• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    82 months ago

    Right on. The “cooling effect” will hopefully offset all the kerosene and methane they’re injecting into the upper atmosphere and oceans.

    • Pennomi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They’re injecting water vapor and carbon dioxide, as well as soot (not kerosene or methane). I don’t mean to imply that it’s not an issue, but that more study is warranted (the article says the same thing).

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        22 months ago

        Do you know what those clouds are that come out of the engine at cut off and start up are? Not water vapour or carbon dioxide.

        • Pennomi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 months ago

          If we’re talking Falcon 9, the ignition is using TEA-TEB, a fairly nasty hypergolic. It burns to water vapor and carbon dioxide, plus some boron oxides.

          Starship doesn’t use a chemical igniter, so yes, there’s probably a small amount of methane that escapes during ignition. Generally though the combustion for Starship is incredibly clean, with something like a 99.5% efficiency.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            22 months ago

            Theres nothing to ignite unless the pumps are running full speed. The pumps keep running after after the fire goes out. What are those pumps pumping?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 months ago

      Oh boy, you’d better not look at the cattle industry then.

      Every rocket launch ever done in history doesn’t make even a blip on the graph for human-related carbon emissions.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        22 months ago

        I love that “drop in the bucket” justification. In the 1900’s car exhaust was a huge innovation because it did away with the mountains of horse shit produced by carriages.