The Planetary and Terrestrial Mining Sciences Symposium and Space Resources Roundtable had a strong focus on In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) in space. The presentations explored a variety of possible technologies for resource extraction and refinement in space, and the means by which they could be used to begin to develop a space economy.
Several speakers at the conference’s Commercialization session suggested a potential first step: harvesting lunar resources. The Moon is comparatively close to earth and comparatively straightforward to access compared to asteroids and to Mars. It’s also large enough to support serious resource extraction operations. But while the lunar surface does feature large quantities of Iron, Titanium, Aluminum, and Helium-3, none of them will be simple or cost-effective to mine in the near future.
So a question hung over the session: what would a lunar economy actually look like? Three presentations by Thomas Colvin of the IDA Science Technology Policy Institute, Lockheed Martin’s Adam Marcinkowski, and George Sowers of the Center for Space Resources all pointed to a potential answer: that it would consist of partnerships between private industry and public-sector actors like NASA, and be focused on supplying water to be used for propulsion in Earth orbit, in cislunar space, and eventually for future Mars missions. Industry would get a long-term return on investment and potential transferable technology, while NASA and other space agencies could reap hundreds of millions in savings a year from the arrangement.
Colvin’s presentation looked at “the value proposition for non-federal investors to invest in space mining,” and “how NASA can encourage private co-investment.” The Institute conducted a series of interviews with potential stakeholders, focused on “investors and industry experts,” and used the insights to present potential barriers and potential solutions for bringing private investment into developing a lunar economy.
Investors recognize that lunar propellants are likely to be “the first pillar of a cislunar economy because it has the largest potential market.” They believe that this market for propellants would be focused on extracting water instead of just oxygen. Since this would require a significant investment in surface power, they also see near-term revenue potential in space-based nuclear power and fuel cells, though they have concerns about potential “political risks.” They also see potential in technologies like automated construction and additive manufacturing (3D printing), as well as in lunar excavation, but are reluctant to invest in developing these capabilities without clear demand.
Colvin identified several “investor needs” in his talk that would help build confidence and spur interest. Investors need to know that the Moon was going to remain a priority when the world’s attention shifts to Mars, and that agencies like NASA would remain anchor customers for lunar resources. They were also concerned about NASA’s willingness to support commercial R&D, and the likelihood of NASA pivoting to producing technologies and capabilities in-house; they didn’t want to end up competing with their anchor customer. They also wanted evidence of other customers for lunar goods. Colvin said that NASA was receptive, and was already taking steps to address some of these concerns
Colvin then stated some of the Institute’s recommendations. He said that NASA should “clearly state which technologies it wants to develop in-house or cost-plus,” which it was going to procure commercially, and publicly plan out any potential changes. They recommend that NASA should develop the surface capabilities needed by the Human Explorations and Operations (HEO) mission in collaboration with private-sector partners as part of an “industry roadmap,” as well as assuring industry of NASA’s medium-and long-term role as an anchor customer for lunar resources.
They also recommend that NASA: Issue RFPs for provision of water and propellant and seek to demonstrate use cases for both; work with industry to co-create an architecture for power generation, distribution and storage; fund R&D for terrestrially-relevant technologies with lunar applications; test dust mitigation technologies; and prioritize technology transfer.
Marcinkowski provided Lockheed Martin’s perspective. After discussing some of the technologies that Lockheed Martin is developing to assist in the lunar mission — like solar arrays, lunar rovers, cryogenic hydrogen storage, and rockets for cislunar operations — Marcinkowski emphasized that Lockheed Martin expects a water-based near-term space economy. This is due to the comparative ubiquity of water, and how water-based propellants offer “the lowest wet-mass chemical system for any dry-mass payload.”
He acknowledged it will be difficult, and will require significant R&D work: such as in mining and refining, reusable LOX/LH2-powered crewed landers, orbital propellant depots and refineries, and “a variety of commercial exploration, launch, and transportation systems.” He emphasized that “no one company or one country can do this alone,” and that they plan to be “a key player in a thriving commercial ecosystem.”
Sowers’ presentation pointed to harnessing the significant water resources in shadowed polar areas of the Moon as a means by which satellites and in-space stages could transition to refuellable water-based propulsion and “break the tyranny of the rocket equation.” Sowers said that propellant demands would likely reach 2730 metric tonnes per year. He also said in a best-case scenario where lunar water is supplying propellant for both NASA and commercial lunar and Mars missions, the return on investment could exceed 15%. Sowers believes this could be enough to interest investors.
Sowers believe that this would require public-private partnerships where NASA works with private firms to create these capabilities. He said that this could be a windfall for NASA: he expects a basic investment would require an $800 million initial investment with an annual savings of nearly $500 million a year, but a $1.2 billion investment in a scenario where NASA is running regular biennial Mars missions could save NASA close to $6 billion a year. This is based on using solar-based thermal mining to extract water from the Moon’s permanently shadowed regions.
Put together, these presentations make a case for a space economy based on harvesting water and ice resources on the Moon. The private sector may be reluctant to get involved without governmental partnership. If both parties work together to cultivate these partnerships, though, industry could see a significant profit and space agencies could see potentially impressive savings.