NEEP602

NEEP602 Course Notes (Fall 1996)
Resources from Space

Lecture #24: We "stand on the shoulders of giants!"

Title: Lunar Industrialization and the Saturn VI

Notes:

Assumption: Space resources have a role in the economy of the Earth-Moon-Mars Sector of the Solar System

Resources for use on Earth
Resources for use in space transportation
Resources for use by lunar and Martian settlements
Resources for protection from asteroidal and cometary collisions

Assumption: Many national and world trends lead to the need for a global alternative to fossil fuels for the production of electrical power.

local and global environmental prudence
need for vastly increased standards of living in the third and fourth worlds
long term value of fossil hydrocarbons as chemical feed stocks rather than fuel
long term rise in the cost of fossil fuels
need for vast increases in the availability of electrical power to mitigate the long term effects of cooling or warming of the global climate (the geological rule, not an environmental exception)

Assumptions underlying consideration of lunar industrialization

Alternative(s) to fossil fuels required for the 21st Century
- Global population will double by 2050
- 15 BOE/capita required to stay even with current power consumption
- 60 BOE/capita required to reach current US consumption and quality of life
- Consequences of meeting most of this demand with fossil fuels and fission power plants are unknown
- Global fossil fuel supply probably would be increasingly subject to cartel or sea power control
- Fossil fuels will become increasingly valuable as chemical feed stock
  Global Population Growth
  
  Global Power Consumption
  
  World Energy Needs
  
  CO2 Buildup
  
  War Covers
Space energy resources, such as 3He for fusion, are such an alternative
- Solar and 3He resources exist in space
- Solar technology well demonstrated
- Physics of 3He fusion advancing steadily
- New technologies promise more rapid progress as well as more commercially interesting products
  Fusion Progress
  
  IEC Plasma
3He fusion systems are commercially feasible provided fuel prices are competitive (Lecture 42)
- 3He fusion will be politically and environmentally acceptable
- No radioactive fuel
- No nuclear waste
- Reduction of the environmental impact of power generation
- High efficiencies
- No external effluents such as CO2 and SO2
- Potential for a new domestic industrial base
- Potential for less expensive electrical power
- Indirect creation of the capability to benefit from other space resources
- Indirect creation of the capability to deflect Earth crossing asteroids and comets
- Very limited environmental impact on the Moon (see Cameron, et al., 1990)

Lunar industrialization is a logical first step for the private sector to undertake in accessing space resources

The Moon is nearby and accessible
The Apollo program and subsequent space activities have provided a base for planning
- A lunar resource base of potential economic interest has been identified
- The resource base has been partially characterized by the Apollo investigations, the lunar sample analysis program, remote sensing, and subsequent considerations
- Significant quantities and varieties of lunar materials exist for further investigations related to resource and engineering questions
- Technical feasibility of going to and living on the Moon has been demonstrated by Apollo Program
- The necessary technological concepts for transportation to and living on the Moon have been well developed and tested

Assumption: Development of the energy resources in space for use on Earth also provides large resources for use in space

Lunar 3He
Lunar materials based solar power (see both Glaser and Criswell, in Kearny, 1989)

Rationale for a private initiative relative to energy resources from space as the foundation for gaining access to resources from space

No other option from a domestic political viewpoint due to entitlement and other budgetary considerations
International governmental cooperation next to impossible unless perfectly structured and then it is very difficult
Need to minimize cost through direct investor pressure to maximize total returns
- taxpayer pressure only indirect and diluted through the broader electoral process
Need to maximize management efficiency through direct investor pressure to maximize rate of returns
- taxpayer pressure only indirect and diluted through the broader electoral process

Roles for Governments relative to space resource initiatives

Maintain a favorable treaty environment
- Law of the Sea Convention vs Intelsat Treaty
- "benefit of all mankind"
Defense of legal activities in space
Setting and enforcement of safety and environmental standards through licensing authority
Customers for science and space resources
Protect national interests as required

Sub strategies for Lunar Energy Industrialization (Lecture 42)

Business Plan Development
Financing
Planning
R&D
Design
Manufacturing and Construction
Operations
Marketing and sales
Benefit Distribution

Path to Industrialization

Identification of near term technology spin-offs
Commitment of significant private resources
Planning, research, and development
Attraction of significant investments
Design, manufacturing, and construction
Operations
Lunar 3He can be returned to Earth at commercially viable costs
At $21/barrel for oil, energy equivalent value is about $3 billion/tonne
Since the US uses the energy equivalent of 30 tonnes of 3He/year, the no growth market (after about 50 years) is about $90 billion/yr for the US alone.
For perspective, the Apollo Program cost about $64 billion in today's dollars
The US growth market in 2050, and after complete power infrastructure replacement, would be on the order of $200 billion
These economic figures suggest that a lunar mining operation may be commercially viable if the start-up costs can be held to a few billion dollars per year
Such costs would be comparable to those needed to construct the TransAlaska Pipeline in the 1970s
Various analyses show that the key cost parameter will be cost per kg launched from Earth to the Moon

The Economics of Earth launch

Thompson (1989 and 1993) has shown that the major factor in the cost of large space projects is the cost per kilogram delivered into space (Lectures 35, 36, and 37).
- With respect to lunar 3He, $1000/kg appears to be about the limit and still have an attractive rate of return for investors
- The potential market in space for lunar volatile by products has not yet been factored into this analysis
The "capital" or non recurring cost of research, development, test, construction, and manufacturing of the Apollo Program was about $16 billion or, in current dollars, about $64 billion (See Schmitt, 1994)
- For this capital cost, the Saturn V could place a maximum payload of about 43,000 kg on a lunar intercept trajectory
- The recurring costs of the last Apollo mission to the Moon was about $3 billion, in current dollars, including about $500 million for the hypothetical cost of the original capital investment
- This works out to a cost per kg of about $70,000.
The development of a "Saturn VI" to support a commercial 3He initiative with a payload capacity on the order of 100,000 kg would need to lower these recurring costs by about a factor of 70
Is this reasonable?
- We would know exactly what would be needed.
- Few, if any, parallel design paths would need to be pursued
- Newer, proven hardware technologies could enhance the Apollo capabilities
- Newer, proven computer based technologies would increase performance and lower design, production, and business management costs
- Goals would be extremely focused, as for any good start-up commercial activity
- Business imperatives would be to design to minimum cost as well as to maximum reliability and longevity
- Reusability could be a design goal
- Long term production and operations contracts would reduce cost per launch
- Surplus government space facilities may be available at less than replacement cost
- A market for volatile by products may support a higher launch cost
- A large, talented, highly motivated reservoir of young people would dedicate themselves to this project as their predecessors did to Apollo
Overall Engineering Approach to a SaturnVI low cost, heavy-lift launch vehicle
- Re-engineer Saturn V with advanced but proven technology
- Design for confidence to proceed in the face of launch problems
- Use strap-on rockets for additional lift capability
- Make most sections recoverable and reusable
- Plan for large volume production with built in quality control
Alternatives to a Saturn VI approach
- New development
- Re-engineer Energia

Text:

The following references make good text to supplement this lecture. You can see copies by contacting Prof. Schmitt.

Lunar Environmental Impact: Cameron, E.N., et al., 1990, p54-82

"Saturn VI:" Koelle's "Lunar Base Quarterlies"

Lunar Industrialization: Schmitt, 1994, p527-530

Questions:

1. List and discuss at least five national and world trends that may lead to the need for a global alternative to fossil fuels for the production of electrical power.

2. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of organizing the development of lunar resources under United Nations' management.

3. List and briefly discuss at least eight factors that suggest that re-engineering the Apollo Saturn V launch vehicle (rocket) would lead to significantly lower launch costs than for Apollo.

References:

1994, Lunar Industrialization, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, v47

European Space Agency, 1994, International Lunar Workshop, ESA SP-1170

Cameron, E.N., et al., 1990, Net Environmental Aspects of Helium-3 Mining, WCSAR-TR-AR3-9012-1, 54-82

Culbertson, E.M., 1975, Apollo Expeditions to the Moon, NASA SP-350, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, 313p.

Kearney, J.J. Chairman, 1989 Report of NASA Lunar Energy Enterprise Case Study Task Force, NASA Technical Memorandum 101652.

Schmitt, H.H., 1994, Lunar Industrialization: How to Begin?, Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, v47, p 527-530.

Thompson, H.E, 1993, Cost of 3He from the Moon, Second Wisconsin Symposium on Helium-3 and fusion power, WCSAR-TR-AR3-9307-3.

Back to Syllabus

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