randy.mcdonald@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I've a question relating to asteroid mining.
>
> Reading some of the earlier discussion of asteroid mining, in the
> works of Pournelle and other writers, I've read quite a lot of
> speculation suggesting that it would be relatively easy, energy-wise,
> to move an asteroid into Earth orbit.
I was never sure where that came from. Relatively easy on a per-pound-of
-asteroid basis, and relatively easy period are not the same thing. We
can currently handle things around the earth on the order
(optimistically) of a hundred tons. (Skylab was 77 tons. Yes, I know ...
ISS is bigger ... no more Saturn V's ... shuttle is almost shot ... make
it in pieces ... shuttle derived big boosters ... yadayadayda ... Bugger
that. A hundred tons.)
Small NEO's that we can reliably detect are the size of a couple of
football fields. We've found a few smaller than that which came close to
the earth, partially by chance. They'd be worth something and probably
movable. (See below.)
- March 18, 2004 saw a very close recorded approach of a near-Earth
object (NEO). Asteroid 2004 FH, about 30 meters (100 feet) in diameter
- Only two weeks later on March 31, 2004, meteoroid 2004 FU162 set a new
record for closest recorded approach, passing Earth only 6,500 km (4,000
miles) away (nearly one-sixtieth of the distance to the Moon). Because
it was very small (6 meters/20 feet), FU162 was detected only hours
before its closest approach.
> ...One thing does leave me puzzled: How did they plan to get the
> mineral resources in these asteroids down to Earth? Or did they not
> plan on that at all?
Handwaving of sufficient strength to produce orbital decay and
aerobraking? The be fair, they viewed the materials as most valuable
when used in cislunar space.
Regards,
Jack Tingle
|
