Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by electromagnetic 5685 days ago
This is quite simply amazing news. The implications are astounding, beyond the mere selfish prospect of one day travelling to space as a tourist.

Considering a loose estimate on the value of the asteroid belt is like $5(10^20), it could literally be a new gold rush. It would be awesome (to the true definition of the word) if one day our manufactured goods are being landed from space rather than shipped across the ocean.

Beyond that, I envy my offspring that could one day live in space as if it were mundane.

2 comments

I agree with the sentiment, but there are some practical problems.

Barring a machine intelligence explosion in the next half-century, we'll probably be getting to orbit on rockets.

Nitrous oxide and methane are two big greenhouse gasses. So to get to space, we're going to have to dump a whole lot more of this stuff into the atmosphere.

Note, I haven't run the numbers, so I may well sound like an idiot by noon.

Not all rocket fuels are the same. Falcon 9 appears to run on kerosene and LOX, which combusts into H2O and CO2. H20 is all but a noop (technically a greenhouse gas but cycles very quickly and you're not going to affect the net balance with a rocket), and while the CO2 may be a concern, bear in mind that as big as a rocket may be visually it isn't necessarily a big contributor relative to the rest of the industrialized planet as a whole.

Also, remember that one of the things a practical commercial space program will do is start mining the asteroid belt for rare earth metals, many of which are needed for green technologies. For instance, one problem with fuel cells is that there isn't enough platinum on Earth to make them for everybody. It is not hard to spin the math such that private spaceflight could be one of the greenest things to ever happen to industry. (And I felt I should be honest about the word "spin", but there is a truth there too. One must make full accountings to decide whether something is good, not count up the costs, ignore the benefits, and make grand pronouncements.)

Brings new meaning to carbon footprint?
One thing that I have learned in the past is that large problems can often be completely absolved simply by growing beyond them. As an example, during the industrial revolution, cities were covered in soot. They were a mess. But we plowed ahead instead of saying "gee, we should stick with current technology and stop expanding until we fix the soot", and look where we are now. Today's power makes 1800's power look like a pigsty, purely as a side effect of our growth & development.

What I mean to say is, if past experiences are any indicator, supposing we push on into space, carbon footprints will probably become a concern of the past- most likely due to some development we couldn't possibly have foreseen from our current vantage point. (what 1800's coal plant worker could have foreseen nuclear reactors?)

The classic example of this is the 'manure crisis' at the end of the 19th century. Since commerce and transportation over land and in cities usually required horses at that time, a simple calculation in 1894 by the Times of London forecasted that every street in London would be covered in 9 feet of horse manure by 1950. http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2010/04/weve-recently-had-some-di...
Even just from the ideas we're already aware of, expanding into space could render global warming irrelevant. Things like solar energy collectors, space industry, tethers for transporting raw materials.

Humans have a very big problem with paying attention to the bigger picture. Carbon emissions are only relevant if we still need fossil fuels to run our industry. In space, without oxygen we'll be using nuclear or solar as power sources not hydrocarbons.

I'm pretty sure Carbon Footprint will go the way of Nuclear Winter. While still technically true, the politics and trends will move on and the term will fade into obscurity. There are just too many things to fret about in the world, and humans, constantly exposed to anything eventually assimilate it into background noise.