4 ms·

Have they actually solved the (non-noise) environmental concerns of SST? From a NYT article a few years ago: "According to a 1999 report by the Intergovernment

by gxqoz 6y ago

Have they actually solved the (non-noise) environmental concerns of SST? From a NYT article a few years ago: "According to a 1999 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, introducing 1,000 commercial SSTs more advanced than the Concorde could make the climate impact of airlines balloon by 40 percent by midcentury. That’s on top of the tripling of emissions already expected as more travelers take to the sky." https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/opinion/reviving-supersonic-jets-will-damage-the-climate.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/opinion/reviving-superson...

apsec112 6y ago
They'll make synthetic fuel by pulling CO2 back out of the air: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/06/18/1870486/0/en/Boom-Supersonic-Partners-with-Prometheus-Fuels-to-Supply-Carbon-Neutral-Fuel-for-XB-1-its-Mach-2-2-Demonstrator-Aircraft.html https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/06/18/187048... https://carbonengineering.com/news-updates/aerion-supersonic-and-carbon-engineering/ https://carbonengineering.com/news-updates/aerion-supersonic...
- makerofspoons 6y ago
  That's insufficient to address the pollution from the aircraft. There is also water vapor, black carbon, nitrous oxide, and sulfur oxide that would need to be mitigated: https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2015/09/evolving-climate-math-of-flying-vs-driving/ https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2015/09/evolving-climate-...
- beering 6y ago
  You know what's better than being carbon neutral? Being carbon negative. I'd rather Prometheus pull carbon out of the air to help cover existing fuel needs than to just offset a huge increase in jet fuel usage. I fail to see how building yet another luxury transport service will meaningfully help the world compared to tackling some of the bigger problems in energy and environment. Especially since there's no possibility that Boom is more efficient than existing modes of travel.
  - Wohlf 6y ago
    Would this even be carbon neutral? It will require a lot of power to process carbon out of the air, and will go back in the air when they burn the fuel. Not to mention the logistics and manufacturing of everything involved.

by gxqoz 6y ago

apsec112 6y ago

They'll make synthetic fuel by pulling CO2 back out of the air: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/06/18/1870486/0/en/Boom-Supersonic-Partners-with-Prometheus-Fuels-to-Supply-Carbon-Neutral-Fuel-for-XB-1-its-Mach-2-2-Demonstrator-Aircraft.html https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2019/06/18/187048... https://carbonengineering.com/news-updates/aerion-supersonic-and-carbon-engineering/ https://carbonengineering.com/news-updates/aerion-supersonic...

makerofspoons 6y ago
That's insufficient to address the pollution from the aircraft. There is also water vapor, black carbon, nitrous oxide, and sulfur oxide that would need to be mitigated: https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2015/09/evolving-climate-math-of-flying-vs-driving/ https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2015/09/evolving-climate-...
beering 6y ago
You know what's better than being carbon neutral? Being carbon negative. I'd rather Prometheus pull carbon out of the air to help cover existing fuel needs than to just offset a huge increase in jet fuel usage. I fail to see how building yet another luxury transport service will meaningfully help the world compared to tackling some of the bigger problems in energy and environment. Especially since there's no possibility that Boom is more efficient than existing modes of travel.
- Wohlf 6y ago
  Would this even be carbon neutral? It will require a lot of power to process carbon out of the air, and will go back in the air when they burn the fuel. Not to mention the logistics and manufacturing of everything involved.