I think we should hesitate a bit more with the general consensus that SpaceX’s rocket activity is good prima facia. It seems like what people mean is that they support the goals of space exploration ( I might as well). But really, have we evaluated:
- projected emissions for GTM on-asteroid mining
- projected emissions for human space colony development and maintenance until off planet energy is developed
- general projected emissions versus every alleged goal, weighted by probability and time
Doing a third party CB analysis seems essential and should be part of some sort of reg study, considering we all share the air, we all suffer climate change detriments, and 500k cars is a lot! Also SoaceX achieved excellent efficiency for satellite launches with Falcon 9 and Starship theoretically lowers emissions efficiency since payloads must be heavier to accommodate for additional positioning hardware (there are trade offs and SoaceX seems convinced that Starship is better long term for these use cases).
I think we should hesitate a bit more with the general consensus that SpaceX’s rocket activity is good prima facia. It seems like what people mean is that they support the goals of space exploration ( I might as well). But really, have we evaluated:
- projected emissions for GTM on-asteroid mining
- projected emissions for human space colony development and maintenance until off planet energy is developed
- general projected emissions versus every alleged goal, weighted by probability and time
Doing a third party CB analysis seems essential and should be part of some sort of reg study, considering we all share the air, we all suffer climate change detriments, and 500k cars is a lot! Also SoaceX achieved excellent efficiency for satellite launches with Falcon 9 and Starship theoretically lowers emissions efficiency since payloads must be heavier to accommodate for additional positioning hardware (there are trade offs and SoaceX seems convinced that Starship is better long term for these use cases).