

instead of making little money (by making fuel) why not make more money? (by setting there energy intensive manufacture) this seems to be current meta, with places like iceland and norway making aluminum and nitrogen fertilizers respectively. this can continue in other places and maybe extended to some other industries.
Because now you have to establish a complex supply chain and potentially large worker base in a place that’s potentially quite inconvenient for both, instead of a much simpler supply chain and smaller workforce.
this requires massive renewables buildout, which means electricity is cheap for regular people
Well, not necessarily. Because as I said, there are places which are very sunny and/or windy which are also a long way away from the people and industries which would like to consume the power that could be produced there.
Long distance power transmission is an very expensive infrastructure to build, and unless you’re building even more expensive modern HVCD systems you can get significant transmissions losses to the point where your distant renewables aren’t really much good. If you can convert the power to something transportable, either on-site or nearby, then you can avoid the transmission losses and giant infrastructure projects.
Much as I do not like the oil industry, there is a significant amount of equipment and expertise out there for storing, transporting and converting flavours of hydrocarbons into other flavours. Some use could be made of it.
then you have to compete with biofuels
I’m not so sure about that. They’re a whole ecological catastrophe in and of themselves, and another cash crop that rich nations can extract from the poorer ones, ultimately to everyone’s detriment. They’re also going to be feeling the squeeze from climate change which is going to make them harder to grow economically as time goes on.
There might be a breakthrough ethanol-brewing algae which might suddenly change everything, but I don’t anyone has the bioengineering chops for that yet.
hydrogen costs
I strongly feel that hydrogen is even more of a dead-end technology than these e-fuels. It is a right pain to store and transport and has rubbish energy density. There’s no future in the hydrogen economy. I’d bet we’re more likely to jump to artificial photosynthesis and fancy fuel cells than we are to see any substantial hydrogen infrastructure.

Weirdly, the moon might actually be more hostile that mars… the dust is sharper, the gravity is lower, the radiation is worse, the nights are longer and colder, there’s less water…
It is a much cheaper and quicker means of murdering a bunch of astronauts though, so it does have that going for it.