tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post9006799692624662065..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Final Frontier 9: Asteroids vs. The MoonAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-76864629551890771932009-05-18T18:12:00.000-06:002009-05-18T18:12:00.000-06:00This reminds me of the most excellent video game '...This reminds me of the most excellent video game 'Homeworld.'Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12968634190280933116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-10938411343003018562009-05-18T14:30:00.000-06:002009-05-18T14:30:00.000-06:00Alonzo -
You've written an important post. To j...Alonzo - <br /><br />You've written an important post. To jump out ahead of you..... real space development; ie, humanity expanding its economic and other sphere beyond just the Earth, to stay - won't happen without learning to use space resources. Dependent on bringing up resources from Earth is an automatic no-winner.<br /><br />Your second major point is also correct - that source of resources is not the moon. Now, that doesn't mean we'll never use lunar resources: whoever establishes permanent bases on the moon, even if only Antarctica-style research bases, will use lunar resources. Why import oxygen to breathe when the lunar soil is chock full of it, for example? <br /><br />But study after study has made clear that lunar resources are only economically intelligent when used <I>on</I> the moon, for those living and working there. Exporting lunar resources - as long as the means of export is rockets - just doesn't compute (literally, when you run the numbers). Now if we ever end up with another mode of transport of materials off of the moon, then things could change somewhat. That's why one of my heroes, Gerard O'Neill, decades ago focused on electromagnetic resource launchers from the moon's surface. Run by electricity, 'all' you would need is a catcher in space to grab the stuff. Or, if a space elevator ever is made practical. <br /><br />But as long as we're using rockets, lunar resources will be a needed - but limited to - enabler for lunar surface activities. <br /><br />There is one other problem with lunar resources - there isn't that much of it. Lots of oxygen, silicon, some titanium and nickel in places, and diverse Helium 3. But not much else. <br /><br />That's reason 2 for asteroidal resources: they tend to have more resources - including water in many cases (ie containing hydrogen), as well as other elements. And as you point out, NEO materials are 'easier' to get to. <br /><br />There is a third reason to pay attention to NEOs, though: they threaten us on Earth. For real. They are a real combination of danger, and opportunity. And while the mantra of NASA is 'Find them early, Find them early, find them early", one reason we really <I>do</I> need to 'find them early" is because we can't do anything about any one particular NEO, unless we study it, and find out exactly what it is made of, and what it's structure is. Depending on how big it is, and how it is put together, will determine what mitigation strategy we can consider to protect ourselves. <br /><br />So we already need to find NEOs more aggressively than we are at the moment; particularly since, as sea levels rise and more humans live near coastlines, the ability of a small NEO to cause a tsunami and widescale death gets easier and easier. Once we find them, we really do need - for safety reasons - to figure out what they are made of and what their structure is. <br /><br />And that latter is exactly the data we space cadets want for our third reason - sustainable space development.Dave Huntsmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18238454047860847548noreply@blogger.com