Rocket propulsion and economics (split from Solve the climate crisis: A thought experiment)

LaurieAG · January 24, 2020

7 hours ago, Sensei said:

Current methods ("carbon tax") are not constructive. Electricity making companies will pass the all costs to their customers and they will be, as always, victims of the regulation made by government. Current methods rely on private companies to do everything (to earn money). Investors interested in renewable energy sources are starting from ground level and what they will earn one year will invest in the next year which drastically limits the growth rate. State-owned solar panels making companies can start from hundreds production factories across the entire country without bothering about cost of such giant investment since day zero (establishment of such company). If government would not pay for Apollo program, private business sector would not ever do in, as it is impossible to make money on it! Private business mostly do everything the easiest ways to earn money. It is unlikely that SpaceX would make rockets if they would not have possibility to make deal with NASA for delivery of stuff to ISS. Where would these rockets fly? Such company would be infinite hole sucking in the all investors moneys and would not ever return investment in any predictable time span. It would remain toy of billionaire or never being established.

If SpaceX Rocket Boosters run on Cryogenic Liquid Oxygen and Refined Petroleum 1 it just drives up the price of Petroleum while carrying with it a cryogenic storage system for whatever can get through its fuel seals while in space and the Chinese Long March series Rocket Boosters aren't that much different.

The RP-1 Booster engines in the Falcon 9 uses RP-1 (alternately, Rocket Propellant-1 or Refined Petroleum-1) is a highly refined form of kerosene outwardly similar to jet fuel, used as rocket fuel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RP-1

Meanwhile the new generation of Long March rocket family, Long March 5, and its derivations Long March 6, Long March 7 will use LOX and kerosene as core stage and liquid booster propellant, with LOX and LH₂ in upper stages. While the Long March 11 uses these solid propellant + Oxidizer loads as well.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_March_(rocket_family)#Propellants

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_March_11

So does anybody know what else happens when a Cryogenic Oxygen/Refined-Petroleum engine'd Rocket Booster travels from the tip of the F2 region of the Thermosphere, from the Appleton layer at 500km and transports excess electrons down to the top of the E region or Kennelly-Heaviside layer at 125km as identified by Gupta?

Winds generated in the lower ionosphere by thermal forcing from below have characteristic periods expressed as submultiples of a day. Waves with a period of 24 hours dominate at low latitudes, whereas those with a characteristic period of 12 hours are more important at high latitudes.
The origin of the waves is basically similar to that of oceanic tides caused by the pull of lunar gravity. The vertical motion that generates ionospheric waves, however, is the result of the diurnal pattern of heating and cooling rather than gravity. Additional waves can arise owing to irregular forcing, associated, for example, with thunderstorms, motion over mountain ranges, and other small-scale meteorological disturbances. These small-scale disturbances are referred to as gravity waves to distinguish them from the more regular planetary-scale motions excited by the diurnal cycle of heating and cooling. The regular response to thermal forcing is known as the atmospheric tide.

Would whatever Energy/light mixture or Atmospheric Lunar tide and gravity wave along with whatever else it carried with it appear on Dual Doppler systems as patches of zero wind?

Like the one that dissipated just before Beaudesert in South East Queensland at 11:00 UTC on 24/01/2020 on the Australian Mount Stapylton Dual Doppler Radar?