6 ms·

While not cost effective in the slightest, jettisoning nuclear waste into outer space is one proposition. Naturally, launching rockets filled with nuclear wast

by ovao 8y ago

While not cost effective in the slightest, jettisoning nuclear waste into outer space is one proposition. Naturally, launching rockets filled with nuclear waste comes with its own safety concerns.

sxates 8y ago
What's the carbon footprint of a thousand rocket launches?
- ovao 8y ago
  An interesting question, actually. Presumably very, very large.
- CommieBobDole 8y ago
  Somewhere in the ballpark of a thousand 747 flights at maximum range, maybe a little less. The Falcon 9 carries 147 metric tons of RP-1, which is functionally the same thing as Jet A (both are kerosene), while a 747-400 carries 165 metric tons of Jet A. For a very broad estimate, I'd say the carbon footprint of a thousand Falcon 9 rocket launches is somewhat less than the carbon footprint of a day's worth of aircraft travel, globally.
  - a1369209993 8y ago
    It's also relatively easy[1] to switch over to liquid hydrogen rocket fuel if you decide space lauches really must be hit with pointless double standards. 1: where "easy" means "literally rocket science"
- proactivesvcs 8y ago
  And what's the radioactive footprint of the handful that catastrophically fail?
205guy 8y ago
Elon has the space-launch market covered too, he's one step ahead of everyone.
fvdessen 8y ago
> While not cost effective in the slightest I looked it up, and underground storage seems to cost about the same as launching into space with falcon heavy launches, at about 1700$ per kg. [1] https://www.smh.com.au/business/underground-nuclear-waste-facility-could-cost-33-billion-20160216-gmuwsf.html https://www.smh.com.au/business/underground-nuclear-waste-fa... [2] https://www.quora.com/Rockets-What-is-cost-of-sending-1-kg-weight-into-space https://www.quora.com/Rockets-What-is-cost-of-sending-1-kg-w...
jeremyjh 8y ago
> Naturally, launching rockets filled with nuclear waste comes with its own safety concerns. You mention this like it is a "problem to be solved". It seems like a complete show-stopper to me. Rockets go down. Launch enough, and it will happen, regardless of all safeguards. There is no acceptable place on earth to shower hundreds of square kilometers with radioactive material with thousands of years half-life.
- ovao 8y ago
  It wasn't a serious comment.

by ovao 8y ago

While not cost effective in the slightest, jettisoning nuclear waste into outer space is one proposition. Naturally, launching rockets filled with nuclear waste comes with its own safety concerns.

sxates 8y ago

What's the carbon footprint of a thousand rocket launches?

ovao 8y ago
An interesting question, actually. Presumably very, very large.
CommieBobDole 8y ago
Somewhere in the ballpark of a thousand 747 flights at maximum range, maybe a little less. The Falcon 9 carries 147 metric tons of RP-1, which is functionally the same thing as Jet A (both are kerosene), while a 747-400 carries 165 metric tons of Jet A. For a very broad estimate, I'd say the carbon footprint of a thousand Falcon 9 rocket launches is somewhat less than the carbon footprint of a day's worth of aircraft travel, globally.
- a1369209993 8y ago
  It's also relatively easy[1] to switch over to liquid hydrogen rocket fuel if you decide space lauches really must be hit with pointless double standards. 1: where "easy" means "literally rocket science"
proactivesvcs 8y ago
And what's the radioactive footprint of the handful that catastrophically fail?

205guy 8y ago

Elon has the space-launch market covered too, he's one step ahead of everyone.

fvdessen 8y ago

> While not cost effective in the slightest I looked it up, and underground storage seems to cost about the same as launching into space with falcon heavy launches, at about 1700$ per kg. [1] https://www.smh.com.au/business/underground-nuclear-waste-facility-could-cost-33-billion-20160216-gmuwsf.html https://www.smh.com.au/business/underground-nuclear-waste-fa... [2] https://www.quora.com/Rockets-What-is-cost-of-sending-1-kg-weight-into-space https://www.quora.com/Rockets-What-is-cost-of-sending-1-kg-w...

jeremyjh 8y ago

> Naturally, launching rockets filled with nuclear waste comes with its own safety concerns. You mention this like it is a "problem to be solved". It seems like a complete show-stopper to me. Rockets go down. Launch enough, and it will happen, regardless of all safeguards. There is no acceptable place on earth to shower hundreds of square kilometers with radioactive material with thousands of years half-life.

ovao 8y ago
It wasn't a serious comment.