What Happened To Space Mining? 

It would take 30 years of heavy investment which capitalist would never do because of how capitalism is structured. If some billionaires donated to the public sector so collaboration governments could create an efficient space hook for exiting orbit but even then asteroid mining ships equipped with robots and 3d printing technology would be a bigger investment.

@@richardlyman2961 he already did the best part, he cut the cost of a rocket building to the companys. thats enough

@@kuroitenshi1632 true, so let him screw around with twitter I guess. He’s kinda earned it, just hope he doesn’t bankrupt himself

Given Earth's population is declining, there is no point for "space mining". Because mineral cost is only getting cheaper as human population collapse

Exactly I don't think any of THESE People will be able to get the job Done..BUT they will plan out and take the first steps that Future generations will use to achieve this.

Have you seen the killer asteroid coming

Yeah but as the moon is a disk which is very clear to any half intelligent person how do you mine a holographic disk that they have been recording the fact that with great regularity stars are clearly seen through the moon. Thus why no matter howler away or close and what ever angle the exact same angular perspective is seen by everyone but this is my thinking this last bit the Nth Skies see a mirror image as its translucent thus giving the illusion its a Nth-Sth issue which it is not ...well not spherically speaking! British Astrological Society I believe records these events and has for 200 years I believe! Like mining a rice cracker don't you think...one that no one has landed on obviously! Damn right you got a problem Houston! Stop hogging all the Helium!

Good explenation.. Are you an Economist?

Fantastic analysis. That's such a great point..Who knows what the world could look like if platinum were as affordable as copper.

Yeah, they always gripe about it crashing the price of e.g. gold, yet electrum , a 50/50 mix of gold and silver, makes excellent electrical wire. its resistance is so low its practically a superconductor and would be great for hose wiring. But only if the cost gets down to that of copper.

water...

@@Trigger200284 water’s actually hella cheap if you’re mining oxygen since hydrogen is super light weight. I have a feeling if capturing water is challenging it’ll end up being a lower priority since oxygen is super common.

Space habitats yes. But humans won't live in space permanently until it will be "safe", with less risks to health. Moon is the first and only option for a long time. Mars is a lost cause as long as there isn't any fast enough spacecraft to maintain sustainable transport back and forth. Asteroid mining will take off earlier than space tourism to Mars. We need energy from the sun. And for that, you need resources from asteroids to build the infrastructure around orbit.

@@Max.J.H. Completely disagree. There will almost certainly be a million people living on Mars this century, I don’t expect we’ll have a million people in space habitats for at least another hundred and fifty years.

​@@mynameismatt2010 What makes you think there will be so many people there? Mars is dead. There's no reason to live there yet. You need to send a lot of reasources and robots in advance, which can develop infrastructure for colonists. To reach a milion in 2100, we should send 14k a year starting from 2030. That's quite a number. Imposible to reach before 2050. Habitats on the Moon are far less demanding and a lot easier to sustain.

It was always hype and delusion and largely still is. I am an aerospace engineer who moved into the Australian mining industry after meeting Harrison Schmitt (Apollo 17) in 2002. At that time he was talking up the possibility of mining the moon for Helium-3. I went looking for real practical experience and was lucky because at the time Australia went on a mining construction boom to feed China raw materials. What I got was an education in practical mining, site construction, maintenance, mineral processing, logistics and importantly INFRASTRUCTURE. Before you even start digging mine sites need a staggering array of infrastructure for power and water. I can tell within seconds that most of these people have never even visited a working mine. I have actually built them and worked on them. When real mining people see this stuff they can't stop laughing.

@@tonywilson4713 when they say mining they also mean redirecting big rocks floating in space towards earth where they can the mining (these rocks can contain very valuable materials like gold and diamond...)

It's always the ignorant loud group who think they know better. The smarter ones are the not so vocal group because they know, they act first and talk later.

@@onsokumaru4663 Very well put. There was a great British TV Series called _"Hustle"_ about a team of conmen, who do complex lomg cons like the one done in the film _"the Sting."_ At the very end of the very last episode they talk to the audience about NOT GETTING conned. The make the point that honest people can't be conned. People looking for the easy way or people who cheat can be conned. Its right here at 49:50 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-OMisS2AjnYA.html

😆👽👊

Glass Air whent self owned, but when hard times hit no one had any money to reinvest so it went belly up. Most people spend what they make and if they saved they would not want to reinvest when 90% of the other employees didn't. They would want more ownership and you are back to some owning and making more than others. Your idea is pure communist!

You know that adage "If product is free, than you are the product". Well, that is not entirely true: even if product's price is not zero, you are the product. Those who are more rewarded in the chain of production are ones who mine you, the customer, because you are harder to produce than material product is. Material production is streamlined and mature, hunting customers is (hopefully) not that predictable and certain.

I used to work in the commercial space industry, and it is rife with inequality. The people who actually do the work of making rockets and supporting the systems, make way less than business "leaders" who's actual involvement in the projects is negligible.

@@Shredderbox so true

All those helium balloons I ran around with as a kid...

😂😂😂 oh no, you let it get away!!

Astroid: oooo... A planet with life. PREPARE TO DIE!!!💥 Astroid Miner's: oooo... RESOURCES! GET HIM!!!⛏️🤑 Astroid: Oh...Noooooo....🫤

"Sir, its getting away!!" "PREPARE FOR RAMMING SPEED!'

Ruin more places that don't belong to humanity. Disgusting 🤢

@@Fido-vm9zi If we put a flag on it becomes ours then right? Either way, I would rather put all the damaging mining and manufacturing on lifeless planets and asteroids than here on Earth

I mean we could use that to our advantage and effectively just drop things from orbit using Aldrin cyclers.

@@KRYMauL I agree but the people in charge think too small. They gear everything to chemical propulsion and small ships with out gravity. The larger ships built in space that never land atomic power could transport people and supplies anywhere in our solar system in comfort.

@@KRYMauL The cycler ships don't need as much delta v. They start in orbit and increase delta v to get to where they are going and use gravitational bodies to help. Larger reactors could be used the energy buffered super cooled condensers. Then use large vasmir engines. The buffers can recharge in orbit and on the way to location. The vasmir is variable specific impulse which is the most efficient. It is like gears in a car. You use the same power out put but decrease the mass of the propelant as you get to higher speed. This well give you higher specific impulse.

Except WHY should we go up there in the first place? Unless space benefits us down here, there is no reason to go up there.

Space mining (basic formula): asteroid mining drone, transporting drone, processing drone, and SpaceX interstellar cargo rocket drones to transport resources back to earth.

I am an aerospace engineer who moved into the Australian mining industry after meeting Harrison Schmitt (Apollo 17) in 2002. At that time he was talking up the possibility of mining the moon for Helium-3. I went looking for real practical experience and was lucky because at the time Australia went on a mining construction boom to feed China raw materials. What I got was an education in practical mining, site construction, maintenance, mineral processing, logistics and importantly INFRASTRUCTURE. Before you even start digging mine sites need a staggering array of infrastructure for power and water. I can tell within seconds that most of these people have never even visited a working mine. I have actually built them and worked on them. When real mining people see this stuff they can't stop laughing and can barley comprehend how anyone can believe them.

@@tonywilson4713 Are you suggesting that asteroid/moon mining is impractical at our current level of technology? What if we set up a mining station in fixed orbit, and bring asteroids to that station for processing? Could use massive solar arrays or nuclear power, and have centripetal gravity if needed for extraction purposes.

@@ChickensAndGardening Not suggesting but stating it for a fact. The idea you could just move an asteroid from where they are to Low Earth Orbit is nothing but Star Trek fantasy. Here's something I tell people who go on about this nonsense. Jeff Bezos has claimed he wants to move the heavy industries like iron ore processing into Low Earth Orbit where there's lots of sun light 24/7 to use and you don't have to worry about pollution. One of the iron ore mines I once worked on has a capacity of about 20 million tons a year. Its a good example because the math is very easy. At about 70% iron by weight that produces about 14 million tons of raw iron a year ready to make stuff out of. The Space Shuttle could bring back from LEO 14 tons of payload which was about 13-1/2 tons more than anything else. So if you want to bring back those 14 million tons of iron ore from LEO it would take about 1 million Space Shuttle flights. Australia in total produces about 815 million tons of iron ore a year which would require over 40 million Space Shuttle Flights. Even if we made a new magic rocket that was 100 times better than the Space Shuttle that's still 400,000 flights a year. And so you know Australia produces less that 1/3rd of the worlds iron ore. Sorry but its 99.99% space fantasy nonsense. The other 0.01% is however very interesting. There are some very rare materials available from places like the moon where for those very rare substances the option of mining them in space is plausible. World Platinum production is about 215 tons a year and our needs there have been growing. If we can get a rocket that makes the logistics practical then that's plausible. If Helium-3 were to become the main fuel for nuclear fusion that needs about 5-9 Space Shuttle Flights to power the entire planet each year. But the issue there is nobody yet has a power station that runs on Helium-3. At the end of the day its just guys selling visions of the future.

I agree.

@@tonywilson4713 Mining for earth use is not worth it in most cases. But mining in space for space is.

Bezos's Blue Origin company is a vanity project. Whereas, Musk's SpaceX is a real space ship doing real work.

Neither musk nor bezos have the technology to mine asteroids. Also, they're not investing their billions in space mining. Musk is more focused on mars, bezos is more towards the space tourism.

​@@ChickensAndGardening When Elon directed some of his effort to SpaceX, people said the same. It takes time to do real work. But you gotta start - that's where Blue Origin is currently.

Let me point this out for you 8$ a month x 300million potential customers + a 300$ startup cost then realize 50$ alone and how far that would compete with the rest of the country Waymo is in 30 states and 6 countries we can automate production down to energy production and transportation down to nothing with the right battery and solar alone slowly fueling all of Americas needs which we have been we have factories out in the middle of nowhere doing just this New Mexico grows how many pounds of fish in a desert that isnt polluted with all that microplastic and 100% done in aquaponics some states are smart with there infrastructure and then when your a republican state full of morons who constantly show what hypocrisy looks like and what failures to capitalism looks like i mean look at new mexico if you need a good reference republicans get in all they build is clubs and wastes of money democrat gets in hospitals and food water security boom republican gets in reverts alot of those achievements for man

WRONG!!! Bezos's Blue Origin is NOT up there, except by law suits, political gifts and getting government money for his own sub orbital toys while SpaceX is the one, and only one, that is up there! There is no comparison!

Or crash the asteroid on the Moon and mine it there. Potentially very dangerous. Difficult (or maybe impossible) to get international political support for such a procedure. In theory extremely lucrative, since the Moon is relatively close and will have a lot of supporting/synergistic infrastructure soon.

Attaching thrusters to a asteroid makes no sense at all. You mine and process it where it is. With a large ship built in orbit with gravity.

@@clementvining2487 the asteroid that Elon Musk has his eye on moves around within the Asteroid belt. In 2026 its orbit will lead it to outside the belt close to Mars. Because it's an asteroid in the belt, attaching thrusters to the asteroid to move it out of the belt to safely mine it without the fear of other objects colliding into your operation.

@@Christopher-tz3mr Bad idea it may come apart and take too much power.

Just the idea of “bringing” an asteroid ANYWHERE near earth is just dangerous. If taken to its logical conclusion then earth’s orbit will be filled with asteroids, a little too crowded for my taste.

I'd rather have NASA hire these guys as engineers, and everyone's expertise is put together, under one roof, for the benefit of all. All the new technology invented, all the best of everyone coming together. You know, like we used to? But no...we'd rather be greedy and compete against each other, while giving government money to individual companies because they have great lobbyists... No one wants to share. We want to OWN! And of course, with no treaty, they'd never think that unscrupulous corporations or government bodies might attack those "honey bees" and steal the resources for themselves, since you're ONLY thinking of profit? o_O (15:26)

Julius Caesar built two walls encircling the city of Alesia and defending their wall from an outside attack from over 300,000 Gallic soldiers. Anything can be done with the right plan and support.

@@praetorianstride5948 President Kennedy also rallied the nation to send man to the Moon in just ten years time. The issue at hand isn’t whether something can or cannot be done.

@@williamyoung9401 *Soviet Anthem start playing in the background*

i think china will have the stomach the capitalists wont. for them its about securing rare earth mineral supply, practically forever. not about selling it. when you bring such extreme amounts of supply, the value will go to zero. there is no profit incentive.

We don’t have unlimited resources, maybe that’s the problem space mining solves.

The expensive part are taking the miners out to space and succesfully landing those materials back to earth and transporting them to where they'll be sold, since you have to land them in the oceans. Mining them and transporting them to a moon base or an space platform, say we build a platform orbitting mars which is the closest to the asteroid belt, we could easily explore Mars or create whatever we want to make there and it'd be extremely cheap, and probably done mostly by AI excluding the humans that'd probably be at the platform, since you need next to nothing in fuel to propulse spaceships at incredibly high speeds in space. So yes, asteroid mining is definitely the future, but it's not the type of future people expect of bringing those materials down to earth, but rather to build and manufacture stuff out there for usage outside our planet. It's the future of humanity, providing we stop our society's self destruction and we stop feeding media and their bs, abusing human emotions to make money out of biased news and we start focusing more on the future rather than short-term profit and changes.

@@williamnguyen2411 I'm thinking the same thing, like they talk about platinum for example, OK if we still have platinum in the soil, i understand that it is not appealing to go mine it in space, but what about the other ressource? like, i dunno, let me use the shield in marvel that is suppose to be "the entire planet reserve in that one shield" (because i don't have anything else that come to mind for the example) well, mining in space would make that finite ressource into an infinite ressource, allowing us to build more of them than what we can at the current time.... Another example would be paladium, we have a finite amount of it on earth, there is not a lot of mine of it and it is pretty rare, we cannot build a lot of thing that require paladium so much that the junkyard where all our electronic go, there is scavenger looking for it because we don't have more, if we find an asteroid with paladium in it, we could start manufacturing more stuff that we could ever right now because right now we are running out of it...

Precisely. Giant moon bases and space ships will only happen when the materials needed to build those things dont have to expensively escape earths gravity well. Space mining is the only way to have a true human presence in space.

It's not ...sorry!

@@kevt6151 Why dont you think so sir?

@@Dr.Cr0w Because he just enjoys trolling.

easily is a strong word

Until we run out of the moon.

@@godofnothing520 Or until some country dominates the production just for their own nation only. China is very Hyper nationalistic when it comes to resources they covet for their own.

@@godofnothing520 Yeah. How long should that take? A million years?

Yes, because arrogant humans, who think everything belongs to a few, need to destroy the moon next.

Or maybe if we build the infrastructure to get into space a lot cheaper like sky hooks.

Yah when asteroids are like the distance from the earth to the moon or far more

Yeah skipped the video (which I assume was poorly researched and full of laughable mistakes) and am reading like you. Hehe.

Yep. Musk fanboys who know everything, average age 12, who know everything and have been brainwashed from birth!

Yes. Because I ♥ imagining thoughts.

@MegOh! Businesses yeah, not so much of a book guy; make a video about that book, im all ears; educational enough for me meghan.

Make sense

there is no disagreement that it is possible. just that if it will be a free market profit incentive venture or tax-paid "good for mankind" venture, like china.

@MegOh! Businesses I'd love to hear what exactly wouldn't work in reality as I've done countless hours of research on this topic.

Sounds pretty good. People like the previous poster would steal claims in the darkness of space, that is why they say it won't work. But most people can read and write and follow directions, so it could work. We are centuries away from making it commercially viable, and it will take investments at a global level as well as a cessation of silly terrestrial wars that benefit the few while costing the many. Space terrorism/war would be relatively cheap for the aggressor and expensive for the victim and losses would be hard to replace.

@MegOh! Businesses well people only 120 years ago would laugh you out of the room if you said that in 20 years time there would be reliable heavier than air flight sooooooo

@MegOh! Businesses Yes, yes. The Earth is flat, what was I thinking.

@@FinGeek4now Research alone isn't enough. For one those things you mentioned is true. But it is more efficient to mine and process the ore where it is. On earth there are these large fishing factories that fish and process and can the fish on the ship. Then when it is full they bring it where it needs to go. They get more for the finished goods. Anyway if you build large mining ships in orbit with gravity powered by liquid fuel molten salt reactors you can take the byproduct (thorium)from mining processed ore and use for fuel for the reactors. Use water for air water and propelant. It well be self maintained until full and get a enormous amount more for the goods. All metal could be on very large spools for 3d printing to deliver anywhere needed. Or another ship could take delivery. A ship like this would have enough power for processing in space the main way of construction in space and findly on earth well be 3d printing. These spools of metal well be very valuable compared to the ore.

I think they named a Canadian Junior High after him 😄

Kind of undercuts the authority of the speaker when she doesn't know how to pronounce the name of the world's most famous astrophysicist, lol.

Hey, he's an astrophysicist; not an economist, lol.

Nah, they have same goals, just one has a better spokesperson.

😡 😡 😡

but instantly becoming the largest supplier of rare elements would probably make you pretty rich.

@@a_person5660 For sure, but even on Earth the cost of extracting and processing REEs is high, then add to that the cost of engineering a sophisticated and risky space mission. Not sure the economics really work out that well. Still would be interesting to see. I think deep-sea mining is more likely to happen any time soon.

Yeah but the price of platinum, cobalt, uranium, etc isn't artificial

That argument is an over simplification of the economics. The price is determined by how much the demander is willing to pay to have something and how much the supplier is willing to to be payed to provide their ressources. And this is influenced by a combination of the number of suppliers, the number of demanders and the cost of production. If you have a small number of demanders and a high number of suppliers, the demander are the ones that drive prices, this is what we observe with farmer and retail the farmers have almost no bargaining power. If you have a large number of demanders and a small number of supplier it's the opposite and is what we observe with as you noted the diamond industry but also the oil industry. And finally if the cost of production is higher than the selling point well without some form of aid the suppliers will go out of business. If you are the one flooding the market then you have control over the price.

You’re comparing something that is a luxury item to things arhat are needed in everyday products. Not a good comparison.

100+ years MAYBE

Same 😂

Cardassian lies

for this reason i believe in the future mining in space will be more useful when we have the means to process said material in space and build with it in space. Would allow for space colonies to be much more self sustainable and allow us to build much, much larger more efficient spacecraft because you don't have that little atmosphere or earth's gravity problem. Sad it will most likely not happen in our lifetimes

@@nick123nak6 .. Depends on how old you are.

Currect technology is not the problem it is how we use current technologies. The applied physics and engineering is there but used the wrong way.

@@nick123nak6 Well surprise we have the technology to build large space ships now with gravity. We also have the technology to power them for over half a century. But the people who control the money don't want it. The technology is disruptive and would put them out of power.

@@clementvining2487 .. Please explain.

I hope planetcracking is a thing in future lol

@@technofanable and I hope there are no markers XD

I'm not sure I trust this Trans Astra. Sounds to me like they're trying to spin pretty stories to get not only venture capital, but also government money to run their "business." They haven't produced a thing, except pretty stories. Maybe we should leave this to NASA to try out for the next few decades, before we start giving companies all our money on future prospects that never pan out? Even the spokesman realizes he's spinning a line. (8:18) "Just look at OUR projections. We guarantee, you'll make money." Never heard that one before... Any company can be "revenue positive" with government money. "5-7 year time frame." Right...

This is human stupidity, it wont change. Some of us realize that, but we cant speak up because we dont have the voice. The only thing that can wake us up is a global catastrophe, i cabt think of other way, no movement will rise up because they care and say money is the biggest problem humanity faces.

@MegOh! Businesses youre the living proof of human stupidity, not even a joke

Money is just a simpler way of determining the value of someone's efforts and products than bartering sheep for clothing for water for cooking oil for weapons for prostitutes for drugs, etc. People have always been bad at setting fair value, it is just more obvious in a monetary system than in a barter system. In a barter system, the con-man leaves the rube feeling good about his trade. In a monetary system, the con-man tells the rube what to do all day while playing on Facebook and makes 3x the money, so it is more obviously unfair.

@@kylesmith8128 Money is a human invention. The universe doesn’t care how much money you have. The resources are there for the taking. They are basically infinite. Value, ie “Supply and demand” no longer makes sense when the supply is infinite.

@@oregonsbragia So what are the slaves going to produce with these resources?

Not more thrust but more fuel yes but the plan is probably to produce fuel insitu. Once you are orbital the amount of thrust is much less important than when taking off. This is because when you are taking off you need to produce more thrust than the weight of your vehicles but once you are in orbit your weight is 0. Having higher thrust is still helpful as it allows you for shorter burn limiting gravity drag but these gain are almost nothing compared to using a more efficient engine and their are mitigating methods like simply doing multiple burns at the optimal orbital point. This is what we see at 9:02, that orbit is what we would observe by doing multiple boost burn at perigee..

@@gavinkemp7920 thank you for replying back. I fully get what you wrote, but you are talking about the orbit. If the mining vehicle would have to return to earth to sell the materials, then wouldn’t the vehicle require additional thrust during the landing process to earth considering it would have the original mass minus burned fuel plus the mined materials?

​@@nickiogr well you would need a very good reason to return the mining vehicle. it would make more sense to leave it their as it could continue mining will the ship is bringing the ressources back to earth. As for landing that will depend on how you are landing but it will involve the use of an aerobreak, baring a massive breakthrough in propulsion technology. as such you need little fuel to land assuming you choose propulsive landing rather than parachutes. For example if we take starship as an example it needs about 1200 tons of propellant to reach orbit (and that is ignoring super heavy) but only 29 tons to land. so even full of valuable ores the returning starship will be much lighter than when it took off.

The metals can be returned ballistically, so you just need the additional fuel to get you back to earth orbit.

@@gavinkemp7920 There is a better way.

no! don't tax them for space mining. its way better for the environment then earth mining

@@Wyatt125 Space is infinite. Therefore, the potential profits of exploiting space are infinite, and must be taxed.

@@firefox39693 Which countries tax rates are you referring to? Country A has high taxes for stuff, but Country B has low taxes.

@@Puzzoozoo We need an international way to tax the rich, like private jets and stuff.

@@Puzzoozoo Any country that has the highest possible tax rates, royalties, and the best social safety net would be the best country to emulate. You need a way to collect the money, then distribute that money in order for it to bring a widespread benefit to the economy.

hehe. Damn belters always griping about poor working conditions. ;)

I think the economics of space mining only works out when you keep the materials in space, for example to build orbital structures. It's currently too expensive to bring materials back to the Earth's surface, even if you don't need to worry about oxygen and cabin temperatures (within reason). Some day when we have figured out a "sky hook" or "space elevator" which lets you cheaply send things and people up and down the gravity well, though even then, tons of mined lithium or iron are going to be problematic.

WHAT!?!! A OLD SHUTTLE YOU SAY!?!!! Are you serious?! You don't know much about the shuttle, do you? I don't think you thought this through!

The Space Shuttle was not capable of that. It was designed for missions in low earth orbit, not interplanetary travel. Just because something can reach low earth orbit doesn't mean that it can go into deep space and back. Leaving Earth, then stopping at an asteroid, then accelerating back again with cargo requires such a high fuel-to-payload-ratio that it is barely possible at all as long as we use chemical rockets.

You pretty much have to try and keep it quiet? How much you have and then severely limit the amount you release to keep prices high..much like the diamond trade

Not quite. A sudden introduction of materials in a system creates DEFLATION, which is good! The reason the Spanish example happened as it did was they based their currency itself on gold and silver, so when silver prices collapsed, so did the currency. Today currency is not tethered to a metal, which is good, introduces its own problems, but not this one

@@akashgarg9776 interesting, thanks for the reply

only after humanity starts running out of some rare earth minerals. id wager at least 100 years.

That’s the part we don’t care about, it’s only about the money.

That’s not how it works and the “resources” are far from endless. Its essentially just a mine but in space rather then underground.

the opposite... it only crashes the rare earth mineral market... but it enables other markets to soar now that they actually have a future when rare earth minerals are in forever abundance..you just need to sell your rare earth mineral-related stocks and buy new ones.

exactly. btw it's also known as tritium

Not a good idea to mess with the moon

The western world is realizing that oil and gas are two sources we cannot depend upon.. mainly because of the evil forces selling them (Russia & countries in Middle East). Therefore, it is more likely that Europe (at least) focuses on other sources of energy.. probably renewable because it's able to be produced domestically. A single Saudi Arabian person will not be the first trillionaire lol actually once oil becomes obsolete, they'll be poor.

Saudis will run out of money before they run out of oil.

If another company brought down the space diamonds, obviously De Beers no longer has a monopoly. And many diamonds are artificially made today anyways, far cheaper.

@@TheBooban that shows that you have no clue of what is really going on they would still have a monopoly on it for sure. Diamonds right now as it is or so plentiful that they could sell a 1 carat diamond for $100 and still make a nice profit but they don't let people know about that they keep it a secret.

She must be white

Why are you old?

Automated asteroid mining would definitely be good, moreso for a Martian colony. The mining of hundreds of tons of water ice from asteroids for delivery to Mars would be extremely good, especially with advances in new types of propulsion. I think as it stands right now, asteroid mining for Earth cities/businesses isn't feasible, because things that we require on Earth are always on Earth. For colonies on celestial bodies, however, it's definitely more feasible and maybe even their only option.

My thoughts also, and at 65 I to will never live long enough to see it happen. Hope the next world gives me a ring side sea to go with immortality. :)

Right...they would need some kind of space force to protect mines......oh wait....

I don't think he is professional

@@infraredimmortalerth What do you mean? I didn't say anything about him being professional. He voiced other space documentaries back then for people too

We have such law and it is forbidden.

There was an ocean floor mining agreement and many of the mineral rights were given to dirt poor nations . Last I heard big western corporations signed away the rights for a pittance and bribing corrupt officials . Ultimately no matter what the intentions the wealth ultimately ends up with big corporations.

but what about space pirates? bet you didn't think about that one