NEEP533 Course Notes (Spring 1999)
Resources from Space
Lecture #42 Show me your ROI!
Title: Interlune Intermars Initiative
- INTERLUNE INTERMARS INITIATIVE, INC.
- Delaware Corporation incorporated in 1997
- Privately Financed
- Vision Statement:
- CREATE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES RELATED TO RESOURCES FROM SPACE, THAT, TAKEN AS A WHOLE, SUPPORT THE PRESERVATION OF THE HUMAN SPECIES AND ITS HOME PLANET
- INTERLUNE INTERMARS INITIATIVE, INC.
- Mission Statements:
- 1. Develop commercial enterprises related to resources from space that provide a competive return to investors.
- 2. Protect the Earth's environment and increase the well-being of its inhabitants by using energy from space, particularly lunar 3He, as a major alternative to fossil and fission fuels.
- 3. Develop resources from space that will support future near-Earth and deep space activities and human settlement.
- 4. Establish the human species in diverse, self-sufficient enclaves on the Moon and Mars.
- 5. Develop reliable and robust capabilities to launch payloads from Earth to deep space at a cost of $1000/kg or less (1997 dollars).
- 6. Endow a world-class Space Biomedical Sciences Institute within the mainstream of biomedical research.
- 7. Conduct intramural and extramural research related to resources from space that will provide cost effective support for lunar and martian settlements.
- 8.Develop the technical and organizational capability to deflect asteroids and comets that pose significant threats to human settlements in the solar system.
- 9. Cooperate with nations and world organizations to guarantee that both the space treaty enviroment and national regulatory and economic structures encourage all peaceful space enterprises.
- 10. Endow a "Solar System Fleet Academy" for training of cadres of space specialists, generalists, and skilled workers.
- 11.Endow an International Energy and Environment Foundation with the funds necessary to establish a worldwide technical and economic base for the use of energy from space.
- Logic for considering a business initiative related to lunar resources
- Resources for use on Earth
- Resources for use in Earth orbit
- Resources for use in space transportation
- Resources for use by lunar and Martian settlers
- Resources for protection from asteroidal and cometary collisions
- A lunar resource base of potential economic value has been identified.
- This resource base has been partially characterizedy by the Apollo investigations, the lunar sample analysis program, on-going remote sensing and subsequent laboratory analysis.
- Significant quantities and varieties of lunar samples exist for further investigations related to resource and engineering questions.
- Technical fesibility of going to and living on the Moon has been demonstrated by Apollo, Skylab, Mir,and soon, the International Space Station.
- The necessary technological concepts for transportation to the Moon have been well developed and tested.
- Logic for considering a business initiative related to 3He fusion
- Global population will double to over 10 billion by 2050
- 15 BOE/capita required to stay even with current global comsumption
- 60 BOE/capita required globally to reach current US consumption and quality of life
- ?? BOE/capita require to mitigate the long term effects of global climate change whether warming or cooling (climate change is the geological rule, not an environmental exception)
- Consequences of business-as-usual will be "huge"
- Cartel control, defense requirements, environmental costs
- Fossil hydrocarbons (fuels) will become incresingly valuable as natural chemicals
- At $21/barrel for oil, energy equivalent value is about $3 billion/tonne
- As the US uses the energy equivalent of 30 tonnes of 3He/year to produce electricity, the no growth market for the US alone is about $90 billion/year.
- For perspective, the Apollo Program cost about $64 billion in today's dollars.
- The US growth market is 2050, and after nearly total power infrastructure replacement, would be about $200 billion.
- These economic figures suggest that a lunar minig operation may be commercially viable if start-up costs can be financed, that is, held to a few billion dollars/year for about 10 years with returns on investment begining within 3-5 years of initial investment.
- No radioactive fuel
- Little or no nuclear waste
- Reduction of the environmental impace of power generation
- High conversion efficiences
- No external effluents
- Potential for a new domestic industrial base
- Important spin-off technologies
- Potential for less expensive electrical power
- Concurrent development of other space resources
- Concurrent development of the capability to deflect Earth-crossing
- Very limited and transitory environmental impact on the Moon's surface and atmosphere
- Potential Business Implementation Schedule for the INTERLUNE INTERMARS
INTITIATIVE, INC.
This schedule is only one of many such possible schedules that might be devised for 3He or other space resource development.
To the extent currently possible, this schedule allows for many of the regulatory, technical, and financial uncertainties that always accompany projects of this magnetude.
Timelines:
Lunar resources have a future role in the economy of the Earth-Moon-Mars sector of the Solar System.
The Moon is near-by and reasonably accessible
The Apollo Program and subsequent space activities have created a base of knowledge for planning
An alternative to fossil fuels for the generation of electrical power will be required early in the 21st Century (Lectures #2, 3, 4, 5, and 38).
3He fusion is a scientifically sound concept and steadily advancing technologically (Lectures #24 and 25)
3He fusion systems are commercially feasible provided fuel prices are competitive and R&D financing available (Lectures 26 and 41)
3He fusion power is politically and environmentally sound (Lectures #2 and 26)
Lunar 3He resources can be extracted at commercially viable costs (Lectures #21 and 27)
Permanently occupied settlements on the moon are feasible (Lectures 13, 20, and 28)
Competition
- Government 3He or lunar or space-based solar energy initiative
- Funding probably not possible due to entitlement demands and other budgetary considerations.
- International governmental cooperation prohibitively complex under normal mechanisms.
- History shows that costs will increase and management efficiency will decrease relative to plans as taxpayer pressure to control costs is only indirect and diluted through the broader electorial process.
- Conservation
- Limited in total potential as ultimately energy is required for growth and improvement of quality of life.
- Not realizable internationally due to growth demands
- Coal/oil fired plants (Lectures #5 and 38)
- Long term value as chemicals
- Long term environmental issues
- Long term cost of fuel
- Natural gas or gasified coal plants (Lectures #5 and 38)
- Long term value as chemicals
- Long term environmental issues
- Long term cost of fuel
- Long term supply limited
- Tritium and deuterium based fusion concepts suffer from two problems (Lectures #24 and 26):
- Very large magnets and very complex reactor systems are required to contain and control the fusion plasmas
- This will make power plants very costly
- Neutrons are the primary reaction product
- To extract energy these neutrons must be adsorbed in the reactor walls, giving up heat
- This heat is extracted at efficiencies of 35-40%
- The adsorbed neutrons produce radioisotopes in the reactor walls
- This requires the walls to be replaced every few years and handled as high level radioactive waste
- This also requires fail safe cooling systems to avoid meltdowns in the case of a loss of primary cooling
- Plant decommissioning will be complex and expensive
- These problems and their consequences do not exist with 3He fusion (Lectures #25 and 26)
- Relatively simple plant designs should be possible if IEC technology matures
- Protons are the primary reaction product
- Electricity can be produced by direct conversion at efficiencies as high as 70%
- Little radioactive waste is produced
- No loss of cooling problems exist
- Plant decommissioning will be routine, when required
- Modern Nuclear fission plants (Lectures #5 and 38) could be competitive with 3He fusion, however:
- Policies limiting development of breeder reactors and/or reprocessing of spent fuel will severely limit long term viability of fission technology
- Problems with waste disposal and decommissioning will add further uncertainty
- Political viability remains uncertain due to perceived levels of risk - Brown's Ferry, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and other mishaps don't help.
- Much of the rest of the world is headed in toward reliance on fission (see Abelson, 1996)
- Terrestrial solar energy may be important regionally but will suffer from several practical limitations as a global energy source that can meet every growing demand (Lectures #5, 36, and 38)
- Geographical limits to direct application
- Cost of storage and transport for indirect application
- Net environmental impact of manufacturing and operation
- Technical reliability
- Unsubsidized cost
- Greatest potential may be biologically catalyzed hydrogen generation for portable fuel
- Lunar or satellite solar power needs to be evaluated against lunar 3He, but major technical and political issues remain to be resolved (Lectures #36 and 38)
- Costs
- Technical feasibility
- Net environmental impact
- Political viability of power beaming
- Roles for governments
- Maintain a favorable treaty, regulatory, and tax environment (Lectures 34 and 35)
- Defend legal activities in space from illegal threats
- Set and enforce safety and environmental standards through licensing authority
- Be a customer for resources and services that fill legitimate public needs
- Protect national interests as required
References:
Abelson, P.H., 1996, Nuclear Power in East Asia, Science, v 272, April 26, 1996, p465.
Schmitt, H.H., 1997, Interlune-Intermars Business Initiative: Returining to Deep Space. Journal of Aerospace Engineering, April 1997, 60-67.
 |
|
University of Wisconsin Fusion Technology Institute · 439 Engineering Research Building · 1500 Engineering Drive · Madison WI 53706-1609 · Telephone: (608) 263-2352 · Fax: (608) 263-4499 · Email: fti@engr.wisc.edu |
Copyright © 2003 The Board of
Regents of the University of Wisconsin System.
For feedback or accessibility issues, contact
web@fti.neep.wisc.edu.
|