this post was submitted on 21 Feb 2024
253 points (100.0% liked)

196

18349 readers
597 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
253
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

gif

is there a way to get gifs to actually work on lemmy? the funny would be stronger if this was animated

Aston Martin’s Lawrence Stroll’s Flights Challenge F1’s Environmental Goals

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 years ago (6 children)

I mean, if it is hydrogen powered, should the hydrogen be sourced by clean methods, then the only byproduct is water. Net zero

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Hydrogen is not sustainable while electric power could be used for other things. Only when there is a massive excess of renewables(+Batteries) this becomes remotely viable.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

You can’t exactly use electricity directly to power a rocket, and fuel represents such a small cost compared to everything else that governments can afford the dedicated production.

Honestly though, the spacecraft themselves are such a tiny emitter compared to things like manufacturing, transport, and electrical generation that they can basically be ignored untill we have basically eliminated thouse emissions.

[–] Sonotsugipaa 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Apparently you can use electricity to power a rocket ~~, they do require expensive fuel like xenon but they're roughly ten times as efficient as chemical thrusters and they do propel ions~~

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Ion and Hall effect thrusters have high efficiencies, but absurdly small thrusts. They work in situations where you can burn for months on end to get the same change in velocity a few minutes worth of a chemical rocket, but would never be able to lift even their own weight off earth.

I also don’t the think that you can even get one to function as deep into the atmosphere as ground level as the would just ark across the potential instead.

load more comments (2 replies)