Another successful SpaceX launch.

[maw lod qan]

Wasn't as good as the last one I watched with this being an early evening, but still nice seeing it climbing up towards space.

Those early morning shots with the sun below the horizon catching the contrail is really a sight.

[niallk]

Just hope it wasn't full of Starlink satellites!!

[happy-kat]

How much carbon has that launch just pumped into the atmosphere!!

[DaveL59]

9 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

How much carbon has that launch just pumped into the atmosphere!!

well assuming the usual H+O2 fuelling, perhaps not as much as you'd think. but that said the footprint for building it all etc, a fair bit...

[Cyril]

Vairous websites have calculations on the amount of C02  from space x's launch.

"The Falcon 9 rocket runs on fossil fuels, namely Rocket Propellant 1 or RP-1, which is highly refined kerosene.

Each launch burns 29,600 gallons or 112,184 Kilograms, with each Kg of fuel releasing 3 Kg of CO2, so each launch releases 336,552 Kg of CO2."

https://championtraveler.com/news/one-spacex-rocket-launch-produces-the-equivalent-of-395-transatlantic-flights-worth-of-co2-emissions/

About 330 imperial tons.

[Gfamily]

On 17/12/2019 at 13:05, DaveL59 said:

well assuming the usual H+O2 fuelling, perhaps not as much as you'd think. but that said the footprint for building it all etc, a fair bit...

As Cyril has pointed out, SpaceX use RP1 (basically refined paraffin) and LOX as fuel and oxidiser - the refrigeration required for Liquid H2 is much greater than you need for Liquid O2, so the engineering challenges is far greater, and apart from that, the mass density of LH is much lower than that for RP1 - which would require significantly larger fuel tank stages. 

Although the Saturn V rocket did use LH / LOX, it was only in the Second and Third stages. If they had tried to use it for the First Stage, the tanks would have had to be about twice the diameter.

[DaveL59]

ah ok, fair enough. So essentially these private operations don't care about polluting and carbon footprint, so long as they can do it cheap, not good

[Cyril]

We as individuals are constantly hearing from environmentalists and politicians to cut our carbon emissions yet Ellon Musk can in a day throw hundreds of tons of co2 into the atmosphere let alone his contribution to space junk all for  profit.

Should we not all be looking for inspiration to cut CO2 emissions, at the moment there are hundreds of thousands of car ownrs in the UK that would like switch to electric or hybrid vehilces but that won't happen very quickly, cost and profit will keep us away from these vehicles for a long tim

[JamesF]

1 hour ago, Cyril said:

"The Falcon 9 rocket runs on fossil fuels, namely Rocket Propellant 1 or RP-1, which is highly refined kerosene.

Each launch burns 29,600 gallons or 112,184 Kilograms, with each Kg of fuel releasing 3 Kg of CO2, so each launch releases 336,552 Kg of CO2."

https://championtraveler.com/news/one-spacex-rocket-launch-produces-the-equivalent-of-395-transatlantic-flights-worth-of-co2-emissions/

Something about the figures on that page just didn't quite add up and it took me a short while to work out what I think is wrong.

I suspect that by "395 transatlantic flights" they mean something like 395 times the CO2 emissions per person of a transatlantic flight.  I think the actual CO2 emissions of a single flight from, say, LHR to JFK is going to be nearer 220 tonnes, or two thirds of the CO2 emissions of a Falcon 9 launch.

That may still seem a lot to you, and I don't think I'd disagree, but consider that there are probably well over 100 transatlantic flights (and many a fair bit longer than LHR/JFK) from the UK alone, every day.

James

[Hallingskies]

We need to get into space and break our ties to this planet.  If Musk can do that then we can’t begrudge him a bit of CO2.  Airlines do far more damage.  But he will never be forgiven for destroying the night skies for profit with his wretched satellites...