Space Crack

Back in 2006 Elon Musk famously said:
"I don't believe in the mining of stuff in space. The transportation costs are so horrendously high that I don't think there's anything… if there were packages of purified crack cocaine in orbit right now, I'm not sure it would be financially viable to go and retrieve them"
Which is ironic when you consider that it was at the unveiling of the Dragon that he made this famous quote. According to a recent presentation a Falcon 9/Dragon flight for robotic servicing would cost ~$80M. This includes launch vehicle, Dragon spacecraft, operations and recovery. It doesn't include the robotic arm, so let's include $5M for that.



The Dragon has a downmass of 3000kg. Per kg, that's $28,330. The street value of cocaine hydrochloride powder is $80-$100 per gram, or ~$80,000 per kg.

As such, in just 4 years SpaceX has managed to make the Space Crack market profitable.

(and Platinum $49,187/kg, and Gold $38,838/kg).

Comments

  1. Josh12:14 PM

    Now if only we could grow coca in space...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michael Laine12:29 PM

    Trent, add this up: Heavy lift rockets (SpaceX) + Boosted electric demands and energy conversion expertise (Tesla Motors) + Solar panel and electrical expertise (Solar City) = ?????

    Is Musk in stealth mode building a Space Based Solar Energy system?

    Movhael laine

    ReplyDelete
  3. QuantumG12:33 PM

    Well, if you look at that same article I linked to, he specifically says he thinks Space Solar Power is unworkable.

    But there are plenty of people floating around who believe in it and are getting venture capital interest.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike8:47 AM

    Once upon a time I did not believe that Space Solar Power would work. Now I think the idea has significant potential.

    The only thing I have not resolved in my mind is what happens when any object plows thru a section of solar panel? Does anyone know?

    Also, has anyone done any study regarding the reduction of sunlight hitting the earth? Is it significant?

    What about putting the panels closer to the Sun a la Asimov?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Unknown6:54 AM

    I guess the take-home of the article is that there are things we value enough to import from space.
    Also, if a mass driver were constructed, we could be talking about a gift that keeps on giving.

    ReplyDelete
  6. QuantumG10:44 AM

    A mass driver? I'm guessing you mean on the Moon. I've yet to see a design for one that is actually within our technological capabilities. The original O'Neill designs were on the order of Japanese-high-speed-train which the US can't even sell terrestrially. I actually think spinning Lunavators are more workable at the moment.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Disabling OS-X Device Removal Warnings In Yosemite

Image
If you're anything like me you've probably seen the Disk Not Ejected Properly message so many times that you've forgotten how annoying it is.. despite the fact that you never even wrote anything to the usb drive that you're yanking out of your Mac the operating system insists that you remove it "correctly". You're supposed to click the eject button. Why? I dunno, Apple seems to think that if you can write to it then the operating system might have written to it - and being Apple, they probably have. Well ya know what? Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me. Note: this will not fix your external drive disconnecting when your Mac goes to sleep. For that problem try disabling "put hard drive to sleep when possible" in both the Battery and Power Adapter tabs of the OS energy saver settings. What appears below is a dirty hack for deliberately removing a warning that Apple insists on showing you every single time you yank out a usb stick.
Read more

Rebirth Of The Spaceship

Image
Over the last year the space advocate community has splintered into two major groups in answering the question "where should we go next?" Moon First or Mars First . This division was present in the Review of Human Spaceflight (aka Augustine) committee's final report in late 2009, with the surprising conclusion that there isn't the funds for either, suggesting a number of intermediate destinations first - including asteroids. However, as few people consider asteroids to be truly interesting destinations for the human utilization of space ( except me! ), the debate rages on. Many Moon First advocates are "Mars Next" advocates while most Mars First advocates are "Moon Again?" detractors. The former claim that Mars exploration will benefit from lunar exploration, particularly in experience and risk reduction, and perhaps the procurement of propellant. The latter claim that lunar exploration is just a distraction and want to avoid the risk of be
Read more

Living Inside An Asteroid

Image
Deriders of the new NASA direction have latched on to the announced human asteroid mission in the 2025 timeframe as something they "can't imagine" and therefore is not worth doing. Of course, the administration is talking up the "science" that can be done on an asteroid, and how this could better inform us should the need arise to divert or destroy one that threatens Earth. This is good politics as nothing motivates like fear, but for those of us who think the human spaceflight program is really about preparing us to live at the future homes of humanity, asteroids would seem to be just a stop on the way - I disagree. As I've written previously, the new NASA direction isn't about asteroids - it isn't about destinations - it's about going and specifically, it's about going to Mars. I'm not sure NASA knows yet why they're going to Mars, but they're focusing on the technology to get there and get back safely, and some of the
Read more