Also just ignore the part where their carbon emissions just surpassed several countries yearly output combined with that one launch
this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
1192 points (99.2% liked)
196
17520 readers
1405 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
Other rules
Behavior rules:
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, etc…)
- No genocide denial
- No support for authoritarian behaviour (incl. Tankies)
- No namecalling
- Accounts from lemmygrad.ml, threads.net, or hexbear.net are held to higher standards
- Other things seen as cleary bad
Posting rules:
- No AI generated content (DALL-E etc…)
- No advertisements
- No gore / violence
- Mutual aid posts are not allowed
NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.
Other 196's:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I hate rich fucks as much as anybody, but this particular vehicle uses liquid hydrogen and oxygen for propellant, so no direct carbon emissions from the fuel.
The spacex superheavy is the biggest rocket stage around and has somewhere around 1.7 million kg of methane in it at launch. That results in about 4.7 million kg (4675t) of CO2 when it's burned. That's the same as the yearly emissions of 338 average americans, or 962 people at the global average.
Rockets are big, flashy and make a lot of smoke, but the numbers really don't amount to much when compared to the sheer scale of more mundane economic activities.
I can guarantee that that hydrogen was not produced sustainably
To copy paste an earlier reply of mine:
I was talking about the direct emissions of launching a rocket. The indirect emissions are obviously vastly larger and might as well include everything in the wider economy that enables stuff like this. Just maintaining the necessary industrial capacity is already a huge strain on the planet. That's what I'm after with these comments. The rich fucker joyride is a largely inconsequential yet overtly visible result of a bloated system hiding in plain sight. The aerospace sector as a whole is just the tip of the iceberg of a global industrial society in ecological overshoot.
That you for stating the obvious and completely missing the point.
"oh ye technically we didn't cause extreme mass emissions just now"
is not an excuse for extreme mass emissions. Until someone figures out how to get sustainable hydrogen production to work for a scale useful for more than a few cars this is simply not a sustainable approach. And from what I understand, it likely won't anytime soon
Sorry, I suppose I'm a bit too used to idiots going off about the smoke plume caused by the rocket carrying an Earth observation satellite or such. When there's anything to be gained, the costs of the endeavour should be measured up to that. Here there's no gain for anybody (unless one of those fuckers onboard has enough braincells to be able to appreciate the overview effect enough to affect their future behaviour for the better), so it's a net negative no matter how much the cost for the planet is. My intent was not to excuse anything about this.
ergo "direct"
So each launch is 2x the faeroe islands annual CO2 output
Yes, the comment I replied to is technically right in that there are some tiny countries out there. Or they would be, if the rocket in question would've been a vastly larger rocket that burned a carbon containing fuel. The New Shepard tourist joyride is tiny for a rocket and its exhaust is water vapour.
Where did they get all the hydrogen? How did they make the rocket. While it may not emit much carbon on launch day, it will have taken a shit load to produce it.
I was talking about the direct emissions of launching a rocket. The indirect emissions are obviously vastly larger and might as well include everything in the wider economy that enables stuff like this. Just maintaining the necessary industrial capacity is already a huge strain on the planet. That's what I'm after with these comments. The rich fucker joyride is a largely inconsequential yet overtly visible result of a bloated system hiding in plain sight. The aerospace sector as a whole is just the tip of the iceberg of a global industrial society in ecological overshoot.
Hydrogen is usually produced from natural gas with all the carbon being released as CO². So just the direct cost of making the fuel is already terrible.
So hydrogen creation is carbon neutral, didn't know that! /s
Although I doubt it, hydrogen can be produced using renewables.
It's still going to be significantly "greener" than using methane as a propellant, though.
I don't really celebrate any holidays or even my birthday. But if that rocket with bezos or musk or some other cunt goes up in flames, i make that a new tradition
My friends and I all do a shot on November 29th for a similar reason haha. I'd celebrate for the reasons you mentioned as well.
Fireworks in the name of the cunts
Who is she and what is going on with her face?
Edit: is it Michael Jackson?
It's funny because he's so obviously and publicly going through mid-life crisis. He underwent this physical transformation by becoming this swole guy at the same time he divorced his normal wife to get with this plastic lady.
He's one of the wealthiest men in the history of humanity but falls for the same crap a 50 year old used car dealer would. I love it.
I hate bezos with a passin, but he didn't pick his new wife by looks. I hope.
Allergic reaction to space bees.
To shreds, you say?
and his wife?
We will never know. No helping lemming. And we are to lazy to search ourself. Well, no big deal I guess.
It's obviously also photoshopped and staged.
I don’t mind sending billionaires to space. My issue is bringing them back to Earth.
Wtf is going on with his bicep
Lizards actually don’t have biceps, that’s called a glusquai and Bezos’ is pretty standard for the species
He’s probably on human growth hormone and testosterone replacement therapy for “longevity”. Maybe he doesn’t workout enough though, so he won’t have the overdeveloped physique of typical anabolic abusers. Just the extra testosterone and hgh can cause muscle growth on their own, doesn’t mean you get huge all over though.
all the while claiming it is peak feminism because some rich guy's trophy wife went to space and most articles don't even mention the two real scientist women on board.
Tax wealth, not work.
Up the HIGNFY
At least there's a chance it blows up and kills them.
Must be super weird to play astronaut, knowing that more people hope that you go up in flames than you make it back alive.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›