i should be allowed to invest in high risk companies where i will never lose all my money.
NicosMind Google has a subsidiary that plans to setup space ports that are self sustaining from asteroids. The plan is to become the central hub for all space travel. Controlling fuel and supply in space.
Space gold rush when?
PhazonSouffle Gold is for poor people
I was born too soon. Damn it!
:27 curve
Why doesn't NASA support or fund an asteroid mining mission instead of a mission to send men to Mars?
we gaan ze even lekker maken meid
$Trillions, Trina!
first you need to develop impulse engines (made famous by Star Trek) to get there in a reasonable amount of time, then you need to somehow lasso 1 and bring it back to Earth orbit for easier mining, then you need to figure out what to do with the waste, possibly dump it on Jupiter or Saturn, can't just leave it there as its a space hazard
Matt Thanatos Mate. They don’t exist. Do some research into propulsion.
not yet at least, that's why I said "develop", modern airplanes were impossible in the 1940s
Matt Thanatos Problem is, they aren’t real.
you're missing the point, they aren't real YET
why don't we just try mining the moon before we get too ambitious ?
Watch the video. She explains why we don't.
Great talk but very slow.
Soft-disclosure verb.
Revealing a closely guarded secret in a manner that doesn't directly reveal the secret.
Example:
YOuTube channel :
TEDx Talks
Video:
How can we better protect astronauts from space radiation? | Sarah Baatout | TEDx Antwerp
sounds like we humans could be on our way to create a huge alien structure then?
a huge human structure. but I get what you mean
zoek en gij zuld vinden meid
Aspiring space miners please study supply /demand curves , market elasticity and all the other aspects of economics that make dropping a giant ball of platinum on the earth’s commodity markets a gigantic waste of your time and other people’s money
Who disliked this? lol. Like, grumpy cat is 1, but what about the other 40?
she should have a talk with elon musk
1967 Act say you cannot mine Any Space Asteroid.....
Arrr...Now that be right unfortunate.. 'n we wouldn't want t'be up to be up to anything illegal up there, now, would we, matie..
Ah, quite right. Can't be doing anything naughty.Carl Lelandt
That can be changed
We need to get this done, Elon Musk needs to look into this big time!!
Imagination provides futuristic opinions , but it should be restricted in reality border.
She’s not wearing any tights
whats the difference between Nina Hooper abd Elon musk
Ooh what a desirable woman she is. Sweet, intelligent, intellectually expansive and totally alluring physically. The real deal packaged in a perfectly crafted personna of infinite depth and charm. I am smitten.
Can we drink irradiated water from the wall?
spectrol do do go ahead make money for it get suport
:)
What kind of accent is that?
new zealand
Hehe close, Monika, but not quite. I'm Australian!
Vincent Stark ,
She said that she is from Australia in the video. And, apparently, she told you again in the comments.
Nina...why dont you go on an asteroid yourself, instead of asking someone else to do it for you.....its very easy, just get a elon musk car and go.......if you wanna make money with platinum, just buy 150 billions of it...and see how much the price will soar and then sell it lil by lil..........but if u go into space and then declare u mining platinum there.....u would likely see that prices of platinum will go below those of wheat.