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.

170 points

I would be exactly 0% shocked to learn this was true.

permalink
report
reply
72 points

I’d be shocked if Abbott didn’t try to give them a Texas Medal of Freedom award for doing this.

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

And for removing water breaks for workers when it’s really hot out

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Or… I could see him mandating more water breaks… provided it comes from the test area. People in the biz refer to that as remediation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points

And with Chevron ruling they wont face any repercussions!

Isnt crony capitalism great!?!?!?!

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Would you be more shocked to learn that it isn’t true? It is possible that this entire story is based on two typos in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality report.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Your* username

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

although you’re username would certainly give the impression you’re just defending musk

I find it interesting that people automatically assume my username implies endorsement of the person.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah i don’t believe this at all

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
161 points
*

Ok so, going to the CNBC article and my own memory, as charitably summarized as I can:

Boca Chica is originally built with certain parameters and specifications, before Musk announced they would be doing all of the testing for Starship at that location.

Then, SpaceX just started doing so, and then asked for permission from relevant regulatory bodies … later.

At this point, Common Sense Skeptic on YouTube did a video or two specifically going into the details of exactly how bonkers it is to do huge scale rocket testing basically half a kilometer away from protected nature zones.

Then, one of the Starship tests blew apart huge parts of the launch pad after Elon had said that would not be a problem.

Then, Elon folded on that notion, and built the water deluge system and modified the launching configuration, without getting any permits beforehand from relevant regulatory agencies.

So the run off from all that water has been going into a protected natural environment for… about a year now.

The EPA began investigating this in August of 2023, and informed SpaceX they were in violation in March of 2024.

Literally the day after SpaceX was formally notified their water deluge system was in violation, SpaceX did its third Starship test, again using the water deluge system.

Now, cue SpaceX lying all over the place, saying that they’ve been told they were allowed to do this the whole time, and that there were no detectable levels of mercury in the discharge, even though their own permit that they belatedly filed indicates the detectable level of mercury in the discharge were about 50x the safe level.

SpaceX said in its response on X that there were “no detectable levels of mercury” found in its samples. But SpaceX wrote in its permit application that its mercury concentration at one outfall location was 113 micrograms per liter. Water quality criteria in the state calls for levels no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity and much lower levels for human health.

To conclude:

“Further wastewater discharges could trigger more investigations and criminal charges for the company or any of the people involved in authorizing the launches,” he said.

  • Eric Roesch, Environmental Engineer

Basically, the environmental aspects of this have been a known and ongoing shit show for over a year, but have only been covered by a few YouTube channels and blogs, vastly drowned out by the cacophony of SpaceX fans.

I highly suggest every one check out Common Sense Skeptic on YouTube, they have been calling bullshit on SpaceX for a while now.

In particular, one interesting vid they did shows that a former NASA administrator bullshitted her own request for project process to get it awarded to SpaceX, using blatant double standards.

I say former NASA admin because quite quickly after rubber stamping a huge amount of taxpayer money toward Starship development, she now works for SpaceX.

permalink
report
reply
32 points

Good thing the supreme Court expects companies to not do this shit

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

Thank you very much for the synopsis. I am disgusted and unsurprised.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Don’t worry, with the Chevron ruling out of the way, this can be thrown out in court and promptly swept under the rug. 💪🇺🇲🦅

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

I’m very curious as to who this NASA admin is…no name comes to mind?

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Kathy Lueders

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Thank you!

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Ah you beat me to it, I stepped away for dinner =P

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

SpaceX said in its response on X that there were “no detectable levels of mercury” found in its samples. But SpaceX wrote in its permit application that its mercury concentration at one outfall location was 113 micrograms per liter. Water quality criteria in the state calls for levels no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity and much lower levels for human health.

Upon closer inspection, it seems possible that this discrepancy is based on two typos in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality report. The actual value may be closer to 0.113 micrograms per liter, not 113.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Just a small correction about the pad exploding/water deluge system.

They were already working on the water deluge system before the pad blew up. They simply didn’t think it was going to explode like that since it worked as expected during the half thrust test, and the water system wasn’t ready yet.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Maybe they should have had the water system ready before the full test just in case.

Like someone concerned about health and safety would do.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

Why would you wait to have something else ready if you think what you have is going to work?

All the physics modeling they did and live tests showed that the concrete should work.

When it looks like something should work, you test it. They had approval to test it after showing it should work.

These people are launching and landing rockets at a pace never done before, they know how to model these kind of things. Now obviously something went very wrong here, but it wasn’t just a willy nilly choice.

You test the things that you think will work, otherwise you never know if they’ll work.

While the concrete may not have been their final decision for Boca Chica, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t a possible solution for other location where a large quantity of potable water isn’t available.

Edit: just further to possible other locations, the concrete if it worked, wouldn’t allow the rapid turn around time they want as they’d need to set new concrete vs piped water ready to go. But for a launch location that maybe wouldn’t need the rapid cadence, maybe it’d be perfect and cheaper if it’d work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yes, thats what SpaceX is saying.

As of right now, the original blurb I quoted from the CNBC article has been modified to this:

SpaceX said in its response on X that there were “no detectable levels of mercury” found in its samples. But SpaceX wrote in its July permit application — under the header Specific Testing Requirements - Table 2 for Outfall: 001 — that its mercury concentration at one outfall location was 113 micrograms per liter. Water quality criteria in the state calls for levels no higher than 2.1 micrograms per liter for acute aquatic toxicity and much lower levels for human health

CNBC is currently sticking with their report. This is not factually inaccurate information, it is a clarification, a specification.

Perhaps SpaceX could actually provide evidence that they submitted a version with the typo fixed, that TCEQ is ‘currently updating the application’, or that other lab tests corroborate that the 0.113 number?

Either way, doesn’t change the number of complaints the TCEQ received, that SpaceX was releasing deluge water for roughly a year without permission to do so, that they were told to stop doing that and then did it again literally the next day.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

They also wrote <0.113 on table 16 at the same outfall.

Table 2 and 16 also have 139 and 0.139 for sample 2, reversed so T2: (113/0.139) T16: (<0.113/139)

No matter how you look at it, that’s extremely shoddy reporting by CNBC. Whoever wrote that report also needs to have a long chat with their supervisor.

Also SpaceX claims they had permission to do it based on existing rules they are under, AND TCEQ was there to help with the first test even. The EPA had factually incorrect information when they requested they stop, and then gave the A-OKAY once SpaceX corrected their misunderstandings.

edit: Selenium also goes from 2.86 to 28.6 on sample 1

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Thanks for the summary! Very easy to follow.

Sorry if this is a stupid question, but wouldn’t diluting the runoff with more than 1:50 ratio with fresh water fix this problem? If it’s joining a large body of water down the line, wouldn’t that effectively negate the problem?

I don’t know anything about the area or it’s ecosystem. But it seems like being close to protected wilderness is kind of a prerequisite for this kind of thing, because you can’t have human inhabitants nearby. And it seems that logically, large swaths of unoccupied land would be zoned as such until there was a need for some kind of development.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

One of the fundamental principals of the RCRA is that dilution is not an allowable solution to pollution. Otherwise, you could just say that any amount of pollution is below applicable concentrations after it mixed into the oceans, atmosphere, whatever. And any company could emit as much as they wanted as long as they diluted it. Oil spills could simply be left alone because they’d eventually distribute throughout the earth.

Concentrations must be considered as they occur in their process streams. The process stream must meet certain requirements first and foremost, and it must be further checked to see if that could significantly affect the air or water in which it is emitted, just to make sure its good to go since water flow, temperature, and wildlife migration change throughout the year. The same is true for air emissions as well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Thank you for some more specific commentary on this.

I had a gut feeling that uh… reverse homeopathy probably is not a legitimate methodology to approach environmental toxins with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I am far from an expert on the toxicity of mercury (and that’s nearly certainly just one kind of pollutant in this scenario), but it seems unlikely this would solve the problem.

The same amount of mercury is still being emitted, it just might lessen the amount that gets absorbed by immediately local soil… and just disperse it a bit more evenly over a longer range eventually mostly pooling along the shores of the Gulf of Mexico.

Which… is still part of a protected natural environment with endangered species living in it. As I recall, there is specifically a species of endangered turtles that live in this area, so, they’re still fucked, along with I think some other endangered birds, reptile and small mammals.

What they should have is a proper method of containing this dirty water, filtering and extracting dangerous chemicals, and a proper way of disposing those.

But that would require foresight and planning, which is anathema to Musk’s ‘move fast and break stuff’ style of ‘rapid iteration’.

Also, It is not true that large sections of uninhabited land are necessarily zoned as some kind of protected habitat. It is true there are lots of areas of the US where this is the case, but not totally.

Musk was trying desperately to get NASA to let him use Cape Canaveral for Starship, but they viewed this (correctly, in hindsight) as too risky.

So, when they said no, and he had deadlines to meet, basically said ‘fuck it’, took his existing facility and massively illegally upgraded it far beyond what was legally allowed by initial use permits, and just did everything Starship there, generally completely ignoring any concept of ‘regulations’ that might apply to this.

He could have actually given investors and NASA themselves more realistic budget and timeframe ideas for how expensive and time consuming it would be to do this properly, but he did not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

What they should have is a proper method of containing this dirty water, filtering and extracting dangerous chemicals, and a proper way of disposing those.

It is also important to note that the dirtiness of the water may have been misreported. It seems possible that this story is based on two typos in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality report. The actual concentration of mercury may be 1000x lower.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points
*

I highly suggest every one check out Common Sense Skeptic on YouTube

They lost their credibility as soon as they started hating on Musk for clicks and views. Don’t get me wrong, there’s plenty of valid criticism of Musk, but criticizing anything and everything related to Musk no matter what has become Common Sense Skeptic’s entire brand and business strategy. I don’t think they can be considered an unbiased party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
66 points
*

When sending probes to Mars or other rocky bodies, 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?

permalink
report
reply
2 points

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/

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
60 points

TCEQ has no power to enforce anything in Texas without the Governor and AG’s cooperation. Mark my words. As long as Texas is run by conservatives, absolutely nothing at all will be done to protect the environment in Texas. Absolutely nothing. Everything related to the environment is performative in Texas, not substantive.

Conservatives delight in pollution. They equate pollution with freedom. Conservatives in Texas intentionally choose vehicles with the worst exhaust, they litter, they dump chemicals directly down drains, into sewers and into waterways, they “roll coal”, they joyfully embrace chemical plants and they mock absolutely anyone who has any problem with dirty air or water. If you can’t handle chemical-laden air, you are considered weak or “librul”. Clean water is for pussies.

There’s a reason the number one cancer research center in the U.S. is based in Houston. The air is famously polluted by nearby refineries that do not report what they release into the air to the public. They are permitted to “self-report” that they are not violating any rules, but there is no actual check performed by TCEQ without a great deal of advance notice and preparation.

Texas is a conservative haven of airborne and waterborne carcinogens. Musk knew that when he moved here. That’s the reason polluters move here. Because conservatives fucking love pollution.

When I hear of a conservative in Texas getting a brutal form of cancer, I just smile and nod because I presume they’ve achieved their goal. It’s the only silver lining in Texas, other than the silver-laden clouds.

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Agreed. I’ve read an article hear and there over the past couple years about this and how a reckoning is coming. Space-X leaving California in favor of Texas is too big an advertisement for their brand. They won’t do anything to upset the Musky child.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Clean water is for pussies.

Well when you only consume monster energy drinks and miller lite, why would you need water?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

Not ‘conservatives’

Nothing conservative about them

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I mean they are referred to as conservatives because of their predominantly archaic social and economical laws not because they conserve the ecology

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Their politics are not conservative. They are inflammatory and extremist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
49 points

And you just know Texas lawmakers were fine with this because the right people got paid off to look the other way by Musk.

The dangers of mercury poisoning are well understood. We’re talking about insanity, paralysis and death. Nobody can pull a, “we had no idea” excuse. Google “Minimata Japan disaster” if you want to know what happens when a corporation poisons people with mercury for nearly 40 years.

permalink
report
reply
24 points

This is how they make more Republicans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I thought that was lead.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Little bit of this, little bit of that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

This and dropping infants head first onto tiled floors.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

i thought that was how they cracked the tiles for aesthetic purposes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They are susceptible to various brain damaging chemicals

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 510K

    Comments