SpaceX’s high-profile rocket explosion on April 20 has angered environmental and civil liberties groups, who are outraged by the level of damage to the local environment in Texas. The explosion caused significant pollution that affected local communities and could threaten endangered species Boca Chica Beach near Brownsville, Texas. Some experts say the entire scenario likely could have been avoided if the aerospace company had installed a flame deflector, or flame trench, a long channel built into the ground below the launch pad that diverts heat and energy away from the rocket.
Prior to this disaster, several organizations in the Rio Grande Valley community issued strongly worded press releases opposing SpaceX launches such as this one.
During SpaceX’s first orbital test flight, the American space company launched a rocket called Starship from its private launch pad in South Texas at around 8:30 that morning. About four minutes into the flight, it was necessary to press the self-destruct button to prevent a bigger disaster. It instantly exploded in a ball of fire and smoke. It was the largest and most powerful rocket ever developed (emphasis on “was”).
The original plan called for the rocket to enter suborbital flight for about an hour and 17 minutes, making a nearly complete circle around the globe before splashing down somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. Although it launched successfully, it sustained significant damage to the launch pad and five of its engines failed. It reached about 24 miles (39 kilometers) before its altitude began to drop, it spun and its end-of-flight system was activated. The flight lasted about four minutes before the Starship was destroyed. No one was hurt.
Many people immediately took to social media to bash SpaceX CEO, Chairman and Chief Technology Officer Elon Musk. Although the company did not consider the launch a complete failure (explosions during missile testing are also not uncommon), the extreme damage caused by this launch may have been prevented by the flame deflector, a structure located below the launch pad that directs the rocket’s extreme heat and exhaust in a controlled manner. The lack of a flame deflector scorched the landscape and plant life near the missile pad, as seen in post-launch images.
“A billionaire is closing our beach to use the land to test his experimental technology, endangering the lives of local residents while destroying acres of wildlife sanctuary.”
It seems the company was somewhat aware that the lack of a flame deflector was a bad idea. In a tweet from October 2020 Musk wrote “I wish Boca didn’t have a flame deflector, but that might turn out to be a mistake.” It seems he was right.
SpaceX called the detonation a “rapid unplanned decommissioning,” a tongue-in-cheek “it looked expensive” joke that’s been around in the industry since at least the 1960s. But the company had reason to celebrate. The rocket got off the launch pad and provided valuable data to improve the next flight. After the launch, SpaceX was congratulated by many in the aviation world, including the administrator of NASA Bill Nelson and Director General of the European Space Agency Joseph Aschbacher. According to the New York Times, one employee even doused his colleagues with a bottle of champagne.
But the community living near the launch site has faced fallout from the launch in both senses of the word. The explosion essentially destroyed the launch pad, carving a massive crater and sending chunks of concrete, sheets of stainless steel and other debris into the ocean at Boca Chica Beach. The Dodge Caravan was crushed by debris that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service says was scattered over 385 acres, sparking a fire that burned 3.5 acres of Boca Chica State Park land.
Clouds of ash and particles rained down on residents of Port Isabel, about six miles away, settling on homes, cars and streets, shattering several windows. It is unclear whether the particulate matter is dangerous to breathe or touch, or if it will contaminate the soil. An FAA environmental assessment of the spacecraft indicated that some stages of the rocket used kerosene, which is toxic to breathe, as fuel; the assessment also notes that the rocket contains more than 100 gallons of hydraulic fluid, which is often hazardous.
Salon reached out to SpaceX to find out why the launch pad doesn’t have a flame deflector, among other questions; SpaceX did not respond to Salon’s request for comment.
One Port Isabel resident, Sharon Almager, told the New York Times that the situation was “terrifying” and described locals as “being victimized”.
“He just wanted to blow this thing up,” Almager said of Musk. “Everyone else is kind of cursed.”
Prior to this disaster, several organizations in the Rio Grande Valley community issued strongly worded press releases opposing SpaceX launches such as this one. On April 19, 27 organizations, including the Sierra Club, Voces Unidas, and the South Texas Environmental Justice Network, signed a letter expressing concern that the aerospace company’s operations are “destroying the wildlife refuges and sacred lands of the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe of Texas and are threatening Rio Grande Valley communities with risk of explosion.”
Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter, The Vulgar Scientist.
“A billionaire is shutting down our beach to use the land to test his experimental technology, putting the lives of local residents at risk while destroying acres of wildlife,” Sierra Club Brownsville organizer Emma Guevara said in a statement. “Who will be responsible for the destruction this company continues to cause when the government continues to ignore the very real and very serious concerns of community members?”
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the department that regulates all aspects of civil aviation in the US, is currently conducting an “accident investigation” into the whole case, which will determine whether future flights pose a risk to public safety. Until the investigation is complete, all future test flights at SpaceX have been suspended, which the agency says is standard practice when something goes wrong on this scale.
Although it’s quite a setback, NASA chief Nelson told Congress on Thursday that he expects SpaceX to be back up and running in about two months. Still, Nelson said the explosion could delay the Artemis III mission, which aims to send a human crew to the moon’s surface in 2025; however, nothing threatens missions more than budget cuts.
Like it or not, SpaceX is currently one of the biggest investors in space exploration, with NASA as one of its biggest customers. These Starship rockets can not only bring us back to the moonbut could ever put people on mars. But their local impact is just as important, if not more so. We can get to space with much less damage on our own turf.
#massive #exploding #SpaceX #rocket #devastated #town #wildlife #sanctuary #locals #outraged
