New here, asteroids prefered

Matt Gallimore wrote:

> Does anyone see a
> great breakthrough in launch costs the next decade? Most likely, the
> pilot programs would be out there now.

Agreed. I do think SpaceX is going to reduce costs by a factor of 5-10,
and once commercial service really gets into the swing of things, we
might get another factor of 2-5. But I don't see it getting a lot
cheaper than that with regular rockets.

There are more far-out concepts (lightcraft, space elevator, rotovators,
etc.) which could reduce costs more, but they're much further out than a
decade.

> As for using the asteroids for construction in earth orbit... More and
> more nations have a vested interests in the orbital environment. Looks
> like we are in for a multi-year debate on the legality and liability for
> asteroid capture. My opinion: we've got years before there will be an
> agreement allowing any government or business to capture asteroids and
> place them around out planet.

I think this is a good point. Politics and liability always get in the
way of progress (and sometimes they even keep us safe).

There may be useful stuff floating around at the Trojan points, though.
And there are almost certainly useful remnants of asteroids on the Moon.

> I favor robotics for the
> moon. In the near term it is the safer and more economical approach.
> Structures to be built initially would be those shelters needed for
> certain equipment or processes. Trying to build a large strucuture or
> lunar town (anything more than a construction shack for 3-4 people)
> would, in the near term, be a big distraction of resources from building
> orbital space based habs.

Maybe, though the more people we have living and working there, the
better they can support such big industrial projects like a space hab.

Best,
- Joe