andy@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Andy Clews) (01/16/90)
From article <1990Jan15.164939.29641@utzoo.uucp>, by henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer): > The main problem is that solid rockets put out all kinds of garbage, some > of it with enough chlorine content to possibly be an ozone issue. I read in the UK-based "Green Magazine" that every Shuttle launch causes the eventual destruction of 1 million tonnes of atmospheric ozone due to the chlorine compounds in the SRBs. Can anyone confirm or (hopefully) deny this? -- Andy Clews, Computing Service, Univ. of Sussex, Brighton BN1 9QN, ENGLAND JANET: andy@syma.sussex.ac.uk BITNET: andy%syma.sussex.ac.uk@uk.ac Voice: +44 273 606755 ext.2129
jdnicoll@watyew.waterloo.edu (Brian or James) (01/17/90)
As well as the chlorine problem, I remember some concern about possible side effects of NOx compounds produced by the boosters. I understand that the exhaust of a (for example) hydrogen-oxygen fueled booster would be primarily H2O, but would there be significant amounts of other compounds produced, either from incomplete combustion of the fuel, or from chemical reations caused by the admittedly transient presence of the several thousand degree exhaust? Again, from my rather dim memory, I recall that there were reports of large, temporary holes forming in the ozone layer. Since I that Orion was designed in (Pre-atmospheric test ban), these extra cancer deaths were felt to be acceptable (and probably difficult, if not flat m possible to detect against the normal cancer death rate.). Maybe France can use Orion:) . SF authors use nuclear drives in atmosphers with cheerful abandon. I recall reading one were the viewpoint character says something like "OK, we're over the 'burbs. Switch to photon drive." I suspect the author has -no- idea just how much energy the 'thinly populated' suburbs were about to receive. (As yet another aside, would there have been any EMP side effects from Orion?) James Nicoll
jdnicoll@watyew.waterloo.edu (Brian or James) (01/17/90)
*Sigh* Sorry about the previous posting. Some important sentences got lost on the way to posting. Let's try this again... As well as the chlorine problem, I remember concern about possible side-effects caused due to NOx compounds produced by boosters. While I realise that the exhaust from a (for example) hydrogen-oxygen fueled booster would primarily H2O, would there be significant amounts of other compounds produced, either from incomplete combustion of the fuel, or chemical reactions between atmospheric gasses caused by the admittedly transient presence of the several thousand degree exhaust? Again, from my rather dim memory, I recall reports of large, temporary holes in the ozone layer forming after launches. I don't know if these reports were verified. Other, more energetic boosters could have some *really* interesting side effects. Orion would have caused some additional cancer deaths if it had ever been used as a launching system. Because of the environment Orion was designed in (pre Atmospheric Test Ban USA), these additional deaths were felt to be acceptable (and probably difficult, if not impossible, to detect against the normal cancer rate.). Perhaps France can replace Arianne with Orion :). SF authors use nuclear drives with a charming disregard for safety (And often physics, as well.). I recall one author whose protagonist said something akin to "OK, we're over the 'burbs. Turn on the photon drive." I suspect the author had *no* idea just how much energy the 'thinly populated' suburbs were about to receive. No wonder they were thinly populated! As yet another aside, would there have been any EMP related side effects from Orion? James Nicoll
mvp@v7fs1.UUCP (Mike Van Pelt) (01/17/90)
In article <19846@watdragon.waterloo.edu> jdnicoll@watyew.waterloo.edu (Brian or James) writes: >SF authors use nuclear drives in atmosphers with cheerful abandon. I recall a Larry Niven story, where a fusion-drive ship is conveyed to orbit by a thruster that was "... air compressed almost to degenerate matter. Using a fusion drive in the Earth's atmosphere was good for a one-way trip to the Organ Banks -- in pieces." -- Mike Van Pelt I would like to electrocute everyone who uses the Headland Technology word 'fair' in connection with income tax policies. (was: Video Seven) -- William F. Buckley ...ames!vsi1!v7fs1!mvp
dd2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Daniel Alexander Davis) (01/17/90)
Also, I heard someone mention a local problem of heat pollution adversely affecting the ecology of Cape Canaveral. I do not know whether this is true, my memory of where I heard it is too inexact. Does anyone know? Dan Davis (is), the Repunzel of the Mathematics Department. Carnegie Mellon student Disclaimer - don't look at me, I'm also a music major.
kimf@tybalt.caltech.edu (Kim Flowers) (01/17/90)
Hey, what about all those HOH molecules them hydrogen-oxygen boosters are spreading all over the place! Could be a real problem... :) mAd_QuArK!
dietz@cs.rochester.edu (Paul Dietz) (01/18/90)
In article <13353@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> kimf@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Kim Flowers) writes: >Hey, what about all those HOH molecules them hydrogen-oxygen boosters >are spreading all over the place! Could be a real problem... :) Actually, they could be, if the launch rate is high enough (read: much larger than now). The upper stratosphere is extremely dry. If we inject water there, it could form high altitude ice clouds, especially in polar regions. Such clouds cause net warming by reflecting infrared radiation. Also, ice clouds in the Antarctic stratosphere are thought to play a part in the formation of the ozone hole. Paul F. Dietz dietz@cs.rochester.edu
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (01/19/90)
In article <0Zgv2xK00XcS4==Vhj@andrew.cmu.edu> dd2f+@andrew.cmu.edu (Daniel Alexander Davis) writes: >Also, I heard someone mention a local problem >of heat pollution adversely affecting the ecology >of Cape Canaveral... Sounds very implausible. A shuttle launch is maybe 20-30 gigawatts of power for half a minute or so (it climbs quickly, remember). Sunlight is roughly a gigawatt per square kilometer, continuously. Any effects from launches would be transient and localized. -- 1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu