Space Travel: Polluting The Final Frontier?

The rise of space tourism among billionaires has sparked concerns about its environmental impact on Earth. Space travel requires a large amount of propellant to escape Earth's gravity, with common fuels including kerosene, liquid hydrogen, and liquid oxygen. These fuels emit a range of substances, including carbon dioxide, water, chlorine, and other chemicals, contributing to a hefty carbon footprint. The pollution from rocket launches reaches the stratosphere and mesosphere, layers of the atmosphere that are usually pristine. The accumulation of pollutants in the upper atmosphere could lead to unforeseen consequences for Earth's climate, such as altering the polar jet stream and changing weather patterns. The potential environmental costs of space tourism have led to calls for scientific evaluation and regulatory oversight to address the unique challenges posed by this emerging industry.

Rocket launches emit carbon dioxide, water, chlorine, and other chemicals into the upper atmosphere

The BE-3 engine, which powers Blue Origin's New Shepard suborbital vehicle, emits mainly water along with some minor combustion products. However, rockets propelled by other types of fuel pollute the atmosphere with carbon dioxide, water, chlorine, and other chemicals. For instance, SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket uses kerosene, and NASA's new Space Launch System uses liquid hydrogen. These fuels emit a variety of substances into the atmosphere when they are burned.

Rocket launches can produce up to 300 tons of carbon dioxide into the upper atmosphere, where it can remain for years. The number of rocket launches is currently very small, but emissions from rockets are emitted directly into the upper atmosphere, which means that their effects can be long-lasting. Even water injected into the upper atmosphere, where it can form clouds, can have warming impacts.

The accumulation of these particles over years and decades is a cause for concern for scientists. As the current climate crisis started relatively slowly as the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere grew, the pollution in the stratosphere may only start causing harm some years later. Injecting pollutants into the stratosphere could alter the polar jet stream, change winter storm patterns, or affect average rainfall.

The environmental impact of rocket launches is not limited to the upper atmosphere. Rocket engines also release trace gases that contribute to ozone depletion, as well as particles of soot. The production of hydrogen fuel, which is considered "clean," can also cause significant carbon emissions.

Rocket engines release trace gases and soot, contributing to ozone depletion

Space launches can have a significant carbon footprint due to the burning of solid rocket fuels. Rocket engines release trace gases and particles of soot into the upper atmosphere, which contribute to ozone depletion. This occurs as the combustion of rocket fuel produces various gases, including highly reactive trace-gas molecules known as radicals, which dominate stratospheric ozone destruction. A single radical in the stratosphere can destroy up to 10,000 ozone molecules before being deactivated and removed. Soot and aluminium oxide particles emitted by rocket engines provide chemically active surfaces that increase the rate at which these radicals "leak" from their reservoirs and contribute to ozone destruction.

Solid rocket motors (SRMs) and liquid rocket engines (LREs) contribute to ozone depletion to varying degrees. SRMs emit larger quantities of gases and particles that deplete the ozone, while LREs emit smaller amounts. The type of fuel used also plays a role, with solid rocket fuels generally considered more harmful to the ozone layer than liquid rocket fuels. This is due to the catalytic cycle of destruction caused by chlorine radicals, which are more prevalent in solid rocket fuels.

The accumulation of pollutants in the stratosphere and mesosphere over time is a significant concern for scientists. While rocket launches are relatively infrequent, the increasing popularity of space exploration and the emergence of space tourism could lead to a larger impact on the ozone layer in the future. Currently, global rocket launches deplete the ozone layer by approximately 0.03%, a small fraction compared to other ozone depletion substances. However, as the space industry expands and these other substances decrease, the relative impact of rocket launches on ozone depletion could become more significant.

To mitigate the potential harm caused by rocket launches, advancements have been made to make liquid rocket fuel non-nitrogen-based, reducing the effects of nitric oxide on ozone loss. Additionally, using chlorine-free rocket fuel could be a future approach to protect the ozone layer from the destructive effects of chlorine radicals.

Space tourism could significantly increase the frequency of rocket launches, exacerbating pollution

The rise of space tourism could significantly increase the frequency of rocket launches, exacerbating pollution. The environmental consequences of space tourism are likely to be severe. Rocket launches can produce up to 300 tons of carbon dioxide, which is released into the upper atmosphere and can remain there for years. The BE-3 engine, which powers Blue Origin's New Shepard suborbital vehicle, emits mainly water and some minor combustion products, making it a relatively cleaner option compared to other rocket engines. However, the production of hydrogen fuel can still cause significant carbon emissions.

The impact of space tourism on the environment is a growing concern. Virgin Galactic, for instance, aims to offer 400 spaceflights each year, and with each flight generating as much pollution as a 10-hour transatlantic flight, the carbon footprint of space tourism could be incredibly high. The emissions per passenger for space flights are estimated to be between 50 and 100 times higher than those of a long-haul flight. This is because rockets require a large amount of fuel to propel them into space, and the emissions are released directly into the upper atmosphere, where they can remain for a long time.

The accumulation of pollutants in the stratosphere and mesosphere, which start at altitudes of about 6.2 miles (10 kilometers) and 31 miles (50 kilometers) respectively, is particularly worrying. These pollutants can have long-term consequences, such as altering the polar jet stream, changing winter storm patterns, and affecting average rainfall. The ozone depletion caused by rocket engine exhaust is also a significant concern, as a depleted ozone layer would absorb less incoming sunlight, leading to heating of the stratosphere.

The potential environmental impact of space tourism has led to criticism of the industry, especially in the context of other global crises such as climate change. While companies like Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin, and SpaceX are pushing forward with their space tourism plans, the lack of regulatory oversight and safety standards for human passengers is concerning. The impact of space tourism on pollution and the environment is expected to be a major area of focus as the industry develops.

Space junk from derelict satellites and other objects accumulates in Earth's orbit

Space debris, also known as space junk, is any piece of machinery or debris left by humans in space. This includes defunct human-made objects in space – principally in Earth orbit – which no longer serve a useful function. These can be derelict spacecraft (non-functional spacecraft and abandoned launch vehicle stages), mission-related debris, and fragmentation debris from the breakup of derelict rocket bodies and spacecraft.

There are about 2,000 active satellites orbiting the Earth, with an additional 3,000 dead ones. There are also around 34,000 pieces of space junk bigger than 10 centimetres and millions of smaller pieces. This junk can remain in orbit for hundreds or even thousands of years. The accumulation of space junk is a growing concern as it poses a risk to functioning spacecraft. The risk of collision increases as more objects are launched into space.

Space junk results from several factors. Firstly, some satellites and rocket bodies are abandoned in orbit after their useful lives. Secondly, collisions or anti-satellite tests in orbit can create thousands of new pieces of dangerous debris. For example, the first accidental in-orbit collision between two satellites in 2009 generated more than 2300 trackable fragments. Additionally, the harsh space environment can cause the disintegration of external and internal parts of satellites and rocket bodies, leading to explosions and further fragmentation. Finally, human-made junk has also been left on the Moon and can be attributed to paint flecks, solidified liquids expelled from spacecraft, and unburned particles from solid rocket motors.

To mitigate the issue of space junk, several solutions have been proposed and implemented. The United Nations has requested that companies remove their satellites from orbit within 25 years of their mission's end. While challenging to enforce, companies have developed methods such as using harpoons, nets, magnets, or lasers to grab or heat up the satellite, increasing its atmospheric drag so that it falls out of orbit. Another approach is to design missions to leave the rocket second-stage in an elliptical geocentric orbit with a low-perigee, ensuring rapid orbital decay and avoiding long-term orbital debris.

Rocket launches expose passengers to radiation, with potential health risks

Space travel can cause pollution in several ways. Rocket launches burning solid or hydrocarbon fuels release soot and trace gases into the upper atmosphere, contributing to ozone depletion. The production of hydrogen fuel for "cleaner" rockets can also cause significant carbon emissions. Furthermore, the accumulation of "space junk" from disused satellites and other objects in Earth's orbit is a growing concern. The impact of space tourism on the environment is particularly worrying for scientists, as it involves frequent launches of rockets with high pollution outputs.

Frequently asked questions