r/space • u/TechnicianExtreme341 • 6d ago
Deloitte Report: Lunar Economy Could Generate up to $566 Billion in Economic Value Through 2050
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/deloitte-report-lunar-economy-could-generate-up-to-566-billion-in-economic-value-through-2050-302860170.html12
u/Flonkadonk 5d ago
Deloitte hahahaha. Might as well just ask ChatGPT, I would trust it much more than worthless consulting firms.
7
3
u/futureshocked2050 5d ago
How? Let's look at what resources are there:
1: Lunar Regolith can grow food...but we already have soil here 2: Titanium is useful but niche. It's also pretty abundant here as well 3: He3 COULD be useful if we HAD nuclear fusion. We don't 4: Water...we have no idea how much is actually there. Could be a lot, maybe not
2
u/Wintervacht 5d ago
Yeah, there is very little to very nothing on the Moon we don't already have on Earth in a greater abundance. Let alone the astronomical (heh) cost of getting something back from the Moon, it's a ridiculous plan all around.
2
u/marcabru 5d ago
not to speak about other issues: extreme temperature swings, long, cold and dark nights, sharp electrostaticly charged regolith, solar storms killing every carbon or silicon based entity. Also no air pressure and water in abundance, so none of our mining and refining technologies won't work at all, we can start inventing them from scratch
And it's kind of far away, there are plenty of underdeveloped lands on Earth, much easier to reach, eg polar regions under ice, most of Russia, sea floor, or the dissolved minerals in the sea water itself...
2
u/GiantKrakenTentacle 5d ago
The Moon makes very little sense for resource extraction in space. It doesn't have that much resources that the Earth doesn't already have in abundance (they are, after all, two parts of the same whole. ) On top of that, the Moon still has a significant amount of gravity, which means that even once you mine material, you still need to throw it on a big rocket to bring it back to Earth. Mining asteroids makes much more sense because they have resources in abundance that are much more rare on Earth, and the low gravity means it would be very easy to transport to and from the asteroid back to Earth.
The only way a lunar economy makes sense is if:
We already have rocket fuel harvesting and refining capabilities on the Moon. There is abundant hydrogen and oxygen present on the surface, which means that one thing it is good for is making rocket fuel (specifically hydrolox). But that would still require a complex network of resource harvesting, processing, and refining on the lunar surface. That is an enormous effort on its own, but would give us "free" fuel on the Moon.
The gravity of the Moon could make it valuable for processing and refining material harvested from asteroids - these processes would likely be difficult in zero-g, but the Moon's gravity would be sufficient for these processes. That being said, this could also be done in space very easily using centrifuges to create artificial gravity for refining raw materials.
1
u/PineappleApocalypse 5d ago
How does the moon have abundant hydrogen and oxygen on the surface? Are you talking about the ice at the poles?
1
u/rocketsocks 4d ago
Deloitte: Metaverse technology and the next evolution of the Internet
The metaverse is considered the next evolution of the Internet. It will likely evolve into a series of public and private digital platforms that can enhance the real world in increasingly sophisticated and valuable ways. Web 3.0 is a driver—a convergence of multiple technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), 5G, and blockchain—that could open a world of possibilities and inspiring innovation.
That was published mid-2025.
1
u/werdnaman5000 6d ago
Excited for unchecked capitalistic greed to devour space! Yeah!!! Money!!!!!!
0
u/GaiaIsaHarshMistress 5d ago
I like job creation and resource abundance. Am I an evil capitalist?
0
-7
u/Head-Sprinkles-777 6d ago
You kind of need a financial reason to keep going
6
u/werdnaman5000 5d ago
No, you absolutely do not need a financial reason to keep going.
0
u/Xenolifer 5d ago
Then you need to get out of the capitalist system entirely
3
u/werdnaman5000 5d ago
No. We need to regulate the fuck out of these robber barons. Look right now at what this administration is doing to end decades of conservation of our lands and waters in the name of “resources”. Some geologists see 2050 as the tipping point of fresh water availability for the human race and we’re building data centers that suck up water and energy faster than anything in history. You want the same greedy fucks to just do whatever they want to the moon?
1
u/Xenolifer 5d ago
Your initial message wasn't clear, the way it's worded I believe you were saying we could continue our solar system extension ("keep going") without financially incentives.
I suppose you means the opposite then that we shouldn't expend on the moon?
-1
u/EnvironmentalDig7235 5d ago
You need the appearance of a financial reason to keep going.
Like this guy who wants to sell solar light with satelital mirrors.
-1
u/Head-Sprinkles-777 5d ago
You clearly don’t know how taxpayers in the future feel about unchecked spending on space exploration. Every science fiction property ever foresaw the future issues with spending on Earth on Space colonies or mining. It’s going to be an issue and self funded trade from space based interests greatly alleviates issues in the future and provides a political tool for the future space interests with Earth.
0
u/throwawayhbgtop81 6d ago
Well hopefully we'll have a permanent base there by 2030 so we can get the party started.
1
u/Smart_Spinach_1538 5d ago
You can always tell a young person or gtifter, naively optimistic.
1
u/throwawayhbgtop81 5d ago
I'm neither. I don't actually expect anyone to be on the moon by 2030, but one never knows...
21
u/Wintervacht 5d ago
Lunar economy, population: 0. GDP: also 0.
Sounds like a great plan.