Gas Stations in Space?

by Space Frontier Foundation on January 11, 2010 · 21 comments

Originally published in Space News on January 4, 2010

“We can’t do anything ‘worthy of a great nation’ within the current human spaceflight budget.” This is how many, both in Washington and elsewhere, are interpreting the findings of the Augustine committee, appointed by U.S. President Barack Obama to rethink the future of human spaceflight. They apparently believe Moon and Mars trips are the only exciting things a space program can do — and that only the government can do it. So they conclude either that government needs to spend lots more money so we can do something worthwhile, or that we need to accept dramatically more modest, and less expensive, goals.

Intriguingly, the report also contains hints of other paths. It tells, for example, of the benefits that arise “from the development of in-space refueling,” suggesting that the best way to create this capability is to have a “government-guaranteed market for fuel in low-Earth orbit.” Government guarantees and orbital gas stations hardly seem exciting, but let’s take a closer look.

Before I do, however, I’d like to take a moment to address the nitpicking rocket geeks who are going to be flaming me if I don’t specify that when the Augustine report says “fuel” it clearly means “a variety of fuels and oxidizers.” I find this a sensible semantic simplification that I intend to follow.

I also need to address the objection that refueling adds complexity to space missions. This is clearly true. It also would be simpler to sell new cars loaded up with enough fuel to last for the planned mission life of the vehicle, thus avoiding the need for a complex network of dangerous and expensive gas stations scattered across the global landscape. Sometimes the advantages of simplicity are overwhelmed by the benefits of a bit of complexity.

Fuel depots fundamentally change the economics of going beyond low Earth orbit. A lighter and drastically cheaper spaceship can be sent to low Earth orbit with empty tanks and fueled up before continuing on its way. (Readers wanting detailed numbers on this can find them on page 65 of the Augustine report. Discussion of the required technologies begins on page 100.) Even better is the potential to refuel returned spaceships so they can be reused for multiple trips to deep space destinations, saving even more.

The Augustine report also examines how “refueling introduces the idea of critical launches and less critical launches in any given mission.” If it takes several launches, all of which need to be successful to accomplish a given goal, the overall risk of failure climbs significantly. Since launches carrying the fuel can occur long before a final commitment is made to launch critical components, the overall risk is reduced, even if the system used to launch fuel has much lower reliability.

Because fuel depots can be supplied by almost any size launch vehicle, they spur competition, innovation and price reductions in Earth-to-orbit transportation. Since governments are the largest consumers of such services — primarily for defense, but also for environmental remote sensing and civil space — taxpayers are the main beneficiaries of these cost reductions.

Once a market exists for fuel transported to low Earth orbit, there inevitably will be entrepreneurial efforts to use extraterrestrial resources to manufacture fuel in space for use in space. Both the Moon and some near-Earth asteroids contain the basic components of most types of rocket fuel, as well as numerous other valuable resources. Many of us are convinced that these resources can be mined and processed for significantly less cost, and dramatically less environmental impact, than transporting them from the surface of the Earth. If these efforts prove profitable, we will have our first space mining and manufacturing operations — the first steps toward expanding human civilization into the solar system.

After rocket fuel comes electricity. While we may one day use the abundant, unfiltered, 24-hour, high-noon sunlight in space for radio transmission of electricity to Earth, the near-term opportunity is to use that energy for the kinds of satellites that we already have in space. The technology we develop to supply our fuel depots will enable us to manufacture electrical generators made mostly from raw materials found in space. This further reduces costs and increases capabilities.

It gets even better. Most satellites today cannot be maintained on orbit. But if we are able to mine and manufacture fuel and generate electricity in space, we could dramatically extend the life and capabilities of a new generation of satellites, in much the same way that we have done for the Hubble Space Telescope.

Fuel, electricity and satellite maintenance lead to many more potential markets, some of which nobody today can possibly foresee. Costs keep dropping; capabilities keep rising; more markets open up.

Which do you find more worthy of our great nation: a few dozen government boots planted on the Moon and Mars, costing taxpayers millions for each footprint, or whole new industries, creating millions of high-paying, private-sector jobs, building the means to get paying customers to the Moon, Mars or anywhere else they can afford? The first step towards one requires a big jump in federal spending. The first step toward the other is a “government-guaranteed market for fuel in low Earth orbit” that both increases capabilities and saves money.

Bob Werb is the chairman of the board of the Space Frontier Foundation, an organization of people dedicated to opening the space frontier to human settlement.

Gas Stations in Space (pdf)

{ 21 comments }

Marcel F. Williams January 12, 2010 at 6:40 pm

Fuel cost have only been a minor component of the cost of spaceflight. Space vehicle development cost and how much demand there is for manufacturing a particular vehicle or vehicles is the key, IMO. Space depots have the potential to increase fuel efficiency. But the problem, IMO, is not fuel efficiency, its the lack of demand for manned launch vehicles.

NASA only had 5 manned space flights last year. Yet polls show that 7% of the wealthy would be willing to pay $20 million plus for a trip into space. Thus, out of 100,000 people in the world who could afford to travel into space, 7000 say they would be willing to pay the price. If just 10% of these individuals were launched into orbit every year aboard a space craft that could carry 4 tourist, that would require 175 manned space flights every year. That sort of demand would dramatically lower the cost of rocket vehicles while also making such things as reusable space vehicles and fuel depots much more viable. Of course, the demand for manned space launches would increase as the cost of the vehicles went down due to economies of mass production.

So what we really need is a simple and safe manned space rocket (a DC-3 for space) that can be easily operated by private companies and a destination: space stations and moon bases.

mediahuset1234 July 8, 2011 at 3:56 am

carlei murciali
Thank you for bringing this information out into the open.
Thank you for your articles!
With this article you provide great insight in the matter of google penalties.
Sometimes it is hard to figure out what’s allowed and what isn’t.

Griselda July 18, 2011 at 9:29 pm

Came across your blog and it is totally AMAZING. I run this really great site and would love to have the chance to sponsor your blog.Please let me know if you are interested.

Bill Hensley January 13, 2010 at 4:41 am

Marcel, I think you missed the point. Fuel depots are primarily for missions beyond LEO. They make such missions less expensive by allowing spacecraft to be launched by smaller launch vehicles, and allowing fuel to be launched with less reliable launch vehicles. Finally, they enable in-space reuse of spacecraft without having to take them back to the Earth's surface to refuel them. It's not about fuel efficiency or fuel cost. It's about vehicle costs.

dinesh March 3, 2011 at 10:55 am

This is an informative post, i had come to that conclusion after ppi claims reading it. You have kept lots of efforts to keep this post. I cannot comment on your knowledge since you have 100 plus tips on it. I feng shui books had learn't so many news points from them. I would like to share in my blog, since my visitors would like it. pajama jeans

Turbo Fire March 16, 2011 at 5:32 pm

NASA only had 5 manned space flights last year. Yet polls show that 7% of the wealthy would be willing to pay $20 million plus for a trip into space. Thus, out of 100,000 people in the world who could afford to travel into space, 7000 say they would be willing to pay the price. If just 10% of these individuals were launched into orbit every year aboard a space craft that could carry 4 tourist, that would require 175 manned space flights every year. That sort of demand would dramatically lower the cost of rocket vehicles while also making such things as reusable space vehicles and fuel depots much more viable. Of course, the demand for manned space launches would increase as the cost of the vehicles went down due to economies of mass production.

annyrpsoft April 9, 2011 at 7:55 am
rahuldev1234 April 17, 2011 at 4:51 pm

Excellent read, I just passed this onto a colleague who was doing a little research on that. And he actually bought me lunch because I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that: Houston OBGYN

web design uae April 18, 2011 at 1:42 am

Gas Stations in Space?

Interesting topic to discuss.I just love the info you had given.

redhnbhgfjhfdg April 25, 2011 at 2:33 pm

hello this was a terrible artical, im sure its fake

dave April 25, 2011 at 2:34 pm

nice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tom G April 25, 2011 at 11:00 pm

I agree with Marcel Williams. But, I think we can both commercial and goverment sponored space flight

maatarini June 8, 2011 at 10:52 am

Interesting post and thanks for sharing. Some things in here I have not thought about before.Thanks for making such a cool post which is really very well written.will be referring a lot of friends about this.Keep blogging Video Editing Software

kitchen hoods June 13, 2011 at 10:54 pm

Thanks for your sharing and your post is so cool.
Keep up this excellent work!

navy nurse June 13, 2011 at 10:55 pm

You must be a cool person!
This article let me know much about this topic, it is really useful to me.

dyson dc14 June 13, 2011 at 10:57 pm

Cool post! How did you know this? And your post keeps me informed from this topic, thanks very much!
Best regards
From victoria secret offer code

vent hood July 1, 2011 at 1:24 am

Interesting post and thanks for sharing. Some things in here I have not thought about before.Thanks for making such a cool post which is really very well written.

bingo July 6, 2011 at 5:47 am

ohh man this awesome working.. i can understand what writer wants to say..!!
great work. awesome.. :)

I am really impressed by the way you have described every thing.. :)
Thanks for the post.

Jsparco July 6, 2011 at 3:31 pm

Gas stations in space!? Although it seems funny, this could help future missions. Re-supplying fuel for our ship can allow longer transport and stay in space. I highly think it's something that needs to be addressed and looked further into.
Orlando Roofing Contractors

Throat Cancer July 21, 2011 at 8:55 am

Well I definitely liked reading it. This information provided by you is very constructive for correct planning.

0about2014 July 22, 2011 at 9:15 pm

.Good article makes constant progress, thank you share, the accumulation of knowledge is to keep learning, attention is the beginning of wealth.Oakley Polarized Sunglasses

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: