Comments on Next Big Future: Why space exploration ?

Space robotics will reduce the cost of sending min...

2008-04-13T12:19:00.000-07:00

Space robotics will reduce the cost of sending mining probes to NEAs and beyond.

The point of space mining is not to return the materials to Earth, but to develop an infrastructure in space. Space based manufacturing using space materials makes a lot more sense.

In fact, in situ robotic factories on the asteroids themselves (or at rich locations on the moon) would allow a lot of savings over transport of raw or processed materials to Earth.

Please rephrase the question as:

Why should...

2008-04-13T11:53:00.000-07:00

Please rephrase the question as:

Why should we spend public (e.g. tax payers') money on space?

This is an entirely separate question. Of course we are all "pro-space" in the sense that we believe it is desirable and our destiny to settle space. However, are government-funded space programs the best approach to making this happen? Or would it be better off left to entrepreneurs and private industry?

The think the comparative levels of success of the semiconductor and computer industry as compared to, say, NASA and the Tokamak fusion programs makes clear the answer to this question.

Excelent article Brian, this is not just a good ad...

2008-04-12T10:47:00.000-07:00

Excelent article Brian, this is not just a good advice for space exploration but also for everyday life, one cant wait to solve every single problem before starting a new bussines, thanks.

And about the reasons to go to space, in my opinion the most important is energy.

Mining is a pretty weak argument. There's simply n...

2008-04-12T07:08:00.000-07:00

Mining is a pretty weak argument. There's simply no material currently needed here on Earth than can't be had here thousands of times cheaper than getting it from elsewhere in the solar system. There are only two scenarios for mining to make sense: (1) a market develops for something like He3 that simply doesn't exist on Earth; or (2) it's cheaper to haul materials to Earth orbit for construction than to lift them up from the surface. I think that the only short-term incentives are microgravity manufacturing and space tourism. If and when these things start to be profitable, we might see a slow and steady increase in orbital construction, which might eventually drive down costs of mining operations.

Like you said, there will be other incentives. Whatever happens, I'm certain that the growth will be exponential. That means that we'll have a lot of slow progress for a long time, then it will explode.

Very good points, Brian.

The astounding w...

2008-04-12T05:06:00.000-07:00

Very good points, Brian.

The astounding wealth that exists in space will pay for further expansion, once we get far enough to exploit it. Your ideas of using robots, pre-placing fuel depots, and using alternative propulsion methods are good principles to keep in mind.

NASA squanders money on politically motivated climate research that it should be spending on space missions. But that is government bureaucracy for you. The main purpose of any bureaucracy is to perpetuate itself.

If space flight beyond earth's orbit shall have an...

2008-04-11T23:11:00.000-07:00

If space flight beyond earth's orbit shall have any future, those state sponsored molochs like NASA and ESA have to give up their de facto monopoly.

Space flight beyond earth's orbit will only have a future in our generation if the whole thing offers a propper return on investment and thus incentives for commercialization. And the only incentive I currently see (more will of course be discovered) is mining, be it on the moon, or mars, or astroid belt, or on mercury. Space mining operations have to become as regular businesses as airlines.

The "new" Ares is a prime example of absent innovation, Soviet-style bureaucracy paired with defense of pork, and lack of willingness to take a risk. That has plagued space flight since the Germans left NASA. Bureaucracy should have no business in space flight. Flight control and orbital coordination & controll should be handed over to a global organisation. There are of course risks, and people will die. But how many sailors lost their lifes when just sailing accross the Atlantic to the New World? They all know what the risk is and they're doing it on their own free will.

The key problem of course is still how to get stuff up there (and back at a later stage). It's a pitty that Sea Dragon was never developed. Hundred of tonnes at a reasonable price, plus it could be launched from international waters, meaning that no national bureaucracy has a say in it.