posted
I know many people here follow science, space programs, astronomy, etc... So you might know more about this than I do.
Are there any current theories that show possibilities for actually making money out of space programs? Are there potentially some resources out there that could make big space programs fiscally motivated? What are these resources? What are they needed for? Where could we potentially find them? Are we technologically able to use them?
Posts: 273 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
1) In the past the space program helped us by creating such things as Velcro and Micro-Computers.
2) Satellites do everything from manage our intercontinental communications system to running your GPS. All of these were $ made from Space.
3) There is a new movie out about a possible mining of the moon for Helium 3. This is a useful element in creating new forms of very powerful nuclear reactors.
4) There are more precious metals orbiting in the asteroid field than on our planet, and they don't require strip mining.
Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am about four months away from completing my orbital death ray. I fully expect it to be profitable within the year.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
a) Nickel-iron asteroids, possibly with rare earths b) Solar energy - it's raining soup c) Helium-3 on the moon
The problem with the third is that it requires working fusion reactors to make the helium-3 valuable in the first place. The other two both have the problem of getting the resources back into the Earth's economy - of course it's possible to build colonies for their own sake using asteroidal resources and solar energy, but then you've abandoned any sort of economic argument. To make money, you have to be able to trade with the existing Earth economy.
I think the best prospect in the short term is solar-energy satellites beaming down microwave power, on the grounds that this does not require you to find a way of splashing down many tons of iron without an almighty bang. Next perhaps the valuable rare earths. I don't think asteroid iron is ever going to be cheaper on the Earth's surface, but it does occur to me that if you had a lot of solar-energy satellites, you could make money from putting a big old chunk of iron in Earth orbit and selling the iron for satellite shielding. Anyone running a satellite would likely be glad to pay to make it more robust in the face of solar storms or even orbital debris; shipping enough iron up from Earth is obviously not going to happen, but if it's already in orbit it might be cheaper to make shielding than to ship a new satellite every so often.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: The other two both have the problem of getting the resources back into the Earth's economy - of course it's possible to build colonies for their own sake using asteroidal resources and solar energy, but then you've abandoned any sort of economic argument. To make money, you have to be able to trade with the existing Earth economy.
I think the best prospect in the short term is solar-energy satellites beaming down microwave power, on the grounds that this does not require you to find a way of splashing down many tons of iron without an almighty bang.
There's a Gundam joke just waiting to be made in this thread.
Posts: 691 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It occured to me that some money might be made with space tourism. I think that a lot of very rich people would be willing to pay a lot of money for a proper space trip. Not just visiting earth's upper atmosphere, but visiting a space station, spending a few days in space, spacewalking, even visiting moon.
Of course right now this would be too expensive, but maybe in a hundred years or so it could have more potential.
Posts: 273 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Russians were doing that for a while, but for whatever reason they've decided to stop that part of the program.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I should learn to not read these post while drinking pop. I always laugh and pop comes out of my nose!
Posts: 204 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tuukka: It occured to me that some money might be made with space tourism. I think that a lot of very rich people would be willing to pay a lot of money for a proper space trip. Not just visiting earth's upper atmosphere, but visiting a space station, spending a few days in space, spacewalking, even visiting moon.
Of course right now this would be too expensive, but maybe in a hundred years or so it could have more potential.
I don't think this scales well. Consider those Earth economies today that depend on tourism; none of them are doing very well. A few individual entrepreneurs might make some money off this, but I don't think it's big enough to drive the sort of innovation and investment that drops prices to commodity levels and gives employment to millions. If nothing else, space travel is by all reports rather uncomfortable; if it's cheap enough that anyone can afford it, you can't charge a whole lot.
quote:That's what I said.
Well, yes, but you're ignorant of the fact that my already-perfected mind-control ray took over your workers and your orbital death ray is now under my control. Incidentally, you needed to reverse the polarisation on the magnetron wigglers; your design would have aimed back along the controlling radio waves, leading to blowing up your own lab rather than your actual targets.
*Sends orders to mind-control ray* You didn't read this post.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: I don't think this scales well. Consider those Earth economies today that depend on tourism; none of them are doing very well. A few individual entrepreneurs might make some money off this, but I don't think it's big enough to drive the sort of innovation and investment that drops prices to commodity levels and gives employment to millions. If nothing else, space travel is by all reports rather uncomfortable; if it's cheap enough that anyone can afford it, you can't charge a whole lot.
The countries that are heavily dependent on tourism are typically 3rd world countries. However, I don't think they are 3rd world countries because of tourism. Tourism is helping their economy a great deal, in some countries it's the main reason they are able to thrive. Tourism is one of the biggest industries worldwide.
So I don't really see the causality in that part of your argument.
But anyway: Almost every person I know would want to travel to space. Yes, it's uncomfortable. But it's also an experience. Typically the most expensive tourist attractions around the world nowadays are exactly the kind of places that offer "uncomfortable" experiences. Climbing to Mt Everest is very uncomfortable, and very expensive. Taking a military boot camp training course in the middle of a jungle is also very uncomfortable, and typically very expensive. Yet this type of extreme-tourism is getting increasingly popular all the time.
The prizes can range from millions to hundreds of thousands of dollars, and yet there are a lot people willing to pay. It's the experience, and the possibility to do something unique that others haven't done, that attracts people.
Posts: 273 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I am about four months away from completing my orbital death ray. I fully expect it to be profitable within the year.
We'll see who gets the death ray up first! MuHAHA- *cough!* -HA!!!
Posts: 3486 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:The prices can range from millions to hundreds of thousands of dollars, and yet there are a lot people willing to pay. It's the experience, and the possibility to do something unique that others haven't done, that attracts people.
Yep. And when it gets cheap enough that everybody can afford it, what will happen?
quote:The countries that are heavily dependent on tourism are typically 3rd world countries. However, I don't think they are 3rd world countries because of tourism.
Right, but that's not my assertion. I'm rather saying that they won't stop being third-world countries on account of tourism. The reason being, tourism is a one-on-one service, and that doesn't scale. Tourism is to industry as consultation is to mass-market software: Sure, your individual consultant might make 200 an hour, but he can only work 16 hours a day. A shrinkwrap program, on the other hand, sells for 35 bucks, but you can sell 2 million copies. You can make a living off service jobs, but to get filthy stinking rich you must be able to scale, and that means mass production.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Yep. And when it gets cheap enough that everybody can afford it, what will happen?
If if gets that cheap, it will also become much more comfortable. I don't think there is any reason why space travel needs to be uncomfortable. If it becomes cheap and comfortable, then it will become mass tourism. Kind of like if they ever build an elevator that travels to the top of Mt. Everest. Also at the point it becomes that cheap, we have reached a point where we have active, large scale space programs - After all, they are cheap then. The cost is what's making them so rare now.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Right, but that's not my assertion. I'm rather saying that they won't stop being third-world countries on account of tourism. The reason being, tourism is a one-on-one service, and that doesn't scale. Tourism is to industry as consultation is to mass-market software: Sure, your individual consultant might make 200 an hour, but he can only work 16 hours a day. A shrinkwrap program, on the other hand, sells for 35 bucks, but you can sell 2 million copies. You can make a living off service jobs, but to get filthy stinking rich you must be able to scale, and that means mass production.
Yes, but I don't understand how this prevents space tourism from being commercially viable.
Tourism is a major industry in rich western countries. Space Tourism companies wouldn't establish a new nation in space, they would work from earth, and most likely from rich nations at that.
"In the US, tourism is either the first, second or third largest employer in 29 states, employing 7.3 million in 2004, to take care of 1.19 billion trips tourists took in the US in 2005."
posted
Ok, try it this way: A space trip now costs, perhaps, about as much as a trip to the Americas in 1520. Why didn't the Spaniards make a killing in the tourist trade, and develop their new-found resource by researching cheaper, safer ships to really get the mass market?
quote:Yes, but I don't understand how this prevents space tourism from being commercially viable.
That's not what I'm saying. Certainly it's commercially viable; so is consulting. But you can't build a new sector of the economy on it, because there's no economies of scale; worse, there's no particular incentive to discover economies of scale, because the profit margin you can charge for a commodity is nowhere near what you can charge for a lucury only available to the rich, even after accounting for volume.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: Ok, try it this way: A space trip now costs, perhaps, about as much as a trip to the Americas in 1520. Why didn't the Spaniards make a killing in the tourist trade, and develop their new-found resource by researching cheaper, safer ships to really get the mass market?
Because tourist culture didn't really exist back then? There was some tourism, but a trip to America and back took very long. Tourists typically don't have months to spare.
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: ]That's not what I'm saying. Certainly it's commercially viable; so is consulting. But you can't build a new sector of the economy on it, because there's no economies of scale; worse, there's no particular incentive to discover economies of scale, because the profit margin you can charge for a commodity is nowhere near what you can charge for a lucury only available to the rich, even after accounting for volume.
But isn't this basically the same as any new luxury tourist attraction? It's not a new sector of economy, it's simply an expansion of a pre-existing sector.
Nowadays people do travel across the Atlantic as tourists. It was too expensive and time-consuming in the 1520's, but now it is not. I would imagine that 500 years from now, a lot more people are going to space, and not everyone goes there to work.
First you have to ask millions per person. Then hundreds of thousands. Then dozens of thousands - And the number will likely stay there. I know personally many people who would seriously consider paying that last number of money.
I'm not really sure what you are debating here. I didn't say this is possible now, I said that this might be possible in a hundred years or so. I've never said that I think millions of people will travel to space as tourists, like millions of people travel to sunny beaches around the world every year. I said that many people - wealthy people - are most likely willing to pay money to have a trip to space.
There are currently over 10 million people around the globe classified as U.S. dollar millionaires. I'm sure that many of them are multi-millionaires, who do have some spare money to spend. MirCorp sold their tourist space flights to ISS for 20 million per person. Virgin Galactic is currenly selling sub-orbital flights for $200.000 a person, and they have already booked over 200 payments before they have done even one single flight. So obviously there is interest, and there are people who have the money to pay.
Posts: 273 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
It looks like we're arguing about different things. When you said "make money in space", I assumed - like any SF reader - that the purpose was to bootstrap an enormous space-based economy, culminating in a future where several million people are living in the asteroid belt and the solar system's economy is at least one-third outside of LEO. You, on the other hand, appear to want just to make a few bucks. So, fair enough, that you can do with tourism. But as space-related futuristic thinking goes, I find it rather depressing. I'd rather have the orbital death rays.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: It looks like we're arguing about different things. When you said "make money in space", I assumed - like any SF reader - that the purpose was to bootstrap an enormous space-based economy, culminating in a future where several million people are living in the asteroid belt and the solar system's economy is at least one-third outside of LEO. You, on the other hand, appear to want just to make a few bucks. So, fair enough, that you can do with tourism. But as space-related futuristic thinking goes, I find it rather depressing. I'd rather have the orbital death rays.
Well, one step at a time... Posts: 273 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
But that's just the point I've been making: Space tourism doesn't scale, any more than America tourism would have scaled for the Spaniards. You are, by the way, mistaken about their leisure class: There were quite a few nobles and whatnot who could have afforded to take a few months off to see an exotic locale and relax with the quaint native customs. Not very many, to be sure, but then not many people today can afford a trip into orbit at 200k the pop, either.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: But that's just the point I've been making: Space tourism doesn't scale, any more than America tourism would have scaled for the Spaniards. You are, by the way, mistaken about their leisure class: There were quite a few nobles and whatnot who could have afforded to take a few months off to see an exotic locale and relax with the quaint native customs. Not very many, to be sure, but then not many people today can afford a trip into orbit at 200k the pop, either.
There are approximately 95,000 people around the world who have a wealth of at least 30 million dollars. There are over 10 million millionaires in the world. So there are hundreds of thousands - if not millions - of people who could afford a 200k trip to orbit. So many can afford it.
I would make a guess that this population of rich people is much bigger than the population of rich people was in the 16th century Spain - I didn't find any info on the latter.
Not to mention that tourism was much lesser back in the day - For the rich people of the 16th century it mostly meant going to your summer resort, or vising another city (which sometimes was in another country).
I tried to find info online about how the cross-atlantic tourism was born, but unfortunately I couldn't find anything. But my guess is it started with rich people and expensive trips, and then the prizes started to scale down and the trips became available to more people. And now, 500 years later, we have mass scale tourism.
I could easily see some scaling with space tourism in 500 years as well. Obviously not on equal measure, because there is less to see and experience in close-Earth space than there is in America.
BTW, saying that Space tourism doesn't scale, any more than America tourism would have scaled for the Spaniards, is a flawed comparison. If you talk about only the first Spaniards, then you are only talking about short-term effects. It took hundreds of years for cross-Atlantic tourism to relly take off, but it did take off eventually. It's the same with space tourism. So if we follow the idea that the first Spaniards and comparable to modern day astronauts, then the birth of space tourism is just as inevitable as the birth of cross-atlantic tourism.
Posts: 273 | Registered: Jul 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Space also has free cold, free vacuum, and free microgravity. Free once you're up there, that is.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The real question is why you would go to the trouble of minting currency in space, rather than just doing it on the ground.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I am about four months away from completing my orbital death ray. I fully expect it to be profitable within the year.
We'll see who gets the death ray up first! MuHAHA- *cough!* -HA!!!
" ... one MILLION dollars!"
Posts: 2034 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I'm in the process of writing my own scifi trilogy that involves a rather very well space based economy divided between for lack of a better term "Space Nato" and "space warsaw pact" assuming a timeline divergence at least in the 60's, long story short it sounds plausible when I run it through my head, if anyone's curious feel free to figure out what event in the 60's that going differently would allow the SSSR still be around. My friend doesn't like it as it conflicts with his own scifi story and he wants me to fit this story as the "past" of his own scifi story that takes place hundreds of years later.
IP: Logged |
I've seen it CCCP in Russian (Cyrillic characters) and USSR in English but never the transliterated SSSR before. That's interesting.
I can think of a lot of things we could have done differently that might have helped Soviet Russia fade away sooner. What might have helped them be around longer, I suppose, is if we were even more aggressive than we were. Having a common enemy often prolongs states that aren't able to run their own economies, as it distracts people's attention away from the incompetence of their own government.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Cuban Missile crisis, the Russians succeed in getting Missiles in Cuba allowing them to keep the US decision makers paralyzed when they swoop in and occupy the Middle East using the current in universe Israeli-Arab war as a pretext to do "peace keeping" with the worlds current and future oil supply in their hands they can keep going. There are other differences leading up to it, being alternate history my main character Isaac Pavel Rozhdestvensky (fictional) becomes Premier instead of Khrushchev.
The Scifi trilogy I plan on will revolve around WWIII, though I haven't decided yet but I think I will write the backstory first which would be a series of short stories involving Pavel during WWII where hes a young naive and idealistic Soviet Commissar until he when on a mission behind German lines finds his entire Belorussian Jewish family murdered by the SS and vows to end human suffering by uniting the world behind the Soviet Union.
So far much positive feedback off of the people I've bounced the idea off of.
IP: Logged |
posted
How are you going to handle the fact that the Soviet communist economy is basically defunct by its very nature?
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: How are you going to handle the fact that the Soviet communist economy is basically defunct by its very nature?
Correction the stagnation in the Soviet economy only began to occur during the Brezhnev era assuming the Soviet Union had more foreward thinking leadership it stands to reason its economy could do significantly better, especially if said ahistorical politicians had the diplomatic tact to NOT alienate the Chinese thus causing possibly the second greatest drain in Soviet defense expenditures and significantly compromising its position. Also having control of the worlds oil reserves has precedent, during the Oil Crisis of the 70's the OPEC boycotts of petrol sales significantly helped and is said to have allowed the Soviet economy to last to the late 80's, so if they can directly control said reserves much earlier it could allow for a hyperboom and a massive availability of hard currency, which based on the writings of Paul Kennedy could very well negate nearly every Soviet handicap they had during the 60's to 80's.
There are indeed flaws in this plan but thats what the backstory would flesh out and solve, the diplomatic and geopolitical struggle by Isaac to avoid World War Three then and there Cuba or no Cuba and is what I would be explaining.
To revisit the above topic, the Soviet economy wasn't bad its Command economy was possibly the single greatest contributor to its victory over Germany and there is every historical inclination that during war time government control over the production of war materials was very efficient (they afterall did outproduce Germany in nearly ever field and by early 1942 between lend-lease and its own industry could meet EVERY need of the Red Army so it CAN be efficient just the same steps and allowances that Stalin permitted need to be kept up and awareness and persecution of corruption needs to be maintained.
Also its historical fact that the Soviet military-industrial complex permitting its very different stance and doctrine on how to design military hardware WAS competing just fine with the west in every field of military endeavor by the very competitive nature of the arms race itself it is VERY hard to make a case of Soviet arms being "worse" then its Western equivalent until the 1990's (when they could not continue funding R&D for a time).
But part of the hand wave ultimately is that (Isaac) is to be written as something of a genius, both in the fields of politics and in the Sciences so would once he gained control of the Politburo and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union put through some economic reforms to maintain incentives to work well, efficiently and keep down corruption.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tuukka: It occured to me that some money might be made with space tourism. I think that a lot of very rich people would be willing to pay a lot of money for a proper space trip. Not just visiting earth's upper atmosphere, but visiting a space station, spending a few days in space, spacewalking, even visiting moon.
Of course right now this would be too expensive, but maybe in a hundred years or so it could have more potential.
I don't think this scales well. Consider those Earth economies today that depend on tourism; none of them are doing very well. A few individual entrepreneurs might make some money off this, but I don't think it's big enough to drive the sort of innovation and investment that drops prices to commodity levels and gives employment to millions. If nothing else, space travel is by all reports rather uncomfortable; if it's cheap enough that anyone can afford it, you can't charge a whole lot.
quote:That's what I said.
Well, yes, but you're ignorant of the fact that my already-perfected mind-control ray took over your workers and your orbital death ray is now under my control. Incidentally, you needed to reverse the polarisation on the magnetron wigglers; your design would have aimed back along the controlling radio waves, leading to blowing up your own lab rather than your actual targets.
*Sends orders to mind-control ray* You didn't read this post.
AS IF...you can barely control your OWN mind, let alone other peoples minds.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
