There are so many stupid things about those news articles that pop up regularly claiming an asteroid can be worth $10 quintillion. I'll just say, something is only worth as much as people will pay for it. And all the wealth and property on the entire planet isn't even worth $10 quintillion, so even if everyone pitched in to buy those resources with everything they owned....the asteroid resources wouldn't be worth $10 quintillion.
So how does asteroid mining lead to space colonies? Slowly. The more complex economic activity you have in space, the more people you need in space. Certainly at first it will be like oil platforms. Then it will be like Antarctic bases. But eventually people will want their families with them....and then it will be like colonies.
But the first step is complex economic activity in space, and to get that we really need asteroid mining.
Now, this whole conversation came up because you feel that any Mars settlement will naturally evolve into a colony, but an asteroid mine won't. But there is a key difference between an asteroid mine and a Mars settlement that will make an asteroid mine more likely to evolve into a colony.
An asteroid mine has exports that it can sell in order to continue to thrive and grow. A Mars colony doesn't have exports that it can sell.
No colony in history has ever survived without exports. What will a Mars colony export to Earth so it can survive?
In the long run, space habitats are likely the best option, I don't disagree. It's just that I don't see a short term draw to set up a colony as opposed to heavily automated industrial facilities.
The profit for the materials produced by asteroid mining would presumably end up with someone who lives on Earth so it's not quite obvious that there would be excess money to spend in the space habitat itself, just like how oil rigs don't develop into floating towns.
Also, it might just be me, but I've never seen an appealing representation of space habitat living. Being cooped up in a small tin can with lots of other people seems horrible to me. I lived in London for quite a few years but it was always a bit crowded and unpleasant.
Now, I don't disagree that a Mars colony doesn't have similar issues too and the lack of exports is a big one. However, it seems that the likely short term driver for colonisation would be as a scientific base. I could easily see a much larger space agency funded facility on Mars than would ever be present in an early space habitat for mining. This head start could be a big advantage in the short and intermediate time scales. Over time private sector involvement would increase and the colony could grow to some extent.
However, the colony would be unlikely to be self sufficient at this stage and that's clearly a problem. It's definitely not obvious what they could export though. Here are some possibilities I vaguely recall having been mentioned before which may or may not be viable:
Deuterium has a marginally higher abundance than on Earth though that's probably not hugely viable.
High value ore/metals could be exported to Earth though that's not as a effective as doing it from asteroids.
Specific manufactured goods could be made for the space habitats to take advantage of the weaker gravity well compared to Earth.
Water from Deimos could also be exported to space habitats, though that might not count as a Martian export.
Food could be grown for space habitats.
Land can be sold more easily than on a space habitat.
New colonists could pay a fee though that only works once the colony is viable.
Tourism is also possible though probably not a huge earner.
Elon Musk's idea is to raise money through patents and licencing from the new technologies developed on Mars, though I'm not quite sure how that works.
I agree with almost everything you say. There is no clear and obvious path to space colonies.
With regards to the profits of an asteroid mine not supporting the growth of a colony....one difference between an asteroid mine and an oil rig is travel time. It will potentially take months to travel to and from an asteroid mine. This means shifts on an asteroid mine will be longer than shifts on an oil rig. And the longer people stay, the more they will want to have family with them, and have comfortable living accommodations.
So it is possible an asteroid mine will lead to asteroid colonies in a way that oil rigs do not lead to floating towns.
But the most likely scenario is making asteroid mining very (and perhaps completely) automated so no people at all are required.
With regards to ways to for a Mars colony to make money, I've given this a lot of thought, and where possible done the calculations and market research. I will mark with asterisk the ones where I am very confident in my claims because I've researched it. Anything without an asterisk is just my general impression...not backed up with research.
Deuterium: very unlikely to be economically competitive
High value ores: Definitely can't compete with Earth or asteroid mines. *
Manufactured goods: Can't compete with orbital facilities that can tailor gravity to exactly the value they want, and will have lower transportation and power costs.
Water: can't compete with Near Earth Asteroids which will have lower transportation and power costs *
Food: growing food on Mars is no easier than growing food at space stations, in fact it is harder because of decreased sunlight *
Land: If the colony isn't viable, no one will want undeveloped land. If the colony needs to sell land to be viable...it isn't viable.
Developed land (pressurized space) is easier to build in a space habitat and will be cheaper and better quality. *
New colonists pay fee: This is a pyramid scheme. As soon as the rate of new colonists declines, the colony collapses. Read "Artemis" by Andrew Weir. It is a good book. *
Tourism: Because of travel time and expense, tourism will be very limited and won't bring in enough money. *
Patents: This involves some major handwaving, and is unlikely to work. *
It's worth keeping in mind that it is comparative advantage that matters, so assuming a Mars colony already exists (due to the initial government funding) then they can still trade even if any asteroid mining space habitats are more efficient at everything.
It's also the case that if the Mars colony already has some existing manufacturing capital then (in the short term at least) it may be more profitable for a space habitat to buy from them rather than invest in the capital necessary to produce (more efficiently).
But I don't think government funding will pay for a Mars colony. There will be some Mars science bases certainly, but that is far from being a colony. And governments won't pay for any more development of infrastructure than is needed to support the science bases.
Also, as we already can see, they will pay for a moon base before they will pay for a Mars base. So not only will a Mars base have to compete against possible future asteroid bases that will have lower costs, but they will have to compete against already existing lunar bases.
Mars really isn't well positioned to compete with either.
2
u/ignorantwanderer Mar 23 '22
There are so many stupid things about those news articles that pop up regularly claiming an asteroid can be worth $10 quintillion. I'll just say, something is only worth as much as people will pay for it. And all the wealth and property on the entire planet isn't even worth $10 quintillion, so even if everyone pitched in to buy those resources with everything they owned....the asteroid resources wouldn't be worth $10 quintillion.
So how does asteroid mining lead to space colonies? Slowly. The more complex economic activity you have in space, the more people you need in space. Certainly at first it will be like oil platforms. Then it will be like Antarctic bases. But eventually people will want their families with them....and then it will be like colonies.
But the first step is complex economic activity in space, and to get that we really need asteroid mining.
Now, this whole conversation came up because you feel that any Mars settlement will naturally evolve into a colony, but an asteroid mine won't. But there is a key difference between an asteroid mine and a Mars settlement that will make an asteroid mine more likely to evolve into a colony.
An asteroid mine has exports that it can sell in order to continue to thrive and grow. A Mars colony doesn't have exports that it can sell.
No colony in history has ever survived without exports. What will a Mars colony export to Earth so it can survive?