this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2025
1192 points (99.2% liked)

196

17520 readers
1398 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 16 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I can guarantee that that hydrogen was not produced sustainably

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 13 points 6 days ago (1 children)

To copy paste an earlier reply of mine:

I was talking about the direct emissions of launching a rocket. The indirect emissions are obviously vastly larger and might as well include everything in the wider economy that enables stuff like this. Just maintaining the necessary industrial capacity is already a huge strain on the planet. That's what I'm after with these comments. The rich fucker joyride is a largely inconsequential yet overtly visible result of a bloated system hiding in plain sight. The aerospace sector as a whole is just the tip of the iceberg of a global industrial society in ecological overshoot.

[–] Boomkop3@reddthat.com 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

That you for stating the obvious and completely missing the point.

"oh ye technically we didn't cause extreme mass emissions just now"

is not an excuse for extreme mass emissions. Until someone figures out how to get sustainable hydrogen production to work for a scale useful for more than a few cars this is simply not a sustainable approach. And from what I understand, it likely won't anytime soon

[–] Deme@sopuli.xyz 4 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Sorry, I suppose I'm a bit too used to idiots going off about the smoke plume caused by the rocket carrying an Earth observation satellite or such. When there's anything to be gained, the costs of the endeavour should be measured up to that. Here there's no gain for anybody (unless one of those fuckers onboard has enough braincells to be able to appreciate the overview effect enough to affect their future behaviour for the better), so it's a net negative no matter how much the cost for the planet is. My intent was not to excuse anything about this.

[–] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago