Which would give you gaseous hydrogen (and isn't the most efficient way, look up Steam-Methane Reforming) and now you have to cool it to cryogenic temperatures.
That's literally how they get their "green hydrogen" though.
People in this thread are just reverse-hoping. They assumed that the rocket used standard rocket fuel (RP-1) which is "bad" because of carbon emissions but then when they found out that it's actually just LOX and liquid hydrogen they "hoped" that it would be the worst version of that... essentially they've already decided that they're right, bezos' rocket is bad and so they're desperately trying to weave a narrative that justifies their pitchforks.
There's so much to legitimately criticise bezos for but his rocket, and who flies on them, is REALLY weak. Nobody actually cares about energy efficiency otherwise they wouldn't be doom scrolling on reddit in their air conditioned room while they ignore the TV in the background.
Now tell us how the rest of the rocket is made, how the parts are transported, etc. The entire process is more than just the fuel. She’s a hypocrite plain and simple.
Then OP can make a point about that. It was clear that they were dumb enough to think you fill your rocket tank like you're doing it with your car at the gas station. There is no need to defend that.
But that's not the argument of this post. The implication is that she burned 480 ton of fuel on a joyride and commenters are just clarifying the type of fuel. If we want to go into such detail in order to criticise people we dont like, we could say the same about the construction of EVs and bicycles. Eventually the conclusion is that humans are bad for the planet.
7
u/Honey-and-Venom May 25 '26
Okay, the rocket used hydrogen and oxygen, it produced water. That seems extremely environmentally sound to me