Methods of getting O2 and water from the moon's surface has been researched around the world for decades. Somehow I don't think the final piece to this puzzle is that NASA or ESA just need to hire some scrappy Canadian Arctic oil drillers a la Armageddon (199suck).

Meanwhile, the only material that the article says specifically is of commercial value to mine on the moon is He3. The reason it's valuable, according to the article, is due to its potential in fusion, which they say is something to anticipate because of a breakthrough in fusion, which they link to within their own magazine. And of course, like all other breakthroughs in, and current research around, practical or scalable fusion, it's D-T and has zero to do with He3, which would require from the ground up entirely new engineering to be developed and scaled.

I suppose if I were to invest in a Canadian company that wants to do space mining, I'd ask first if they had or were bidding on a known contract with a space agency that's actually going to the Moon; and if they're talking about He3 and all that, I'd ask if they know what is the absolute capacity of that market, at the current trend of the field. If that passes, then price elasticity is next. This process is part of what I call an Elf Aquitaine hoax sniffer.