The new race to the moon

China Releases Video Simulating Its First Crewed Lunar Landing at 50:49

a reply to: Ove38

It's the start of the Lunar gold rush , we are approaching a time when mining the Moon for the riches contained within will be viable so getting up there now and staking your claim is imperative if you don't want to miss out on the prime territories.

SpaceX mining Corp ?

This is going to raise our taxes to combat global warming a buch!

WHAT IS THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SPACE TRAVEL?
One rocket launch can produce from 200 to 300 tons of carbon dioxide....

The SpaceX Falcon 9 and NASA Space Shuttle both produce around 400 tons of carbon dioxide per launch....

The upcoming SpaceX Starship and Super Heavy produce a staggering 2,683 tons per launch. When adjusted for payload, it produces about the same as the Falcon 9: 27 tons of carbon dioxide per ton to low-Earth orbit.

Marais noted that these figures are small compared to global air travel. But air travel produces one to three tons of carbon dioxide per passenger. As rocket launch emissions increase nearly six percent per year, she warned that it may not take long to outpace air travel.

Maybe there's more to climate change than just us peons polluting the environment; the PTB know it and are taking full advantage of the opportuning to enrich themselves at the working person's expense?

ARE SPACE ROCKETS BAD FOR THE EARTH? WHY THE QUESTION IGNORES AN IMPORTANT TRUTH
SpaceX, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, and others are launching more rockets than ever. Is it good for the planet?

“How the billionaire space race could be one giant leap for pollution,” The Guardian wrote. “The cost [...] will be paid in carbon emissions,” read a Popular Science headline. “Who is thinking about the atmosphere?” asked The Hill.

One billionaire that claims to be thinking about the atmosphere is Elon Musk. The CEO claims he is “working on sustainable energy for Earth with Tesla & protecting future of consciousness by making life multiplanetary with SpaceX.”

But does SpaceX’s work to explore the stars undermine Tesla’s work to clean up Earth’s atmosphere? The short answer is that we don’t really know.

“The current level of data about rocket emissions does not provide researchers with enough information to fully assess the impact of launches on the global environment,” he says.

Current rocket launches have a negligible effect on total carbon emissions — Everyday Astronaut found they accounted for 0.0000059 percent of global carbon emissions in 2018, while the airline industry produced 2.4 percent the same year.

But the long-term effect is less clear, especially as companies like SpaceX move from hosting 26 launches in a year to 1,000 launches per rocket in a year.

“I think we can guess that rockets won't be a huge impact on the environment, and they probably won't stand out as a sole source of new problems,” Darin Toohey, professor at the University of Colorado Boulder’s Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences, tells Inverse. “But they will add to the growing list of activities that have negative impacts on the environment.”

Here is what we know so far.

WHAT IS THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SPACE TRAVEL?
This depends a lot on the rocket, and which fuel it burns to create thrust.

Eloise Marais, an associate professor of physical geography at University College London, told The Guardian in July that she has simulated the effects of rocket launches for a decade. She found that one rocket launch can produce from 200 to 300 tons of carbon dioxide.

This largely corresponds with Everyday Astronaut’s calculations. The United Launch Alliance’s Delta IV Heavy, which just burns hydrogen, comes out on top with basically no carbon. The SpaceX Falcon 9 and NASA Space Shuttle both produce around 400 tons of carbon dioxide per launch.

USA Today reported that Blue Origin’s New Shepard emitted basically no carbon dioxide. That’s because it uses liquid hydrogen and oxygen as its fuel.

The upcoming SpaceX Starship and Super Heavy produce a staggering 2,683 tons per launch. When adjusted for payload, it produces about the same as the Falcon 9: 27 tons of carbon dioxide per ton to low-Earth orbit.
Marais noted that these figures are small compared to global air travel. But air travel produces one to three tons of carbon dioxide per passenger. As rocket launch emissions increase nearly six percent per year, she warned that it may not take long to outpace air travel.

HOW MUCH POLLUTION DO ROCKETS PRODUCE?
Beyond the carbon emissions outlined above, it’s important to remember that rockets can also emit other gases and pollutants.

In a 2020 analysis, Everyday Astronaut explained that each rocket will produce varying amounts of pollution. Take the SpaceX Falcon 9: It burns rocket propellant and liquid oxygen, so it emits carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides, carbon soot, carbon monoxide, and sulfur compounds.

Other rockets produce pollutants like inorganic chlorine and alumina. Some, like the hydrogen-burning Delta IV Heavy, only produce water vapor and nitrogen oxides.

Water vapor has an effect on the atmosphere. In a 2012 paper published in the Journal of Geophysical Research, the authors observed how the final NASA Space Shuttle launch in 2011 emitted around 350 tons of vapor during its ascent. That created polar mesospheric clouds brighter than 99 percent of other such clouds in the area.

DO SPACE LAUNCHES DAMAGE THE OZONE LAYER?
Scientists in the 1970s warned that commonly-used chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, were creating a hole in the ozone layer. The Montreal Protocol in 1990 banned such ozone-depleting chemicals, but the CBC notes that the protocol didn’t cover aerospace.

In 2009, research published in the journal Astropolitics claimed that current rocket launches deplete a few hundredths of a percent of the ozone layer per year.

[www.inverse.com...]

We don't know what any negative consequences are going to be, but we do know the potential for a very bad outcome is high-so let's forge ahead!

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Ove38

It's the start of the Lunar gold rush , we are approaching a time when mining the Moon for the riches contained within will be viable so getting up there now and staking your claim is imperative if you don't want to miss out on the prime territories.

SpaceX mining Corp ?

Great until someone hits a rivet.

Or stumbles on part of an old oak barrel in a mineshaft at 50 feet.

Ah dang, who saw this coming? LOL


Looks like the moon is owned by China now, who could stop them?

Can we have Taiwan now? You guys have the MOON

a reply to: Ove38

I've followed this "space race" for decades. In reality, it is a cover, a hunt for the origins of the local UFOs...and that is what it has ALWAYS been about regardless of what the big powers say as they shoot rockets and probes here and there....

The Moon is not the real target. That target is Mars, most specifically, Phobos, and always has been since we discovered from the Viking Orbiters that Phobos and Deimos very much in defiance of several laws of physics that should not allow them to be situated where they are. They are placed bodies put in those positions by an old, perhaps long gone or almost long-gone civilization.

We are witnessing live-action Tomb Raiders preparing their attack. Go get'em Musk boy!

a reply to: Sundog1

Where can you find info on Phobos and Deimos?

About time we get a space race. I wish i could have felt the excitement in the 60's.

we cannot leave the earth.
we are trapped in a grid here, a pris0n so to speak.

if we could leave the earth we would immiadetly be free!

there are threads on here about this, and all the old 0kkult concepts line up with it.

when we dye, refuse to go into the lite.
refuse reinkarantion.
then look for holes in the grid in the atmosphere, fly thru.

then you can go anywhere instantly.
i know where i am going, to go watch stars being born.

a reply to: drongosrevenge

we cannot leave the earth.
we are trapped in a grid here, a pris0n so to speak.

Except we've already sent people to the Moon and have people living outside Earth in orbit on the ISS.

a reply to: Ove38
Are hey there yet? Don't think so.
Simply incredible we have to wait more than 50 years for the next manned moonlanding.

www.evawaseerst.be...

originally posted by: zandra
a reply to: Ove38
Are hey there yet? Don't think so.
Simply incredible we have to wait more than 50 years for the next manned moonlanding.

It was like that with the South Pole. Two countries raced to reach it in 1912, then nobody went back until 1956 (44 years).
The first manned descent into the Mariana Trench was in 1960, the second in 2012 (52 years).

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Ove38

It's the start of the Lunar gold rush , we are approaching a time when mining the Moon for the riches contained within will be viable so getting up there now and staking your claim is imperative if you don't want to miss out on the prime territories.

SpaceX mining Corp ?

This is so grossly untrue.

Lunar regolith has an average hardness of about that of rubies, close to diamonds. The abrasiveness of the Lunar dust is extreme.

I have theorized a way to extract the helium-3 from titanium-oxide using thermal variance and an ionic collector plate, but you won't be collecting minerals from the moon any time soon.

www.nasa.gov...

a reply to: gortex

It'll be more like, China Vs Private Corporations with US congressional funding.

Long gone are the days of National patrionage towards a project all Americans can aspire to.

Actually, seems like the inverse.

originally posted by: nugget1
This is going to raise our taxes to combat global warming a buch!

WHAT IS THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SPACE TRAVEL?
One rocket launch can produce from 200 to 300 tons of carbon dioxide....

The SpaceX Falcon 9 and NASA Space Shuttle both produce around 400 tons of carbon dioxide per launch....

The upcoming SpaceX Starship and Super Heavy produce a staggering 2,683 tons per launch. When adjusted for payload, it produces about the same as the Falcon 9: 27 tons of carbon dioxide per ton to low-Earth orbit.

Marais noted that these figures are small compared to global air travel. But air travel produces one to three tons of carbon dioxide per passenger. As rocket launch emissions increase nearly six percent per year, she warned that it may not take long to outpace air travel.

Maybe there's more to climate change than just us peons polluting the environment; the PTB know it and are taking full advantage of the opportuning to enrich themselves at the working person's expense?

ARE SPACE ROCKETS BAD FOR THE EARTH? WHY THE QUESTION IGNORES AN IMPORTANT TRUTH
SpaceX, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, and others are launching more rockets than ever. Is it good for the planet?

“How the billionaire space race could be one giant leap for pollution,” The Guardian wrote. “The cost [...] will be paid in carbon emissions,” read a Popular Science headline. “Who is thinking about the atmosphere?” asked The Hill.

One billionaire that claims to be thinking about the atmosphere is Elon Musk. The CEO claims he is “working on sustainable energy for Earth with Tesla & protecting future of consciousness by making life multiplanetary with SpaceX.”

But does SpaceX’s work to explore the stars undermine Tesla’s work to clean up Earth’s atmosphere? The short answer is that we don’t really know.

“The current level of data about rocket emissions does not provide researchers with enough information to fully assess the impact of launches on the global environment,” he says.

Current rocket launches have a negligible effect on total carbon emissions — Everyday Astronaut found they accounted for 0.0000059 percent of global carbon emissions in 2018, while the airline industry produced 2.4 percent the same year.

But the long-term effect is less clear, especially as companies like SpaceX move from hosting 26 launches in a year to 1,000 launches per rocket in a year.

“I think we can guess that rockets won't be a huge impact on the environment, and they probably won't stand out as a sole source of new problems,” Darin Toohey, professor at the University of Colorado Boulder’s Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences, tells Inverse. “But they will add to the growing list of activities that have negative impacts on the environment.”

Here is what we know so far.

WHAT IS THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SPACE TRAVEL?
This depends a lot on the rocket, and which fuel it burns to create thrust.

Eloise Marais, an associate professor of physical geography at University College London, told The Guardian in July that she has simulated the effects of rocket launches for a decade. She found that one rocket launch can produce from 200 to 300 tons of carbon dioxide.

This largely corresponds with Everyday Astronaut’s calculations. The United Launch Alliance’s Delta IV Heavy, which just burns hydrogen, comes out on top with basically no carbon. The SpaceX Falcon 9 and NASA Space Shuttle both produce around 400 tons of carbon dioxide per launch.

USA Today reported that Blue Origin’s New Shepard emitted basically no carbon dioxide. That’s because it uses liquid hydrogen and oxygen as its fuel.

The upcoming SpaceX Starship and Super Heavy produce a staggering 2,683 tons per launch. When adjusted for payload, it produces about the same as the Falcon 9: 27 tons of carbon dioxide per ton to low-Earth orbit.
Marais noted that these figures are small compared to global air travel. But air travel produces one to three tons of carbon dioxide per passenger. As rocket launch emissions increase nearly six percent per year, she warned that it may not take long to outpace air travel.

HOW MUCH POLLUTION DO ROCKETS PRODUCE?
Beyond the carbon emissions outlined above, it’s important to remember that rockets can also emit other gases and pollutants.

In a 2020 analysis, Everyday Astronaut explained that each rocket will produce varying amounts of pollution. Take the SpaceX Falcon 9: It burns rocket propellant and liquid oxygen, so it emits carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides, carbon soot, carbon monoxide, and sulfur compounds.

Other rockets produce pollutants like inorganic chlorine and alumina. Some, like the hydrogen-burning Delta IV Heavy, only produce water vapor and nitrogen oxides.

Water vapor has an effect on the atmosphere. In a 2012 paper published in the Journal of Geophysical Research, the authors observed how the final NASA Space Shuttle launch in 2011 emitted around 350 tons of vapor during its ascent. That created polar mesospheric clouds brighter than 99 percent of other such clouds in the area.

DO SPACE LAUNCHES DAMAGE THE OZONE LAYER?
Scientists in the 1970s warned that commonly-used chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, were creating a hole in the ozone layer. The Montreal Protocol in 1990 banned such ozone-depleting chemicals, but the CBC notes that the protocol didn’t cover aerospace.

In 2009, research published in the journal Astropolitics claimed that current rocket launches deplete a few hundredths of a percent of the ozone layer per year.

[www.inverse.com...]

We don't know what any negative consequences are going to be, but we do know the potential for a very bad outcome is high-so let's forge ahead!

This is complete bupkis since rockets generally burn hydrogen and oxygen into water, there is no carbon or chlorine involved..

originally posted by: DarthTrader

originally posted by: nugget1
This is going to raise our taxes to combat global warming a buch!

WHAT IS THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SPACE TRAVEL?
One rocket launch can produce from 200 to 300 tons of carbon dioxide....

The SpaceX Falcon 9 and NASA Space Shuttle both produce around 400 tons of carbon dioxide per launch....

The upcoming SpaceX Starship and Super Heavy produce a staggering 2,683 tons per launch. When adjusted for payload, it produces about the same as the Falcon 9: 27 tons of carbon dioxide per ton to low-Earth orbit.

Marais noted that these figures are small compared to global air travel. But air travel produces one to three tons of carbon dioxide per passenger. As rocket launch emissions increase nearly six percent per year, she warned that it may not take long to outpace air travel.

Maybe there's more to climate change than just us peons polluting the environment; the PTB know it and are taking full advantage of the opportuning to enrich themselves at the working person's expense?

ARE SPACE ROCKETS BAD FOR THE EARTH? WHY THE QUESTION IGNORES AN IMPORTANT TRUTH
SpaceX, Blue Origin, Virgin Galactic, and others are launching more rockets than ever. Is it good for the planet?

“How the billionaire space race could be one giant leap for pollution,” The Guardian wrote. “The cost [...] will be paid in carbon emissions,” read a Popular Science headline. “Who is thinking about the atmosphere?” asked The Hill.

One billionaire that claims to be thinking about the atmosphere is Elon Musk. The CEO claims he is “working on sustainable energy for Earth with Tesla & protecting future of consciousness by making life multiplanetary with SpaceX.”

But does SpaceX’s work to explore the stars undermine Tesla’s work to clean up Earth’s atmosphere? The short answer is that we don’t really know.

“The current level of data about rocket emissions does not provide researchers with enough information to fully assess the impact of launches on the global environment,” he says.

Current rocket launches have a negligible effect on total carbon emissions — Everyday Astronaut found they accounted for 0.0000059 percent of global carbon emissions in 2018, while the airline industry produced 2.4 percent the same year.

But the long-term effect is less clear, especially as companies like SpaceX move from hosting 26 launches in a year to 1,000 launches per rocket in a year.

“I think we can guess that rockets won't be a huge impact on the environment, and they probably won't stand out as a sole source of new problems,” Darin Toohey, professor at the University of Colorado Boulder’s Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences, tells Inverse. “But they will add to the growing list of activities that have negative impacts on the environment.”

Here is what we know so far.

WHAT IS THE CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SPACE TRAVEL?
This depends a lot on the rocket, and which fuel it burns to create thrust.

Eloise Marais, an associate professor of physical geography at University College London, told The Guardian in July that she has simulated the effects of rocket launches for a decade. She found that one rocket launch can produce from 200 to 300 tons of carbon dioxide.

This largely corresponds with Everyday Astronaut’s calculations. The United Launch Alliance’s Delta IV Heavy, which just burns hydrogen, comes out on top with basically no carbon. The SpaceX Falcon 9 and NASA Space Shuttle both produce around 400 tons of carbon dioxide per launch.

USA Today reported that Blue Origin’s New Shepard emitted basically no carbon dioxide. That’s because it uses liquid hydrogen and oxygen as its fuel.

The upcoming SpaceX Starship and Super Heavy produce a staggering 2,683 tons per launch. When adjusted for payload, it produces about the same as the Falcon 9: 27 tons of carbon dioxide per ton to low-Earth orbit.
Marais noted that these figures are small compared to global air travel. But air travel produces one to three tons of carbon dioxide per passenger. As rocket launch emissions increase nearly six percent per year, she warned that it may not take long to outpace air travel.

HOW MUCH POLLUTION DO ROCKETS PRODUCE?
Beyond the carbon emissions outlined above, it’s important to remember that rockets can also emit other gases and pollutants.

In a 2020 analysis, Everyday Astronaut explained that each rocket will produce varying amounts of pollution. Take the SpaceX Falcon 9: It burns rocket propellant and liquid oxygen, so it emits carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrogen oxides, carbon soot, carbon monoxide, and sulfur compounds.

Other rockets produce pollutants like inorganic chlorine and alumina. Some, like the hydrogen-burning Delta IV Heavy, only produce water vapor and nitrogen oxides.

Water vapor has an effect on the atmosphere. In a 2012 paper published in the Journal of Geophysical Research, the authors observed how the final NASA Space Shuttle launch in 2011 emitted around 350 tons of vapor during its ascent. That created polar mesospheric clouds brighter than 99 percent of other such clouds in the area.

DO SPACE LAUNCHES DAMAGE THE OZONE LAYER?
Scientists in the 1970s warned that commonly-used chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, were creating a hole in the ozone layer. The Montreal Protocol in 1990 banned such ozone-depleting chemicals, but the CBC notes that the protocol didn’t cover aerospace.

In 2009, research published in the journal Astropolitics claimed that current rocket launches deplete a few hundredths of a percent of the ozone layer per year.

[www.inverse.com...]

We don't know what any negative consequences are going to be, but we do know the potential for a very bad outcome is high-so let's forge ahead!

This is complete bupkis since rockets generally burn hydrogen and oxygen into water, there is no carbon or chlorine involved.