Skip to main content

View Diary: XCOR: wanna take a ride into space? (187 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Good reason to go Hydrogen/Oxygen rockets. (0+ / 0-)

    Similar to the 2nd stages of the Saturn boosters.

    Space program, which provides so much of the science on climate change and environmental damage to the ecosystem, should be clean.

    •  Problem is hydrogen (0+ / 0-)

      suffers from the long tailpipe issue

      •  No problem for hydrogen. Saturn example. (0+ / 0-)

        Cliche buzzwords like "long tailpipe" are meaningless without science.  Your claim that hydrogen is a "dirty fuel" lacks any scientific basis. Hydrogen is THE clean fuel. In abundance, easily extracted via solar, wind or other sustainable energy process.

        Back to US space program, Liquid Hydrogen/Liquid Oxygen powered rockets are clean burning and should be the basis for US space program.

        •  I am not anti-hydrogen (0+ / 0-)

          and there is a way to deploy hydrogen.  This wasn't an attempt to do buzzwords.  

          I am just saying, simply going to hydrogen isn't the entire solution.  

          As for actual rockets - right now, there are 3 rockets in the US Fleet (at the large rocket level - lot more variety at the small level).  Of those, only one is hydrogen, and the problem is Hydrogen is better for Upper stages, but not so great for a first stage.  

          •  Hydrogen is answer to clean rockets. (0+ / 0-)
            I am just saying, simply going to hydrogen isn't the entire solution.

            The question was not the "ENTIRE SOLUTION" but how US rockets could and should be clean and Hydrogen powered rockets ARE the answer to that question, a proven answer.

            •  why not use (0+ / 0-)

              things like RP-1, and then extract the carbon out of the atmosphere to reconstitute RP-1?  

              In other words, why not deploy our own carbon cycle?

              •  Can you elaborate a bit? I suspect most of us do (0+ / 0-)

                not know much (or anything) about RP-1. Thanks!

                "But there is so much more to do." - Barack Obama, Nov. 4, 2008

                by flitedocnm on Sun Nov 06, 2011 at 10:52:50 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Re (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  flitedocnm

                  RP-1 stand for Rocket Propellant 1 (yes kiddies, sometimes engineers name things really badly/obviously)

                  Its a kerosene derivative.  For most US liquid fueled rockets involving space launch, it is used at least as a first stage (certainly in the Atlas V and Falcon 9)

                  Now, RP-1 can also be made synthetically (or something very close to it can).  

                  So, the idea being, you can build a human carbon cycle, that burns the RP-1, and then recaptures the carbon to make new RP-1.  

                  Thus making you carbon neutral.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site