47
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] just_another_person@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Well this is an insane plan. The most obvious problem being the fuel required to round trip materials collection. Next, there's how to decelerate the payload into Earth's atmosphere.

Really, I think the biggest one nobody talks about is: what are the negative effects of adding more mass to Earth over time? If you're talking about mining an entire dwarf planet and bringing that mass back here, then that would have to have some negative consequences.

[-] Bimfred@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Right now, the Earth is losing mass at about 55 000 tons per year. Yes, losing. About 100 000 tons of hydrogen and helium escapes the upper atmosphere, partially offset by roughly 45 000 tons of dust and meteorites getting scooped up along our orbit.

Considering this has been happening for millions of years, I think we're quite safe from affecting the Earth's mass and orbit within the span of even centuries.

But it's much more likely that the majority of material mined and processed in space will not be coming down to Earth. It's much better put to use in orbital construction, or shallower gravity wells like the Moon and Mars.

You're entirely right that getting to the rocks, and getting the mined stuff to where it's actually useful, are gonna be a problem. Maybe we'll finally get some nuclear thermal engines, cause the shite ISP of chemical rockets is really insufficient for these trips and ain't no one wanna wait on the gravity assists.

load more comments (8 replies)
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
47 points (87.3% liked)

Futurology

1670 readers
88 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS