Why haven't we built small robot's (minning machines) and sent them into the asteroids to harvest the ore there and then use it to make objects for consumption on earth, or to make more robot's to mine more asteriods?
2006-06-14 10:50:47 · 9 answers · asked by Spacecars 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Other - Science
because the cost of building robots and sending them out to space to mine these asteriods, then transporting the ore back to earth is more than the ore itself. We will begin to harvest space junk when space travel becomes cheaper.
2006-06-14 10:53:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A number of companies are exploring the possibility and NASA and the Commerce department have both established Space Commercialization offices that are dealing with that subject among others. Mining will only be economically feasible under two sets of circumstances though. First, if the value of the ore mined (AND REFINED) in space must exceed the overall cost of the effort to mine it. And second, would be both government and commercial efforts to produce construction grade materials in space for delivery to construction sites in orbit, on the moon, or on other planets, when the cost of delivery from earth would cost more.
2006-06-14 10:57:43 · answer #2 · answered by Rick T 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
could desire to mankind have the technologies? particular. DOES mankind have the technologies? NO. Stuff like it particularly is two hundred-500 years away. we'd decide for greater rockets and the skill to construct issues a lot greater than the area Station is area. those technologies do exactly no longer exist yet.
2016-12-08 09:12:38 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
simply put cost vs benefit it would lliterally cost millions per mining robot, much less targeting systems, transport, transport of minerals back to earth etc... meanwhile asteroids contain mainly large amounts of iron, which we have in plentiful supply here on earth.... Note.. we dont destroy our iron sources.. if we start running short, all we need do is to start recycling.. but there is no real fear of that in the immediate future
2006-06-14 10:56:50 · answer #4 · answered by Thomas P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
its probably to expensive for the government, but the idea seems to make sense except what if the asteroid hit a planet? then all the technology would be lost
2006-06-14 10:54:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Economics. At this point, technology that would be used to do such operations would not generate enough income for it to be profitable. Profit is the biggest motivator for anything to happen in today's world.
2006-06-14 10:54:30 · answer #6 · answered by quntmphys238 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what would we want from asteroids would be a better question, probably radioactive from the rays of the sun and unusable because of it
2006-06-14 11:47:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
My guess? I'm not a scientist, but you would have to get close enough to them, be able to land on them, and maybe catch up with one.
2006-06-14 10:54:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Too expensive. And since that's the case, please don't suggest that the US try it (as long as Bush is in office). ;-)
2006-06-14 10:55:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋