Elon Musk plans to use natural gas from Texas for his spaceships

Photographer: Austin Barnard / Bloomberg

Elon Musk became the richest man in the world thanks to enthusiasm for Tesla Inc.’s sleek electric cars. and the company’s stratospheric share price. But while Musk is arguably the most well-known clean energy CEO, SpaceX, his other company, will likely rely on drilling for natural gas to power Starship, the new spacecraft and rocket designed to take humans to the moon, Mars. and take it further.

Musk’s SpaceX wants to use a location in South Texas to launch rockets to transport people and cargo to the Moon and Mars. To do that, the company plans to drill gas wells to make its own fuel and electricity, according to a Federal Aviation Administration document seen by Bloomberg.

Musk has long ridiculed the oil industry by touting renewable energy and electric vehicles as the keys to averting climate disaster. But the FAA document and SpaceX’s comments to Texas regulators show how, at least in the short term, some of its goals will depend on fossil fuel extraction plans that are already being criticized by environmental groups.

While Musk has said he wants to eventually remove carbon from the atmosphere to produce fuel, no cost-effective method has yet been developed to do so. The billionaire is donating $ 100 million to one prize for “Best Carbon Capture Technology”.

The SpaceX site in Texas will be supplied by at least five nearby gas sources, along with two gas-fired power plants, according to the FAA document. Purified gas from the wells will be pumped into cooling equipment that turns them into liquid methane, the document shows. The methane can be combined with liquid oxygen and other compounds to make rocket fuel.

SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment. But in a hearing last week with the Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates oil and gas in the state, the company’s lawyers said gas from the wells would be used for “missile plant operations.”

The document Bloomberg has seen appears to be an unfinished draft environmental review, an FAA spokesman said. A public comment period that ended last week will be used to complete the official draft review. Once completed, the draft will be posted on the agency’s website for another round of public comments.

The company is also requesting permission from the FAA to add a gas treatment plant and equipment that will turn the methane into its liquid form, and plans to expand a nearby solar farm and build a water desalination plant, it shows. from the agency’s reports.

SpaceX originally built the coastal site for its Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy rockets, which are used to deploy satellites, but never used for that purpose. The company is now requesting permission to use it as a launch site for spacecraft that will carry humans and cargo to the Moon and Mars, FAA records show.

Vertically integrated

One possible motivation for SpaceX’s plans to produce gas: vertical integration. Musk has long been a fan of the strategy he uses to maintain control of his companies’ supply chains. By drilling for gas, SpaceX would avoid paying a third party to produce it and route it to the launch site.

Depending on the fuel ratios between liquid oxygen and methane, a single launch would require tens of millions of cubic feet of gas.

Even without considering the need for gas to fuel SpaceX’s power plants at the Texas site, a minimum of 10 launches per year would require about half a billion cubic feet. That would cost about $ 1.37 million, based on the current benchmark gas futures trading in New York.

To secure that gas, SpaceX launched a subsidiary called Lone Star Mineral Development in June. The company wasted no time buying up mineral rights in the area, as well as an 806-acre lease originally laid out by the Houston-based oil company Sanchez Energy, which rebranded itself as Mesquite Energy after coming out of bankruptcy last year.

However, it is not clear how much gas Lone Star can extract from the site. Cameron County, where the launch site is located, is not a productive source of fuel. Sanchez’s lease, which went into production in 2011, yielded approximately 536 million cubic feet of gas in that first year, according to data from the Railroad Commission. But after that, production continued to sag until the well was decommissioned in March 2014.

Geology isn’t the only hurdle to SpaceX’s gas production plans. The company faces legal challenges for a plot of land that forms a small corner of the drilling contract. Closely connected producer Dallas Petroleum Group LLC says it paid property taxes on two wells there and is asking the Railroad Commission to resolve a dispute over control of the wells with Lone Star. It had previously charged Sanchez with access to the wells and adjusted the lawsuit on Friday to add SpaceX and Lone Star as suspects.

Lone Star also purchased two offshore drilling rigs from drilling contractor Valaris Plc last year. They will likely be used as landing pads for SpaceX’s reusable rockets, FAA records show.

Environmental opposition

A coalition of a dozen environmental groups is already raising the alarm about SpaceX’s expansion plans. The missile launch site has gone well beyond its original permit, and the company’s plans threaten an environmentally sensitive wildlife corridor along the US-Mexico border, according to the coalition.

Last year at the launch site, “there were at least three explosions, some of which resulted in more fires setting fire to smaller areas,” said EJ Williams, vice president of the American Bird Conservancy, in an email. “These explosions directly affected the designated critical habitat used by federally protected and other declining species.”

To discover Bloomberg’s ESG insights, click here

More traffic on the highway leading to the launch site has drastically increased the number of animals killed by vehicles, and road closures for rocket launches have prevented biologists from studying endangered migratory bird species that nest nearby, according to David Newstead, a director of bird protection. projects for the Corpus Christi-based Coastal Bend Bays & Estuaries Program.

The FAA originally allowed SpaceX for 12 launches a year and 180 hours of road closures, but Newstead said his group documented more than 1,100 hours of highway closures last year.

Due to changes to SpaceX’s plans for the Texas site, environmental groups want the FAA to use a stricter and more transparent process to review the company’s proposals. For example the The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission requires companies constructing new gas pipelines or exporting terminals to submit regular public updates, while the FAA does not mandate the same level of disclosure, said Patrick Anderson, chairman of the Sierra Club’s Lower Rio Grande Valley chapter.

Although SpaceX is requesting permission to produce gas in the short term, the launch site in Texas could eventually promote Musk’s zero carbon ambitions. Gas drilling could potentially be part of gaining longer-term experience of in-situ resource use, or ISRU, the practice of generating products from local materials. While there are no fossil fuels on Mars, those landing there may need to drill for water or minerals.

Musk could also drill to gain experience developing carbon dioxide storage wells. SpaceX will likely have to use carbon capture on Mars to make fuels for the journey home, making it crucial to get the technology right.

Historically, liquid hydrogen was the fuel of choice for early space missions, while a rocket loaded with kerosene and liquid oxygen sent Buzz Aldrin, Neil Armstrong and Michael Collins to the moon.