This is tantamount to selling investment shares in gasoline companies in 1700. As you point out, we can't even make the easily-fused isotopes break even in fusion reactions. The Helium-3 reaction is even harder, although its attractive for its relative lack of neutrons.
You want to make money in space, you find a nickel-iron asteroid, and start mining. The amount of expensive and useful metals in even a small one is staggering. I could see the investment needed to learn to live on the Moon paying off in asteroid mining and refining technologies.
Could see the Moon doing well as a tourist destination, too, although I think large Earth-orbiting space stations would do a lot better. A test case: How many tourists pay to go to Antarctica?
Space/Science » in reply to I'm very skeptical about lunar economic development
Agreed: Helium 3 is bogus.
The whole thread (49 posts)
- A roadmap
- re: A roadmap
- I wish it were so but I'm skeptical
- re: A roadmap
- re: A roadmap
- re: A roadmap
- When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- re: When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- re: When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- re: When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- re: When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- re: When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- So the answer was: never? (n/t)
- re: When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- re: When was the last time you stuck your nose in, over here...
- re: A roadmap
