A 10-fold increase in rocket launches would start harming the ozone layer
SpaceX Starship, shown sitting to the right of the launch tower beside the Super Heavy booster, is set to lift off on Monday for an integrated test flight of the rocket system.
Photo:via CNN Newsource
The international space industry is on a growth trajectory, but new research shows a rapid increase in rocket launches would damage the ozone layer.
Several hundred rockets are launched globally each year by a mix of commercial companies and nation-state space programmes. These take place at around 20 sites, almost all in the Northern Hemisphere, with the most prolific
launch rates
currently from the United States, China, New Zealand and Russia.
Our
latest research
explores the tipping point when launching more rockets will begin to cause problems. Our findings show that once rates reach 2,000 launches a year - about a ten-fold increase on last year - the current healing of the ozone layer slows down.
We argue that with care, we can avoid this future. The economic benefits of industry growth can be realised, but it will take a collaborative effort.
The
ozone layer
protects life on Earth from harmful solar ultraviolet (UV) rays. It is slowly
healing
from the effects of chlorofluorocarbons and other damaging chemicals emitted last century, thanks to
global cooperative agreements
under the
Montreal Protocol
.
Gases and particulates emitted by rockets as they punch through the atmosphere are known to
thin the ozone layer
. So far, they don't cause appreciable ozone depletion, as relatively few launches take place each year.
However, launches are steadily increasing. In 2019, there were 102 launches. By 2024, that increased to 258 worldwide. There are expected to be even more in 2025. At multiple sites worldwide, the launch industry projects impressive levels of future growth.
For US-based launches, a three-fold increase in the number of rockets launched in 2023 is expected
as soon as 2028
.
One driver of this growth is the effort to build out
satellite constellations
to tens of thousands of units, positioned low in Earth's orbit. These require many launches to create and are
happening
in several nations, run by a number of companies.
Once in place, these constellations require ongoing launches to keep them supplied with active satellites.
To figure out how future launches could affect the ozone layer, we first built a
database of ozone-depleting chemicals emitted by rockets
currently in use. We then fed this database into a model of Earth's atmosphere and climate, and simulated atmospheric composition under several scenarios of higher rates of rocket launches.
We found that with around 2000 launches worldwide each year, the ozone layer thins by up to 3 percent. Due to atmospheric transport of rocket-emitted chemicals, we saw the largest ozone losses over Antarctica, even though most launches are taking place in the Northern Hemisphere.
Fortunately, the ozone losses are small. We wouldn't expect to see catastrophic damage to humans or ecosystems. However, the losses are significant given global efforts underway to heal the ozone layer. The global abundance of ozone is still around 2 percent lower than before the onset of losses caused by chlorofluorocarbons.
Photo:
Twitter/SpaceX
Encouragingly, we found no significant ozone loss in a scenario of more modest rates of around 900 launches per year. However, this is for the types of rockets that are in use right now around the world.
We focus on current launch vehicles because it is uncertain when the new and massive rockets currently in development will enter use. But these larger rockets often require far more fuel, which creates more emissions at each launch.
Rocket propellant choices make a big difference to the atmosphere. We found fuels emitting chlorine-containing chemicals or black carbon particulates have the largest effects on the ozone layer. Reducing use of these fuels as launch rates increase is key to supporting an ongoing recovery of the ozone layer.
Re-entering spacecraft and satellite debris can also cause damage. However, the global scientific community doesn't yet fully understand the chemistry around re-entry. Our work provides a realistic "floor" for the lowest level of damage that will occur.
But it is important to remember that these effects are not locked in. It is entirely possible to create a launch industry where we avoid harmful effects, but that would require reducing use of chlorine-containing fuels, minimising black carbon emissions by new rockets and monitoring emissions.
It will take keen effort and enthusiasm from industry and regulators, working together with scientists. But this needs to start now, not after the damage is done.
-
This story
originally appeared on The Conversation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
9 hours ago
- RNZ News
Beef farmers likely first in line for emissions-reducing livestock pill
Photo: RNZ/Susan Murray Industry-government venture AgriZero is hinting that New Zealand beef may be the first agricultural sector to gain access to tools like a new methane-reducing pill for livestock - and soon. Ruminant BioTech was developing a slow-release bolus, or pill, to be fed to livestock. Recent trials on New Zealand farms resulted in a reduction of methane emissions. It was one of AgriZero's 10 investments towards reducing agricultural emissions. AgriZero first invested $1.8 million into Ruminant BioTech's product in April 2023, followed by $4m to accelerate its commercialisation in August. Chief executive Wayne McNee said the company was planning a limited release for beef cattle, once it was approved by the regulator. "Ruminant BioTech, so likely to be the first of these products in the market. It's a bolus, many of you will have heard of, containing bromoform," he said. "The benefit of a bolus, obviously is that you can administer it once, it lasts for at least 100 days, reduces methane by 70 percent or so over that period. "And the current thinking is to probably administer one of these [boluses] to an animal during its lifetime, and you average out the benefit of that over the period of that beef animal's life." Ruminant BioTech's bolus won a protype category innovation award at Fieldays near Hamilton in June. Ruminant BioTech's bolus contained Tribromomethane (bromoform), a chemical compound that could be found in marine algae, phytoplankton or as a by-product of chlorinated drinking water. It applied to register trade names for two products, the "Calm A Cattle Bolus" in September and "Emitless" more recently in May. Department of Internal Affairs information showed Emitless was a 172g oral bolus containing 48g of Tribromomethane, and users were instructed not to use the product in cattle intended for reproduction, or cattle intended to produce milk for human consumption. Whereas, Calm A Cattle Bolus was a 165g bolus containing 36g of Tribromomethane, intended to reduce enteric methane emissions in cattle for up to 4 months. Last week, the Environmental Protection Authority said it determined that the inhibitor - containing 50-70 percent tribromomethane as the active ingredient - fit within the scope of the veterinary medicines group standard, under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act (1996), and did not require an individual approval. Before the product could be used in New Zealand though, it would require registration under the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act (1997), which was administered by the Ministry for Primary Industries. New Zealand Food Safety deputy director-general, Vincent Arbuckle said it had received and was assessing the application for registering Ruminant BioTech's "Emitless" product. Ruminant Bio Tech's R&D team holding boluses, designed to curb methane emissions in cattle, in front of the lab team producing a batch of boluses Photo: Supplied Arbuckle said the product was an intraruminal bolus for reducing enteric methane in cattle weighing between 350 kilograms and 450kg for up to 4 months. Would you feed your cattle emissions-reducing technologies like the bolus? Let us know ruralnews@ McNee said it expected a result from the regulator soon. "It's going through regulatory process at the moment and hoping to be available later this year or worst case early next year," he said. "Certainly by next year and over the next few years, we'll see one or two products, maybe three products come into the market each year. That's what the companies are telling us." McNee said in future, farmers will have a range of emissions-reduction tools to choose from. "If there's a productivity improvement, it may be relatively straightforward to get uptake. "But in other cases, if it's pure methane reduction, then at the end of the day, somebody's going to have to pay for that," he said. "There are a number of processors, certainly the ones that have invested in us, who are talking with companies offshore to look at the potential to provide incentives to farmers to take up those tools." Also speaking at the red meat sector conference in Christchurch this month, Dr John Roche the chief science advisor for the Prime Minister and the Ministry for Primary Industries, said progress had accelerated. "Incredibly exciting. I've sat in front of Select Committee for the last several years talking about these technologies and I kid you not, two or three years ago I was promising I'm reasonably confident they'll be here by 2030. "Two years later, I'm saying we will have a bolus that reduces methane by 70 percent in dry stock, slow release over 120 days, and it will be released either later this year or early next year," he said. "These technologies are coming fast and more of them are becoming available." Company records showed Ruminant BioTech Corp's main shareholders were Rosrain Investments, which owned 44 percent of the business. It had two company directors from New Zealand and two from Australia. Other backers included New Zealand Trustee Services, Crown Terrace Investments and New Zealand Green Investment Finance, the latter a government fund towards low-emissions projects that the government announced in April it will shut down .
RNZ News
11 hours ago
- RNZ News
Genetically-modified purple tomatoes being considered for sale
File photo. Photo: Thomas Martinsen/ Unsplash New Zealanders are being asked if they want to eat genetically-modified purple tomatoes. Food Standards Australia New Zealand said it had received an application to use and sell the fruit. It said the tomatoes contained genes from the snapdragon plant, Del and Ros1-N, that made it produce blue pigments, resulting in purple skin and flesh. "If approved, the GM Purple Tomato will be sold fresh, as a whole tomato, or used as an ingredient in processed food products such as sun-dried tomatoes or pastes," it said. "Our safety assessment found no public health or safety concerns with food derived from purple tomato lines containing event Del/Ros1-N. It is as safe as food from conventional tomato varieties." FSANZ chief executive Dr Sandra Cuthbert said it was the sixth genetically modified food being assessed through a shared process with Health Canada, which streamlined approvals. 'If approved, food from these tomato lines would need to be labelled as genetically modified under the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code, ensuring consumers have the information they need to make informed choices,' Dr Cuthbert said. She said the application related only to the use of the GM Purple Tomato as food in Australia and New Zealand. An application for commercial cultivation in Australia was being assessed by the Gene Technology Regulator and cultivation in New Zealand would require separate approval by the Environmental Protection Authority, she said. The importation of viable seeds into either country was subject to separate biosecurity and quarantine requirements. Public comment on the application would close on 10 September. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
3 days ago
- RNZ News
Are vape recycling stations skirting advertising rules?
New research from Auckland University suggests vape companies may be skirting advertising rules, that have been in place since 2020, with branding on vape recycling and phone charging stations. VapeCycle is a recycling initiative run by the vape company VAPO. VAPO has sponsored music festivals in the past, and is one of the many vape brands owned by VEC Limited. VapeCycle boxes - where people can dispose of their empty vapes, appeared, for example at 2024's Rhythm and Vines, and Northern bass festivals - with VEC Limited product branding on the recycling boxes. Pictures of the vape boxes on Rhythm and Vines' website show them with pictures of bright vapes - however VAPO says at the festival itself, these were not the boxes used - but they had been used in other locations in the past. Lucy Hardie is a public health researcher at Auckland Univeristy and says the imagery, and branding, may be perceived as product promotion, which is prohibited. A social media post from VAPO. Photo:
