>>12007824Reminder that while hydrogen and methane are both non-toxic gasses apart from risk of asphyxiation due to displacement of oxygen, methane is nonetheless the cleaner propellant, because purified methane is produced via condensation processes working with mixed natural gasses, whereas hydrogen is produced as a by product of the recombination of shorter chain hydrocarbons into longer chain hydrocarbons, in a process that both consumes hydrocarbon fuels and produces more fuels that go on to be burned elsewhere. Therefore, every single molecule of hydrogen produced represents the creation and release of dozens or perhaps hundreds of CO2 molecules, whereas every molecule of methane produced represents only a couple molecules of CO2 released.
If once considers a future scenario where chemical fuels are being produced via clean energy, such as nuclear fission, then even in that case methane is the better propellant for the environment, because while hydrogen fuel production via water electrolysis is a totally carbon-neutral process, the production of methane from carbon dioxide actually removes carbon from the atmosphere. When the fuels are burned later, the methalox rocket produces water and CO2, but not all of the captured carbon goes into the atmosphere. Every time a Starship leaves Earth orbit for interplanetary space, it always carries away at least a few dozen tons of methane, which represents a net reduction of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere of a mass about 2.75 times greater (because CO2 weighs 44 g/mol and methane weighs 16 g/mol but both have the same number of carbon atoms per mol).
The truth is out; hydrolox rockets are actually far more polluting than methalox rockets today, and in the future will do nothing to assist with carbon sequestration projects, meaning hydrolox rockets are effectively a symbol of climate denialism and scientific ignorance. Defund all hydrolox vehicles now and stop raping the environment, allow humanity to progress into space.
