Mining Concepts for Accessing Asteroid Resources

Applying Mining Concepts to Accessing Asteroid Resources Mark Sonter, Asteroid Enterprises Pty Ltd, Brisbane, [email protected] ph +61 7 3297 7653, and The Asteroid Mining Group: Al Globus, Steve Covey, Chris Cassell, & Jim Luebke; with Bryan Versteeg & James Wolff Mining the Near-Earth Asteroids: -- There are very high-value resources in space, awaiting the development of an in-space market; And the technology to get to them, and retrieve them, is available now

Images from William K Hartmann Asteroid characterization: What do they look like? How big are they? Why are we interested in them? What goodies do they contain? How many are there? What structure / fabric / strength? How (pray tell) might we mine them?? Asteroid 951 Gaspra (18 km x 10 km x 9 km) - silicate Asteroid 243 Ida (59 km x 23 km x 19 km) - silicate

253 Mathilde (66 km x 48 km x 44 km) - carbonaceous Eros 433 Eros (33 km x 13 km) - silicate Itokawa with International Space Station to scale Its a rubble pile with lots of void space: = 1.95 g/cc Regolith (present even in micro-g!!) is gravel-size particles Asteroids offer both Threat and Promise

Threat of impacts delivering regional or global disaster. Promise of resources to support Humanitys long-term prosperity and expansion into the Solar System. The technologies to tap asteroid resources will also enable the deflection of at least some of the Impact-Threat objects -- It is likely that the Near Earth Asteroids will be major resource opportunities of the mid 21st century -- Thus we should seek to develop these technologies, to

meet the emerging in-space markets Asteroid Resources High and increasing discovery rate of NEAs Growing belief that NEAs contain easily extractable high-value products Accessing asteroid resources is dependent on development of market(s) for mass-in-orbit How to compare schemes for mining a NEA and returning the product to market?? Capex, payback time, and net present value are critical design drivers, in choice of target, market, product, mission type, extraction process, and propulsion system

Asteroid structure and strength Asteroids retain deep regolith (except the smallest?) Often heavily fractured or rubble piles Have significant void space (macroporosity) Many appear to contain H2O in clays or salts

Many appear to contain kerogen-like material (!!) Many appear to contain Ni-Fe and PGMs Some may be extinct / dormant comet cores The value of these commodity products in space, is thousands of dollars per kilogram Products from asteroid mining: Raw silicate, for use in space (ballast, shielding) Water, & other volatiles, for use in space (propellant)

Ni-Fe metal, for use in space (construction) PGMs, for return to Earth (catalyst for fuel cells) Semiconductor metals, for use in space (solar arrays) Water can be used for PROPELLANT for the RETURN TRIP The in-space market for raw material is not yet a reality.... But all mass used in space and originating from Earth costs

at present $10,000 per kg to launch, thus setting a rough lower limit on the potential value of these products Lots of new knowledge: New Targets (generated by search programs) Images, Concepts and Understandings But mining (and processing) is difficult, even on Earth! (we will come back to this, later--)

-- Of course, the vast majority of the little fellas have not yet been found As opposed to the 1 km ones, where the discovery rate has leveled off because most have now been found There are literally millions undiscovered in the under 30 metre and under 10 metre size range Huge increase in potential targets: Total # 300 m diam 1 km diam NEAs

8800 2700 850 PHAs 1300 500? 150

Potentially Hazardous Asteroids: approach Earth orbit to < 7.5 x 106 km (0.05 AU) Apollos: 4700 (Earth crossers, sma 1 AU) Amors: 3300 Atens: 700

(Earth crossers, sma < 1 AU) Atiras: 10 (Orbit totally inside Earths) (1 AU < Perihelion < 1.3 AU) (1 AU = 150 x 106 km = radius of Earths orbit) - as of March 2012

From Mike AHearn, P.I. Deep Impact: 15% of NEAs have Jupiter Family Comet type orbits (and hence cometary in origin??) Comets are 50% H2O by mass Most ice is 1 to 3 thermal skin thicknesses deep (? say 10 m)

Comets have bulk density 0.5 g/cc and thus 75% empty space: highly porous!! Weak: tensile strength <100 Pa from SL9 (at km scale); < 10 kPa from Deep Impact (at metre scale) Thermal conductivity very low

Deep Impact excavated 5000 tonnes of ice from within 2 m of surface of Comet Wild (!!) Cryptocomet model: Loose & fluffy or cinder lag deposit, insulating the underlying icy matrix (? 1 metre) Densified underlying ice-claykerogen layer of thickness 2 metres Deep porous low density ice-claykerogen matrix

How to mine this?? We could encounter a weakly bound rubble pile or a fragment of one: Large boulders, voids, macroporosity at depth Grading finer to gravel regolith at surface ?? Ices in voids?? How to mine this?? Impact development of megaregolith

Terrestrial Project Development Path: Desktop studies: what to look for, & where Open-literature and proprietary data reviews Reconnaissance of prospective target areas

Identification of potential targets Field work identifies extended mineralization Drillout of prospect to define orebody Metallurgical testwork to confirm extractability

Project conceptual planning / prefeasibility studies Bankable Costing & Feasibility Study (& EIS) Funding and Project Go-Ahead Construct and Commission

Mining Engineering and Economics Material is ore only if you can mine, process, transport and market it for a profit. Terrestrial Mine Project Planning involves choosing between competing mining & metallurgical extraction concepts, to: Minimize Capital Expenditure (Capex), Minimize operating cost (Opex),

Consistent with desired Production Rate, and also Minimize payback time, and Minimize project risk -and therebyMaximize Expectation Net Present Value So must it be also, in Space Mining Bankable Feasibility Study must develop: A Mining Plan, based on an Accurate orebody model, and a Metallurgical Process Flowsheet, based on Accurate understanding of the ore, which optimises Recovery, and minimizes Capex, Opex, & Payback Time, and optimizes the Production Rate, so as to maximize the Expectation Net Present Value.

Choice of Mining Plan and Process is often surprisingly difficult-Some cautionary tales from Oz mining scene -Olympic Dam Cu-U-Au project: very non-obvious mining and processing choices Mulga Rocks U+ base metals project: ditto ditto Nolans Rare Earths project: very challenging process development Beverley U In-Situ Leach: seriously compromised by lack of accurate orebody model The Economic Imperative for Asteroid Mining: Maximize Expectation NPV implies

Minimize project risk Simplest possible extraction, processing, and propulsion systems KISS principle Minimize CAPEX single or double launch, unmanned; Maximize returned payload fraction minimize return v including capture into Earth orbit Minimize return v targets orbit should be low

eccentricity and earth grazing; use lunar flyby capture Minimize payback time minimum duration mission target asteroid semi-major axis 1 AU; Synodic period constraint single season mine mission Asteroid Mining Project Economics will be driven by

MINER MASS and LAUNCH COST SPECIFIC MASS THROUGHPUT OF MINER MISSION DURATION and MASS RETURNED DELTA-V for RETURN into Earth Orbit

POWER & PROPULSION SYSTEM parameters VALUE PER KG DELIVERED TO LEO GEO or HEO Mining Method Advantages Disadvantages Surface reclaim with snowblower

(accepted) robust process; easy to handle loose soil; easy to monitor Problems with anchoring & containment; surface will be desiccated. Solar Bubble vaporizer (rejected) Simple, Collects volatiles only

Unacceptably high membrane tension; how to (a) seal (b) anchor? In-Situ Volatilization (rejected) simple concept; asteroid body gives containment. needs low permeability; risks are loss of fluid; clogging; & blowout.

Explosive Disaggregation (potential) Very rapid release of mass, short timeline. Capture of material is unsolved. Downhole Jet Monitoring (rejected) Mechanically simple; Separates mining from

processing task. Need gas to transport cuttings to processor. blowout risk high. Underground mining by mechanical mole (accepted) reduced anchoring & containment problems; physically robust Mechanically severe; hard to

monitor; must move cuttings to surface plant Mechanical miner SpaceMole? Must solve these basic tasks: Anchoring (onto a micro-gravity body!) Comminution Ground control (even in micro-g) Containment of product cuttings Handling of cuttings thru Processor Separation and storage of product(s) Comparisons with Terrestrial Mining Best comparisons are with

Remote, high grade, very high value, high margin, small throughput, exotic product operations. see following slides: Terrestrial Remote High Value Mines Klondike Goldrush, 1898 Ekati diamond mine, Canada (access by ice road, 10 weeks

per year) Namibia offshore diamond dredging (Skeleton Coast) Artisanal goldminers in Brazil, PNG and elsewhere Bulolo goldfields, New Guinea, 1930s (more airfreight than entire rest of world total, to build 8 x 1500 tonne dredges) Shinkolobwe, Belgian Congo, 1920s; and Port Radium,

Canada, 1930s (Radium was $100,000 / gram!) Nautilus Deep Sea Massive Sulphides (Manus Basin, PNG) BHP-Billiton Ekati Diamond mine, NWT, Canada: 10 weeks ice road access per year. At the height of the Mt Kare gold rush in the highlands of Papua New Guinea, these villagers would flag down passing helicopter taxis to fly them to the bank Andamooka opal fields, South Australia

Bulolo Goldfields, 1930s Read Not a Poor Mans Field by Waterhouse, Halstead Press Notes from Terrestrial Mining (2) There is a vast range of orebody types & geometries, thus vast range of mining methods: Open pit (shallow or deep, soft or hard rock, strip mine,

dredge, ) Underground (room & pillar, Long-Hole Open Stoping, cut & fill, block cave) In Situ Leach... Must understand your orebody and choose correct (and robust) method or risk project failure Ore grade is measured in Gold: Uranium:

Pb, Ni, Cu: grams per tonne (ppm) kg per tonne (or lb/ton) % But in reality, mining engineers talk about ore grade in terms of -- $ per tonne So should we for example, see next: Haul truck, Prominent Hill Copper Mine, 200 km NW of Woomera, South Australia: Cu grade = 2%; Au = 0.2 g/t Value of ore at recent Cu & Au price = $170 / tonne PGMs or Water or Ni-Fe?

Assume we have a target asteroid which contains 50 ppm PGMs and 10% H2O and 10% Ni-Fe: PGMs value (on Earth) $4,000 / tonne of regolith ore H2O or Ni-Fe value (in orbit) $1 x 106 / tonne of ore (replacing $10,000 / kg cost if launched from Earth) Which product is more important?? Is this ore ?

- Only if we can mine, process, transport, and sell the product, AT A PROFIT Comparisons with Terrestrial (2) Seabed Mining of Massive Metal Sulphides in Volcanic Black Smoker Vent chimneys Some interesting parallels with asteroid mining--- very high value ore, multiple products - small multiple deposits, mineable sequentially - low mass throughput (down by factor of 50-100) - mobile, teleoperated equipt - terra nullius if outside national EEZ - no landowner ident & compensation issues!! Seabed Massive Sulphides

Metal grades can be +50% Exploring for Seabed Massive Sulphides offshore PNG (in active Black Smokers and extinct Black Smoker chimney strewnfields on seamounts) Why Seabed Massive Sulphides - Lower discovery costs: exposed, easy sampling

Low cost / easy trial mining Shorter project lead time: easy ore access (no shaft, decline, or open pit prestrip) No landowner compensation costs Cheaper beneficiation, easier metallurgy, less

materials handling: all due to ultra-high grade No pit to port infrastructure: major Capex item in terrestrial mining Seabed Massive Sulphides (2) Cheaper plant: build in shipyard, sail to site FPSO vessel can even be leased: removes single biggest Capex item!

Single plant can access several deposits sequentially, hence - Lower feasibility hurdle: access to multiple deposits plus plant mobility means not necessary to confirm full mine life reserves Much less waste & enviro impact due to low mass throughput: thanks to ultra-high grades

(adapted from presentation by Julian Malnic, Nautilus CEO, 2000) Note the amazing parallels of Deep Sea Massive Sulphides Mining with our hypothesized NEA Mining. Notes from terrestrial processing From simple (gravity, magnetic, electrostatic separation) to highly complex, including

Pyrometallurgical (smelters, fire refining etc) Hydrometallurgical (leaching, solvent extraction) Electrolytic Vapour separation!! (Mond nickel process) Terrestrial Processing (2) Metallurgical flowsheet: how to separate the product(s) from the waste - This is more complex and difficult if trying to extract multiple products: Solid / solid separation : density or electrostatic Solid / liquid sepn: by dissolution / precipn / filtering Solid / vapour sepn: volatilization, eg Mond process (nb: vapour processes are limited by low massflows) Liquid / liquid: smelting, melt electrolysis etc -- Must choose correctly or you may lose your project

Comparisons with Terrestrial (3) NEAs are prolific, with subset having low v Many are very prospective for H2O, Ni-Fe Very valuable ore ($1x106 / tonne) Easy extraction (??) Target return parcels 500 - 5,000 tonnes Asteroid resource return missions will be

analogous to short campaign or Trial Mining of very high value ores So what will an Asteroid Miner look like?? I dont know, but: Design depends on target orebody model Small, highly integrated, digger (plus processor?) Assume solar powered (nuclear is out, politically)

Assume main products are raw silicate, H2O, and / or Ni-Fe delivered into LEO, GEO, or HEEO We await only development of market in orbit Ultimately, Remote Miners will process regolith In-Situ to produce propellant for return, But and this is very recent finding, from our own studies, & validated by the Keck Workshop: For objects smaller than (say) 7 metres diameter, and in low-eccentricity earth-grazing orbits, it now appears to be possible to return the entire body to High Elliptical Earth Orbit (HEEO),

using Earth-origin propellant and high Isp electric propulsion (eg Hall Thrusters). This technology is no more demanding than a communications satellite. What we are up to, near term: Papers for ISDC and AIAA; Further development of concept(s): Dont Send the Astronauts to the Asteroid Bring the Asteroid to the Astronauts A radical alternative to the planned 2025 asteroid visit

Al Globus, Chris Cassell, Jim Luebke, Mark Sonter, Bryan Versteeg, and James Wolff, ISDC 2012, Washington, DC Asteroids to Astronauts Our alternative is to bring multiple small asteroids into High Earth Orbit (HEO) where astronauts set up mining equipment on them. Requires:

Identification and characterization of candidate asteroids in terms of size, mass and rotation rate Vehicle to capture asteroid, despin and perturb asteroid orbits into Earth-orbit-intercept trajectory A thrust program v under a few hundred m/s, to enable lunar gravity assists to bring asteroid into HEO System to bring astronauts to HEO and maintain them Asteroid mining hardware and procedures Markets for asteroidal materials Why We Think This Works

Damon Landau, JPL, Keck Workshop Oct 2011: Analyzed lunar assist return for 1991VG, 2006RH120, 2007UN12, and 2009BD Result 500 ton asteroid to HEO - assuming a density of 3 tons/m3 ~ 5-6 m diameter 40 kW near-term solar electric propulsion (SEP) - 8 tons of Xenon fuel required. Falcon Heavy $80-120 million/flight 14-16 tons payload

Sonters catcher net: friction surfaces (brake pads) on all joints to absorb rotational energy Asteroid Retriever probe with Capture Bag extended (from Asteroid Retrieval Feasibility, Brophy et al, being report of the JPL Keck Institute Asteroid Workshop, Oct 2010) Comparison Astronauts to Asteroid Asteroid to Astronauts Six months travel time

Six days travel time No rapid return Return in three days No resupply Resupply in three days Fixed, short stay times Indefinite stay times Much larger v, new vehicles required

Smaller v, Falcon Heavy and Dragon sufficient One asteroid per mission Potentially many asteroids per mission Repeat visits to same asteroid very difficult Repeat visits easy Cannot supply asteroid materials markets beyond science

Potentially supply multiple asteroid materials markets Some contribution to planetary defense Includes full planetary defense system (detection and deflection) Single, monolithic system Many nearly independent components of intrinsic value

The Key Use gravity assists to bring the v down to the 100s of m/sv down to the 100s of m/s Find candidates that will enter the Earth-Moon system in a few years For v down to the 100s of m/sv-inf < 0.8/1.5 km/sec use lunar assist into HEO Assume Asteroid density 3.3 tons/m3 Engine exhaust velocity 35 km/sec (solar electric) So -- in summary: Physically this should not be too difficult The bus design appears to be not much more difficult than a commsat queries remain around design of grabber and processing

We therefore seek to make contact with potential users of in-space resources And with resource developers looking for new high-value markets and prospects For queries, contact Mark Sonter, [email protected]

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • PowerPoint Presentation

    PowerPoint Presentation

    For Thou art the Resurrection, the Life, and the Repose of Thy servant(s) (state Soldier's name) who has (have) fallen asleep, O Christ our God, and unto Thee we ascribe, glory, together with Thy Father who is from everlasting and...
  • Chapter 4

    Chapter 4

    Chapter 4: Project Integration Management Information Technology Project Management, Fifth Edition Balanced Scorecard Institute The balanced scorecard suggests that we view the organization from four perspectives, and to develop metrics, collect data and analyze it relative to each of these...
  • Le tympan de l&#x27;Eglise Ste Foy de Conques

    Le tympan de l'Eglise Ste Foy de Conques

    C'est ce qu'on peut voir sur cette partie du tympan : des anges ouvrent les tombeaux et les morts en sortent pour être jugés. La manière dont les morts sont jugés est expliquée par cette petite scène, juste en dessous...
  • A* / A Intervention - WordPress.com

    A* / A Intervention - WordPress.com

    Quotations. There is a path through the willows and among the sycamores, a path beaten hard by boys coming down from the ranches to swim in the deep pool, and beaten hard by tramps who come wearily down from the...
  • ESD AWARENESS - DescoEurope

    ESD AWARENESS - DescoEurope

    ESD damage cannot be seen by the naked eye. Only very sophisticated high magnification photography with the aid of a scanning electron microscope, can show the damage. * Per ESD Handbook TR20.20 section 5.3.6.1.2 ESD Effects "In the electronics industry,...
  • Notes 5.1: Work and Kinetic Energy

    Notes 5.1: Work and Kinetic Energy

    A 50 gram ball is attached to a spring with a spring constant of 120 N/m. If the spring is compressed by 10 cm, what will be the balls velocity when the spring is released? During a hurricane, a large...
  • The Solar System - 1N Integrated Science

    The Solar System - 1N Integrated Science

    Comets are giant, dirty snowballs which move around in elliptical orbits around the Sun. As a comet travels towards the Sun some of its ice gets vaporized by the heat form the Sun. A long "tail" is formed behind it...
  • First Year - Technical University of Košice

    First Year - Technical University of Košice

    Calibri Arial Office Theme North American Doctoral Programs in Economics: An Overview Ph.D. Program Rankings Ph.D. Program Rankings 2 + 3 = 5 years First Year Second Year Years 3+ Textbooks Textbooks Textbooks Publish or Perish Publish or Perish Useful...