Comment from Buckner, James
James BucknerOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter opposes the establishment of permanent offshore launch facilities due to the risk of hurricane damage in the Gulf. They suggest using mobile launch pads on retired semisubmersible rigs instead to mitigate environmental and safety concerns.
While I find that having additional launch sites on the continental shelf is interesting, I have to think about the existing environmental consequences of offshore launches.
The first issue is the risk of hurricanes in the Gulf. 2005 was a very bad year for the Gulf with Hurricane Katrina. Multiple offshore platforms were heavily damaged. I cannot support permanent launch facilities offshore in hurricane zones. We average 1 category 3 or better hurricane every few years.
The second issue is the environment aspects of the launch. If we can locate the launch site in areas that are not sensitive to ocean creatures, then we can limit the exposure to chemicals burned during launch. Methane is not a problem with some of these modern rockets.
We already have the precedent which is the Sea Launch platform. We can utilize retired semisubmersible drilling rigs as launch pads and they can be positioned anywhere on the OCS. We have existing ports such as Galveston, Brownsville, and Port Aransas which could host the platforms when not in use. These ports have the capability to handle large loads such as rockets, and the infrastructure would require some modification to be viable.
The US government has already used retired semisubmersible rigs as radar platforms. We can use the same technology for mobile launch pads provided the environmental and security issues are mitigated.