In fact, aviophage herself is missing the point, Yes, the main boosters use hydrogen/oxygen fuel, but while that itself is clean burning, the processes needed to PRODUCE that fuel are not. Hydrogen and oxygen are produced typically by electrolysis of water. That requires vast amounts of electricity. Since 80% of the electricity produced in the US comes from burning coal, it is safe to say that those rockets are effectively running on coal power. In terms of effects on the environment, it takes many tonnes of coal to produce the electricity to produce the fuel, to power the space shuttle. It then of course requires a lot of other fossil fuels to get that fuel to the launch facilities.
As for the solid rocket boosters, it's misleading to say 'they are not flammable until mixed"..Noooo, but they are toxic, and their byproducts are as well. I can't see how flammability is really the issue.
NASA is a huge industrial complex, with plants, suppliers, and facilities all over the country. It does have a very large environmental footprint. Personally I think it's worth it, but let's not pretend it doesn't affect the environment.
If there replaced into to be a disaster, then it rather is going to surely impression NASA's plans for a at the same time as, yet they only have approximately 7 area holiday missions left anyhow previously they retire the area shuttles constantly in 2010, next 3 hundred and sixty 5 days.. so in the event that they could get by those final 7 undertaking with none problems then each and every thing would be ok :]
The first answer is uninformed. NASA does not use petrolium based fuels for spacecraft. The Space Shuttle main engines burn liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, which is the cleanest fuel combination possible. It produces only water as its end product. The solid rocket boosters are fueled with metallic powders, which are not flammable until mixed and loaded.
NASA is an industrial operation, and as such uses cars and trucks, airplanes, structural materials, and a lot of electricity. Therefore NASA produces some pollution, but the space flights themselves produce only a negligible amount of pollution.
nasa space program is all right except the satellites it sends to space. some satellites uses plutonium oxides in the ash forms encase in a ceramic box as a battery for the satellites.
however plutonium oxides is very toxic. a little bit can kills everyone on earth if the satellites explodes during launch.
nasa is taken the chance that it will never happens.
I suppose that all depends on how you define "affect". Does it emit pollution into the air from rockets, trucks, aircraft, any thing else that supports the program and emits pollution? Yes it does. To what degree of effect can be debatable, but if I had to guess the carbon footprint is rather large.
The fuel they use is the most highly concentrated form of patroleum on the planet. They have it refined at special facilities all over the country and if you looked it up you would see a video where one of these refineries caught fire and exploded. The video shows a shock wave spread out and send everything flying, if that isnt a danger to the environment I dont know what is.
Comments
In fact, aviophage herself is missing the point, Yes, the main boosters use hydrogen/oxygen fuel, but while that itself is clean burning, the processes needed to PRODUCE that fuel are not. Hydrogen and oxygen are produced typically by electrolysis of water. That requires vast amounts of electricity. Since 80% of the electricity produced in the US comes from burning coal, it is safe to say that those rockets are effectively running on coal power. In terms of effects on the environment, it takes many tonnes of coal to produce the electricity to produce the fuel, to power the space shuttle. It then of course requires a lot of other fossil fuels to get that fuel to the launch facilities.
As for the solid rocket boosters, it's misleading to say 'they are not flammable until mixed"..Noooo, but they are toxic, and their byproducts are as well. I can't see how flammability is really the issue.
NASA is a huge industrial complex, with plants, suppliers, and facilities all over the country. It does have a very large environmental footprint. Personally I think it's worth it, but let's not pretend it doesn't affect the environment.
If there replaced into to be a disaster, then it rather is going to surely impression NASA's plans for a at the same time as, yet they only have approximately 7 area holiday missions left anyhow previously they retire the area shuttles constantly in 2010, next 3 hundred and sixty 5 days.. so in the event that they could get by those final 7 undertaking with none problems then each and every thing would be ok :]
The first answer is uninformed. NASA does not use petrolium based fuels for spacecraft. The Space Shuttle main engines burn liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen, which is the cleanest fuel combination possible. It produces only water as its end product. The solid rocket boosters are fueled with metallic powders, which are not flammable until mixed and loaded.
NASA is an industrial operation, and as such uses cars and trucks, airplanes, structural materials, and a lot of electricity. Therefore NASA produces some pollution, but the space flights themselves produce only a negligible amount of pollution.
nasa space program is all right except the satellites it sends to space. some satellites uses plutonium oxides in the ash forms encase in a ceramic box as a battery for the satellites.
however plutonium oxides is very toxic. a little bit can kills everyone on earth if the satellites explodes during launch.
nasa is taken the chance that it will never happens.
I suppose that all depends on how you define "affect". Does it emit pollution into the air from rockets, trucks, aircraft, any thing else that supports the program and emits pollution? Yes it does. To what degree of effect can be debatable, but if I had to guess the carbon footprint is rather large.
The fuel they use is the most highly concentrated form of patroleum on the planet. They have it refined at special facilities all over the country and if you looked it up you would see a video where one of these refineries caught fire and exploded. The video shows a shock wave spread out and send everything flying, if that isnt a danger to the environment I dont know what is.