>>12391112>there are plenty museum pieces that have no scientific value.Yes, but ISS has no other value of any kind either. I wouldn't put chunk of asphalt that broke off of the shoulder of the road outside my house on display in a museum either.
In fact the only way I would support putting the ISS on display is if it were done SPECIFICALLY as an example of what not to do in a space program, with placards and things explaining just exactly how limited, overcomplicated, expensive, and downright retarded the entire ISS is.
>we shoudn't rely on hopiumLet me amend my statement; Falcon 9 is already here, and could launch 20 ton habitat modules to LEO for less than $50 million. No station module has any reason to cost more than $50 million; if it does someone is scamming someone else. Falcon 9 could add one extra launch to the manifest per every two months and get a 600 ton ISS replacement launched in 2.5 years. Falcon 9 launch economics already make materials in LEO worth ~$2000/kg as opposed to Shuttle's ~$20,000/kg.
When Starship starts flying, even if reusability is a total failure and every launch is expendable, it will still be operating with sub-$1000/kg economics. Reusable Starship gets easily ~$100/kg.
>it's just as speculative as asteroid mining techAsteroid mining isn't going to be worth doing for Earth until long after we have robust deep space transportation. It will be developed at Phobos by Mars industries who have more experience in space living AND more incentive to mine low gravity rubble piles. Don't put the cart before the horse.
