Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Earth Government Mars Moon NASA Space

Trump Signs Executive Order To Support Moon Mining, Tap Asteroid Resources (space.com) 218

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Space.com: President Donald Trump signed an executive order today (April 6) establishing U.S. policy on the exploitation of off-Earth resources. That policy stresses that the current regulatory regime -- notably, the 1967 Outer Space Treaty -- allows the use of such resources. This view has long held sway in U.S. government circles. For example, the United States, like the other major spacefaring nations, has not signed the 1979 Moon Treaty, which stipulates that non-scientific use of space resources be governed by an international regulatory framework. And in 2015, Congress passed a law explicitly allowing American companies and citizens to use moon and asteroid resources.

The new executive order makes things even more official, stressing that the United States does not view space as a "global commons" and sees a clear path to off-Earth mining, without the need for further international treaty-level agreements. The executive order, called "Encouraging International Support for the Recovery and Use of Space Resources," has been in the works for about a year, a senior administration official said during a teleconference with reporters today. The order was prompted, at least in part, by a desire to clarify the United States' position as it negotiates with international partners to help advance NASA's Artemis program for crewed lunar exploration, the official added. (Engagement with international partners remains important, the official said.) "As America prepares to return humans to the moon and journey on to Mars, this executive order establishes U.S. policy toward the recovery and use of space resources, such as water and certain minerals, in order to encourage the commercial development of space," Scott Pace, deputy assistant to the president and executive secretary of the U.S. National Space Council, said in a statement today.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Trump Signs Executive Order To Support Moon Mining, Tap Asteroid Resources

Comments Filter:
  • Nothign new here. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Freischutz ( 4776131 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @08:12AM (#59916766)
    This is nothing new. US policy has always been: "all your resource are belong to us and if you disagree we'll pay your country a visit and bring you a whole bunch of democracy".
    • by BAReFO0t ( 6240524 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @08:35AM (#59916838)

      The US is rapidly going downwards, especially in terms of global power.
      Before, you either had to sell it onthe US's terms, or die. Then China came, and said "Alright, I'll buy it at a higher price.". This is why the oil price went "up" (actually normalized).
      And they actually built Africa some infrastructure in exchange for their exploitation.
      BRICS expanded on that second world of power.
      And now that the UK leaves the EU, the EU too is free to oppose the US, without constant vetoing by and special treatment for the US lapdog. Which you can see, with them actually countering US punitive tariffs with their own ones.
      And frankly, Trump played a key role in this lately. He isn't taken serioulsy, and neither is the US leadership. (And believe me, we'd love to see real statesman at the helm. Somebody one can actually look up to.)

      I just hope this all goes well for the American citizens, when the tipping point is reached.

      With the way the Coronavirus was treated, and with the experience that after W. Bush it didn't get better, but a charismatic one actually mostly kept the status quo, to be succeeded by an even worse one, ... it's looking pretty grim, ... but not hopeless.

      The problem is: A little bit of Sanders/Warren would do good, ... but only a *little* bit, not the whole package at once! If somebody is about to die of thirst, drowning him in a lake won't do him any good either. Just spice things up with a little humanity and teamwork. You know, being social, not social*ist*, keeping capital, witout staying capital*ist*. Being nice to your fellow cititens, instead of "everyone for himself and fuck all the others".
      Oh well, who am I talking to. :/

      • A little bit of Sanders/Warren would do good, ... but only a *little* bit, not the whole package at once!

        I wouldn't be too worried about that. Congress has enough infighting to temper anything too extreme. And neither of them would try to subvert the office and try to abuse their position. I'll take someone with extreme views and only moderate influence any day of the week.

        • by Freischutz ( 4776131 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @10:53AM (#59917374)

          A little bit of Sanders/Warren would do good, ... but only a *little* bit, not the whole package at once!

          I wouldn't be too worried about that. Congress has enough infighting to temper anything too extreme. And neither of them would try to subvert the office and try to abuse their position. I'll take someone with extreme views and only moderate influence any day of the week.

          The Byzantine empire went down hill largely because its rulers were so busy stabbing each other in the back and stirring up useless internal conflict that it didn't have the strength or the time to deal with external threats. Unless something changes quite radically the American Enpire may very well go the same way.

      • If things follow the path they've taken on Earth then it's America's moon until they run out of money to pump into it. Then China will include the moon in its Belt and Road programme.
      • Ouch. I almost wish that I had not commented here. I would have modded you up. Out of all your postings, this is probably the most spot-on that you have had.
      • by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

        The US isn't really going downhill, at least not economically. What's happening is that the rest of the world is catching up.

        Europe got pounded in the world wars. The US and UK were essentially identical in terms of GDP / capita up until 1941. Then the US kept growing and the UK, along with the rest of Europe, had a period of stunted growth because, well, a lot of stuff got destroyed. That set them behind a decade or so. Eastern Europe had another massive contraction in 1989 after the Soviet Union collapsed

        • The US isn't really going downhill, at least not economically. What's happening is that the rest of the world is catching up.

          Yes, but it is the relative position of countries that matter when it comes to exercising power. In the past, the US has used this soft power to coerce other countries into doing what it wants. With the playfield becoming far more level the US's influence is rapidly waning. This is eventually going to have major impacts in the US.

          The US has managed to ignore social welfare because its economy was booming and its poorer citizens could look at their counterparts in other countries and think they were stil

    • That and it is an executive order. And it will take more than 5 years (assuming Trump wins the next election) to get this in place. In which the next president will probably just stop it.

      Mining the moon, for earthbound material is super expensive, and worse than just mining it on the bigger planet that we are on. However, if the goal was to get a moon base with the plan of building a spacecraft for additional long-range space travel. As it takes less energy to make it on the moon, then launch it into s

    • As it should be.
      I mean seriously, should resources be in the hands of those who (through historical conquest or simple accident) happen to be standing atop them today? Or should they go to those who are best able to use them?

      By your logic, basically North America should have remained under the control of a bunch of quasi-stone age tribes who still hadn't figured out the wheel or the written word (to say nothing of medicine), practiced human sacrifice, engaged to some degree in cannibalism as of the 15th ce

  • https://space-agency.public.lu... [public.lu]

    So not America first! :-)

  • by Lucas123 ( 935744 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @08:24AM (#59916798) Homepage
    The monolith appears.
  • Good. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 )

    "the United States does not view space as a "global commons""
    I'm glad, because nothing would hinder humanity's eventual move into space more than that.

    I know that those fond of massive governments and regulation love the idea of keeping, well, pretty much anything that doesn't have humans without humans forever.

    Well, count me as one that is all for the unrestricted mining of the moon and asteroids and anywhere there isn't already identified life. (I'm not a pure libertarian, it should remain regulated for

    • Global Commons = international waters.

      Hardly in conflict with doing whatever you want up there.

    • Easy to speak as one belonging to a power that CAN actually mine from space, if they wanted to.
      This initiative will make the rich richer and the poor poorer. The few countries / conglomerates who have the capacity to perform space mining will move farther up, and the rest will fall behind even more.

      So... "unrestricted" is actually restricted to an elite few.

      • Perhaps for a brief moment, but you shouldn't need an advanced degree in economic theory to realize that's not how it works. I can't think of a single instance in history where one civilization finding more resources made everyone else poorer. Conquered, yes; poorer, no.
    • Apparently, nobody with the capacity to exploit space sees it that way either. What does it tell you about the value of the Lunar treaty if none of the nations capable of getting there are signatories?

      And I'm fine with that. It doesn't make sense to establish a legal framework before you know what the requirements/issues/conditions will be, and the only way to discover them is to move ahead and find out.

    • by guruevi ( 827432 )

      Treaties mean nothing when resources are involved. Look at China and Russia, they care nothing about treaties, not the UN, not the WHO, not the nuclear treaties.

      The only reason Antarctica hasn't been developed is because we have at least 100 more years worth of oil supplies in the US, Eastern Europe and the Middle East, which is why Russia and China are aggressively expanding towards oil and gas-rich areas both in Europe and Africa. It's extremely cold in Antarctica and going there is expensive and dangerou

      • by cusco ( 717999 )

        Look at China, Russia, and the US they care nothing about treaties, not the UN, not the WHO, not the nuclear treaties.

        Fix that for you.

  • by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @08:26AM (#59916804) Journal

    "The moon belongs to America, and anxiously awaits the arrival of our astro-men. Will you be among them?"

    Simpsons had it first.

  • that Trump won't tap? First it's porn star ass, now as-teroids.

    Maybe some of the coal miners from earth can go to work the mines on the moon!

    • We're whalers on the moon,
      We carry a harpoon.
      But there ain't no whales
      So we tell tall tales
      And sing our whaling tune.

  • time to launch a new era of exploration, space cowboy. There's gold in them there regoliths! YEEEE HAW
  • by cordovaCon83 ( 4977465 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @08:33AM (#59916834)
    I don't see anything that could go wrong with deregulating space mining. Come to think of it, it's not even deregulating! They haven't even regulated it yet! This is libertarianism at its finest! Deregulate everything! Especially the Oxygen regulators! Those certainly shouldn't be regulated!
  • Me me me me me. It's all about ME!
  • by blindseer ( 891256 ) <blindseer@earthli[ ]net ['nk.' in gap]> on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @08:39AM (#59916850)

    The treaty on preventing any nation from laying claim to off Earth resources was nonsense. This was nothing more than the USA saying that they made their point on proving their ability to send people to other bodies in the solar system and bring them back. No other nation then or since has had the independent capability to colonize the moon.

    Well, the USA just shed their self imposed shackles on this.

    It looks like the race might be on to put people on the moon again. I find it difficult to believe any nation has the capability to send people to the moon and bring them back safely. The USA will do this again, all it needed was to decide to do it. You think the USA can't win this race again? Hold my Diet Pepsi.

    • by cusco ( 717999 )

      Bring them back safely? I'd go even if it was a one-way trip.

      • Bring them back safely? I'd go even if it was a one-way trip.

        Ditto. In a heartbeat....

        • by cusco ( 717999 )

          A few years ago some group was looking for volunteers for a one-way exploratory trip to Mars. They had so many respondents that they crashed the web server, repeatedly.

      • Bring them back safely? I'd go even if it was a one-way trip.

        You'd not be send. Extensive isolation followed by an existential crisis would make you an insane liability to any mission on the books.

    • The space race was just a thinly veiled ICBM race with Russia (same tech basically). The patriotism that was created by the act was all very useful at the time too. Our excuse for going back to the Moon is likely the same. I really doubt that there would be a financial payoff from Moon mining.

      • The tech for an ICBM is woefully simple compared to that to send three people to the moon and bring them back. Not just in terms of actually reaching orbit (which ICBMs don't do), but actually breaking orbit, achieving orbit around the moon, landing, taking off again - and keeping those 3 people alive for 8 days in an environment that would kill you in under a minute if you didn't have everything absolutely correct.
      • by guruevi ( 827432 )

        No, the goal of the moon was to set up a base before the Russians. Little did we know how much of the space and nuclear race was stolen from the US by some within the US government (a lot of the scientific community was enthralled with communism and was happy to help) that the entire Sputnik thing was basically a copy and extension of US ICBM tech.

        On the other hand communism had made the USSR bankrupt to such an extent that Sputnik was basically as far as they were going to be able to go. We did to an exten

    • by DavenH ( 1065780 )

      I find it difficult to believe any nation has the capability to send people to the moon and bring them back safely. The USA will do this again, all it needed was to decide to do it. You think the USA can't win this race again? Hold my Diet Pepsi.

      How would China possibly compete in this race with their better education, better average intelligence, un-toddlered leadership, respect for scientific fact, better work ethic, and more powerful economy? I really doubt this isn't going to be the American century. The only thing keeping America relevant is Silicon Valley, and that edge is slipping.

      • by DavenH ( 1065780 )
        doubt this is going to be*
      • How would China possibly compete in this race with their better education, better average intelligence, un-toddlered leadership, respect for scientific fact, better work ethic, and more powerful economy?

        They will be unable to compete because of a pervasive lack of trust. A nation of free people has an inherent trust of others, because trust building is vital in a free economy. It takes trust in others to do their job to truly excel. The people of China know this but the government cannot tolerate it. The government cannot trust that the people building rockets, sending people into orbit, and so on, will not simply take over. The government does not trust its own people. The government knows that it r

      • How would China possibly compete in this race with their better education, better average intelligence, un-toddlered leadership, respect for scientific fact, better work ethic, and more powerful economy?

        The ironic thing is, your question is actually real because of your unintentionally sarcastic components. Not one of those things is true, you are buying into lies from a country built top to bottom on them. It's why in any real endeavor China has not managed to far that well, because they are entirely a p

      • If you believe the Chinese upper education (college/university) system is better (it's not even close), they are more intelligent (racist much?), their leadership isn't "toddler" (Xi is all about Xi, he's the consummate narcissist and a despotic, spoiled one at that), respect scientific fact (like eating bats, and that leaving all your windows open in winter is a cure for lung issues), better work ethic (where it's the hours, not the quality that matters), and more powerful economy (which is smaller and loa
    • Mighty big talk about a nation that has been able to put no one in space for nine years, and has not been able to send a 13th person for a short stay on the Moon for nearly 50 years.

      The U.S. has never had the ability to colonize (in any useful or valid sense of the word) the Moon. The longest stay on the Moon was just short of 75 hours.

      • Big talk from a person probably from a nation that most likely never even built their own orbital vehicles, let alone put someone on the moon, even if for a day or two...
    • Well, the USA just shed their self imposed shackles on this.

      Yep, Nation hell bent on raping the earth over oil appears to finally stop discriminating against the rest of the solar system. This should come as no surprise to anyone.

    • by cusco ( 717999 )

      the USA just shed their self imposed shackles on this.

      If I'm not mistaken Reagan and both Bushes already said this, Rump is just parroting his far more competent predecessors.

  • Which resource is cheaper to mine in the moon and bring back, rather than mine locally in Earth?

    • Considering that the U.S. does not mine all of it's mineral resources due to regulation and areas being off limits. I would think that mining on the moon cost wise is probably is about the same. We still have the resources in the U.S., we just are not able to mine them. The moon though, the environmentalists have not gotten control of that area yet.
      • Re:I wonder... (Score:4, Informative)

        by mobby_6kl ( 668092 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @09:59AM (#59917120)

        Considering that the U.S. does not mine all of it's mineral resources due to regulation and areas being off limits. I would think that mining on the moon cost wise is probably is about the same. We still have the resources in the U.S., we just are not able to mine them. The moon though, the environmentalists have not gotten control of that area yet.

        Mining what exactly though? What are you unable to mine on earth due to regulations that you can mine cheaper on the moon than buying from China or Australia or wherever?

        • Mining what exactly though? What are you unable to mine on earth due to regulations that you can mine cheaper on the moon than buying from China or Australia or wherever?

          That very much depends on the political situation both in the US and in China. The US's largest rare earths mine is closed because the Nuclear Regulatory Agency requires them to treat the thorium that occurs in the tailings as a radiological hazardous waste, even though it hasn't been concentrated any more than it was in the ore to begin with. The extra expense makes operating the mine a losing proposition, so it's idle. China currently sells rare earths globally, but if they ever decided not to, or to s

    • The most cost savings will be probably to mine on the moon for operations in space. The vast cost of space is getting payloads to orbit from the Earth.
      • The most cost savings will be probably to mine on the moon for operations in space. The vast cost of space is getting payloads to orbit from the Earth.

        This.

        Shipping sheet aluminium from Luna to LEO is cheaper than shipping it from bottom of a 1g gravity well. And oxygen. Yeah, that aluminium oxide rock can provide both. Hell, once you separate the Al from the O2, not only can you ship it to LEO, you can use it as fuel for the rockets doing the shipping....

        And then maybe we can expand ISS from a tiny ou

      • I never understood that. Why would mining on the moon be any different than mining on earth? They're both floating in space, it's not rocket science!

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Depends on where you intend to use said resources, but it's a lot easier to collect helium-3 on the moon than to refine it on earth.

        -jcr

        That's a dangerous plan. Once you deplete the helium in the moon there won't be anything keeping it up in the sky.

    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      Trump's ego.

    • Moon rocks?

  • Somewhat fundamentally, ownership is a concept. When is something yours? Obviously the cake is mine if I lick it. In the West - a plot of land was yours if it had a fence, and this was protected by the US regulatory framework. What protected the US regulatory framework, you ask? Guns and force.

    Somewhat fundamentally, you have a country if you (a) declare that you are a country, and (b) no able and willing group stands against you.

    If you take a moon-rock - it is YOURS until someone takes it. For as lon

    • Property is theft.
      —P. J. PROUDHON

      Property is liberty.
      —P. J. PROUDHON

      Property is impossible.
      —P. J. PROUDHON

      Consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.
      —RALPH WALDO EMERSON

      (Credit: The Illuminatus Trilogy)

  • Do we own the moon? I hereby claim Giordano Bruno crater and all mineral rights below and well as the space above it as my own.

    • F it, actually I claim the entire Sea of Tranquility. Nasa owes me rent now dating back to 1969. I won't evict them during this pandemic, but expect the back rent when this is all over.

    • ok, get up there and set up the stakes for you claim. Depending on the law you may have to actually develop your claim for it to be legal.
  • In before killer robots start taking hostages

  • by WindBourne ( 631190 ) on Tuesday April 07, 2020 @09:45AM (#59917074) Journal
    Space IS 'global commons' per the treaties that have ratified back in the 60s. Trump can not undo that unilaterally. In fact, all it would take is another nation to bring that up to court and BOOM goes the order.

    But being global commons does not mean that we can not mine, etc. There was nothing in ratified treaties that prohibited that.

    And if Trump really wants to get to the moon and fast, with our allies, he is going at it all wrong with this.
    • by guruevi ( 827432 )

      What allies? The EU governments have been overrun by such bureaucracy, the EU is about to break up during this pandemic. The Chinese, without a European backbone pushing back for the last 2 decades are aggressively pursuing most of Asia and some of Africa that Japan, Israel and Saudi Arabia are seriously reconsidering their non-aggressive military stances. The UK has been talking austerity programs since 2002 leading up to Brexit and it's unclear whether their centrist government will even survive their slo

    • and then can tell the court where to go.
  • USA does not even have rockets to send astronauts in LEO, they will go to the moon with Russian rockets?

    • Falcon 9 and ULA's Atlas V are both rated for humans. SpaceX is sending their Falcon 9 and Crew Dragon up in May with people on it.

      The only sticky wicket for the Atlas V is the Boeing Starliner and Orion are the only capsules that can go on it (IIRC) and they're not ready yet.

      By Jan 2021 we should have two capsules (SpaceX and Boeing) ready to go and ULA's already got the replacement for Atlas V and Delta IV in production with the Vulcan.

      We have some options for getting people into LEO.

    • Condominium (sp). Or an alternative, the state in Firefly.
  • Great stuff for a country that hasn't been sending people to space on their own ships in decades.

Bus error -- driver executed.

Working...