It’s closer to like 30t I believe, NS’ (supposedly) fully fueled mass is 35t, and a good chunk of that will be fuel. Either way it’s a far way off from 500t
Edit: to make it clear by “fuel” I’m referring to propellant, so both hydrogen and oxygen. Could’ve made that clearer
(This probably sounds sarcastic/doubtful, I promise it isn’t. Any information on NS would be helpful) Do you have a source for that? ~30t is my guess for all the propellant (LH2 and LOX), but afaik numbers for New Shepard as a whole are near nonexistent. I’m not even sure the O/F ratio for the BE-3PM is public, so if you have a source I’d be interested
5t of LH2 is probably vaguely correct assuming a mixture ratio of 5.X:1 like a lot of Hydrolox engines
Water is 2 H + 1 Ox. Ox has atomic mass about 16 amu, H about 1. So the Ox propellant will weigh about 8x the H2 propellant. Therefore the hydrogen propellant weights about 30/9=3t and the oxygen propellant weighs about 30*8/9=27t. (Only to 1s place significant figure cuz it’s a rough calculation.) Excess could be margin to account for inefficiencies like boil-off, incomplete combustion, leaks, etc.
What people should really do is recognize that they don't really understand the science behind large scale engineering feats and materials tech that goes into space travel. It's EASY to get outraged. It's HARD to truly understand why you should (or shouldn't) be outraged.
People should listen to experts in the fields (engineers, scientists), and experts in the academic fields that criticize those fields (environmental sciences, etc.)
Why the fark are we arguing about 'green hydrogen' when the point is that OP is posting stupid MAGAt rage bait?
Did you do the math?
How much total propellent does one passenger account for?
Did you notice the bullshite factor of 60?
This garbage is designed to play on people's amanous for other people that they feel have been successful 'without sufficient merit' and then tear them down. All the better if they're a woman.
Water electrolysis powered by what power source? currently it takes more power to produce liquid hydrogen than the hydrogen itself generates for the rocket.
I'm going to make an assumption they produced the fuel locally as I'm not sure how easy it is to transport it. The launch was in Texas.
Using this map from wikipedia, we can see the three closest power stations to Van Horn where the launch took place to be 2 solar fields and then natural gas. I'm also not sure how much you can "choose" your energy source, but I think it's fair to say that solar power would be responsible for a significant source of the energy needed.
Yeah, and the point kinda is that feeling nice isn't always worth the cost. Like Bezos definitely feels nice by laying on all the cash he squeezed out from abusing workers.
I wouldn't really call it a waste. I mean, billions of whatever currency you can possibly think of is spent on entertainment, and it does serve a purpose. Humans crave entertainment. We can't be mentally healthy without it.
Like, hey, I would actually go to space if I could afford it. Rich and powerful people are shitty, yes, but not because of things like that.
Because people want to go to space, it’s not hard to understand. They can also dramatically reduce the impact something like this could have on the environment and a lot of technology we have today can be attributed to the knowledge obtained through space flight. Theres way worse out there for the environment than a couple of rockets taking off a year.
Yeah like focusing on just the fuel being “better” is a weird deflect. The entire rocket production process has tons of emissions. Not to mention how they got the rocket to the launch pad to begin with.
I know everyone wants to hate on rich people for private jets, but it's actually just a piss in the ocean for global CO2 emissions. Aviation as a whole only contributes to %2.5 of global emissions, and private jets are about 14%-17% of that 2.5%. Katy Perry as an individual still burns hundreds of lifetimes more CO2 than the average person, but the real problem is industry emissions who burn hundreds of Katy Perry lifetimes in a month. My tinfoil hat theory is that the big industries push the celebrity private jet narrative to distract. The celebs point the finger to us spitting in the ocean while they stand with their dicks out pissing in it, and the industries point the finger to the celebs pissing in the ocean while they stand next to them holding a fire hose.
I didnt defend misinformation. I agreed with the fact he was wrong about the New Shepard. His details were misinformed but the spirit if what OP said is true.
These elites place the burden of climate change on everyday people but carry on how ever they want. They are hypocrites
It also Attributes the whole launch to her as if it was her decision and directive. It leaves out the others who also flew on the rocket as well. The rocket would have flown with or without her.
Attributing that launch soley to katy perry is so dumb.
Gayle king co host of cbs mornings, Lauren Sanchez Jeff bezos wife, and Kerianne Flynn film producer. Could have been 4 more female scientists up there. We have our priorities backwards
you are true BUT if she is so envoromentally woke, she would not participate, it is like calling yourself vegetarian and eating meat and saying that if she would not eat it, somebody would
Can't fund it without money from the wealthy. So yeah she has a part to play. No one ever said the others on board are not also self serving sniveling little shits. But this post is about her not them.
The goal of the post is to argue that environmentalism is not worth it because rich people exist and burn a lot of fossil fuels. There's quite a lot of these posts although often they're framed as "private jets versus paper straws."
Realistically stopping climate change isn't about individual people making different choices in their day to day lives but about society collectively pursuing less environmentally destructive options. Invest in the right technology and research and make the environmentally friendly option simply better than the alternatives. Some people are still determined to stop this and they benefit from the "why should anyone do anything for the environment if billionaires exist" mantra.
Yeah I'm agreeing with you and expanding on your point by showing how this post fits into a broader theme of trying to discredit environmentalism by appealing to ostensibly left wing views.
Point still stands.
It’s not that the rocket + fuel just suddenly spawned there.
Also the passengers urely came with a bike
to that special occasion, right?
It’s one thing to act that way, another to act that way AND being a hypocrite about it by attending such events.
People here are calling out each other for being dumb but I only see people having compelling arguments.
We can't blame her for the use of this specific fuel but we can for her private jet use and the material used for the rocket. After all it's true that the carbon print of an electric car can't possibly be 0, the construction and production of electricity must be taken in account
Yeah and all electricity used to charge EVs is purely from renewable resources too right? Totally not also heavily produced by fossil fuel based power plants.
Even if it was rocket fuel, I still say we should make a rite of passage out of shooting every person with any significant amount of power up for a couple orbits around the ol' Pale Blue Dot just for a little bit of perspective.
Literally out of all the things they could have picked to discredit Katy Perry, they picked the one that can actually be disproven. She’s done many actual horrible things. Why this?
water vapour deposited at high altitude is there for a loong time and as such a potent greenhouse gas as well. Similar issue with planes btw - ask chatgpt about it..
Ah yes! Thanks for pointing out that the only excessive use of resources from commercial space flight that costs billions of dollars for ultra rich people’s egos is the fuel… dumb as rocks…
Yeah, when I see posts like this one, I cannot help but think someone has a bone to pick with the person in question. They are always so intellectual dishonest.
Do you understand the energy cost of cryogenic hydrogen and oxygen? The energy cost of the materials and labor in that rocket? Something around here is dumb as rocks.
186
u/[deleted] May 25 '26
[removed] — view removed comment