Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant • Hacker News Board

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#111

Post by wolverine876 » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:10 PM UTC

idiotsecant wrote: post #52

DisjointedHunt wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much carbon does one year of fires in California produce? For all the regulations on reducing usage, the wise politicians enabled conditions through neglect of forest care and trimming to allow fires so large, the plume could be seen from space and darkened skies as far north as Seattle. The point here is, what is good for the climate isn’t the purview of these simplistic views of climate science. Drilling a well…

>the wise politicians enabled conditions through neglect of forest care and trimming It baffles me that this is so often repeated when it is quite clearly inaccurate if you just think about it for a second. First of all, you don't "trim" a forest the size of many small countries. This isn't a city park. It would take every man, woman, and child's sum efforts to 'landscape' even a fraction of the forests in the PNW. T…

Thanks. Do you have any good sources on the topic that I can read? I would love to cut through all the politicized BS.

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#112

Post by ChuckMcM » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:10 PM UTC

ESGHound wrote: post #81

aazaa wrote: post #53

The article shows many tables without ever quoting sources. In the previous article in the series, the author claims: > ... I’m a “forensic environmental data specialist” (I invented the term just now). I use the troves of free to the public data located in regulatory submittals and permits to extract useful information. ... Great. If free to the public, where are the links? Clicking on those table images just links…

I've cited every single claim I've made. And no, I'm not a fan of Musk. From a legal and technical standpoint, My work has been run through legal, environmental, and oil and gas engineers I've worked with over the years.

Not sure why you are getting downvoted but the GP comment had a very specific request, link to the data source. You've no doubt got those links somewhere right? Adding a post of links to all the public filings would be a real asset here.

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#113

Post by lazide » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:11 PM UTC

politician wrote: post #100

lazide wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The process IS already mastered, depending on the bar you set? This isn’t something unknown or theoretical.

Under STP and 1G, yes. Mars isn't at STP or 1G, so they can't assume that the Earth-standard machinery will work without modifications. This is a reasonable thing to experiment with.

Which I was referencing with ‘depending on the bar’, though it’s a well understood enough process that those variables are generally well understood.

Yet they aren’t, correct?

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#114

Post by justahuman74 » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:11 PM UTC

wolverine876 wrote: post #107

coenhyde wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some more context. If I understand correctly this gas plant is need to power a desalination plant which is need to produce massive amounts of water which will be used to implement a sound suppression deluge system that is required by the FAA. Salt water will corrode everything and there isn't existing water and gas infrastructure in place to lean on. ie they have to build the stack from scratch.

Perhaps there's a more efficient place to build the facility, perhaps someplace with abundant water so that you don't have to spend all this energy to create it?

Because the rocket is so huge, they need to build it either next to a waterway for barge transport, or right next to the launch pad which has to be on the coast

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#115

Post by wolverine876 » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:13 PM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #108

mark212 wrote: post #103

What I can’t seem to find the answer to in this very long and stream-of-consciousness style series of posts is why the author thinks the FAA is the only relevant federal agency. They complain constantly about violating NEPA and accuse the FAA of just waiving this through … but there’s no way someone can operate a point-source emitter (e.g., large 250mw power station, let alone the natural gas processing facility) wit…

It's a valid question. I am surprised (as I am usually) at the emotional content of these sorts of things.

> I am surprised (as I am usually) at the emotional content of these sorts of things.

You're surprised by emotional content of politicized issues, such as the environment and anything Elon Musk?

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#116

Post by smoldesu » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:13 PM UTC

ESGHound wrote: post #77

smoldesu wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what SpaceX is doing doesn't really matter. I can't just show up to Arkansas and say I'm fracking for oil to cure cancer and get hand-waved through. They're private entities, no matter what they're doing, and they're subject to the same scrutiny that everyone else puts up with.

This is not true at all. Doubly not true when your program is subsidized by Federal dollars and takes place adjacent to protected federal lands. The FAA is subject to NEPA review, and hence any SpaceX activity in this area must go through the same process as every other industrial activity that impacts federal interests.

Well my cancer cure is subsidized by federal dollars, and our headquarters is right next to the post office. Can't we just start drilling already?

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#117

Post by gpm » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:13 PM UTC

lazide wrote: post #110

elif wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup and musk also argues in favor of a carbon tax. He is openly hopeful that the fundamental economics will be changed to make producing their own methane via Sabatier economical. It is up to the controllers of incentive structures to change the fundamentals of commerce/ecology.

Pretty sure that would require something like a 5x cost increase in carbon, though I can’t find hard numbers anywhere easily. Do you have any pointers?

> Pretty sure that would require something like a 5x cost increase in carbon

5x over what? The US doesn't have a carbon tax does it?

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#118

Post by Jweb_Guru » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:14 PM UTC

MayeulC wrote: post #57

Jweb_Guru wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah wow you sure showed those people trying to power rockets with solar power.

I mean you can produce methane trough CO2 capture and a lot of solar power. That's basically what musk said was the goal on mars, so they could develop that tech as well. Or space-based solar. If anyone has the capability, it's spacex.

Musk says a lot of dumb things. I'm about as far as a Musk fan as you can be. But acting like rockets are going to be powered by clean energy in the foreseeable future is just wishful thinking.

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#119

Post by wolverine876 » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:15 PM UTC

_3u10 wrote: post #39

Isn’t capturing and then flaring methane the environmentally responsible thing to do?

It's more responsible not to use natural gas, including by reducing energy usage. It's also more responsible to respect the rules made democratically by your fellow citizens then to try to cheat them.

Re: Engineer demos how SpaceX is building fracked well gas plant

#120

Post by speedybird » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 9:16 PM UTC

criley2 wrote: post #48

speedybird wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes sense. If the EPA is slacking and rubber-stamping things, that warrants investigation and criticism. But I'm not buying the angle that the FAA should be expected to enforce the EPA's rules. That's what the EPA is for.

The EPA was utterly gutted over the past 4 years. The sad part is that it takes much longer to rebuild than it does to tear down. The EPA being unable or unwilling to enforce environmental protections is by design.

Supposing the EPA is gutted as you suggest (my sibling comment suggests otherwise), it surely still has more capability and expertise when it comes to environmental regulation than the FAA. I think expecting the FAA to act as a surrogate EPA is expecting too much.