1. A Space Elevator for the Moon
Bradley C. Edwards, Ph.D.
Black Line Ascension

2. Collaborators
This work is based on a NASA proposal developed in collaboration with:
Dr. Hyam Benaroya, Rutgers University
Dr. Michael Duke, Colorado School of Mines
Dr. Hermann Koelle, Berlin Technical University
Ms. Patricia Russell, NIAC
Dr. Bryan Laubscher, LANL
Ms. Pamela Luskin, Futron Corporation
Dr. David Raitt, ESA - ESTEC
Mr. Ben Shelef, Spaceward Foundation
Dr. Paul Spudis, JHU - APL

3. Basic Premise of Work (1)
We want to go to the moon in a real way

4. Basic Premise of Work (1)
We want to go to the moon in a real way
…but does the public support lunar exploration (Wired)

5. Basic Premise of Work (2)
Launch is the single largest cost and complexity driver
$540M to $1B per launch
Congressional estimate of NASA program: $125B over 15 years
~2000 tons to moon at $12k/lb

6. Rocket Transportation
Launch costs are expected to decrease <15%
Will improved operations and technology reduce costs further?

7. Current Moon Initiative (1)
Limited lunar presence
Not self-sustaining
Public, private, political support?

8. Current Moon Initiative (2)
Federally funded program
Relevant timelines: 4 pres. admins., 16 fed. budgets
No “business plan” with interesting ROI

9. A New Approach

10. The Major Difference Utilize space elevator transport
Dramatic reduction in launch costs, complexity and risk
Immature but quickly developing technology
Enables large-scale self-sustained effort

11. The Space Elevator

13. 2006 SE Games

14. Rocket / SE Comparison

15. Direct Impact Reduce program launch cost by ~$60B
Increase tons on moon from ~2000 to 18,000
Reduces complexity
Reduces overall program risk

16. Rest of Program: Baseline
Mature landers based on Apollo
Overbuilt components
Redundant fuel depots in each orbit
Redundant modules in each orbit
Redundant resources

17. Rest of Program: Options
Large volume units
Excess capabilities enables use of new technology
Resale of excess launch capacity or lunar facilities
Same system for Mars

18. Complete System (1)

19. Complete System (2)
Flexible system
Resources everywhere

20. Summary of Concept Mature systems / space elevator base lunar program.
• Lunar Base: Mature technology, extensive, redundant
• Space Elevators (2)
3000 $1B/yr operating cost
High reliability, safe, large envelop
Definable, up-front development risk
• Overall Program
Extensive lunar program: 69 ave. occupants
$68B ( ) total
Safety : SE is safe and inexpensive allowing for redundant and overbuilt systems
- Sustainability:Good business case
- Expandable
- Limited development risk / low overall risk

21. Future Directions SE-based lunar concept proposed to NASA
NASA not interested
Alternative options
Private
Establishing the components, finance and structure
Non-U.S.
Japan: presentation to the PM staff, general
Australia: multiple activities
Europe: EuroSpaceward, German SE games

22. Conclusion A high return approach for a lunar base has been proposed.
The concept is not of interest to NASA
Alternative options for development exist