You taking neutron? That still has a disposable upper stage.
You taking neutron? That still has a disposable upper stage.
US buys launches at the same rate as everyone else. NASA chipped in a few million to get falcon 9 off the ground, but they haven’t been subsidizing for years.
Looks more like the mitchells vs the machines to me.
But a very small portion of human activity is developing chips or launching rockets. Most of it is manufacturing disposable junk or building roads/buildings.
Good vid from real engineering on the subject
SpaceX launches in 2023 were about 0.02 megatons of CO2 directly. I don’t know how fugitive emissions from fueling and defueling, especially on starship with methane.
https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/13082/calculate-falcon-9-co2-emissions
200,000kg/launch, 100 launches.
I don’t have access to dig though it right now, but I thought the NASA paper showed couple percent increase in ozone deterioration.
96 as of September 29 https://spaceexplored.com/spacex-launches-2024/
And they’re on track for ~130 this year.
At least that means they don’t plan to use them for an invasion soon?
How many percent is it?
One way is to put the link into something like this. https://twittervideodownloader.com/download
I don’t think Twitter mirrors work any more unfortunately.
Because we have reason to believe those things might be harmful. We do need much more research to see how harmful they are to ozone, since the one paper’s conclusion was that tens of thousands of satellites re-entering each year may have a percent or two effect on ozone. But I don’t see why we would ban rockets that we have no reason to believe hurt ozone.
How does that relate to what I said? Starship has not launched any payloads yet. Your original comment said this rocket should be banned because it depletes ozone. It doesn’t. You should say we should outlaw SRBs, soot trails, and aluminum satellite reentry, not ban starship or rockets in general.
Nope, this was a test launch.
That is satellite reentry, nothing to do with rocket launches. Building satellites out of something other than aluminum solves the issue, but even with mega consolations the effect is not super significant.
Like charges repel. Putting raw electrons in a container would make a really good bomb.
Plus, the electrons would make new elements as they run into other atoms. You’d need electromagnetic containment to keep it from coming into contact with anything. Come to think about it, that’s pretty much what a particle accelerator is.
It looks like SRBs and kerosene deplete ozone, but hydrogen doesn’t. I don’t see any research yet on methane effects, but it doesn’t produce a soot trail, so I’d guess it’d be more like hydrogen. Since starship uses methane and has an extremely efficient full flow engine, I think the effect on ozone would be extremely small.
The video is really cool.
Yeah, space Force bought the launches? With star shield, the DOD bought space on starlink sats.