https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/astrophysics/greenhouse-gas-space-x/

This science article confirms what I have been thinking, that space flights adds a bunch of gases to the already warming atmosphere. If these three billionaires can’t keep themselves from adding fuel to the fire, maybe they should be banned from taking any trips out until they’ve proved that they’ve zero’ed all their emissions … Scope 1 and Scope 2 and Scope 3!

Only TWO (!) entities so far are saying they’ll zero all their emissions by 2030. Microsoft, a giant, and Canberra, a small state in Australia.

It’s not good enough to say space flight has a lot of positives. The money being thrown at making the space flights happen should be thrown at getting the emissions down.

I’d love to be reading or hearing some time in the near future that that list of billionaires and a few of their buddies have added themselves to the Zero-Emissions-by-2030 list, as well as a bunch of other entities. Let them compete about that.

Definitions of scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions

from … https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/energy-explained/what-are-scope-1-2-3-carbon-emissions
 Scope 1 emissions …. Scope 1 covers emissions from sources that an organisation owns or controls directly – for example from burning fuel in our fleet of vehicles (if they’re not electrically-powered).

Scope 2 emissions … Scope 2 are emissions that a company causes indirectly and come from where the energy it purchases and uses is produced. For example, the emissions caused when generating the electricity that we use in our buildings would fall into this category.

Scope 3 emissions … Scope 3 encompasses emissions that are not produced by the company itself and are not the result of activities from assets owned or controlled by them, but by those that it’s indirectly responsible for up and down its value chain. An example of this is when we buy, use and dispose of products from suppliers. Scope 3 emissions include all sources not within the scope 1 and 2 boundaries.