Xref: utzoo sci.astro:13713 sci.electronics:20833 sci.physics:20160 sci.research:1729 sci.aeronautics:2269 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!convex!texsun!geraldo.Central.Sun.COM!male!jethro!exodus!concertina.Eng.Sun.COM!fiddler From: fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.electronics,sci.physics,sci.research,sci.aeronautics Subject: Re: Excavating (minig) gold in the space by NASA. Message-ID: <14969@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 12 Jun 91 00:36:31 GMT References: <1991Jun11.122417.1@acad2.alaska.edu> <1991Jun11.223608.2087@agate.berkeley.edu> Sender: news@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM Followup-To: sci.astro Distribution: usa Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca. Lines: 25 In article <1991Jun11.223608.2087@agate.berkeley.edu> shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff) writes: > >So the asteroid contains 5.6 years world gold production, and 338 years >platinum metals production (assuming I didn't blow the units conversions.) > >(Someone said that the asteroid was small number ppm gold and thus wouldn't >be worth mining. However, I would guess that the asteroid wouldn't be >homogeneous, and thus the high concentration areas might be worth mining.) One point is that the metals in the mass likely aren't going to be tied up in combination with other elements such as oxygen, sulfur, etc. They should be closer to raw metal than to normal ores. This isn't going to make much difference in the platinum-group metals and gold, since they don't combine much...but the iron and nickel should be easier to refine than they would normally be here dirtside. No need (nor desire!) to bring the whole thing down in one lump sum, as it were, btw. -- ------------ The only drawback with morning is that it comes at such an inconvenient time of day. ------------