SpaceX’s Starship launches at the company’s Starbase facility near Boca Chica, Texas, have allegedly been contaminating local bodies of water with mercury for years. The news arrives in an exclusive CNBCreport on August 12, which cites internal documents and communications between local Texas regulators and the Environmental Protection Agency.

SpaceX’s fourth Starship test launch in June was its most successful so far—but the world’s largest and most powerful rocket ever built continues to wreak havoc on nearby Texas communities, wildlife, and ecosystems. But after repeated admonishments, reviews, and ignored requests, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) have had enough.

  • Kalysta@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    Maybe they should have had the water system ready before the full test just in case.

    Like someone concerned about health and safety would do.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Why would you wait to have something else ready if you think what you have is going to work?

      All the physics modeling they did and live tests showed that the concrete should work.

      When it looks like something should work, you test it. They had approval to test it after showing it should work.

      These people are launching and landing rockets at a pace never done before, they know how to model these kind of things. Now obviously something went very wrong here, but it wasn’t just a willy nilly choice.

      You test the things that you think will work, otherwise you never know if they’ll work.

      While the concrete may not have been their final decision for Boca Chica, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t a possible solution for other location where a large quantity of potable water isn’t available.

      Edit: just further to possible other locations, the concrete if it worked, wouldn’t allow the rapid turn around time they want as they’d need to set new concrete vs piped water ready to go. But for a launch location that maybe wouldn’t need the rapid cadence, maybe it’d be perfect and cheaper if it’d work.

      • zalgotext
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Why would you wait to have something else ready if you think what you have is going to work?

        Because it might not work, and we’re talking about millions of dollars worth of rocketry here, not a bottle rocket launched in your back yard.

        These people are launching and landing rockets at a pace never done before, they know how to model these kind of things.

        Obviously not, or the pad wouldn’t have blown up.

        Now obviously something went very wrong here, but it wasn’t just a willy nilly choice.

        Which is why you implement backup/alternative systems.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Because it might not work

          LOL. Dude, they weren’t even sure that the ROCKET wouldn’t destroy the pad (edit: as in, the WHOLE launch pad including the tower). They’re literally making the largest most advanced rocket ever. There are countless unknowns until you test it.

          • zalgotext
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Exactly, which is why implementing backup systems or planning for catastrophic failure modes is a Really Good Idea.

                • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  I just find it hilarious that your trying to say people shouldn’t test things all their tests and modelling says should work, because this OTHER thing, that’s also never been tested at the same extreme levels, might work better, but you know, maybe not.

                  I’m done with this conversation before I feel more inclined to violate rule 1.

      • Kalysta@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Standard for engineers is to have backup systems to your backup systems.

        Especially for something as important as a rocket that will someday have astronauts on it.

        This was cost cutting and rushing which is bullshit pushed by management, not engineers who know what they’re doing.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          This is a TEST rocket program.

          The goal of the program is to figure out what does and doesn’t work.

          There are numerous zero single failure points all over the ship currently as they figure things out.

          Using the concrete was a way to test if they could set up a launch pad easier. ALL their tests and modeling proved it should work.

          Tests and modeling aren’t the end all be all though and sometimes things you don’t or can’t anticipate happen and then you remodel with the new info. This isn’t a high school project, it’s rocket science.

          There was nothing bullshit about testing it out.

          The goal of IFT1 was don’t blow up the entire stage 0. They didn’t blow up the entire stage 0. They learned the concrete doesn’t work, but also hopefully they were able to learn WHY. And if they found a why that why may lead to it being attempted again in the future maybe even by someone else.

            • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              No, I’m not an engineer (and that’s an Ad Hominem fallacy). But for the love of god, SpaceX is a terrible company because they launched a rocket with INTENTIONALLY missing heat shield points to see what would happen (edit: all while knowing if certain heat shield tiles failed it would guarantee the complete destruction of the ship, that would obliterate any crew you’re oh so concerned about in this test phase!), and even launched their rocket with wing flaps that they suspected would be destroyed by the hot plasma and had already made changes in future designs! God forbid they test a ablative concrete launch pad that survived all their real world tests and showed it should work in models.

              • Kalysta@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                You’ve just explained why we’re pissed at them and not even realized it.

                • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  And you’ve just explained how you have absolutely no understanding of how spacex functions and why and why it’s a good thing.

                  This is how they land rockets on barges at sea and no one else can, or thought it was even possible.