Xref: utzoo sci.space:32183 sci.geo.meteorology:631 sci.space.shuttle:8096
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!cs.umn.edu!sialis!orbit!pnet51!rambler
From: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org (Dan Meyer)
Newsgroups: sci.space,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.space.shuttle
Subject: Re: Solid-fuel Rockets and Ozone
Message-ID: <5237@orbit.cts.com>
Date: 27 Jun 91 03:05:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: orbit.5237
Sender: news@orbit.cts.com
Organization: People-Net [pnet51], Minneapolis, MN.
Lines: 61

cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu (Joe Cain) writes:
>In article <1991Jun25.192324.22019@uvm.edu> work@emily.uvm.edu (Steven S. Work 1st) writes:
>>  " _NASA space shuttle destroys the ozone layer_
>>   Despite all the coverage given to the growing hole in the ozone layer, 
>>   little or no attention has been paid to Dr. Helen Caldicott's claim that 
>>   the space shuttle is one of the ozone layer's biggest destroyers. According 
>>   to Cadicott, 250 tons of hydrochloric acid are released into the air every 
>>   time a space shuttle is launched. With each launch, one quarter of 1 
>>   percent of the ozone is destroyed. So far, claims Caldicott, the space 
>>   shuttle has destroyed 10 percent of the ozone. 
>>        In addition, Two Soviet rocket scientists have warned that the solid-
>>   fuel rocket boosters used on the shuttle release 187 tons of ozone-
>>   destroying chlorine molecules into the atmosphere with every launch, as 
>>   well as seven tons of nitrogen (another ozone depleter), 387 tons of carbon 
>>   dioxide (a major contributor to the greenhouse effect), and 177 tons of 
>>   aluminium oxide (linked to Alzheimer's disease). Other solid-fuel rockets, 
>>   such as the U.S. Delta rocket, the U.S. Titan, and the French Ariane V, 
>>   also contribute to ozone destruction." 
>
>	My understanding of the ozone problem is that the chemical
>interactions only affect the portion of ozone that is below the layer
>of production, that is the ozone that would naturally be safe from uv
>destruction. Thus it would be impossible to wipe all ozone protection
>from uv to the surface due to its rapid formation by sunlight. Ozone
>holes would thus only occur in darkness and in the worst case the
>bulge in the vertical distribution that frequently forms due to
>subsidence at high altitudes would be diminished. Am I the only person
>unconcerned about ozone depletion being a danger at mid and low
>latitudes? (I also don't worry about global warming)
>
>	I attended the recent international science fair in Orlando
>and was educated as to the effect of metallic aluminum on creating
>Altzheimers affects in worms (stupid behavior plus concentrations of
>aluminum in the equivalent of their brain tissue). From now on we only
>use coated aluminum pots in our house! Although I would surmise that
>normal ground level exposures would far exceed that thrown out by
>rockets, it would be good to have someone put a pencil to it.
>
>	At least a decade ago I witnessed a NASA attempt to suppress a report
>written by Art Aiken of Goddard Space Flight Center that estimated
>that the one a week Shuttle schedule then proposed would create enough
>nitrous oxides to wipe Florida's orange crops. 
>
>	It seems to me that quantitative estimates of the effects of
>such gases are in order from unbiased sources. Although I am not
>normally paranoid about governmental suppression of facts, the present
>administrative climate would seem to caution that one should pay some
>attention to plausible warnings, if it is possible to sort them out
>from hysterical rantings from those environmentally polarized.
>
>Joseph Cain		cain@geomag.gly.fsu.edu
>cain@fsu.bitnet		scri::cain

YEA YEA YEA!!!! there is finally another conservative viewpoint out there!!!!


--- Dan

Remember: " Buffalo never Oink " Seen on a South Dakota travel brocure.
Advertisment: Try the Railway Post Office , a railfan BBS ! (612) 377-2197.
UUCP: {crash tcnet}!orbit!pnet51!rambler
INET: rambler@pnet51.orb.mn.org