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

161–170 of 231 posts

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#161

Post by makeitdouble »

throwaway69123 wrote: post #132
nologic01 wrote: post #128

Commercial space is a tragedy of the commons in the making. What is its "carrying capacity", who calculated it, who enforces it? What are the long term effects, when do they kick in? What are potential secondary effects or tipping points? Astronomy is already a casualty as the sky stops being "dark". I guess who cares about fundamental knowledge when there is profit to be had.

Space is alot bigger than you think or make out, the effects on astronomy are short lived while they get into position

While you might have a point, "the impact is too small to worry" is now the meme answer to any problem we should probably worry about before it becomes a huge deal with too big to fail players.

The more reassuring answer could be "there's already regulation Y that stops any single company from causing too much damage."

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#162

Post by versteegen »

kergonath wrote: post #151
machdiamonds wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yes, the batteries are very energy intensive to produce. Which is a very strong incentive to build lithium ion battery factories where cheap electricity is available, which most likely means hydro, or other renewables (because hydro, wind, solar tend to be far from population centers). I've seen some really unfair analyses of the CO₂ produced by EV production that assume all energy inputs are from renewable sources at the US average (just 21% of electricity in 2021), which is not true.

So battery production is a good way to transport energy from where it's cheap to produce to where it's needed, much better than bitcoin.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#163

Post by kfrzcode »

nologic01 wrote: post #128

Commercial space is a tragedy of the commons in the making. What is its "carrying capacity", who calculated it, who enforces it? What are the long term effects, when do they kick in? What are potential secondary effects or tipping points? Astronomy is already a casualty as the sky stops being "dark". I guess who cares about fundamental knowledge when there is profit to be had.

[flagged]

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#164

Post by nologic01 »

kfrzcode wrote: post #163
nologic01 wrote: post #128

Commercial space is a tragedy of the commons in the making. What is its "carrying capacity", who calculated it, who enforces it? What are the long term effects, when do they kick in? What are potential secondary effects or tipping points? Astronomy is already a casualty as the sky stops being "dark". I guess who cares about fundamental knowledge when there is profit to be had.

[flagged]

You seem to be the typical online bully with a hidden agenda, typically self-serving.

I provided a reference (among many available) to the concrete concerns of a professional body. Do you refute this concern? Where is any hint that you have any grasp of the topic?

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#165

Post by rewmie »

machdiamonds wrote: post #157
rewmie wrote: post #150

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]. 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 net…

> Tesla's role in shaping the EV landscape is undeniable.

You're jumping to conclusions. Just because Tesla exists that does not mean that all hypothetical transitions from fossil fuel to electric should be attributed to Tesla.

I repeat: Tesla is responsible for only 15% of EV sales, and nothing leads to believe that the remaining 85% of the EV market does not serve as a substitute good. Claiming that Tesla is an environment protection messiah is peak corporate worship.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#166

Post by rewmie »

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?

> 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.

That's specious reasoning at best. It's absurd how you try to depict a Robber Baron move as a simplistic fiscally responsible stance. It's even sillier once you realize the only reason Elon Musk did his best to sabotage the program was because he believed it would be a success and thus a threat to his bottom line.

I really do not understand this corporate worship nonsense, specially when dealing with this specific corporation.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#169

Post by hef19898 »

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.

Depends whether you factor in the CO2 certificates Tesla sells to ICE OEMs or not.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#170

Post by concordDance »

nologic01 wrote: post #164
kfrzcode wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You seem to be the typical online bully with a hidden agenda, typically self-serving. I provided a reference (among many available) to the concrete concerns of a professional body. Do you refute this concern? Where is any hint that you have any grasp of the topic?

From an outside perspective both your statements about each other seem plausible.
Post reply on HN