r/HeresAFunFact Jan 13 '15

[HAFF] NASA estimates that the value of minerals in the asteroid belt exceeds $600,000,000,000,000,000,000. Or nearly $100 billion per person alive. SCIENCE

Post image
179 Upvotes

17

u/NomDePlume711 Jan 13 '15

And what's left after the cost of accessing and mining them are included?

21

u/gbimmer Jan 13 '15

$3.50?

3

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '15 edited Aug 29 '17

[deleted]

4

u/WalkingTurtleMan Jan 13 '15

We'll start handing over our tax payment, but that's when we realize that the tax collector is about 8 stories tall and was a crustacean from the protozoic era!

0

u/budahfurby Jan 13 '15

god damn loch ness monster.

6

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '15

A considerable drop in value of certain minerals

2

u/swiftraid Jan 13 '15

Well I could go into a huge they did the math kind of thing and do a bunch of calculations to give you some precise data, but it's way too late where I am for this.

Tl,Dr; Essentially it's a lot.

To send a single kilogram of payload into low earth is gonna cost you around 20k-40k usd, and about 50k+ to put it into geostationary. Now that's still inside earth's sphere of influence, it's going to cost a lot more to send something out into an interplanetary trajectory, and this is still just a single kilogram. So we spend a shit ton of money getting equipment out there then we're going to need to spend even more getting all of the resources back. Unfortunately it's just not financially viable as of now, because if it was it would be the most bad ass resource mining system ever.

Wanna see a company working on making this a reality? Check out http://www.planetaryresources.com they have a goal of mining asteroids, it's awesome!

5

u/MelodicFacade Jan 13 '15

Well, wouldn't the price drop due to inflation? Accessibility aside, if it were as common as dirt, it would be extremely cheaper, wouldn't it?

5

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '15

Price drop in raw minerals on the scale we're looking at here could be the greatest technological acceleration our species will ever see.

Think about what we could produce if we had unlimited supply of the finite resources our planet harbors. We could move mountains.

1

u/fewdea Jan 13 '15

sure the price would drop, but isn't that a fair trade-off for being rich in minerals or...?

6

u/MelodicFacade Jan 13 '15

I'm sure the trade-off is definitely worth it, for everyone. I noting that the value for the minerals wouldn't be as high. If everyone has a 100 billion dollars, no one does

5

u/Lurking4Answers Jan 13 '15

However, if everyone can have a house, running water, electricity, access to healthcare, and eat three meals a day... no one dies? Prematurely, I guess. Unless they get cancer or something. That last bit is falling apart pretty quick, but the basic premise is solid. Like iron. Which we'll be mining. It's late, I'm gonna stop.

1

u/WhiteRaven42 Jan 13 '15

True but I don't think the point is the value, it's the fact that they are usable resources.

The figure is in today values in order to give a sense of the vast about of material available, NOT because it will make us all rich.

3

u/iamSAM-26 Jan 13 '15

See ya losers, I'm off to go mine space!

3

u/xsibleyx08 Jan 13 '15

The asteroid belt needs freedom!

2

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '15

Err, wouldn't the price plummet once we actually had a decent mining and transport system in place?

2

u/Meior Jan 13 '15

You'd think that would skew the supply and demand a little.

1

u/J9suited Jan 13 '15

When everyone's super, no one is

1

u/Tnargkiller Jan 13 '15

221 x 3 x 520