Really interesting read on the whole natural gas plant, but is there any info on whether this is a processing plant in conjunction with generating power, or just a power plant? They will need thousands of tons of pure liquid methane (not just LNG, it has enough impurities to cause issues with the engines) per launch, and we're talking about a lot of launches. Also would be interesting to see you write a cost-benefit analysis of the environmental impact compared to the potential for space development that Starship enables.
Nothing but misinformation from your site. You do not even know the difference between mineral rights and gas rights. "hundreds of wells" when there is a gas glut in TX and an existing unused pipeline. Go suck Bezos.
Eric, Thank You for doing this. i was appalled when i first learned what SpaceX was up to in Boca Chica. How this facility ever received permits for building in such a biologically fragile environment is beyond me. i've emailed Earth Justice a couple of times in an attempt to get them involved, but received no response at all which greatly disappointed me.
Sorry for stupid questions but why would SpaceX want to create a gas plant anyway (by which you mean a gas power station I think)? SpaceX needs liquid methane as fuel for their Starship rocket, along with liquid oxygen. They don't need to burn methane to create electricity: they use electricity from the grid.
In general if you want to save the environment you should campaign against the use of cars not against rockets or SpaceX. Cars produce millions of times more CO2 than rockets ever have. After cars, look at aviation again it's millions of times more CO2 and other pollutants than the entire rocket industry going back to Sputnik. It's true that a rocket taking off will create large amounts of local noise and pollution. When the Saturn Vs launched in the 1960s birds flying nearby were roasted in mid air. People took the attitude it was worth it and I agree. If you want rockets to launch they have to launch from somewhere and local people will always object. If your attitude it "never launch another rocket, never leave Earth again" that's an attitude I respect but don't agree with.
As for FAA being in the pocket of SpaceX, if that were the case why have they repeatedly delayed their decision now putting it off till 28 March?
How does the process look going forward? Can SpaceX adjust their environmental assessment? That is, could they decide not to build some of the related infrastructure, such as the gas power plant, the liquefier and the pretreatment facility. This would mean the proposed operations would more closely resemble the original 2014 permit. SpaceX could instead get the liquid methane they need delivered by truck. Such an adjustment will most likely be more costly for SpaceX, but perhaps quicker (in terms of acquiring the necessary permits to launch rockets). The years-long environmental assessment of the gas power plant, liquefier, and pretreatment facility could perhaps be done in parallel (or are you not allowed to split an environmental assessment into smaller distinct parts?)
Does SpaceX have anyone in the Biden administration on its side, who want rockets to be launch for the purpose of boosting national pride and advancing technological progress and leadership of the US in space exploration? My great fear is Biden is consumed with a dislike of Elon for political reasons.
Really interesting read on the whole natural gas plant, but is there any info on whether this is a processing plant in conjunction with generating power, or just a power plant? They will need thousands of tons of pure liquid methane (not just LNG, it has enough impurities to cause issues with the engines) per launch, and we're talking about a lot of launches. Also would be interesting to see you write a cost-benefit analysis of the environmental impact compared to the potential for space development that Starship enables.
establishing natural earth habitats on mars is a way to safeguard all species on earth. factor that in.
If the FAA approves all the things that violate the law, isn't it sort of routine to file a lawsuit?
Nothing but misinformation from your site. You do not even know the difference between mineral rights and gas rights. "hundreds of wells" when there is a gas glut in TX and an existing unused pipeline. Go suck Bezos.
Bullshit
Eric, Thank You for doing this. i was appalled when i first learned what SpaceX was up to in Boca Chica. How this facility ever received permits for building in such a biologically fragile environment is beyond me. i've emailed Earth Justice a couple of times in an attempt to get them involved, but received no response at all which greatly disappointed me.
Sorry for stupid questions but why would SpaceX want to create a gas plant anyway (by which you mean a gas power station I think)? SpaceX needs liquid methane as fuel for their Starship rocket, along with liquid oxygen. They don't need to burn methane to create electricity: they use electricity from the grid.
In general if you want to save the environment you should campaign against the use of cars not against rockets or SpaceX. Cars produce millions of times more CO2 than rockets ever have. After cars, look at aviation again it's millions of times more CO2 and other pollutants than the entire rocket industry going back to Sputnik. It's true that a rocket taking off will create large amounts of local noise and pollution. When the Saturn Vs launched in the 1960s birds flying nearby were roasted in mid air. People took the attitude it was worth it and I agree. If you want rockets to launch they have to launch from somewhere and local people will always object. If your attitude it "never launch another rocket, never leave Earth again" that's an attitude I respect but don't agree with.
As for FAA being in the pocket of SpaceX, if that were the case why have they repeatedly delayed their decision now putting it off till 28 March?
Space Channel has been covering this from the beginning
https://spacechannel.com/fate-of-spacex-in-boca-chica-tx/
A crew with FESCO Petroleum Engineers appeared on the SpaceX Boca Chica site today, with a heavy truck and mobile crane . 20 Jan 2022
How does the process look going forward? Can SpaceX adjust their environmental assessment? That is, could they decide not to build some of the related infrastructure, such as the gas power plant, the liquefier and the pretreatment facility. This would mean the proposed operations would more closely resemble the original 2014 permit. SpaceX could instead get the liquid methane they need delivered by truck. Such an adjustment will most likely be more costly for SpaceX, but perhaps quicker (in terms of acquiring the necessary permits to launch rockets). The years-long environmental assessment of the gas power plant, liquefier, and pretreatment facility could perhaps be done in parallel (or are you not allowed to split an environmental assessment into smaller distinct parts?)
Does SpaceX have anyone in the Biden administration on its side, who want rockets to be launch for the purpose of boosting national pride and advancing technological progress and leadership of the US in space exploration? My great fear is Biden is consumed with a dislike of Elon for political reasons.