Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

spaceweatherarchive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 231 posts

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#151

Post by kergonath »

machdiamonds wrote: post #116
cj wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

And I wonder how many times over Tesla makes up for it.

You would be surprised. It takes several years for the low emissions of an EV to compensate the increased emissions during fabrication compared to ICEs (and disposal: ICEs are mostly steel and plastic, with fewer fancy chemicals as batteries). Teslas, being large and heavy, also use way more energy than they should to move around 100 kgs of human. Energy that is not free of GHG emissions.

EVs are mostly good over the long term, but they are not an instant win button.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#152

Post by HPsquared »

reaperman wrote: post #146
angiosperm wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Ozone Layer is considerably lower than the Ionosphere proper, and protects all surface life from ionizing solar UV radiation. It most likely is as damaged by rocket exhaust as the ionosphere, and much more slowly healed. That undoubtedly deserves its own article, which will unavoidably be confused with this one and be considered old news.

Why would O3 be damaged by H2O? SpaceX rockets are powered by hydrogen and oxygen and produce water as exhaust.

Kerosene and oxygen.. Anyway it's probably that the exhaust plume will contain reactive species like nitrogen oxides, maybe the water vapour could have a role. It's not a big effect.

Hydrazine powered rockets have a much bigger effect (all those nitrogen oxides) and are still not a very big deal.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#153

Post by machdiamonds »

rewmie wrote: post #147
machdiamonds wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, Elon Musk made an effort to halt the California high-speed rail project, but failed, leading to the project pushing forward. The repercussions have been billions of taxpayer dollars funneled into a project that remains considerably far from completion. The budget has skyrocketed from a modest $9 billion to an eye-watering $128 billion. Adding insult to injury, the first phase isn't expected to kick off until…

> Indeed, Elon Musk made an effort to halt the California high-speed rail project (...) As such, blaming Musk's efforts for the state of California's issues seems misplaced. Ok. So you agree Musk tried to sabotage California high-speed rail, but as he failed then... We should ignore it?

Not sure if you read the rest of my comment, but I'm saying it wasn't a negative thing that he tried to get the project canceled and it seems like he was right about how it was going to go. So maybe not ignore it, but praise that he tried to get it canceled?

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#154

Post by [deleted] »

rewmie wrote: post #150
machdiamonds wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 3…

> 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 represen…

[deleted]

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#155

Post by tigershark »

Jeff_Brown wrote: post #35
arbuge wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One famous example occured on August 25, 2017, when a Falcon 9 rocket carrying Taiwan’s FORMOSAT-5 satellite created a hole four times bigger than the state of California. Doesn't sound too local to me.

Good point. Deserves some numbers. California's area is about 500 thousand km^2, and the Earth's is about 500 million, which means the side facing the Sun is about 250 million, so we're talking about 0.2% of the area facing the sun. Suppose the hole takes six hours to heal (the article makes it sound like it takes much less), and suppose there's a launch every month (since launches have in the past carried 600 satell…

Spacex it’s aiming to launch in 2023 about 100 times per year, and they are not too far behind given that they launched already 49 times. The launch cadence is going to drastically increase once starship is available. It seems a quite bigger impact that your numbers show. You used 12 launches per year, so you were off by an order of magnitude.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#156

Post by tigershark »

jakeinspace wrote: post #117
esquivalience wrote: post #5

Seems like this isn't considered to be a big issue, beyond that it is a very visible thing that instinctively 'feels' like a bad idea. > Rocket engines spray water (H2O) and carbon dioxide (CO2) into the ionosphere, quenching local ionization by as much as 70%. A complicated series of charge exchange reactions between oxygen ions (O+) and molecules from the rocket exhaust produce photons at a wavelength of 6300 Å–the…

Who measures light wavelengths in angstroms rather than nm?

Everyone? It’s the preferred unit for electromagnetic wavelengths.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#157

Post by machdiamonds »

rewmie wrote: post #150
machdiamonds wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 3…

> 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 represen…

Tesla's role in shaping the EV landscape is undeniable. Their advent redefined the trajectory of electric mobility when major automakers were largely dismissive of the concept. With the success of their Model S, and more the Model 3, Tesla shattered the misconception that EVs lacked practicality, thereby nudging traditional manufacturers to expedite their own electric ventures.

The opening of Tesla's Supercharger network has been instrumental in making EVs from all manufacturers viable for a broader demographic in the U.S. Moreover, for a considerable period, Tesla struggled to meet the high demand for their vehicles, with many potential owners enduring long wait times to receive their cars. Given the limited and less attractive EV alternatives at that time, it's unlikely that these consumers would have opted for another EV.

In the U.S., where Tesla has a market share close to 60%, Chinese automakers like BYD, SAIC, or Geely have not yet established a significant presence. Thus, most American consumers would not have likely considered these other EVs.

Additionally, Tesla's pricing strategy has exerted downward pressure on the overall EV market, making these vehicles more accessible to the masses. Other manufacturers are indeed emulating Tesla's approach, further acknowledging Tesla's influence on the industry's transition to electric vehicles.

As to the emissions offset calculation, the figures referenced consider each Tesla vehicle as a replacement for a conventional gasoline car. Whether a Tesla purchaser might have considered another EV is irrelevant to the emissions reductions associated with each Tesla vehicle. Also the amount of emissions needed to offset SpaceX emissions is comical and obviously Tesla covers those even with a small fraction of the vehicles they sell.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/20/investing/china-tesla-ev-pric...

https://www.businessinsider.com/ford-ev-production-slow-than...

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/02/1152586942/tesla-price-cuts-f...

https://electrek.co/2021/11/08/ford-ceo-praises-tesla-intern...

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/28/tesla-is-setting-the-bar-for...

https://electrek.co/2023/06/05/gm-ceo-tesla-lead-electric-ca...

https://insideevs.com/news/652293/ferrari-ceo-says-tesla-was...

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#158

Post by adhesive_wombat »

op00to wrote: post #19
dfox wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only insignificantly. Most of the radiation is filtered/diverted by the magnetosphere. The only really practical effect of the disturbance is making the already hard to predict sky-wave propagation of HF even more harder to predict and characterize. Which is today realistically of an interest to HAMs and mostly as an fallback for intelligence agencies and diplomatic services. Edit: It also somewhat changes the scatte…

What about high frequency trading shops?

They should be banned anyway. The more we can do to make their operations impossible the better.

Their mere existence makes a mockery of the idea of the stock market as a considered reflection of value of companies and explicitly makes it into a gambling den for dead-eyed people competing to have the fastest card counting systems under their suits. If a company is valuable now, it'll be valuable in 5 minutes.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#159

Post by jcims »

panick21_ wrote: post #98
s3p wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for this. Is 'waste' used in a specific vernacular? I've never heard of someone saying waste instead of vast before.

I have dyslexia and English isn't my first language.

None of my business of course but Dutch or German by any chance?

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#160

Post by avgcorrection »

machdiamonds wrote: post #153
rewmie wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Indeed, Elon Musk made an effort to halt the California high-speed rail project (...) As such, blaming Musk's efforts for the state of California's issues seems misplaced. Ok. So you agree Musk tried to sabotage California high-speed rail, but as he failed then... We should ignore it?

Not sure if you read the rest of my comment, but I'm saying it wasn't a negative thing that he tried to get the project canceled and it seems like he was right about how it was going to go. So maybe not ignore it, but praise that he tried to get it canceled?

- If someone bought a Tesla we can assume that they would have bought a fossil car if Tesla didn’t exist

- If Musk tried to sabotage something and he failed: his intent doesn’t matter

- But the project that he tried to sabotage probably should have failed anyway

— The Musk Prayer

Post reply on HN