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

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

#141

Post by dragontamer » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:27 PM UTC

Ericson2314 wrote: post #92

dragontamer wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The FAA document is pretty clear on this subject. SpaceX is building a 1MW solar plant and a 250MW natural gas plant. See the document in question: https://www.faa.gov/space/stakeholder_engagement/spacex_star... Just Ctrl-F on "250 MW", to find page 130/131, which discusses the 1MW solar + 250MW natural gas plan. -------- As such, we know how they're planning on powering the rocket. With traditional natural gas metho…

Oh thought they were burning the gas for more base electricity. This does make sense, but it is odd that the existing gas market is not sufficient.

> This does make sense, but it is odd that the existing gas market is not sufficient.

Its not very clear why the PEA is setup in this manner at all. We know that SpaceX wouldn't ask for something from the regulators unless they had a plan for it, but that's about it.

I think it would have been reasonable to just pipe 99.9% pure methane from some other producer (it is Texas after all, surely there's a supplier out there willing to sell a bunch of methane to SpaceX??).

What's absurd is that the PEA calculations seem to be calculated from the standpoint of a raw-mining operation, and not pre-treated methane. This implies that SpaceX is planning on purifying its own methane, instead of buying it up from a large market that already exists in the area.

----------

I'm sure rocket fuel needs more treatment steps than commodity natural gas. But starting from commodity natural gas probably would have been easier, rather than starting from a well?

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

#142

Post by gpm » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:28 PM UTC

sbierwagen wrote: post #134

gpm wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there is. You need water to your east (because you can't fly over people for safety reasons), for a really long way. As in launches from texas have to dodge Florida, Cuba and all the other islands over there. You need very low population density (because rocket launches and landings require large exclusion zones). You need to be in the US, because of export restrictions. You want to be as far south as p…

>You want to be as far south as possible, for efficiency reasons It is absolutely true that a rocket launched at the equator gets the biggest boost from the Earth's rotation, but stuff isn't put into orbit just for fun, it's often because you want it pass over a specified part of the Earth's surface. To pass over CONUS you need some inclination, and the more inclined an orbit is the less assist you get from the plane…

For normal moderately inclined orbits the boost is still greatest at the equator, just always less than for non inclined orbits (until you start launching retrograde).

The soviet launch site was indeed chosen for other reasons than maximizing payload... in particular I think I recall that it was largely motivated by avoiding launching over China, and being in an empty enough part of the world that it's unlikely to kill to many people (despite launching over land).

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

#143

Post by ChuckMcM » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:30 PM UTC

wolverine876 wrote: post #115

ChuckMcM wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Yes I am. Contextually Texas has a huge methane problem[1] and there is every indication that SpaceX will run their facility in a responsible way. What people "get" for SpaceX running that activity is a space capability that is superior to every other nation on the planet.

I do understand being emotional about the environment and a desire to preserve it in the presence of people and the activities that we have to do to survive. So I understand being emotional about an administration rolling back EPA restrictions on coal power waste water release[2] (for example).

Analogy: I don't understand a co-worker being "mad" at you for driving 10 miles to the office because they ride their bike that same distance and are therefore doing more for the environment than you are. Proud of their own efforts? Sure. Mad because not everyone can do what they do? No, I don't understand that.

[1] https://www.texasobserver.org/methane-abandoned-oil-wells/

[2] https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/trump-epa-rol...

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

#144

Post by FireBeyond » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:35 PM UTC

fallingknife wrote: post #24

groby_b wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The big deal is that the well is seemingly exempt from the regulation all other wells go through. It doesn't matter what Musk does with the methane, what matters is that he's at best exploiting loopholes and at worst operating extrajudicially. Also, SpaceX "powering the human colonization of Mars" is a pretty huge sip of the Kool Aid there. Given the founder's track record, it's about as believable as "fully self-dri…

Given his track record? Who has a better one?

How's FSD looking?

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

#145

Post by cma » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:37 PM UTC

coenhyde wrote: post #85

stefan_ wrote: post #3

The context here seems to be that SpaceX is in fact building an old boring fracked well gas plant in federally protected land, but because they cursorily mention rockets and call it a "methane processing thingamajig" instead of what it plain is, the FAA who has no experience doing environmental review but is involved because rockets is all too happy to just nod it through.

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.

If it is for desalination why aren't they using solar, which wouldn't even need storage in that application.

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

#146

Post by plorg » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:38 PM UTC

speedybird wrote: post #33

DisjointedHunt wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[Edit]: You’re a coward if you downvote to suppress an opinion without having the decency to engage in debate. Jesus. . You actually think carbon released from burning wood is exempt from the whole “making the planet unlivable” effect? Repeat that to yourself while you watch the skies turn red. That’s a ridiculous statement to make.

If you think wildfire smoke makes a region unlivable, then consider that before deciding where to live. Wildfires are a natural part of the ecological cycle in some parts of the world. You can fault California for botching their forest management by suppressing fires and consequently causing larger fires later on, but either way you will have to cope with the smoke. (Also, the sky turning red is actually somewhat pre…

Sure, but when the smoke is bad enough to create bad air quality over half a continent away I think it's more than a "you chose to live in the wrong place" problem.

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

#147

Post by rpmisms » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:46 PM UTC

Jweb_Guru wrote: post #118

MayeulC wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> But acting like rockets are going to be powered by clean energy in the foreseeable future is just wishful thinking.

So were practical electric cars 20 years ago.

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

#148

Post by rpmisms » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:48 PM UTC

inglor_cz wrote: post #93

whatever1 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I checked in Europe 80% of the gas price was taxes. Last time that I checked in the US up to 30% of the fuel price was paid for RINS, aka renewable energy certificates. So yes we do pay for sustainability. Unlike the billionaire explorers.

Space research and development is a huge part of sustainability. It is literally our only chance to move some polluting industries off Earth, at least long term. (I do not expect to see it happening in my lifetime.) Reusable rockets are a huge progress in space research. People long thought them outright impossible or impractical. And aside from SpaceX, no one has them yet. ESA's model of throwing away the entire Ari…

> And aside from SpaceX, no one has them yet.

I agree with you generally, but Rocket Lab in NZ is also reusing rockets.

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

#149

Post by elif » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:48 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?

If musk followed strict economics as implied by your premise, he would be launching disposable rockets with Boeing.

who knows what expense space X would be willing to shoulder to be sustainable... We are fortunate that it is still privately owned, and isn't legally obligated to pursue the financial interests of shareholders like all the other players in aerospace.

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

#150

Post by danielheath » Sat, Oct 16, 2021, 10:49 PM UTC

wolverine876 wrote: post #122

willvarfar wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s like the one company on earth actually concretely trying to change that …

Not in this case, apparently, and definitely not the only company, not even in the auto industry.

I believe that was a reference to the mars colony goal, not to protecting this planet