this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
286 points (96.4% liked)
Space
8771 readers
42 users here now
Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.
Rules
- Be respectful and inclusive.
- No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
- Engage in constructive discussions.
- Share relevant content.
- Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
- Use appropriate language and tone.
- Report violations.
- Foster a continuous learning environment.
Picture of the Day
The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula
Related Communities
🔭 Science
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm confused as to how the mercury got in the water in the first place. Is it leeching out of the storage tanks, or was it already present in the water prior to its delivery to SpaceX?
As far as I am aware, no part of the launch system relies on mercury as a major (or even minor) component. Where is the mercury coming from?
Looks like it might have literally been a typo. The figures in the report keep varying between xxx and 0.xxx: https://www.tceq.texas.gov/downloads/permitting/wastewater/title-iv/tpdes/wq0005462000-spaceexplorationtechnologiescorp-starbaselaunchpadsite-cameron-tpdes-adminpackage.pdf
Interesting, looks like you might be right:
The mercury value for Sample 1 switches between 0.113 μg/L and 113 μg/L, and the value for Sample 2 switches between 0.139 μg/L and 139 μg/L. I also notice that the values for Aluminum (or "RAluminum") switch between 61.5 and 6.15, and Chromium values switch between 0.282 and 0.000282. Seems rather sloppy. My analytical chemistry professor would not be impressed.
Additionally, SpaceX have since refuted the original CNBC article claiming it is "factually inaccurate": https://x.com/SpaceX/status/1823080774012481862
Expand for long tweet:
Highlights pertaining to mercury levels:
What do you think has happened here? Are there legitimately concerning mercury levels which SpaceX are trying to downplay, or have CNBC taken some slightly sloppy data, come to their own conclusions, and run with it?
And the mercury value of 0.133ug/l is the detection limit of the test. So what the rapport is saying is that there is no detectable mercury in the water.