Launch Hoopla

[LordFerret]

All the launches that have been going on... NASA, ESA, Russia, China, India... what happened to all the concern and hoopla over rocket launches punching holes in the Ozone layer? Has this become a non-issues these days? Just curious.

[Rakaydos]

Other than literally piercing a non-material layer, I am unaware of rocket byproducts that would negatively affect the Ozone layer.

[Streetwind]

I would wager that your average morning rush hour in the world - one morning, all countries counted - will effortlessly dwarf all rocket launches conducted within an entire year in terms of CO2 emissions. Just from cars alone.

Also, take a look at the Delta IV Heavy - it's the single largest rocket currently in operation, and it has no CO2 emissions at all while running. It exhausts water vapor. Just because it has a giant trail of fire coming out one end doesn't mean it's going to harm the environment

[Kryten]

I would wager that your average morning rush hour in the world - one morning, all countries counted - will effortlessly dwarf all rocket launches conducted within an entire year in terms of CO2 emissions. Just from cars alone.

Also, take a look at the Delta IV Heavy - it's the single largest rocket currently in operation, and it has no CO2 emissions at all while running. It exhausts water vapor. Just because it has a giant trail of fire coming out one end doesn't mean it's going to harm the environment

I thought people had finally cottoned on that global warming and ozone depletion are completely different things with different mechanisms. Sadly not.

[jwenting]

I thought people had finally cottoned on that global warming and ozone depletion are completely different things with different mechanisms. Sadly not.

I thought they'd finally caught on to the fact that both are complete and utter fabrications, scams.

Sadly not.

[Mazon Del]

Riiiiight. I'll just assume that to be a troll-post.

Anyway, best my knowledge on the ozone situation was not that the rockets caused a depletion effect, but more the leavings of the rocket engines as they passed by disrupted the layer, poking a hole a mile wide or so that wasn't a hole, so much as a reduced effectiveness zone. This drifted with the high altitude winds for a week or so before fixing themselves. Technically an issue for people down-wind, but not something world-threatening.

[lajoswinkler]

"Punching holes" through rarified gas? Honestly, are you trolling?

[Bill Phil]

I would wager that your average morning rush hour in the world - one morning, all countries counted - will effortlessly dwarf all rocket launches conducted within an entire year in terms of CO2 emissions. Just from cars alone.

Also, take a look at the Delta IV Heavy - it's the single largest rocket currently in operation, and it has no CO2 emissions at all while running. It exhausts water vapor. Just because it has a giant trail of fire coming out one end doesn't mean it's going to harm the environment

Actually...

Steam is also a greenhouse gas. Just to say....

[Mazon Del]

"Punching holes" through rarified gas? Honestly, are you trolling?

It mostly has to do with the chemical reactions between the water from the rocket exhaust. As you say, its rarified. It takes a bit for the natural drift of the gas to fill in the gap.

[Rakaydos]

I thought they'd finally caught on to the fact that both are complete and utter fabrications, scams.

Sadly not.

[Mazon Del]

As a person from St Louis (and the 90's at that). I can attest to the fact that people these days are silly. I played in subzero temperatures for HOURS and it was glorious! Except the one time my boot feel off at the bottom of the hill...that was a fascinating kind of pain.

And back then rockets had to launch away from the gravity well both ways!

[LordFerret]

Riiiiight. I'll just assume that to be a troll-post.

Anyway, best my knowledge on the ozone situation was not that the rockets caused a depletion effect, but more the leavings of the rocket engines as they passed by disrupted the layer, poking a hole a mile wide or so that wasn't a hole, so much as a reduced effectiveness zone. This drifted with the high altitude winds for a week or so before fixing themselves. Technically an issue for people down-wind, but not something world-threatening.

You seem to be the only one here who has caught on to the issue I brought up.

About 5 years ago this was an issue, as I understood it. Not that rocket engine exhaust was depleting the ozone, it was punching a hole, a gap, an actual area void of ozone... which would over time close up. The fact it created a 'hole' however was a concern. A few universities and publications such as National Geographic and Nature touched the topic. I do believe NASA itself also addressed the issue, but it seems to have gone away because there was no appreciable actual "depletion". However, I myself wonder this issue, now that so many agencies and nations are doing launches. It seems almost every day (not literally of course) that someone is launching a new communications or weather satellite, or resupply to the ISS, or whatever. With the increase in these launches comes an increase in these 'holes'. And while one of you (Streetwind) mentions the exhaust from the liquid fuel rocket engines is not much more than water vapor, the solid rocket boosters ever-so more prevalent in use these days do indeed contain exhaust elements which deplete the ozone... although the amount of depletion from such is still cited as being less than tenths or hundredths of a percent - which in time, and with increased launches on a regular basis, will rise as a contributing factor.

I'll note here the failure of NASA to successfully launch the QuikTOMS ozone monitoring satellite in 2001... and unless I've missed something somewhere along the line, there's been nothing launched since to replace it.

Q. Is it true that launching the Space Shuttle creates a local ozone hole, and that the Space Shuttle releases more chlorine than all industrial uses worldwide?

A. No, that is not true. NASA has studied the effects of exhaust from the Space Shuttle's solid rocket motors on the ozone. In a 1990 report to Congress, NASA found that the chlorine released annually in the stratosphere (assuming launches of nine Shuttle missions and six Titan IVs -- which also have solid rocket motors -- per year) would be about 0.25 percent of the total amount of halocarbons released annually worldwide (0.725 kilotons by the Shuttle 300 kilotons from all sources).

The report concludes that Space Shuttle launches at the current rate pose no significant threat to the ozone layer and will have no lasting effect on the atmosphere. The exhaust plume from the Shuttle represents a trivial fraction of the atmosphere, and even if ozone destruction occurred within the initial plume, its global impact would be inconsequential.

Further, the corridor of exhaust gases spreads over a lateral extent of greater than 600 miles in a day, so no local "ozone hole" could occur above the launch site. Images taken by NASA's Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer at various points following Shuttle launches show no measurable ozone decrease.

So, where are these images?

Even the ESA has (at least) addressed the issue somewhat...

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Engineering_Technology/Clean_Space/What_about_ozone/%28print%29

I'm not looking to be an alarmist or some kind of Eco-nut, but this was (still is) an issue and I do from time to time wonder why it's not been given notable attention.

[Leszek]

All the rocket launches combined are still trivial. At least for the time being. The ozone layer is slowly recuperating after the ban on CFC's. The rocket launches are not likely to make any sort of serious dent.

[magnemoe]

Riiiiight. I'll just assume that to be a troll-post.

Anyway, best my knowledge on the ozone situation was not that the rockets caused a depletion effect, but more the leavings of the rocket engines as they passed by disrupted the layer, poking a hole a mile wide or so that wasn't a hole, so much as a reduced effectiveness zone. This drifted with the high altitude winds for a week or so before fixing themselves. Technically an issue for people down-wind, but not something world-threatening.

larger volcanoes tend to deposit huge amount of dust into the stratosphere, guess they also send up lots of vapor and that it can reach even higher.

[Mazon Del]

It is well known that significant enough atmospheric events can do some weird things locally and globally to the upper atmosphere. Events such as eruptions or even hurricanes.

Strictly speaking, I'm not really sure there is much that NASA can do about it. Maybe alter some of their fuel uses, but considering that as you pointed out, what we are worried about is the global launches, it really needs to be every space program. Chances are, non-problematic fuels are not very cost-effective.