A colleague in school said that it is cheaper to mine resources on the moon and bring them to earth than to do the same in Antarctica because it is so cold in Antarctica. Is that true?
7
-
1$\begingroup$ In Antarctica, you have an ice shield with an average thickness of about 2km to drill through first. It's a costly challenge, but my gut feeling is that's not enough to make it more costly than trying to mine on the Moon. For the first kilogram of material maybe, but not for a constant operation. $\endgroup$– DarkDustCommented Jun 13 at 7:15
-
5$\begingroup$ The temperature on the lunar surface varies from over 100 C during the day to below -100 C at night (which is colder than the lowest temperature recorded in Antarctica). That’s a much more challenging environment than Antarctica, even before you factor in the absence of air and the transport costs. $\endgroup$– Peter ErwinCommented Jun 13 at 7:45
-
4$\begingroup$ It's not even possible to mine minerals on the Moon in 2024. $\endgroup$– John DotyCommented Jun 13 at 15:40
-
2$\begingroup$ The old saying is that if there were gold bars stacked up on the Moon it would be cheaper to leave them there. I suspect that's still true. $\endgroup$– PM 2RingCommented Jun 14 at 0:50
-
2$\begingroup$ I’m voting to close this question because this is not related to Astronomy. $\endgroup$– Nilay GhoshCommented Jun 15 at 7:01
|
Show 2 more comments
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
In general, No.
However, it depends what you are looking for, and exactly where it is located (which has always been true for mining). If you are looking for something that doesn't exist in Antarctica, then the cost is infinite.
It is much cheaper to mine materials on the Moon if they are intended to stay outside of the Earth's gravity well. Mining something on Earth, and then launching it into orbit, is very expensive.
