7 ms·
I was surprised to see this report, given the rockets themselves emit literally zero Carbon Dioxide (the byproduct of their engine being NO2). Then I got to the
by legitster 5y ago
I was surprised to see this report, given the rockets themselves emit literally zero Carbon Dioxide (the byproduct of their engine being NO2). Then I got to the actual meat of it:
>An 11-minute flight emits no fewer than 75 tonnes of carbon per passenger once indirect emissions are taken into account (and more likely, in the 250-1,000 tonnes range).
Ah yes,indirect costs. Sure. These things that don't matter when NASA or SpaceX sends rockets to space (which actually have CO2 generating engines to boot!)
But for the record, the typical US household generates on average of 40-60 of emissions per year. You have to do some phenomenally uncharitable math to make the lifetime claim. It's certainly an... editorial choice to make this an issue about inequality.
- bakuninsbart 5y agoWell, it is like the difference of going on a cruise and using products that were sent via shipping container. The latter is essential for our modern economies to function, while the former is just irresponsibly destroying the environment for your own amusement.
- Meph504 5y agoThe problem is people seeing this as a joyride, spaceX or nasa can send up a thousand rockets, and people correctly see that as progress and testing of the ship and advancement of technology. But because people have a hard on for blaming Bezo's for everything this is classified as some sort of waste of time. Blue Origins intended goal is to reach the moon, and this is a step towards it, one that offers a way to fund the project through space tourism, a practice done by most space programs in one shape or form. Its just painful to watch the hypocrisy, I mean if musk can launch a tesla into space, and not be considered a joyride, I don't think its fair to classify this one any differently. But hey, gizmodo gets its ad revenue, which I'm sure is equality disturbed across all those involved in making this site possible.
- bakuninsbart 5y agoI don't disagree with you, Bezo's flying to space is just really bad publicity, because it makes apparent how much the contemporary space race is a dick measuring contest between filthy-rich tech industrialists. To me, it is honestly one of the most telling signs of the times, that a contest that was originally "held" between the only two super-powers on the planet, is today led as much by capitalists as it is by nation states. Space tourism is only a viable form of commercializing space exploration because we live in incredibly unequal times, and this is where most of the criticism of Bezos in particular comes from. Added on to that, in contrast to Musks companies, Amazon is also constantly in the news for viciously exploiting labor, so that adds to the criticism.
- pksebben 5y agoI don't think anyone here is claiming that musk's space Tesla was anything other than frivolous.
- libertine 5y agoAre NASA and SpaceX missions objective to turn billionaires, millionaires and celebrities into "space cowboys"?
- truculent 5y agoIf NASA does it, the carbon cost could reasonably be amortised over the populace, since it is a public mission. I think it it fair to not give private missions the same benefit of the doubt.