So the pictures you posted look like the debris of the actual booster and ship, which are more or less just steel. What happens to it upon impact with the water is hard to say, but at worst it’ll wash up somewhere, and at best it’ll provide surface area for an artificial reef. As for the “gigantic cloud of methane and oxygen” — the oxygen has very little impact while the methane needs to be considered carefully when at high altitude because of its greenhouse gas effects, but if sufficiently scattered is less than a rounding error when compared to what most natural environments release on a day-to-day basis. Engine shutdown definitely leaks some unburnt gasses, but not really in a substantial amount relative to when the engines are lit. The pumps do shut off, just not right away, and you can expect boosters to not RUD during regular operations. :) And yes, there has been a lot of talk about the launch pad. Looks like that issue is practically solved, and the debris from IFT1 was just concrete and steel. Anything not picked up by the clean up operation will be reclaimed by the environment in a relatively short period of time.
methane needs to be considered carefully when at high altitude
My point exactly. The “it’s just a rounding error, bro” ain’t going to hold up when these things are launching twice a day. And how many current environmental or industrial methane emissions are currently being injected into the high atmosphere? True, we have no word on how much methane gets leaked on engine cut off, but it’s greater than zero and less than a hundred tons. How much gets lost on the pad due to transfers and venting during static fires?
but if sufficiently scattered
Dilution is the solution to pollution? Looking at that radar I find it quite hard to believe it’s metal flakes. Just looking at the rocket equation leads me to believe there’s more propellant there than rocket.
You make really good points. It seems like you really care about the environmental impacts and, for what it’s worth, so do I. I think where we differ is in the conclusion of whether or not the impact is significant. I am not qualified to answer that, but my little back-of-the-napkin math as well as the FAA and FWS reports suggest that it isn’t. But that doesn’t mean vigilance isn’t important, so thanks for your skepticism and concern!
Well, thanks! I’ve been following spacex since grasshopper. I started really paying attention as they started to attempt landings and I watched every launch. I followed starship development super close. The first full stack launch I watched with great excitement, but when I saw it lift off I felt this hole in my stomach, this was meant to happen as often as an airplane taking off? Looking at Falcon 9 and starlink you just know they’re going to get it working. So this “rounding error” is about to become a gigantic industry.
I thought “yay! They’re going to use methane! That just turns to water! Huzzah!” but it only turns to water if it combusts. Otherwise it’s just methane. And it turns out, it’s really terrible as methane. I already didn’t think too highly about RP1 exhaust in the high atmosphere, but that’s already happening with airplanes. But that has a kind of cooling effect on the planet, during 9/11 the lack of plane exhaust led to a measurable decrease in temperature. What does injecting methane into the high atmosphere? We’ll find out I guess, but certainly nothing good. The good news is they’ll stop blowing up every launch but there’s always leakage at ECO.
I’m rambling a little, but thank you for the discussion! Any other time I’ve brought anything like this up I usually get attacked. I also wonder if this kind of argument I’m making is why Elon suddenly became such a right wing petro-state dickwad instead of the “no Planet B” guy I thought he was.
So the pictures you posted look like the debris of the actual booster and ship, which are more or less just steel. What happens to it upon impact with the water is hard to say, but at worst it’ll wash up somewhere, and at best it’ll provide surface area for an artificial reef. As for the “gigantic cloud of methane and oxygen” — the oxygen has very little impact while the methane needs to be considered carefully when at high altitude because of its greenhouse gas effects, but if sufficiently scattered is less than a rounding error when compared to what most natural environments release on a day-to-day basis. Engine shutdown definitely leaks some unburnt gasses, but not really in a substantial amount relative to when the engines are lit. The pumps do shut off, just not right away, and you can expect boosters to not RUD during regular operations. :) And yes, there has been a lot of talk about the launch pad. Looks like that issue is practically solved, and the debris from IFT1 was just concrete and steel. Anything not picked up by the clean up operation will be reclaimed by the environment in a relatively short period of time.
My point exactly. The “it’s just a rounding error, bro” ain’t going to hold up when these things are launching twice a day. And how many current environmental or industrial methane emissions are currently being injected into the high atmosphere? True, we have no word on how much methane gets leaked on engine cut off, but it’s greater than zero and less than a hundred tons. How much gets lost on the pad due to transfers and venting during static fires?
Dilution is the solution to pollution? Looking at that radar I find it quite hard to believe it’s metal flakes. Just looking at the rocket equation leads me to believe there’s more propellant there than rocket.
You make really good points. It seems like you really care about the environmental impacts and, for what it’s worth, so do I. I think where we differ is in the conclusion of whether or not the impact is significant. I am not qualified to answer that, but my little back-of-the-napkin math as well as the FAA and FWS reports suggest that it isn’t. But that doesn’t mean vigilance isn’t important, so thanks for your skepticism and concern!
Well, thanks! I’ve been following spacex since grasshopper. I started really paying attention as they started to attempt landings and I watched every launch. I followed starship development super close. The first full stack launch I watched with great excitement, but when I saw it lift off I felt this hole in my stomach, this was meant to happen as often as an airplane taking off? Looking at Falcon 9 and starlink you just know they’re going to get it working. So this “rounding error” is about to become a gigantic industry.
I thought “yay! They’re going to use methane! That just turns to water! Huzzah!” but it only turns to water if it combusts. Otherwise it’s just methane. And it turns out, it’s really terrible as methane. I already didn’t think too highly about RP1 exhaust in the high atmosphere, but that’s already happening with airplanes. But that has a kind of cooling effect on the planet, during 9/11 the lack of plane exhaust led to a measurable decrease in temperature. What does injecting methane into the high atmosphere? We’ll find out I guess, but certainly nothing good. The good news is they’ll stop blowing up every launch but there’s always leakage at ECO.
I’m rambling a little, but thank you for the discussion! Any other time I’ve brought anything like this up I usually get attacked. I also wonder if this kind of argument I’m making is why Elon suddenly became such a right wing petro-state dickwad instead of the “no Planet B” guy I thought he was.
I appreciate the discussion!