The very same you can find on Earth. They can be extracted with the very same techniques. It will be about three orders of magnitude more expensive. Good luck getting rich!
:-)
2007-12-10 07:17:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Given the cost of transportation from the Moon of $100,000 per pound of payload, mining on our closest celestial body is pretty much out of the question. If mining there is financially out of the question, then mining elsewhere is also financially an impossibility.
This does not preclude returning samples from a mission which is already planned and budgeted for another reason.
One pound or ten pounds would make little difference to the overall mission objective.
Remember that all payloads must be launched and accelerated to Escape Velocity from the target planet.
Acceloeration is accomplished by burning rocket fuel
at so much per second and for a duration depending upon the wieght of the body being accelerated. So, the more payload you attempt to bring home, the more fuel it will
take to get it home. And, what is most important, you have to launch that fuel from Earth and carry it all the way to your distant objective without mishap to use when blasting off for the return voyage. In rather obtuse terms, that is one heck of a lot of fuel to carry around, and you only get one shot at using it to come home.
2007-12-10 07:35:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by zahbudar 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
Well, generally, the theory is that heavier materials stayed close to the sun (hence Mercury's mass), and that lighter elements were blown into the outer solar system (The gas giants) - so, you could expect to find higher concentrations of gold on Mercury & venus than on Earth; I also read that gold was detected on Eros - but I can't find any articles confirming this.
Extracting would be a whole other matter... it would be *very* expensive to mine them - and I don't think it would ever become practical.
2007-12-10 07:37:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by quantumclaustrophobe 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Unless its diamonds or something its not going to be practical on cost grounds alone.
2007-12-10 07:20:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by dontknoweither 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
helium3--is on the moon--that's what everyone wants-it is supposed to fix all the earths energy needs-supposed to anyway http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/401227.stm
2007-12-10 07:35:35
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
you would have to get planning permision first The rest would be easy
2007-12-10 07:23:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋