12 ms·

It may not seem like a big issue but it speaks to the attitude of billionaires. I am no longer free to vent personal amounts of coolant from a refrigerator but

It may not seem like a big issue but it speaks to the attitude of billionaires. I am no longer free to vent personal amounts of coolant from a refrigerator but Elon Musk can punch all of the holes he wants with his expensive rockets.

katbyte 3y ago
Venting refrigerant does actual measurable damage that takes decades to repair, this does not (that we k ow of) and is undone in a single day I get what and agree with what your trying to say but a better comparison is needed
ddq 3y ago
They stole the commons from us and hold it ransom.
- simonh 3y ago
  Where by ‘stole’, you mean granted licensed access to the commons by elected representatives, under strict regulation and monitoring, in order to provide services to the public at competitively bid prices.
dylan604 3y ago
[flagged]
cj 3y ago
I wonder what the total carbon footprint is of the Musk Empire. (Tesla + SpaceX + X + Boring Company + …)
- machdiamonds 3y ago
  And I wonder how many times over Tesla makes up for it.
  - W0lfEagle 3y ago
    Zero?
    - machdiamonds 3y ago
      Tesla's sales of approximately 4.5 million vehicles have each offset about 20 tons of CO2 over their lifetimes compared to a traditional gas vehicle [1]. This equates to preventing a total of 90 million tons of CO2 from entering our atmosphere. As we continue to transition to renewable energy, the environmental benefits of each Tesla vehicle are set to increase further. In contrast, a SpaceX launch generates around 300 tons of CO2 [2], totaling about 72,600 tons of CO2 for the 242 launches to date. We mustn't forget the wide-ranging benefits these launches provide, from improved weather forecasting and GPS services to crewed missions to the International Space Station. If we subtract the CO2 emissions from SpaceX launches from the CO2 savings attributed to Tesla, we see a net savings of about 89,927,400 tons of CO2. 90,000,000 / 72,600 = 1,240x The emissions from his remaining companies are comparably negligible. Furthermore, this calculation doesn't account for Tesla's influence on the automotive industry, propelling other manufacturers to accelerate their production of EVs. As Tesla's sales continue to rise and EVs become more accessible through Tesla's charging network, these benefits will be multiplied. Also, this doesn't factor in the positive environmental impact of Tesla's energy division, which likely offsets the emissions from all of his other companies on its own. [1] https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-emissions-of-a-mid-size-bev-and-ice-vehicle https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/19/billionaires-space-tourism-environment-emissions https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/19/billionaires... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_He...
      - rewmie 3y ago
        > Tesla's sales of approximately 4.5 million vehicles have each offset about 20 tons of CO2 over their lifetimes compared to a traditional gas vehicle [1]. Aren't you presuming that Tesla is the only seller of electric vehicles, and those who bought Tesla would thus never even consider buying any other electric vehicle? I mean, currently Tesla represents around 15% of the overall EV sales, and BYD auto alone representing 21%. This means that as of right now around of 85% of all ev buyers are not buying Tesla.
starbase 3y ago
ionosphere is not the ozone layer, and nobody is allowed to vent freon from their old refrigerators
ericd 3y ago
Why do you want the ability to vent such potent greenhouse gasses? I'd like the ability to visit space at some point in my life, and I'd like our species to become experienced at doing things in space. Like, if we need to be able to deploy something in space to decrease the amount of heat we're taking in to try and buy more time to decarbonize before we're completely F'd because of all the people venting potent greenhouse gasses from their HVAC systems, it'd be nice if we already had a space industrial complex capable of supporting that goal.
- lacrimacida 3y ago
  The space industrial complex would pollute a whole lot more than today, and let’s hope space tourism it’s not something too feasible, aside from stroking egos it wouldn’t do much, space is very human unfriendly after all. I for one hope we move slower not faster.
  - ericd 3y ago
    It’s not just stroking egos; if you read any accounts by astronauts, there’s a profound effect on people that get a chance to look back at earth, and see how it’s actually not infinite. I hope every powerful person gets the chance to do that, I think it’d go a long way in reducing the petty bullshit we engage in.
    - jack_pp 3y ago
      You could do that with a VR headset
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - bergon 3y ago
      Or, you know, you just check your ego from earth. Not sure how much of an impact the trip had on Bezos, and I wouldn't put my hope on such trips fixing the other ones.
simonh 3y ago
There are thousands of people responsible for planning, certifying and monitoring the operations of these launches. Within SpaceX, but also the launch site owners, the FCA, journalists covering it all. There are comprehensive environmental impact assessments, with opportunities for comments from the public. One of the thousands of people involved in all of that is a billionaire. Furthermore it’s an issue that affects all launches, by ULA, NASA, ESA, whoever, not just SpaceX. But sure, go ahead and ignore all of that and make a thoughtless dig against one person, in one country, running one rocket company for the crime of being successful at it.
- seadan83 3y ago
  Evaluations from SpaceX employees needs the biggest grain of salt. Their jobs depend on a certain result and their boss is notoriously pushy. Journalists are not scientists. Did you mean FAA rather than FCA? The FAA did ask SpaceX to do a lot of additional ground level items: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/13/faa-spacex-starship-environmental-review-clears-texas-program-to-move-forward.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/13/faa-spacex-starship-environm... The reviewers at th ed FCA were unlikely to be in the thousands, the rest mentioned I would completely discount. The "crime" is that one person is not stopping to ask whether we should. There is a lot of hubris is there. Regardless, nobody should get a free pass to wreck the earth (but this is kittens, putting tons of C02 in the air is generally free, so... yeah...) Looks like the biggest "green" issue is the rockets burns tons of fuel. Thd FAA review was a green light. This phenomena of punching holes was hopefully considered by the FAA (but at this point, can only hope that everything was at least considered)
  - simonh 3y ago
    Yes sorry, FAA. I’m a Brit so not as familiar with the US institutions. My point is there is extensive and persistent oversight, debate and opportunities for input and objection. Journalists play a role in the public interest in any democratic society. One person didn’t ask whether we should? Space technology has been controversial since its inception. Citizens, journalists and politicians have been questioning it throughout its history. You really honestly think you’re the first person, or this is the first time anyone has stopped to wonder about it? Incidentally, there’s one particularly famous example of this from 1970 that’s a bit of a classic: https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/ https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-... Of course nobody should get a free pass to wreck the Earth. That’s a cartoonishly absurd caricature of what’s going on.

katbyte 3y ago

Venting refrigerant does actual measurable damage that takes decades to repair, this does not (that we k ow of) and is undone in a single day I get what and agree with what your trying to say but a better comparison is needed

ddq 3y ago

They stole the commons from us and hold it ransom.

simonh 3y ago
Where by ‘stole’, you mean granted licensed access to the commons by elected representatives, under strict regulation and monitoring, in order to provide services to the public at competitively bid prices.

dylan604 3y ago

[flagged]

cj 3y ago

I wonder what the total carbon footprint is of the Musk Empire. (Tesla + SpaceX + X + Boring Company + …)

machdiamonds 3y ago
And I wonder how many times over Tesla makes up for it.
- W0lfEagle 3y ago
  Zero?
  - machdiamonds 3y ago
    Tesla's sales of approximately 4.5 million vehicles have each offset about 20 tons of CO2 over their lifetimes compared to a traditional gas vehicle [1]. This equates to preventing a total of 90 million tons of CO2 from entering our atmosphere. As we continue to transition to renewable energy, the environmental benefits of each Tesla vehicle are set to increase further. In contrast, a SpaceX launch generates around 300 tons of CO2 [2], totaling about 72,600 tons of CO2 for the 242 launches to date. We mustn't forget the wide-ranging benefits these launches provide, from improved weather forecasting and GPS services to crewed missions to the International Space Station. If we subtract the CO2 emissions from SpaceX launches from the CO2 savings attributed to Tesla, we see a net savings of about 89,927,400 tons of CO2. 90,000,000 / 72,600 = 1,240x The emissions from his remaining companies are comparably negligible. Furthermore, this calculation doesn't account for Tesla's influence on the automotive industry, propelling other manufacturers to accelerate their production of EVs. As Tesla's sales continue to rise and EVs become more accessible through Tesla's charging network, these benefits will be multiplied. Also, this doesn't factor in the positive environmental impact of Tesla's energy division, which likely offsets the emissions from all of his other companies on its own. [1] https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-life-cycle-greenhouse-gas-emissions-of-a-mid-size-bev-and-ice-vehicle https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/comparative-l... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/19/billionaires-space-tourism-environment-emissions https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/19/billionaires... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_Heavy_launches https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_He...
    - rewmie 3y ago
      > Tesla's sales of approximately 4.5 million vehicles have each offset about 20 tons of CO2 over their lifetimes compared to a traditional gas vehicle [1]. Aren't you presuming that Tesla is the only seller of electric vehicles, and those who bought Tesla would thus never even consider buying any other electric vehicle? I mean, currently Tesla represents around 15% of the overall EV sales, and BYD auto alone representing 21%. This means that as of right now around of 85% of all ev buyers are not buying Tesla.

starbase 3y ago

ionosphere is not the ozone layer, and nobody is allowed to vent freon from their old refrigerators

ericd 3y ago

Why do you want the ability to vent such potent greenhouse gasses? I'd like the ability to visit space at some point in my life, and I'd like our species to become experienced at doing things in space. Like, if we need to be able to deploy something in space to decrease the amount of heat we're taking in to try and buy more time to decarbonize before we're completely F'd because of all the people venting potent greenhouse gasses from their HVAC systems, it'd be nice if we already had a space industrial complex capable of supporting that goal.

lacrimacida 3y ago
The space industrial complex would pollute a whole lot more than today, and let’s hope space tourism it’s not something too feasible, aside from stroking egos it wouldn’t do much, space is very human unfriendly after all. I for one hope we move slower not faster.
- ericd 3y ago
  It’s not just stroking egos; if you read any accounts by astronauts, there’s a profound effect on people that get a chance to look back at earth, and see how it’s actually not infinite. I hope every powerful person gets the chance to do that, I think it’d go a long way in reducing the petty bullshit we engage in.
  - jack_pp 3y ago
    You could do that with a VR headset
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - bergon 3y ago
    Or, you know, you just check your ego from earth. Not sure how much of an impact the trip had on Bezos, and I wouldn't put my hope on such trips fixing the other ones.

simonh 3y ago

There are thousands of people responsible for planning, certifying and monitoring the operations of these launches. Within SpaceX, but also the launch site owners, the FCA, journalists covering it all. There are comprehensive environmental impact assessments, with opportunities for comments from the public. One of the thousands of people involved in all of that is a billionaire. Furthermore it’s an issue that affects all launches, by ULA, NASA, ESA, whoever, not just SpaceX. But sure, go ahead and ignore all of that and make a thoughtless dig against one person, in one country, running one rocket company for the crime of being successful at it.

seadan83 3y ago
Evaluations from SpaceX employees needs the biggest grain of salt. Their jobs depend on a certain result and their boss is notoriously pushy. Journalists are not scientists. Did you mean FAA rather than FCA? The FAA did ask SpaceX to do a lot of additional ground level items: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/13/faa-spacex-starship-environmental-review-clears-texas-program-to-move-forward.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/13/faa-spacex-starship-environm... The reviewers at th ed FCA were unlikely to be in the thousands, the rest mentioned I would completely discount. The "crime" is that one person is not stopping to ask whether we should. There is a lot of hubris is there. Regardless, nobody should get a free pass to wreck the earth (but this is kittens, putting tons of C02 in the air is generally free, so... yeah...) Looks like the biggest "green" issue is the rockets burns tons of fuel. Thd FAA review was a green light. This phenomena of punching holes was hopefully considered by the FAA (but at this point, can only hope that everything was at least considered)
- simonh 3y ago
  Yes sorry, FAA. I’m a Brit so not as familiar with the US institutions. My point is there is extensive and persistent oversight, debate and opportunities for input and objection. Journalists play a role in the public interest in any democratic society. One person didn’t ask whether we should? Space technology has been controversial since its inception. Citizens, journalists and politicians have been questioning it throughout its history. You really honestly think you’re the first person, or this is the first time anyone has stopped to wonder about it? Incidentally, there’s one particularly famous example of this from 1970 that’s a bit of a classic: https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/ https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-... Of course nobody should get a free pass to wreck the Earth. That’s a cartoonishly absurd caricature of what’s going on.