Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
5 minutes ago, royiv said:

So I just assume that he’s fucking up the environment down at Boca Chica. Anyone with some ecological and environmental expertise want to weigh in?

No particular expertise myself, but here's an article from September regarding the topic.
https://www.texastribune.org/2024/09/04/space-x-south-texas-environment/

Meat of the article on potential damage:

The Federal Aviation Administration was set to hold public hearings in August on SpaceX's proposal to launch its Starship/Super Heavy rocket 25 times per year from Boca Chica. However, the coalition urged the agency to restart its public participation process.

In a letter to the FAA, they called for a full environmental impact statement, in English and Spanish, that takes into account all the potentially adverse effects of SpaceX. They also asked for more time for the public to review the reports.

“SpaceX is an issue that's constantly changing, that is getting rubber-stamped permits by regulatory agencies that have really broken processes,” said Bekah Hinojosa, co-founder of the South Texas Environmental Justice Network.

A spokesperson for SpaceX declined an interview for this story.

The FAA, ultimately, postponed the public hearings after the agency became aware of allegations first reported by CNBC that SpaceX violated the Clean Water Act at the Boca Chica Launch Site and was unable to confirm the accuracy of SpaceX’s license application and its draft environmental assessment, according to an agency spokesperson.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality also confirmed that it cited SpaceX for violating regulations. The state reached an agreement with SpaceX to address the issue. The formal agreement is pending approval from the commission or its executive director.

SpaceX responded to the allegations in a post on X, stating it was working with the environmental commission to obtain an individual permit for its water deluge system after previously operating under a Texas Multi-Sector General Permit, which regulates the discharge of stormwater used for industry. The company also noted that both TCEQ and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have allowed their operations to continue.

The CNBC report also raised concerns about traces of mercury in the non-stormwater discharge. However, SpaceX said there was a typo in the permit application and assured that mercury levels were well below state and federal water quality criteria.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, royiv said:

So I just assume that he’s fucking up the environment down at Boca Chica. Anyone with some ecological and environmental expertise want to weigh in?

Steve Bannon Bingo GIF

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/08/12/spacex-repeatedly-polluted-waters-in-texas-tceq-epa-found.html

https://defenders.org/sites/default/files/CBBEP_Boca Chica shorebird nests losses - June 6 2024_0.pdf

 

Turns out aerospace chemicals and a massive level of noise is really REALLY bad for wildlife. It poisons the water and literally crushes eggs with sound

 

Fortunately for SpaceX, that pesky Clean Water Act juuuuuuust got gutted so he's probably in the clear on that.

(not an expert but expert findings aren't hard to find)

Edited by Captainant
  • Rage+1 5
Posted
I really try to not be a hateful person.  And in this case I continue to fail miserably.  It is my failing and I need to stop failing.
But right now my mind wants to see this dipshit get kicked out of the Whitehouse, Tesla, Space X, StarLink and everywhere else, in the loudest way possible.

Meh. If he gets Luigi’ed tomorrow I’ll drink 2 nice bottles of champagne.
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Parliament said:

I really try to not be a hateful person.  And in this case I continue to fail miserably.  It is my failing and I need to stop failing.

But right now my mind wants to see this dipshit get kicked out of the Whitehouse, Tesla, Space X, StarLink and everywhere else, in the loudest way possible.

No, please not Space X.  Watching the rockets blow up on the way to orbit is great entertainment.  People stare when they see me cheering but I DGAF.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by AnTiM
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 3
Posted
52 minutes ago, Storm the Field said:

Does anyone think it would be possible to make a claim, no matter how unsubstantiated, about one of Musk's foes that he wouldn't credulously signal boost?

GlcI6WSXUAEDYu7?format=jpg&name=large

 

It’s always rich coming from the guy who has built his fortune on the backs of the American taxpayer.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
13 hours ago, royiv said:

So I just assume that he’s fucking up the environment down at Boca Chica. Anyone with some ecological and environmental expertise want to weigh in?

 

A local naturalist told me last summer when I was in that area that when the big rocket lifts off, its so loud, that all birds in the area abandon their nests. Any nestlings starve. 

 

I also posted a while back in this thread that the entire area will be a superfund site one day. Adios Laguna Madre, I hardly knew ya. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 6
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

 

 

1.99% for 60 months. Isn't that better financing than most simpletons get?

 

 

That abomination is going to get thrown into the trash heap of history along with the Gremlin, Aztek and Pacer and I’m here for it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, InkaUtexas said:

What does each rocket failure cost? How much of that is US money?

What were the costs of flight diversions?

Efficiency.

As I read what a German fellow had to say. 
“Der wankenflare went kaput”

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
2 hours ago, royiv said:

That abomination is going to get thrown into the trash heap of history along with the Gremlin, Aztek and Pacer and I’m here for it.

I read that as German, Anschluss and Panzer 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

1.99% for 60 months. Isn't that better financing than most simpletons get?

Honestly, that’s a pretty good deal that allows you the opportunity to buy this decades Pet Rock.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

to the moon

image.png.2c13418987a77d68f34d059f941b549d.png

bafkreig5asm2vgvhasnaegkc45h7l3lmmsdxjr3v7bsenuh276eld3boxu@jpeg

 

Quote

Second-hand Tesla prices have also fallen heavily as more owners put them on the market. A three-year-old Model 3 cost an average of £20,887 on Auto Trader in February, down 17pc year-on-year. This compares to an 8.2pc fall in like-for-like prices of all electric cars in the year to January.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/second-hand-teslas-flood-market-154526148.html

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
4 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

What does each rocket failure cost? How much of that is US money?

What were the costs of flight diversions?

Efficiency.

Good questions.  The first is relatively unknown but I've read full stack Starships are thought to cost between $150MM-$250MM each at this point.  They got the booster back, but design and engineering costs and other factors it's not implausible to think these failed launches are costing SpaceX well north of $100MM each failed launch.  Go worst case and call the entire thing a loss because I'm not even sure how reusable these test boosters are even though they've been recovered.

How much is US Money?  Definitely a good chunk.  SpaceX was awarded two contracts during the Biden admin for roughly $2.9B and $1.15B, as part of the Artemis program to get a crewed version of Starship to the Moon.  Current target dates for this are end of 2026, I believe.

Costs of the flight diversions?  FAA says 240 flights were diverted...typical costs of a diversion can be in the $10k-$100k range worst case....so if you say all 240 cost $100k then the max cost of the diversions were around $24 million dollars.  

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, McCroskey said:

Good questions.  The first is relatively unknown but I've read full stack Starships are thought to cost between $150MM-$250MM each at this point.  They got the booster back, but design and engineering costs and other factors it's not implausible to think these failed launches are costing SpaceX well north of $100MM each failed launch.  Go worst case and call the entire thing a loss because I'm not even sure how reusable these test boosters are even though they've been recovered.

How much is US Money?  Definitely a good chunk.  SpaceX was awarded two contracts during the Biden admin for roughly $2.9B and $1.15B, as part of the Artemis program to get a crewed version of Starship to the Moon.  Current target dates for this are end of 2026, I believe.

Costs of the flight diversions?  FAA says 240 flights were diverted...typical costs of a diversion can be in the $10k-$100k range worst case....so if you say all 240 cost $100k then the max cost of the diversions were around $24 million dollars.  

So fair to say he owes the US a bit. Would be funny to see those airlines sue his ass over this. Second time. Yeah, not cool.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Just now, InkaUtexas said:

So fair to say he owes the US a bit. Would be funny to see those airlines sue his ass over this. Second time. Yeah, not cool.

100% he owes us the responsibility to do the job we're paying him to do and ultimately deliver on an end-point objective. 

Airlines could certainly sue and they might, but the damages wouldn't be that much as a percentage of the costs and it would probably just come out of the US Gov't contract coffers, anyways. 

Posted
Quote

 

Last month, a State Department spokesperson told NPR the $400 million figure was "an estimate," and that there are now no plans of moving forward with the purchase. The spokesperson said a plan to begin studying the viability of using Teslas as armored vehicles first started in the Biden administration.

A document from the Biden White House obtained by NPR shows that the State Department planned to spend $483,000 on electric vehicle acquisition in 2025, less than 1% of the $400 million estimated expenditure that first showed up in a spreadsheet of expected State Department contracts. When reports first circulated of the spreadsheet item, a State official edited the document to say the award was for "armored electric vehicles," not "armored Tesla," which the lawmakers homed in on in their letter to Rubio on Friday.

"This raises serious questions about whether the Department not only scrubbed the document to remove any references to Tesla but also may have backdated the publicly available documentation to give the false impression that every element of these procurement plans – including the $400 million value – originated in the prior Administration," wrote the Democratic congressmen.

The State Department and Musk did not return requests for comment.

The lawmakers ask Rubio if State Department officials intentionally changed the electric vehicle purchase amount from $483,000 to $400 million, who oversaw the change and for proof that the contract has been "definitively abandoned."

While the Biden administration document obtained by NPR appears to show the push for the government to buy $400 million of Teslas started under Trump, who exactly put the item in the spreadsheet, and at whose direction, remains unclear.

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
19 hours ago, royiv said:

So I just assume that he’s fucking up the environment down at Boca Chica. Anyone with some ecological and environmental expertise want to weigh in?

I mean the state just told him he was allowed to dump wastewater.

  • Rage+1 5
Posted

but seriously... can't a board of directors fire a ceo? particularly one that is actively and purposely harming the company? 🤔 not to mention moonlighting in a role that is arguably in direct conflict with the company?

like... what are they waiting for? very strange.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, mchookem said:

but seriously... can't a board of directors fire a ceo? particularly one that is actively and purposely harming the company? 🤔 not to mention moonlighting in a role that is arguably in direct conflict with the company?

like... what are they waiting for? very strange.

Not when the board is stacked with his brother and other sychophants

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, mchookem said:

but seriously... can't a board of directors fire a ceo? particularly one that is actively and purposely harming the company? 🤔 not to mention moonlighting in a role that is arguably in direct conflict with the company?

like... what are they waiting for? very strange.

 

15 minutes ago, YChang said:

Not when the board is stacked with his brother and other sychophants

“Yes”

And “it depends”

Problem here is Elmo seems to have stacked his board.

So: yes -> it depends -> Elmo retains control

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
13 hours ago, mchookem said:

but seriously... can't a board of directors fire a ceo? particularly one that is actively and purposely harming the company? 🤔 not to mention moonlighting in a role that is arguably in direct conflict with the company?

like... what are they waiting for? very strange.

There's an incredibly incestuous relationship between executives and BOD's. They often are peers on other BOD's or have interests in each other's business.

Why are executives pushing people back into offices? Because they and their boards have commercial real estate holdings they don't want to tank.

If a CEO does something stupid or evil but they have leverage or enough control of a board members interests, they're bulletproof. Figuratively at least lol.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

I was one of the founding members of an unusual startup that went public.  After the original CEO was pushed out, the new guy ascended from President to CEO.  Nice guy, reasonably bright, but definitely "in the club".  We struggled to achieve consistent profitability because we overbuilt our factory too early in the game and our overhead was too high.  That said, the year we finally broke through to an annual profit it became a loss . . . because of exectutive bonuses.  It was at that point things were clarified for me.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
14 hours ago, mchookem said:

but seriously... can't a board of directors fire a ceo? particularly one that is actively and purposely harming the company? 🤔 not to mention moonlighting in a role that is arguably in direct conflict with the company?

like... what are they waiting for? very strange.

https://www.econotimes.com/Tesla-Chair-Robyn-Denholm-Sells-337M-in-Stock-Amid-Board-Scrutiny-1703598

Denholm previously testified in Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package lawsuit, revealing that her tenure at Tesla had earned her around $280 million. 

Not bad pay for a fiduciary type position.

  • Rage+1 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

NOAA Said to Be Planning to Shrink Staff by 20 Percent
Together with recent firings and resignations, the new cuts could hamper the National Weather Service’s ability to produce lifesaving forecasts, scientists say.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the nation’s premier agency for weather and climate science, has been told by the Trump administration to prepare to lose another 1,000 workers, raising concerns that NOAA’s lifesaving forecasts might be hindered as hurricane and disaster season approaches.

The new dismissals would come in addition to the roughly 1,300 NOAA staff members who have already resigned or been laid off in recent weeks. The moves have alarmed scientists, meteorologists and others at the agency, which includes the National Weather Service. Some activities, including the launching of weather balloons, have already been suspended because of staffing shortages.

Together, the reductions would represent nearly 20 percent of NOAA’s approximately 13,000-member work force.

Managers within NOAA have been told to draw up proposals for layoffs and reorganizations to trim the agency’s staff by at least 1,000 people, according to eight people who requested anonymity because they weren’t authorized to discuss the plans publicly. The effort is part of the “reductions in force” that President Trump required as part of an executive order last month, as he and the billionaire Elon Musk make rapid, large-scale cuts to the federal bureaucracy.

NOAA managers have been asked to complete their proposals by Tuesday, one of the people said. The proposals are likely to involve eliminating some of the agency’s functions, though managers have received little guidance about which programs to prioritize for cutting.

Representatives for NOAA didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment on Saturday.

The recent employee departures have already affected NOAA’s operations in many realms: predicting hurricanes and tornadoes, overseeing fisheries and endangered species, monitoring the changes that humans are bringing about to Earth’s climate and ecosystems.

NOAA, a $6.8 billion agency within the Commerce Department, has been singled out for cuts by some of Mr. Trump’s allies. Project 2025, the policy blueprint published by the Heritage Foundation that is echoed in many of the Trump administration’s actions, calls NOAA “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.” The document calls for the agency to be dismantled and some of its functions eliminated or privatized.

Organizations including the American Geophysical Union, which represents earth and space researchers, have called on Congress to oppose the administration’s actions.

“Undermining NOAA’s operations could risk the safety of millions of Americans and destabilize countless industries, from farming and fisheries to energy and finance, threatening job losses and economic downturn,” the organizations wrote in a letter. They pointed out that, as the planet warms, extreme weather is becoming more frequent and more damaging, making NOAA’s work more critical.

The idea that private companies could replace NOAA in forecasting the weather is a “gross misunderstanding,” said Keith Seitter, a distinguished visiting lecturer in meteorology and climate science at College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Mass.

“The app on your phone or what you’re watching on TV, those are private-sector companies, but those private-sector companies depend critically on NOAA for all the information that they’re using to create those forecasts,” Dr. Seitter said. “It’s a coordinated effort.”

Employees who are still working at NOAA describe feelings of deep anxiety. Their colleagues have been let go unannounced, meaning they have no idea who might simply not show up for work. With their government-issued credit cards frozen, they can’t buy supplies for research projects or travel to retrieve instruments that have been installed at sea. They are scrambling to back up their scientific data, fearful that programs might be shuttered or leases on buildings canceled.

At least three NOAA facilities were on a list of federal properties that the Trump administration flagged last week for possible sale. The list was later taken down, replaced by a web page that said a new inventory was “coming soon.”

The firings of scientists at NOAA and other agencies, plus potential cuts to federal funding for research at universities and hospitals, have fed worries that the administration is undermining the foundations of America’s modern scientific leadership.

On Friday, crowds gathered at “Stand Up for Science” rallies in cities around the nation including Austin, Birmingham, Ala., Boston, Chicago, Denver, Nashville and Washington.

“This is the most challenging moment I can recall for science,” Michael Mann, a climate researcher at the University of Pennsylvania, told the rally in Washington, where the crowd peaked at 5,000 people, according to the organizers. “Science is under siege,” Dr. Mann said.

The National Weather Service has faced budget cuts, hiring freezes and calls for privatization before, Dr. Seitter said. “But nothing where you’ve just arbitrarily whacked whole chunks out of the work force, or potentially taken away whole chunks of budget that support mission-critical things,” he said.

  • Drool 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
29 minutes ago, Chopper said:

Investigator MuSSk is so angry at the Jews he had to find 2 dead ones to try to blame, along with Soros, of course, for his Swasticar stock disaster

image.thumb.png.7630b87943794fbfa687cfaaf104c561.png

Meanwhile he gave how much to the German far right?

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...