I’d been aware of their plans for large-scale activity in cislunar space (and even talk about it in the monograph), but this is the first I’d heard that they are offering to purchase water in space, with a price for various locations.
[Thursday-morning update]
Sort of related: Seeing on Twitter that they’re laying people off today. Not sure what that means.
[Afternoon update]
Here’s the story at the Denver Post. Looks like about 10% company wide. A literal decimation.
So ULA will create a market for water. Good, except they will probably need a market for ACES beyond govt. contracts.
Mining is probably the first thing people think of, but that may not get past the profitability tipping point very soon?
They talked about futures (which all investment really is) but why is real estate left off the table?
Real Estate involves whoever talks about it in claiming land, …on bodies over which the Outer Space Treaty we signed forbids claims. The idea that we should undo, or put effort into re-writing, a treaty signed nearly 50 years ago is, …non-progressive. Worse, there is no leverage to get Putin or Xi to sign onto that, and it will take 10+ years to rebuild the combination of military muscle and space industry growth that would make it worthwhile for them to agree to it. All of which means no sane ULA spokesman will be talking about it. They have contracts *today* that they want honored, and don’t want to piss off the progressives in DC.
After another decade of building space industry through “fishing” regolith off the surface of asteroids and the Moon, actual claiming of land may be spoken of without fear of ULA losses taken immediately for future concepts that require breaking old progressive totems.
Real Estate involves whoever talks about it in claiming land, …on bodies over which the Outer Space Treaty we signed forbids claims.
Some say that the IST forbids countries from making claims but not individuals. In any case, congress passed a bill a while back that was supposed to enable some form of property rights, everyone was really excited at the time.
The bill called for the Obama administration to conduct a review to see if the details of the bill violated any international agreements and is supposed to be reporting back soon, in the next month or two IIRC.
“Some say” is nowhere near sufficient for ULA to put its neck in a noose by pissing off progressives controlling State Department policy. Since they have no need to mention real estate to make their offer, they did not.
I think mining would make the most sense for orbital construction. The price of resources vs propellant is an issue. Has anyone redone the calculations on the price to get a kg of platinum in the face of SpaceX new prices? I think I read a study once that if you had a reusable vehicle the costs would fall into line and it would become competitive but that was like a decade back.
Then there is tourism. There are trips to the Pole and the Everest. So I’m pretty sure there would be willing clients if the service existed. The number of clients depending on the price of the trip.
Some companies could move to space to escape taxes. Remember that company that wants to put hardware on the ISS for a reason like that? You could host an e-bank there or whatever. All you would need would be computers and a communications link. Lag would be an issue but some financial transactions are done once a day in batches so that could actually work.
I notice the article did not go beyond ULA’s current focus on the Moon. It will be interesting to see how this initiative affects interest in the new quasi-moon 2016 HO3, and its possible composition. At a minimum mass of 50,000 mtons, and a minimum distance of 9 million miles, it could provide both Moon mining and asteroid mining ISRU a good launch pad of resources to justify an EML-1 facility.
As a customer, ULA is willing to pay about $1,360 per lb. ($3,000 per kilogram) for propellant in low Earth orbit. The going rate for fuel on the surface of the moon is $225 per lb. ($500 per kg), Sowers said. In talking with asteroid-mining experts, ULA would take delivery of propellant at L1 for $450 per lb. ($1,000 per kg), he said.–
$225 per lb for rocket fuel on Moon is too cheap. $225 per lb of water on the Moon could be almost possible {maybe]. Does heated water count as rocket fuel?? $225 per lb [500 per kg] for lunar water anyone should want to buy. A important aspect is how much would a buyer be willing to buy at $500 per kg or 1/2 million per tonne.
10 tons of water is, meh. 100 tons actually means something. 100 tons being 50 million. That’s a good quantity to buy and having a buyer for 100 tons at 1/2 million per
ton for 100 ton is a small invester.
If there is 1000 tons of lunar water to buy on the Moon, it’s probably a good buy at $500 per kg. And it’s a serious investor
who will paid 500 million for 1000 tons of lunar water mined.
Though problem with that is that lunar water mining business would have focus on mining a lot of water per year and probably
should plan on mining Iron [and have buyer for Iron ore, or make iron and sell to some party wanting lunar iron- and lunar
water and iron miner could be willing offer to buy some stuff which could be made from Iron or steel.
Things like rail, cable, plate metal, etc.
Also $500 per kg of rocket fuel on the moon is fairly meaningless. Does it mean $500 per kg
of LOX or $500 per kg of LH2. Or 1 kg of Hydrogen and 6 kg of LOX. Or 1 kg of hydrogen and
8 kg of LOX. Or would accept Hydrogen as gas. Storing Hydrogen liquid could be problematic
as far as storing tons of it.
Anyhow sell LH2 for $500 per kg is far to cheap. Try $4000 per kg
and you will immediately take it once it’s made- though that would still be very cheap.
LOX at $500 per kg is closer to doable, and it’s much easier to store.
Now if you could get LOX for $500 per kg and LH2 for $4000, a 1 to 6 rocket fuel mixture
is 6 x 500 + 1 x 4000 divided by 7 is $1000 per kg of rocket fuel. If take 1 to 8
it’s $888.89 per kg of rocket fuel.
Because you *could* have surplus of LOX, you might be able to sell LOX at $500 per kg.
If the buyer of this LOX might be interested in exported it off the Moon.
And any exporter of LOX off the Moon could be very helpful to lunar water miner, other miners,
power companies, and other lunar businesses.
So if IK were to sell LOX at $500 per kg, I wnat to buy it back in lunar orbit- at higher price.
Like so a first priority to be able to buy any quantity sold at Low lunar orbit for $2000 per kg.
Or paying to ship it to lunar orbit for 2000- 500 = 1500 per kg. Or sooner I effectively
buy LOX at 1500 per kg, the more infrastructure I could get to the Moon- and with a reusable
lander.
So total $1500 per kg at Low lunar is a good deal- particularly within first years.
So for every ton I sell LOX at 500 per kg, I get option to buy it back at $2000 per kg at
low lunar orbit. This valuable within first 3 to 5 years beginning of operations on the Moon.
Or another aspect is buying future option- if willing to buy Lunar LOX at $500 per kg in 10 years in future,
and one is ready to start immediately mining lunar water that could work. So will buy 100 tons
of Lunar LOX total of 50 million, 10 years after one starting lunar mining
Sorry, but I was more confused than anything else when reading this comment.
$225 per lb for rocket fuel on the Moon is too cheap- if what you mean is LH2 and LOX in 1 to 6 mixture. Unless one you offering to buy very large quantities at that price. Or it is meaningless unless quantities of rocket fuel one will buy at a set price is specified.
Or it’s particularly too cheap price if you want to buy less than 10 tons of it.
If 100 tons- then what kind rocket fuel. Ie would powdered aluminum or water be a rocket fuel will ULA pay $225 per lb for?
100 tons of water or powdered aluminum for 50 million dollars?
Or 100 tons of oxygen for 50 million, and will ULA provide the container to put it in?
Their bid price for “propellant” in LEO of $1,360 per pound is almost a profitable thing right now. The Falcon 9 (no first stage recovery) has a payload of 50,265 pounds and goes for $62 million. That’s $1,233.46 per pound for transportation, propellant and tanks. The Saturn V S-II stage had a mass fraction of 0.908, and without the 5 J-2 engines, it would have been 0.925. So the demonstrable mass fraction for this combination would allow one to put 46,529 pounds of LOX/LH2 into LEO for $1,332.5 per pound. All one would need are tanks that cost less than $1.28 million, and one would be in business!
The Falcon 9 (no first stage recovery) has a payload of 50,265 pounds and goes for $62 million.
SpaceX quotes the $62 million price for a launch with first stage recovery (up to 5.5 mT to GTO). Their price for delivering 50,265 lbs to LEO (i.e. without first stage recovery) is not public, but one assumes it would be higher than $62m.
Take a look at their price list. It is as I quoted. The Falcon 9 had been advertised as putting 29,000 pounds in LEO for $62 million. They difference was partly due to recent upgrades, but mostly due to their withholding a substantial performance margin for barge return. Gwynne has publicly said that reuse of the first stage would save the customer 30%, which means a launch would go for $43.4 million. It would not have the same capacity as a fully expendable, but the cost per pound would still drop slightly.
The Falcon 9 had been advertised as putting 29,000 pounds in LEO for $62 million.
Today there is no publicly posted price for 29,000 lbs to LEO. There is only a price for up to 5.5 mT to GTO.
Gwynne has publicly said that reuse of the first stage would save the customer 30%, which means a launch would go for $43.4 million.
She has speculated about such a price cut, but such a price is not being publicly offered today.