No, that is only the panels required just to generate the electricity for the process.
This does not include, among other things: cabling, scaffolds, mountings, inverters, electronics, any batteries to cover operation during the night, any machinery required for mining, transportation, and building, nor building materials, piping, storage tanks, the actual sabbatier reactor chambers, insultation, duct tape, spare parts, tools, engineers, food, water, oxygen, space suits, vehicles, or toilet paper.
And keep in mind that for the sake of simplicity, [this assumes almost total conversion of energy][1] already, aka. almost losslessly converting the electricity harvested to chemical energy in the fuel, which of course doesn't happen in chemistry. It also ignores a whole lot of other stuff, outlined shortly after the timestamp linked.
And all that is to refill a single ship over the course of 500 days. Not a fleet. Not regular starts to support industry-scale transport logistics. One. Single. Ship. Over the course of 500 days
And we are, again, just talking about fuel production here. An industry also needs spare parts, personnel, tools, replacement machinery, building materials. The people working there need food, water, oxygen, toilet paper, ...
You know what else an industry needs? Waste disposal. We cannot just dump metal shavings, etc. into space: Because we are talking about orbiting platforms or something similar here, so these waste products would then become hyper-velocity projectiles ripping everything to shreds. So there needs to be a plan for that as well, which again involves all the same problems.
Another thing it needs: Energy. The video outlines how difficult it is to support even a single, scope-limited industrial process in a place where we cannot just connect to the electric grid or access large natural gas reservoirs. Solar panels are nice, but processes like smelting materials, welding, metalworking, anything that requires high temperatures? Good luck trying to cover that with solar.
And again another thing: Heat dispersal. Ever wondered why the ISS has so many fins? Many of those are not solar panels, they are heat-exchangers. And they just have to account for the body heat of a small group of people and their equipment. Try to imagine what an industrial facility would need, just in terms of that.
Yeah, so all in all, I guess that we won't support a "cis-lunar-orbit" industry any time soon. While in theory possible (as in, nothing so far violates any laws of physics), it simply isn't practical, and the cost of anything, from setting it up to maintaining it, would be prohibitive.
> I would be more interested in what you think about the more advanced manufacturing, despite all the problems and infrastructure required?
First I'd need to see tangible demonstrations that "having zero gravity" confers an advantage in the first place.
What do I mean by that? Simple: Does zero gravity enable certain processes, that cannot be replicated on Earth, and is the cost of setting up such facilities, vs. developing alternatives that work here, where we have materials, labour, air, etc. available really worth it.
Because "greatest adventure" sounds wonderful and all that, but when the term "industry" enters the discussion, we have to talk about efficiency, expedience and ROI.
No, that is only the panels required just to generate the electricity for the process.
This does not include, among other things: cabling, scaffolds, mountings, inverters, electronics, any batteries to cover operation during the night, any machinery required for mining, transportation, and building, nor building materials, piping, storage tanks, the actual sabbatier reactor chambers, insultation, duct tape, spare parts, tools, engineers, food, water, oxygen, space suits, vehicles, or toilet paper.
And keep in mind that for the sake of simplicity, [this assumes almost total conversion of energy][1] already, aka. almost losslessly converting the electricity harvested to chemical energy in the fuel, which of course doesn't happen in chemistry. It also ignores a whole lot of other stuff, outlined shortly after the timestamp linked.
And all that is to refill a single ship over the course of 500 days. Not a fleet. Not regular starts to support industry-scale transport logistics. One. Single. Ship. Over the course of 500 days
And we are, again, just talking about fuel production here. An industry also needs spare parts, personnel, tools, replacement machinery, building materials. The people working there need food, water, oxygen, toilet paper, ...
You know what else an industry needs? Waste disposal. We cannot just dump metal shavings, etc. into space: Because we are talking about orbiting platforms or something similar here, so these waste products would then become hyper-velocity projectiles ripping everything to shreds. So there needs to be a plan for that as well, which again involves all the same problems.
Another thing it needs: Energy. The video outlines how difficult it is to support even a single, scope-limited industrial process in a place where we cannot just connect to the electric grid or access large natural gas reservoirs. Solar panels are nice, but processes like smelting materials, welding, metalworking, anything that requires high temperatures? Good luck trying to cover that with solar.
And again another thing: Heat dispersal. Ever wondered why the ISS has so many fins? Many of those are not solar panels, they are heat-exchangers. And they just have to account for the body heat of a small group of people and their equipment. Try to imagine what an industrial facility would need, just in terms of that.
Yeah, so all in all, I guess that we won't support a "cis-lunar-orbit" industry any time soon. While in theory possible (as in, nothing so far violates any laws of physics), it simply isn't practical, and the cost of anything, from setting it up to maintaining it, would be prohibitive.
> I would be more interested in what you think about the more advanced manufacturing, despite all the problems and infrastructure required?
First I'd need to see tangible demonstrations that "having zero gravity" confers an advantage in the first place.
What do I mean by that? Simple: Does zero gravity enable certain processes, that cannot be replicated on Earth, and is the cost of setting up such facilities, vs. developing alternatives that work here, where we have materials, labour, air, etc. available really worth it.
Because "greatest adventure" sounds wonderful and all that, but when the term "industry" enters the discussion, we have to talk about efficiency, expedience and ROI.
[1]: https://youtu.be/s-MQrp2P2GI?si=DCLRSeeZ2hLePVAl&t=886