SpaceX’s Starship launches at the company’s Starbase facility near Boca Chica, Texas, have allegedly been contaminating local bodies of water with mercury for years. The news arrives in an exclusive CNBCreport on August 12, which cites internal documents and communications between local Texas regulators and the Environmental Protection Agency.

SpaceX’s fourth Starship test launch in June was its most successful so far—but the world’s largest and most powerful rocket ever built continues to wreak havoc on nearby Texas communities, wildlife, and ecosystems. But after repeated admonishments, reviews, and ignored requests, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) have had enough.

  • frezik@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    When sending probes to Mars or other rocky bidies, NASA is very careful about biological contamination. They don’t want to seed the planet with some extremophile, or contaminate their own samples and mistakenly think it’s native life.

    When SpaceX wants to go to Mars and is also doing this shit, why should we trust them to take the same care?

    • llamacoffee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Planetary Protection is one of my absolute FAVORITE can of worms!! Obviously it is a good idea to be careful and mindful, but I personally believe that NASA’s current policies are complete overkill.

      Let’s think this through. Why don’t we want to bring earth life to another world?

      Maybe because then we won’t be able to tell whether it is indigenous or not? Baloney! Imagine you accidentally bring a lizard to an island that doesn’t have them. If it is indigenous, there would be evidence of them being there in the past, through fossils or otherwise!

      Maybe we don’t want to infect any life that is on that other planet, that earth life could take over that ecosystem like an invasive species? Astronomically unlikely. All earth life is evolved to live in its specific environment and to interact with the species with which it has evolved alongside. As such, totally unrelated organisms form different planets would be so completely alien to each other that they would be unlikely to interact to begin with. Additionally Mars, for example, definitively has no macro-fauna or flora. As such, any possible microbes on Mars would be completely at a loss on how to interact with humans or indeed any earth life.

      Finally, Earth and Mars, for example, exchange ~500 kilograms of material every year. Analysis shows that some of that material never exceeded a temperature high enough for sterilization. Thus, if there was any life on mars, it would have reached us by now, living in our biosphere along with us.

      Anyways I’m a big nerd and I hope this stuff is interesting!

      https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/06/mars-enthusiast-planetary-protection-a-racket-should-be-largely-ignored/

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Maybe we don’t want to infect any life that is on that other planet, that earth life could take over that ecosystem like an invasive species? Astronomically unlikely

        If you were to pick out any one microorganism and try to get it to grow on Mars without any support, you’re right that it would probably die off. If you were to take a pile of random dirt full of microorganisms and drop it on Mars, they would also probably all die off. But if you keep doing this a lot with dirt and rocks from many different environments on Earth, you may eventually find one that thrives.

        There are organisms that carve out some tiny evolutionary niche until they have just the right conditions, and then explode. For example, Ideonella sakaiensis eats PET plastics. It was sitting around doing its thing for millions or billions of years, and then we gave it a place to thrive with all our plastic junk.

        There are places on Earth that have some similarities to Mars. It’s quite possible something would survive there.

        • llamacoffee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I agree completely! Life is so cool. I would also say that we are a very, very long way from sending tons of dirt to Mars, but current probes are essentially sterilized, which adds billions to their cost, and for what?

  • HowMany@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Abbott doesn’t care. Paxton doesn’t give a shit as he counts his bribe money.

    And strangely enough, republicans want to do away with the EPA. Weird.

      • 418_im_a_teapot@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Not sure why you’re getting downvoted (although you’re username would certainly give the impression you’re just defending musk).

        The information you linked to does indeed cast doubt on the validity of the report. Corrected information will be needed before concrete conclusions can be drawn.

        I hate Musk as much as the next person, and definitely wouldn’t be surprised if he was dumping chemicals in the water. But that doesn’t mean we should let confirmation bias cloud our ability to think critically.

        • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          It could be that they mod all the musk communities and are an elon stan but more than likely it’s because they’ve plastered the same comment over 14 times with now llama taking over who is also an active user in the same communities making it seem like brigading. If the case was stated in a single comment it might be upvoted more than others, at this point they’re just spamming anyone who comments regardless of the context.

          I’m all for putting your truth out there, but it just seems like they’re trying to drown out everyone with a “nuh uh, believe me” over letting the facts play out. It’s not like this thread is gonna have any real impact on the company or perception at this point no matter what anyone says.

          • llamacoffee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            My dear friend, the report is factually false. I can’t speak for others, but I personally find it to only be responsible to help dispel false news. And for what it’s worth, Elon is an asshole in my view, but that is irrelevant in this context, wouldn’t you agree?

            As for the facts, you may check them yourself. Here is the actual application. Typo is on page 79, the actual figure is in the appendix on page 177.

            https://www.tceq.texas.gov/downloads/permitting/wastewater/title-iv/tpdes/wq0005462000-spaceexplorationtechnologiescorp-starbaselaunchpadsite-cameron-tpdes-adminpackage.pdf

            Maybe you’re wondering why I am keen on sharing all this. I am a big fan of spaceflight, it’s just something I like and find inspiring. False reports that lean heavily on “Elon Musk bad” make the spacefaring future I’m rooting for more difficult to achieve. Surely it’s ok to correct misinformation?

            • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              My dearest lover, I appreciate you reaching out to me in this way. I missed all the other links you’ve put up and so this copy/paste directly made for me has made my heart swell. I regret to inform you that you’re behind in your news updates and the reporting is only getting worse for you at this time. I apologize for the inconvenience and will never give up being your shelter and rock in the stormy sea of life.

        • Cenzorrll@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I went through the report, and the raw data at the end shows the two samples coming back at “0.139” and “ND”

    • llamacoffee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1823378186836889699

      CNBC updated its story yesterday with additional factually inaccurate information.

      While there may be a typo in one table of the initial TCEQ’s public version of the permit application, the rest of the application and the lab reports clearly states that levels of Mercury found in non-stormwater discharge associated with the water deluge system are well below state and federal water quality criteria (of no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity), and are, in most instances, non-detectable.

      The initial application was updated within 30 days to correct the typo and TCEQ is updating the application to reflect the correction.

    • casmael@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Slippery consistency helps the highest bidder to slide up Elon’s bumhole more easily and efficiently. What you really want in this situation is a low energy threshold for financial turnover - in this case the point at which dollar bills are more than 50% up musks arse. Mercury gets that done, and Elon likes the taste, but unfortunately on this occasion it got into the water supply which is sad to see.

    • acetanilide@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Elon’s daily dose. It takes a lot to get on his level.

      Just kidding, but it seems like something to do with the fuel/exhaust.

      I’ve read multiple articles and the most I’ve gotten is that their first launch didn’t have the cleaner fuel that future launches did. I am not sure how that would cause repeated incidents… perhaps it’s from metal parts in the rockets? 🤔 I could have missed something as I was reading but hopefully someone else will know the answer.

          • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            The pumps need to be running full bore before ignition and keep running after cut off. Watch a video of shut off and tell me where they’re keeping all that CO^2 and water on the rocket.

      • Atrichum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Cleaner fuel? It’s oxygen and methane. Carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, no mercury. Still I can’t think of a source.

        • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I couldn’t think of a source either. Upon closer inspection, it seems possible that this entire story is based on two typos in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality report.

        • acetanilide@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          The article I read said they didn’t use that until after the first launch. I did not look into it further.

    • cannibalkitteh@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Dumping into the water. It is an overall expense, and not related to the business interests. They just needed some evil villain stuff going on because Elon really wants to meet Captain Planet.

    • llamacoffee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1823378186836889699

      CNBC updated its story yesterday with additional factually inaccurate information.

      While there may be a typo in one table of the initial TCEQ’s public version of the permit application, the rest of the application and the lab reports clearly states that levels of Mercury found in non-stormwater discharge associated with the water deluge system are well below state and federal water quality criteria (of no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity), and are, in most instances, non-detectable.

      The initial application was updated within 30 days to correct the typo and TCEQ is updating the application to reflect the correction.

      • casmael@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Naturally. If people forget to turn off the poison sockets before bed, that’s their own problem!

    • masterspace@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I mean, it depends how egregious / serious this violation is and how crucial it is to the rest of their overall successes.

      Elon sucks, but for the same amount of money, NASA can either launch 150 tons of science missions 1 per year on SLS, or they can launch 170 tons of science missions every 2 weeks on Starship.

      Quite frankly I don’t understand why they’ve gotten the level of hate they’ve gotten (and why some people seem so intent on finding ways to hate them), other than their association with their dumbass ceo.

      • johker216@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’d rather NASA be funded well enough to not need private, profit-driven, corporations dictating how we explore space. That and Musk’s stench sticks to all his companies, for good or bad.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          They literally are.

          That’s what SLS is, a rocket built by NASA using their traditional contractors and it costs orders of magnitude more to do the literal exact same thing.

          Again, I get that Musk sucks, but hating on the hardwork of thousands of engineers and personnel because of what one of the employees does in their free time is just as biased as everyone who irrationally praises Musk for what is the hardwork of thousands.

          The folly of hero worship cuts both ways.

        • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          SLS does it the old way, with NASA contracting work out to the old school companies.

          The Commercial Crew and Supply contracts are there to try it a different way. And they’re accomplishing their goals much more quickly and at a fraction of the cost.

      • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        There’s a great synopsis of the situation further up the thread, but the short is:

        SpaceX originally wasn’t going to launch rockets from this facility… until they announced that they were, then asked for permission from the regulatory bodies after their first launch.

        When concerns were raised about the rockets being launched half a kilometer from nature preservation land, and specifically in regard to the possibility of failed launches damaging the launchpad, Elon assured them that no such thing could happen… and then a quarter of the launchpad was destroyed by a failed launch.

        So they installed the water deluge system, again asking for permission after they had already installed and used it.

        Within their permit application for the system - which, again, was installed and used before the application was even submitted - are mercury measurements 50x higher than the Texas maximum threshold for acute mercury toxicity, and far higher than the thresholds for human safety.

        The Elon hate is one thing, and I believe much of the hate for SpaceX is because of how he handles himself and his companies. But the general assurance has largely been that SpaceX has a team of handlers to keep him from screwing things up, and it sounds more like Boeing over there every day.

        They may have Elon on a leash, but they seem to be running his playbook anyway.

        • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          mercury measurements 50x higher than the Texas maximum threshold for acute mercury toxicity

          It is possible that this entire story is based on two typos in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality report.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          Heavy metals are some of the worst things to dump into the environment, and I’m curious to see where the mercury is coming from, why they’re using it, and how they’re going to address it, but it really feels like you’re blowing up a relatively small issue into a massive one.

          They had one launch where they blew up the launch pad accidentally, so they added a deluge system to cope. Now there’s mercury toxicity downstream of the site, but it’s not clear it has anything to do with the deluge system.

          The Elon hate is one thing, and I believe much of the hate for SpaceX is because of how he handles himself and his companies.

          That absolutely is where most of it comes from. Articles that hate on Elon get clicks, so for every actual thoughtful nuanced critique of SpaceX, there’s two dozen click bait articles written by glorified bloggers that will look for any flaw because critiques of Musk’s space company drives traffic.

          But the general assurance has largely been that SpaceX has a team of handlers to keep him from screwing things up, and it sounds more like Boeing over there every day.

          Boeing is failing to do what they used to do 50 years ago. SpaceX is successfully doing things that no one has ever done. Yes the wreckless rule breaking is trademark Elon, but let’s not be hyperbolic.

          • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I’m curious to see where the mercury is coming from, why they’re using it, and how they’re going to address it

            So was I. Upon closer inspection, it seems possible that this entire story is based on two typos in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality report.

            for every actual thoughtful nuanced critique of SpaceX, there’s two dozen click bait articles written by glorified bloggers

            This story may have been on of the latter.

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Lol at the blind downvotes for pointing out that people are blindly hating SpaceX, while linking to proof that the article is wrong.

        • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          They got approval from the fish and wildlife agency before launching with the deluge system

          https://www.tpr.org/technology-entrepreneurship/2023-11-16/faa-gives-ok-to-spacex-for-second-starship-launch

          Published November 16, 2023 at 9:00 AM CST

          The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has approved SpaceX’s next Starship launch, just hours after the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) concluded its assessment of the rocket’s launch infrastructure.

          The FAA gave the company a launch license Wednesday afternoon, saying Starship and its new launch infrastructure would have “no significant environmental changes” for its second launch.

          FWS stated that SpaceX’s water deluge system, meant to suppress the flames and sound from the rocket’s 33 engines, would produce the same amount of water from an average rainfall. The agency does not expect the water to change the mud flats’ salinity or affect shorebird habitat.

          *emphasis mine.

          Flight 2 was on November 18th, 2 days after they get approval for the deluge system.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Hmm, did you read that article before posting it?

          Because Im struggling to see how Starship, a fully reusable spaceship made out of stainless steel, is going to deplete the ozone the way that aluminum satellites do when they are deorbited and burned up…

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              You literally quoted me talking about Starship, and the article OP linked is about Starship.

              SpaceX is going to launch the ~4000 satellites it has permits for, starship doesn’t change that in any way shape or form.

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                or they can launch 170 tons of science missions every 2 weeks on Starship.

                Your words? Because, again, it’s not Starship they’re launching every two weeks.

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Yes, it is. That is using their projected budget and the launch cadence that’s possible with both SLS and Starship. SLS can at most launch twice a year, Starship will be able to launch every two weeks, and costs orders of magnitude less.

          • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Do you know what the clouds coming out of the engines at shut down and start up are? Methane and oxygen. Do you think injecting methane into the upper atmosphere does the earth any favours?

            • masterspace@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Huh, if only NASA Earth’s science budget could stretch farther somehow so they could better monitor and tell us… now I wonder how they could reduce their mission costs by orders of magnitude…

                • masterspace@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  No they’re not. You’re sitting here asking open ended questions like “do you think that will be good for the upper atmosphere”.

      • Pennomi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        SpaceX is cool, Elon is the world’s most colossal asshole. Some people won’t separate the two because they rightfully don’t want to enable him.

        Shotwell could run the whole thing herself, I wish the government would step in and cut Musk out of it entirely.

        • masterspace@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          People who blame the thousands of hard working engineers at SpaceX for Elon’s follies are committing the exact same logical fallacies as the people who hero worship him and praise him for what is the hard work of all those engineers.

          It’s very easy to say in one sentence that Elon sucks and what SpaceX is doing is pretty wild and revolutionary, yet people like the OP I’m responding seem bothered by even that.

    • llamacoffee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1823378186836889699

      CNBC updated its story yesterday with additional factually inaccurate information.

      While there may be a typo in one table of the initial TCEQ’s public version of the permit application, the rest of the application and the lab reports clearly states that levels of Mercury found in non-stormwater discharge associated with the water deluge system are well below state and federal water quality criteria (of no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity), and are, in most instances, non-detectable.

      The initial application was updated within 30 days to correct the typo and TCEQ is updating the application to reflect the correction.

    • Atrichum@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      SpaceX fans have known about this for a long time now, and they just don’t care. They’ve shouted down anyone who has pointed it out for well over a year now

  • Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago
    CNBC - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for CNBC:

    MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Mostly Factual - United States of America
    Wikipedia about this source

    Popular Science - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)

    Information for Popular Science:

    MBFC: Pro-Science - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
    Wikipedia about this source

    Search topics on Ground.News

    https://www.popsci.com/category/spacex/
    https://www.popsci.com/science/starship-fourth-launch/
    https://www.popsci.com/science/spacex-mercury-water-pollution/
    https://www.popsci.com/technology/spacex-starship-super-heavy-booster-explosion/
    https://www.popsci.com/technology/spacex-starship-damage/
    https://www.cnbc.com/2024/08/12/spacex-repeatedly-polluted-waters-in-texas-tceq-epa-found.html

    Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

    • llamacoffee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1823378186836889699

      CNBC updated its story yesterday with additional factually inaccurate information.

      While there may be a typo in one table of the initial TCEQ’s public version of the permit application, the rest of the application and the lab reports clearly states that levels of Mercury found in non-stormwater discharge associated with the water deluge system are well below state and federal water quality criteria (of no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity), and are, in most instances, non-detectable.

      The initial application was updated within 30 days to correct the typo and TCEQ is updating the application to reflect the correction.

  • photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Y’all actually need to read the article before commenting:

    One of the major initial concerns—the wastewater’s mercury content—stems from what experts believe may be egregious typos within SpaceX’s records. Lab reports indicate polluted waters contained 0.113 μg/L of mercury, while subsequent summaries appear to misplace the decimal point to show 113 μg/L. If the former measurement is accurate, then Starship’s wastewater contains roughly 1/17th the legal mercury limit.

    SpaceX has done some shady shit regarding their environmental practices, but this claim about mercury just ain’t it. Some of the comments further down go into more detail.

    • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      That says if the former figure is accurate… But if it’s the latter? Then it’s 100 times more than 1/17th which would mean it’s waaay more than the legal limit… So it depends in which is the typo.

  • jumjummy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    One of the many reasons he moved to Texas. This is what you get when your state is so “business friendly”. All the complaining about California and the related regulations, but this is what those regulations are supposed to prevent (yes I know there are still plenty of examples of companies polluting in CA).

    The Chevron ruling is absolutely a blatant effort to neuter all of these government oversight departments to allow businesses to accelerate their “line go up” polluting efforts.

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      The thing is California used to do the same thing. They invited everyone to California with business incentives, but eventually they had to start putting in regulations because they realized things had gotten out of control.

      Texas today is what California was in the 60s and 70s.

  • gandalf_der_12te@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Did you even read the article? It says in the article that the mercury waste is actually way below the legal threshhold.

    One of the major initial concerns—the wastewater’s mercury content—stems from what experts believe may be egregious typos within SpaceX’s records. Lab reports indicate polluted waters contained 0.113 μg/L of mercury, while subsequent summaries appear to misplace the decimal point to show 113 μg/L. If the former measurement is accurate, then Starship’s wastewater contains roughly 1/17th the legal mercury limit.

    About people just mindlessly hating on SpaceX: SpaceX is really important for the US society as it provides vision and a specific type of stimulation that would otherwise be hard to get. What makes you think the moon landings of 1960s/1970s were great achievements, but spaceflight today is not?

    You telling SpaceX to stop operation is like a fish telling a bird to stop flying, because swimming is sooo much better.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      What makes you think the moon landings of 1960s/1970s were great achievements, but spaceflight today is not?

      probably because we literally invented digital computers for the purposes of doing it. The amount of technical construction and mathematics knowledge required to design build and manufacture the hardware of that era is lost, the space shuttle is one of the most incredible technical achievements of the US to date.

      SpaceX doesn’t even use large rocket engines because they’re hard to build and impractical, but we managed them perfectly fine in the 70s

    • naughtyguy17@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Which measurement is accurate? The former, or the latter?

      You also fail to reference the next statement: “… This, however, does not explain SpaceX’s numerous other alleged reporting issues, regulatory side steps, and disregard for federal and local concerns. In a blog post last year, environmental engineer Eric Roesch also pointed to previous SpaceX water samples reports that appear to omit measurements for nickel, a toxic metal. Meanwhile, the same chart lists multiple pollutants at concentrations at or above TCEQ and EPA standards, including total suspended solids, cyanide, copper, and chromium.”

  • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Nothing wrong with this after Trump wins, guts the EPA, and staffs it full of loyal cronies. This is one of the big goals for Project 2025.

    Because regulations are bad, right?

    • Crikeste@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Nowhere in the constitution does it say you get clean drinking water, sorry sweaty.

    • CafecitoHippo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      You’re telling me the part that doesn’t care about feeding kids, universal health care, clean water, and clean air but is pro gun, pro war, and pro forced birth isn’t Pro Life? SHOCKED!