Most elaborate film viral ever or the birth of "Weyland-Yutani"?
On a serious note, if their claims for the amount of precious minerals available are true then it's going to royaly fuck up any country based on the gold standard or the Dinar.
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 8:30,
Reply)
They should nuke the entire asteroid from orbit.
It's the only way to be sure.
(
JamTallons Sokath, his eyes uncovered!, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 8:43,
Reply)
Hold on a second. That asteroid has a substantial dollar value attached to it.
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 9:58,
Reply)
Get away from her you bitch!
* hydraulic noises*
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 11:27,
Reply)
Really bad print ruins experience.
I watched Aliens at the Prinworks in Manchester a month or so ago and the print was awful. That is all.
(
atdotslash is pushing things forward, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 13:01,
Reply)
Why don't you put her in charge?
(
Jimbotfu DJ Bob Hoskins, going mental in a dustbin, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 13:32,
Reply)
This says it all
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKAn1HvmRXM
(
Fadgebadger /links's pedantic bellend, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 8:59,
Reply)
Hmm
"They struggle to see how it could be cost-effective, even with platinum and gold worth nearly £35 per gram ($1,600 an ounce). An upcoming Nasa mission to return just 60g (two ounces) of material from an asteroid to Earth will cost about $1bn." From www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-17827347
(, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 9:49, Reply)
bullshit
0:25 water in near infinite quantity?
let's go and get it!
i.e. let's go to the sea
1:18
"One asteroid may contain more platinum that has been mined in all of history."
We already have an object that contains "more platinum that has been mined in all of history."
It's called "Earth", and it's a bit closer than the asteroids
It's all a matter of finding minerals that are:
1) easy to mine
2) rich in platinum
A typical platinum mine is 1000-5000 meters underground, and gives about 3 grams of platinum per ton of mineral.
Do the maths... how much more expensive is to carry stuff around the space?
Even supposedly serious sites like popsci.com fall for it, and this makes you wonder.
Example article:
www.popsci.com/technology/article/2012-04/why-mining-asteroid-water-and-metals-isnt-quite-crazy-it-sounds
"Why Mining an Asteroid for Water and Precious Metals Isn't as Crazy as it Sounds"
Cites a research and says: "we could reel in a 500-ton asteroid by 2025 at a cost of roughly $2.6 billion. Given the value of the extractable resources, that might not be such a high price to pay. "
These idiots aren't even able to make a multiplication.
Let's assume this asteroid was by far the richest platinum ore ever found, for example a thousand times richer in platinum than the ores we find here.
500 tons of that asteroid would then give us 1.5 tons of platinum, worth about 75 million, with a cost of 2.6 billion.
In 2025, and supposing you DO find such a rich asteroid. (no-one has observed anything similar yet)
Even assuming the 500-ton asteroid was 100% made in platinum .... it would we worth a bit LESS than the 2.6T$ they are quoting.
And I won't mention the fact that when you mine on the earth you get a very little bit of platinum but a LOT more of other useful things like nickel, copper etc.
(
frox, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 9:50,
Reply)
i am all for space exploration
but for science/fun, not for phony commercial exploitation
trying to sell it as a "new gold rush" is crazy
it's more like "In search of Eldorado", actually
(
frox, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 10:03,
Reply)
Even if you're right.
Even if the worlds richest people are wrong and you're the lone voice of reason.
Who the fuck cares?
All it means is that the worlds wealthiest people have subsidised a large bit of space technology that can be built on to further science.
Or would you prefer all that wealth be hoarded?
NASAs laying people off, why shouldn't they be employed in this gamble?
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 10:07,
Reply)
in a certain way, you are right
The fact is, I doubt these people are that dumb*, and they want to get some money back for theirselves
All they REALLY plan is to send up surveying telescopes.
Then I guess they'll register their mining rights/patents/suchandsuch
And later sell it to the gullied ones.
i.e. I smell a bubble
(apart from the google guys, they have just too much money and want to invest in anything that sounds cool. I guess for them it's just a fun thing to do, which actually is)
(
frox, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 10:20,
Reply)
Well then the world would have gain a few more orbital telescopes and near earth asteroids will be better tracked.
and a few punters will lose a few quid.
I can live with that.
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 10:29,
Reply)
Exactly this
The world's richest and most pretentious will always throw silly money at stupid things, so I say let them get on with it. At least this way we get the satisfaction of stuff happening in space again.
(
Extinct Jesus Dossier BRB...gotta penis..., Thu 26 Apr 2012, 11:24,
Reply)
Very good point!
But it would be worth it if we could send Bruce Willis up for him never to return...
(
Fadgebadger /links's pedantic bellend, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 9:54,
Reply)
When you point out
"We already have an object that contains "more platinum that has been mined in all of history."
It's called "Earth", and it's a bit closer than the asteroids"
Do you know that all the platinum metals minded on Earth actually come from space? They are only found where there has been a past meteor strike. It does not occur natuarally in the Earths core / crust.
(
Lanc Weekend Trailer Park Supervisor, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 11:25,
Reply)
IIRC correctly a lot of the earths water is supposed to have come from space too.
And yes there's lots of it in the oceans the point of finding it in space is that you don't have to lift it up there then. And water + electricity = Hydrogen and oxygen which is good for fuel.
(
Amadeus I care not for your thoughts on grammer, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 11:31,
Reply)
I think it is something like
$20,000 to put 1 Litre of water into space at the moment. Having supply depots out in space will make space exploration so much cheaper and easier.
(
Lanc Weekend Trailer Park Supervisor, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 11:33,
Reply)
Or just use transporters to beam the stuff where you want it.
(
JamTallons Sokath, his eyes uncovered!, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 13:02,
Reply)
This ^
In the video accompanying the article on the BBC they point out that their main aim is in fact water and that minerals and metals are last on their list.
(
mr.dogshit The world's premier anthropomorphic canine faeces, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 12:13,
Reply)
Some figures for you.
Best guess for the maximum Pt yield is about 60 grams a tonne.
www.nss.org/settlement/asteroids/RoleOfNearEarthAsteroidsInLongTermPlatinumSupply.pdf
They're claiming a potential 100 to 1 profit ratio when you consider all the other minerals you'd get.
It makes sense if you're considering manufacturing or living in space - it'd work out cheaper to extract and process in orbit than try to lift from the Earth's surface.
(, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 16:31, Reply)
Getting very bored of this now...
All this crap is making me LESS likely to see the film, which sort of defeats the object
(
Joe Scaramanga with a G-double-O-D vibration, Thu 26 Apr 2012, 11:44,
Reply)