4 ms·

Is there any mention of the type of wastewater? Hydrazine or human waste from starbase? There’s a big difference. It’s pretty standard to put treated wastewate

by pnpnp 3y ago

Is there any mention of the type of wastewater? Hydrazine or human waste from starbase? There’s a big difference. It’s pretty standard to put treated wastewater back into bodies of water. I once talked to a water activist that made me realize water molecules going through your house are typically recycled back into a river through a treatment process. Also - the further you leave Downstream, the more those water molecules have been used. I had never really thought about it that way before.

mlindner 3y ago
Starship doesn't use hydrazine. The article headline is "technically" correct because ANY water that has come from any pipe work/tanks that isn't rain from the sky is "treated wastewater" by weird government definition. The water has no known pollutants in it. It's clean drinking water pumped through pipes and splashing on to the ground and picking up whatever dirt is on the ground.
- pnpnp 3y ago
  I was just using that as an example. You are wrong about having “no known pollutants,” though. Pollutants need to be below some agreed-upon level, so they exist but in theory should be below harmful levels. There can be a perceived difference between industrial chemical wastewater and household wastewater and that’s what I was getting at. One is far riskier for a “spill” accident, and more rigorous prevention measures may need to be discussed upfront. The article didn’t differentiate which it’s going to be. I feel like by not differentiating, the article may be somewhat sensationalized. Without knowing which it is, I’m left wondering.
  - mlindner 3y ago
    The term chemical wastewater generally sounds like it's generated by some kind of chemical process as a byproduct. In this case though there is nothing chemical happening to this waste water. It comes in via trucks and is then pumped back out again.
    - pnpnp 3y ago
      I’m just saying is that it’s very unclear from the article.

by pnpnp 3y ago

mlindner 3y ago

Starship doesn't use hydrazine. The article headline is "technically" correct because ANY water that has come from any pipe work/tanks that isn't rain from the sky is "treated wastewater" by weird government definition. The water has no known pollutants in it. It's clean drinking water pumped through pipes and splashing on to the ground and picking up whatever dirt is on the ground.

pnpnp 3y ago
I was just using that as an example. You are wrong about having “no known pollutants,” though. Pollutants need to be below some agreed-upon level, so they exist but in theory should be below harmful levels. There can be a perceived difference between industrial chemical wastewater and household wastewater and that’s what I was getting at. One is far riskier for a “spill” accident, and more rigorous prevention measures may need to be discussed upfront. The article didn’t differentiate which it’s going to be. I feel like by not differentiating, the article may be somewhat sensationalized. Without knowing which it is, I’m left wondering.
- mlindner 3y ago
  The term chemical wastewater generally sounds like it's generated by some kind of chemical process as a byproduct. In this case though there is nothing chemical happening to this waste water. It comes in via trucks and is then pumped back out again.
  - pnpnp 3y ago
    I’m just saying is that it’s very unclear from the article.