The rise of space tourism could affect Earth's climate in unforeseen ways, scientists worry

Are the effects of rocket launches on the atmosphere really negligible?

Hybrid rocket motors such as those used in Virgin Galactic's rocket planes emit a lot of soot.

Scientists worry that growing numbers of rocket flights and the rise of space tourism could harm Earth's atmosphere and contribute to climate change. 

When billionaires Richard Branson and Jeff Bezos soared into space this month aboard their companies' suborbital tourism vehicles, much of the world clapped in awe. 

But for some scientists, these milestones represented something other than just a technical accomplishment. Achieved after years of delays and despite significant setbacks , the flights marked the potential beginning of a long-awaited era that might see rockets fly through the so-far rather pristine upper layers of the atmosphere far more often than they do today. In the case of SpaceShipTwo, the vehicle operated by Branson's Virgin Galactic, these flights are powered by a hybrid engine that burns rubber and leaves behind a cloud of soot.

"Hybrid engines can use different types of fuels, but they always generate a lot of soot," said Filippo Maggi, associate professor of aerospace engineering at Politecnico di Milano, Italy, who researches rocket propulsion technologies and was part of a team that several years ago published an extensive analysis of hybrid rocket engine emissions. "These engines work like a candle, and their burning process creates conditions that are favorable for soot generation."

Related: Air pollution from reentering megaconstellation satellites could cause ozone hole 2.0

According to Dallas Kasaboski, principal analyst at the space consultancy Northern Sky Research, a single Virgin Galactic suborbital space tourism flight, lasting about an hour and a half, can generate as much pollution as a 10-hour trans-Atlantic flight. Some scientists consider that disconcerting, in light of Virgin Galactic’s ambitions to fly paying tourists to the edge of space several times a day.

"Even if the suborbital tourism market is launching at a fraction of the number of launches compared to the rest of the [tourism] industry, each of their flights has a much higher contribution, and that could be a problem," Kasaboski told Space.com.

Virgin Galactic's rockets are, of course, not the only culprits. All rocket motors burning hydrocarbon fuels generate soot, Maggi said. Solid rocket engines, such as those used in the past in the boosters of NASA's space shuttle , burn metallic compounds and emit aluminum oxide particles together with hydrochloric acid, both of which have a damaging effect on the atmosphere.

The BE-3 engine that powers Blue Origin's New Shepard suborbital vehicle, on the other hand, combines liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen to create thrust. The BE-3 is not a big polluter compared to other rocket engines, emitting mainly water along with some minor combustion products, experts say .

Too little is known

For Karen Rosenlof, senior scientist at the Chemical Sciences Laboratory at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the biggest problem is that rockets pollute the higher layers of the atmosphere — the stratosphere, which starts at an altitude of about 6.2 miles (10 kilometers), and the mesosphere, which goes upward from 31 miles (50 km). 

"You are emitting pollutants in places where you don't normally emit it," Rosenlof told Space.com. "We really need to understand. If we increase these things, what is the potential damage?"

So far, the impact of rocket launches on the atmosphere has been negligible, according to Martin Ross, an atmospheric scientist at the Aerospace Corporation who often works with Rosenlof. But that's simply because there have not been that many launches. 

"The amount of fuel currently burned by the space industry is less than 1% of the fuel burned by aviation," Ross told Space.com. "So there has not been a lot of research, and that makes sense. But things are changing in a way that suggests that we should learn about this in more detail."

Northern Sky Research predicts that the number of space tourism flights will skyrocket over the next decade, from maybe 10 a year in the near future to 360 a year by 2030, Kasaboski said. This estimate is still far below the growth rate that space tourism companies like Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin envision for themselves. 

"Demand for suborbital tourism is extremely high," Kasaboski said. "These companies virtually have customers waiting in a line, and therefore they want to scale up. Ultimately, they would want to fly multiple times a day, just like short-haul aircraft do."

The rate of rocket launches delivering satellites into orbit is expected to grow as well. But Kasaboski sees bigger potential for growth in space tourism. 

"It's like the difference between a cargo flight and a passenger flight," Kasaboski said. "There's a lot more passengers that are looking to fly."

The problem is, according to Ross, that the scientific community has no idea and not enough data to tell at what point rocket launches will start having a measurable effect on the planet's climate. At the same time, the stratosphere is already changing as the number of rocket launches sneakily grows.

"The impacts of these [rocket-generated] particles are not well understood even to an order of magnitude, the factor of 10," Ross said. "The uncertainty is large, and we need to narrow that down and predict how space might be impacting the atmosphere."

Space shuttle's ozone holes 

So far, the only direct measurements of the effects of rocket launches on chemical processes in the atmosphere come from the space shuttle era. In the 1990s, as the world was coming together to salvage the damaged ozone layer , NASA, NOAA and the U.S. Air Force put together a campaign that looked at the effects of the emissions from the space shuttle's solid fuel boosters on ozone in the stratosphere. 

"In the 1990s, there were significant concerns about chlorine from solid rocket motors," Ross said. "Chlorine is the bad guy to ozone in the stratosphere, and there were some models which suggested that ozone depletion from solid rocket motors would be very significant."

The scientists used NASA's WB 57 high-altitude aircraft to fly through the plumes generated by the space shuttle rockets in Florida. Reaching altitudes of up to 60,000 feet (19 km), they were able to measure the chemical reactions in the lower stratosphere just after the rockets' passage. 

"One of the fundamental questions was how much chlorine is being made in these solid rocket motors and in what form," David Fahey, the director of the Chemical Sciences Laboratory at NOAA, who led the study, told Space.com. "We measured it several times and then analyzed the results. At that time, there were not enough space shuttle launches to make a difference globally, but locally one could deplete the ozone layer due to this diffuse plume [left behind by the rocket]."

The space shuttle retired 10 years ago, but rockets generating ozone-damaging substances continue launching humans and satellites to space today. 

In fact, in 2018, in its latest Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion , which comes out every four years, the World Meteorological Organization included rockets as a potential future concern. The organization called for more research to be done as the number of launches is expected to increase.  

Worse than geoengineering 

Rosenlof's team studies the broader effects of human-made substances in the higher layers of the atmosphere using powerful NOAA supercomputers. The work is akin to predicting the proverbial butterfly effect, the influence of minuscule changes in the chemistry of the air tens of miles above Earth on climate and weather patterns on the ground. For her, black carbon, or soot, emitted by rockets burning hydrocarbon fuels, is of particular concern.

"The problem with soot is that it absorbs ultraviolet light, and that means that it could heat the stratosphere," Rosenlof said. "When you start heating the stratosphere, the layer above the troposphere [closest to the ground], you start changing the motion in the stratosphere. You are changing the energy transfer, and that could actually affect what is happening on the ground."

Rosenlof points out that many of the particles generated by some rockets have been of interest to scientists due to the possible effects they could have on the global climate in a different context — that of geoengineering , the deliberate tampering with the atmosphere with the aim of stopping or mitigating global warming. 

Rosenlof recently co-authored a paper that used the same powerful NOAA supercomputers to model what the scientists call a climate intervention. The team was interested in the climate effects of dispersing sulfur dioxide particles, which are known to reflect light away from Earth, in combination with soot (which is also part of rocket emissions) in the lower stratosphere. Soot absorbs energy from sunlight and pushes the sulfur dioxide aerosol particles to a higher altitude by warming up the surrounding air. At that higher altitude, the sulfur dioxide can start its climate-cooling work. The experiment modeled what would happen when 1.1 million tons of sunlight-reflecting sulfur dioxide mixed with 11,000 tons of black carbon were released in the upper troposphere by aircraft over a 10-day period. 

The study didn't find any significant negative effects on weather on Earth. Yet, those results do not dispel Rosenlof's concerns about the possible risks associated with the growing number of rocket launches. 

Altering the jet stream

"Black carbon in the geoengineering experiment that we did isn't as high as the stuff from these rockets," she said. "The problem is that the higher you go, the longer something lasts. Neither of them is ideal, because either of them would produce heating in places where we don't have heating right now."

According to Maggi, the soot particles generated by hybrid rocket engines are extremely small and light-weight. In fact, when he and his colleagues tried to measure the soot output of hybrid rocket engines in a laboratory, they couldn't reliably do it with precision because of the particles' minuscule size. 

"We were able to measure the particle output from solid rocket motors," Maggi said. "These are about a micron in size, and there [are] a lot of them. But because they are large, they fall to the ground more quickly. In hybrid rocket engines, we were not able to collect the soot from the plume because it's extremely fine, a few nanometres in size."

Maggi fears these particles could, in fact, stay in the stratosphere forever.

"They have the same size as the carbon emitted by aircrafts," Maggi said. "And we know that there is a layer of carbon in the atmosphere at the flight level of aircrafts which is staying there. It's very likely that particles coming from rocket motors will do the same."

The accumulation of these particles over years and decades is what worries the scientists. Just 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 down the road.

Rosenlof added that in the long term, injecting pollutants into the stratosphere could alter the polar jet stream, change winter storm patterns or affect average rainfall. 

"You might go from 25 inches [64 centimeters] a year to 20 inches [51 cm] a year in some places, which maybe doesn't sound like that big of a deal unless you are a farmer trying to grow your wheat right there," Rosenlof said. "Then a subtle change in rainfall can impact your crop yields."

Work to be done 

For this reason, Fahey says, it is critical that scientific work starts now to evaluate the future risks. 

"There is this fundamental gap where we just don't have the numbers, and that means that the science is limited because we have this lack of information," he said. "We feel it is part of our responsibility [at NOAA] to assess the impact of human activity on the stratosphere. Rockets are a principal and unique source [of stratospheric pollution], the launch frequencies are increasing and the effects are accumulating."

Fahey envisions a wider research program that would analyze the emissions and impacts of individual types of rocket engines and fuels on the stratosphere. The data could be used in Rosenlof's models to better predict the effects in accordance with the expected growth of the number of launches. Fahey, however, says that a political decision would have to come first to provide NOAA and its partners with funding that would enable them to take the high-altitude aircraft to the sky again and gather the data. The good news is, he added, that the U.S. Congress seems to be aware of the problem and things might soon start to move. 

"We would like to see a national program run by NOAA or the Air Force that would develop a database with basic emission characteristics of modern propulsion systems based on observations," he said. "We could gather some data in ground tests but also in the same way that we did with the space shuttle — by flying through the plumes just after launch."

Follow Tereza Pultarova on Twitter @TerezaPultarova. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook . 

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: [email protected].

Get the Space.com Newsletter

Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!

Tereza Pultarova

Tereza is a London-based science and technology journalist, aspiring fiction writer and amateur gymnast. Originally from Prague, the Czech Republic, she spent the first seven years of her career working as a reporter, script-writer and presenter for various TV programmes of the Czech Public Service Television. She later took a career break to pursue further education and added a Master's in Science from the International Space University, France, to her Bachelor's in Journalism and Master's in Cultural Anthropology from Prague's Charles University. She worked as a reporter at the Engineering and Technology magazine, freelanced for a range of publications including Live Science, Space.com, Professional Engineering, Via Satellite and Space News and served as a maternity cover science editor at the European Space Agency.

FAA to oversee investigation of SpaceX Starship's 3rd test flight

NASA celebrates SpaceX Starship's 3rd test flight, but more work needed ahead of Artemis moon missions

Hubble Telescope spies stormy weather and a shrinking Great Red Spot on Jupiter (video)

Most Popular

By Samantha Mathewson March 15, 2024

By Jeff Spry March 15, 2024

By Robert Lea March 15, 2024

By Mike Wall March 14, 2024

By Robert Lea March 14, 2024

By Brett Tingley March 14, 2024

By Rahul Rao March 14, 2024

  • 2 Artemis 2 moon astronauts celebrate engine test for future lunar missions (video)
  • 3 FAA to oversee investigation of SpaceX Starship's 3rd test flight
  • 4 Debris from burning satellites could be affecting Earth's magnetic field
  • 5 Scientists reveal never-before-seen map of the Milky Way's central engine (image)

Projected increase in space travel may damage ozone layer

  • June 21, 2022

Scientists from NOAA and The Aerospace Corp. modeled the climate response of the stratosphere to increased future emissions of black carbon from rockets burning kerosene fuel. Projected growth in rocket launches for space tourism, moon landings, and perhaps travel to Mars has many dreaming of a new era of space exploration. But a NOAA study suggests that a significant boost in spaceflight activity may damage the protective ozone layer on the one planet where we live.  Kerosene-burning rocket engines widely used by the global launch industry emit exhaust containing black carbon, or soot, directly into the stratosphere, where a layer of ozone protects all living things on the Earth from the harmful impacts of ultraviolet radiation, which include skin cancer and weakened immune systems in humans, as well as disruptions to agriculture and ecosystems.

According to new NOAA research published in the Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, a 10-fold increase in hydrocarbon fueled launches, which is plausible within the next two decades based on recent trends in space traffic growth, would damage the ozone layer, and change atmospheric circulation patterns. “We need to learn more about the potential impact of hydrocarbon-burning engines on the stratosphere and on the climate at the surface of the Earth,” said lead author Christopher Maloney, a CIRES research scientist working in NOAA’s Chemical Sciences Laboratory. “With further research, we should be able to better understand the relative impacts of different rocket types on climate and ozone.” Launch rates have tripled  Launch rates have more than tripled in recent decades, Maloney said, and accelerated growth is anticipated in the coming decades. Rockets are the only direct source of human-produced aerosol pollution above the troposphere, the lowest region of the atmosphere, which extends to a height of about 5 to 10 miles above the Earth’s surface.  The research team used a climate model to simulate the impact of approximately 10,000 metric tons of soot pollution injected into the stratosphere over the northern hemisphere every year for 50 years. Currently,  an estimated 1,000 tons of rocket soot exhaust are emitted annually. The researchers caution that the exact amounts of soot emitted by the different hydrocarbon fueled engines used around the globe are poorly understood.  The researchers found that this level of activity would increase annual temperatures in the stratosphere by 0.5 – 2° Celsius or approximately 1-4°Farenheit, which would change global circulation patterns by slowing the subtropical jet streams as much as 3.5%, and weakening the stratospheric overturning circulation. 

Stratospheric ozone is strongly influenced by temperature and atmospheric circulation, noted co-author Robert Portmann, a research physicist with the Chemical Sciences Laboratory, so it was no surprise to the research team that the model found changes in stratospheric temperatures and winds also caused changes in the abundance of ozone. The scientists found ozone reductions occurred poleward of 30 degrees North, or roughly the latitude of Houston, in nearly all months of the year. The maximum reduction of 4% occurred at the North Pole in June. All other locations north of 30° N experienced at least some reduced ozone throughout the year. This spatial pattern of ozone loss directly coincides with the modeled distribution of black carbon and the warming associated with it, Maloney said.  “The bottom line is projected increases in rocket launches could expose people in the Northern Hemisphere to increased harmful UV radiation,” Maloney said.  The research team also simulated two larger emission scenarios of 30,000 and 100,000 tons of soot pollution per year to better understand the impacts of an extremely large increase in future space travel using hydrocarbon-fueled engines, and more clearly investigate the feedbacks that determine the atmosphere’s response. Results showed that the stratosphere is sensitive to relatively modest black carbon injections. The larger emission simulations showed a similar, yet more severe disruptions of atmospheric circulation and climate loss  than the 10,000 metric ton case.

Building a research foundation The study built on previous research by members of the author team. A 2010 study led by co-author Martin Ross, a scientist with The Aerospace Corporation, first explored the climate impact of an increase in soot-producing rocket launches. A second study performed at NOAA in 2017, on which Ross was a co-author, examined the climate response to water vapor emissions from a proposed reusable space launch system utilizing cleaner hydrogen-fueled rockets. “Our work emphasizes the importance of ozone depletion caused by soot particles emitted by liquid-fueled rockets,” Ross said. “These simulations change the long-held belief that spaceflight’s only threat to the ozone layer was from solid-fueled rockets. We’ve shown that particles are where the action is for spaceflight’s impacts.”   While the new research describes the influence that soot in rocket exhaust has on the climate and composition of the stratosphere, the scientists said it represents an initial step in understanding the spectrum of impacts on the stratosphere from increased space flight.   Combustion emissions from the different rocket types will need to be evaluated, they said.  Soot and other particles generated by satellites burning up when they fall out of orbit is also a growing, poorly understood source of emissions in the middle-to-upper atmosphere. These and other topics will need further research to produce a complete picture of space industry emissions and their impacts on Earth’s climate and ozone.   The study was supported by NOAA’s Earth’s Radiation Budget initiative. For more information, contact Monica Allen, NOAA Research Director of Public Affairs at [email protected] or 202-379-6693.

space travel environmental impact

Meet the women of NOAA advancing greenhouse gas research

space travel environmental impact

Could drying the stratosphere help cool the planet?

picture of clouds over earth from atmosphere

50 Years of Getting ENSO Predictions *Mostly* Correct

A sandy beach is dotted with chunks of ice. The waves are hitting the beach and there is no ice out on the water.

Great Lakes ice coverage reaches historic low

Popup call to action.

A prompt with more information on your call to action.

  • Newsletters

Site search

  • Israel-Hamas war
  • 2024 election
  • TikTok’s fate
  • Supreme Court
  • Winter warming
  • All explainers
  • Future Perfect

Filed under:

How bad is space tourism for the environment? And other space travel questions, answered.

Six questions to consider before launching yourself into space.

Share this story

  • Share this on Facebook
  • Share this on Twitter
  • Share this on Reddit
  • Share All sharing options

Share All sharing options for: How bad is space tourism for the environment? And other space travel questions, answered.

Blue Origin’s New Shepard crew Jeff Bezos, Wally Funk, Oliver Daemen, and Mark Bezos walk near the booster rocket to pose for a picture after their flight into space.

For many, the rise of commercial space tourism is a vulgar display of wealth and power . Amid several global crises, including climate change and a pandemic, billionaires are spending their cash on launching themselves into space for fun. When Amazon founder Jeff Bezos told reporters after his first space tourism trip on Tuesday that Amazon customers and employees had “paid” for his flight, that only intensified that criticism.

But critics won’t deter Bezos and the other superrich. Space tourism is now a reality for the people who can afford it — and it will have repercussions for everyone on Earth.

In fact, all signs indicate that the market for these trips is already big enough that they’ll keep happening. Jeff Bezos’s spaceflight company Blue Origin already has two more trips scheduled later this year , while Virgin Galactic , the space firm founded by billionaire Richard Branson, has at least 600 people who have already paid around $250,000 each for future tickets on its spaceplane.

Now, as the commercial space tourism market (literally) gets off the ground, there are big questions facing future space travelers — and everyone else on the planet. Here are answers to the six biggest ones.

1. What will people actually be able to see and experience on a space trip?

The biggest perk of traveling to space is the view. Just past the boundary between space and Earth, passengers can catch a stunning glimpse of our planet juxtaposed against the wide unknown of space. If a passenger is riding on a Virgin Galactic flight, they will get about 53 miles above sea level. Blue Origin riders will get a little bit higher, about 62 miles above sea level and past the Kármán line, the internationally recognized boundary between Earth and space. Overall, the experience on both flights is pretty similar.

Welcome aboard #Unity22 , Virgin Galactic's first fully-crewed test flight. Watch the historic moment through the eyes of our mission specialists. pic.twitter.com/DEwbBkgJYl — Virgin Galactic (@virgingalactic) July 13, 2021

The view is meant to be awe-inducing, and the experience even has its own name: the Overview Effect . “​​When you see Earth from that high up, it changes your perspective on things and how interconnected we are and how we squander that here on Earth,” Wendy Whitman Cobb, a professor at the US Air Force’s School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, told Recode.

Another perk of these trips is that space tourists will feel a few minutes of microgravity, which is when gravity feels extremely weak . That will give them the chance to bounce around a spacecraft weightlessly before heading back to Earth.

But Blue Origin’s and Virgin Galactic’s flights are relatively brief — about 10 and 90 minutes long , respectively. Other space tourism flights from SpaceX, the space company founded by Elon Musk , will have more to offer. This fall, billionaire Jared Isaacman, who founded the company Shift4 Payments, will pilot SpaceX’s first all-civilian flight, the Inspiration4 , which will spend several days in orbit around Earth. In the coming years, the company has also planned private missions to the International Space Station, as well as a trip around the moon .

These trips are meant to be enjoyed by space nerds who longed to be astronauts. But there’s another reason rich people want to go to space: demonstrating exclusivity and conspicuous consumption. More than a few people can afford a trip to Venice or the Maldives. But how many people are privileged enough to take a trip to space?

“What a nice way of showing off these days than to post a picture on Instagram from space,” Sridhar Tayur, a Carnegie Mellon business professor, told Recode.

View this post on Instagram A post shared by Jeff Bezos (@jeffbezos)

2. Does commercial space travel have any scientific goals, or is it really just a joyride?

Right now, space tourism flights from Virgin Galactic and Blue Origin have only reached suborbital space , which means that flights enter space but do not enter orbit around Earth. Scientifically, that’s not a new frontier. Though these current flights use new technology, suborbital flight with humans aboard was accomplished by NASA back in the early 1960s , Matthew Hersch, a historian of technology at Harvard, told Recode.

Right now, it’s not clear these trips will offer scientists major new insights, but they might provide information that could be used in the future for space exploration. In fact, these trips are also being marketed as potential opportunities for scientific experiments. For instance, the most recent Virgin Galactic flight carried plants and tested how they responded to microgravity .

These private companies primarily see opportunities in their commercial vehicles that can be reused at scale, which will allow the same rockets (or in Virgin Galactic’s case, spaceplanes) to go to space again and again, which lowers the overall cost of space tourism.

Billionaires and their private space companies also see the development of these rockets as an opportunity to prepare for flights that will do even more, and go even farther, into space. Bezos, for instance, has argued that New Shepard’s suborbital flights will help prepare the company’s future missions, including its New Glenn rocket, which is meant for orbital space.

“The fact of the matter is, the architecture and the technology we have chosen is complete overkill for a suborbital tourism mission,” Bezos said at Tuesday’s post-launch briefing . “We have chosen the vertical landing architecture. Why did we do that? Because it scales.”

Beyond potential scientific advancements in the future, suborbital spaceflight might also create new ways to travel from one place on earth to another. SpaceX, for instance, has advertised that long-haul flights could be shortened to just 30 minutes by traveling through space.

3. Is it safe?

Right now, it’s not entirely clear just how risky space tourism is.

One way space tourism companies are trying to keep travelers safe is by requiring training so that the people who are taking a brief sojourn off Earth are as prepared as possible.

On the flight, people can experience intense altitude and G-forces. “This is sustained G-forces on your body, upwards of what can be 6 G in one direction — which is six times your body weight for upwards of 20 or 30 seconds,” Glenn King, the chief operating officer of the Nastar Center — the aerospace physiology training center that prepared Richard Branson for his flights — told Recode. “That’s a long time when you have six people, or your weight, pressing down on you.”

There’s also the chance that space tourists will be exposed to radiation, though that risk depends on how long you’re in space. “It’s a risk, especially more for the orbital flight than sub-orbital,” explains Whitman Cobb. “Going up in an airplane exposes you to a higher amount of radiation than you would get here on the ground.” She also warns that some tourists will likely barf on the ride.

There doesn’t seem to be an age limit on who can travel, though. The most recent Blue Origin flight included both the youngest person to ever travel to space, an 18-year-old Dutch teenager, as well as the oldest: 82-year-old pilot Wally Funk.

4. How much will tickets cost?

The leaders in commercial space tourism already claim they have a market to support the industry. While Bezos hinted on Tuesday the price would eventually come down — as eventually happened with the high prices of the nascent airline industry — for now, ticket prices are in the low hundreds of thousands, at least for Virgin Galactic . That price point would keep spaceflight out of reach for most of humanity, but there are enough interested rich people that space tourism seems to be economically feasible.

“If you bring it down to $250,000, the wait times [to buy a ticket] will be very long,” Tayur, of Carnegie Mellon, told Recode.

5. What impact will commercial space travel have on the environment?

The emissions of a flight to space can be worse than those of a typical airplane flight because just a few people hop aboard one of these flights, so the emissions per passenger are much higher. That pollution could become much worse if space tourism becomes more popular. Virgin Galactic alone eventually aims to launch 400 of these flights annually.

“The carbon footprint of launching yourself into space in one of these rockets is incredibly high, close to about 100 times higher than if you took a long-haul flight,” Eloise Marais , a physical geography professor at the University College London, told Recode. “It’s incredibly problematic if we want to be environmentally conscious and consider our carbon footprint.”

These flights’ effects on the environment will differ depending on factors like the fuel they use, the energy required to manufacture that fuel, and where they’re headed — and all these factors make it difficult to model their environmental impact. For instance, Jeff Bezos has argued that the liquid hydrogen and oxygen fuel Blue Origin uses is less damaging to the environment than the other space competitors (technically, his flight didn’t release carbon dioxide ), but experts told Recode it could still have significant environmental effects .

There are also other risks we need to keep studying , including the release of soot that could hurt the stratosphere and the ozone. A study from 2010 found that the soot released by 1,000 space tourism flights could warm Antarctica by nearly 1 degree Celsius. “There are some risks that are unknown,” Paul Peeters, a tourism sustainability professor at the Breda University of Applied Sciences, told Recode. “We should do much more work to assess those risks and make sure that they do not occur or to alleviate them somehow — before you start this space tourism business.” Overall, he thinks the environmental costs are reason enough not to take such a trip.

6. Who is regulating commercial space travel?

Right now, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has generally been given the job of overseeing the commercial space industry. But regulation of space is still relatively meager.

One of the biggest areas of concern is licensing launches and making sure that space flights don’t end up hitting all the other flying vehicles humans launch into the sky, like planes and drones. Just this June, a SpaceX flight was held up after a helicopter flew into the zone of the launch.

There’s a lot that still needs to be worked out, especially as there are more of these launches. On Thursday, the Senate hosted a hearing with leaders of the commercial space industry focused on overseeing the growing amount of civil space traffic .

At the same time, the FAA is also overseeing a surging number of spaceports — essentially airports for spaceflight — and making sure there’s enough space for them to safely set up their launches.

But there are other areas where the government could step in. “I think the cybersecurity aspect will also play a very vital role, so that people don’t get hacked,” Tayur said. The FAA told Recode that the agency has participated in developing national principles for space cybersecurity, but Congress hasn’t given it a specific role in looking at the cybersecurity of space.

At some point, the government might also step in to regulate the environmental impact of these flights, too, but that’s not something the FAA currently has jurisdiction over.

In the meantime, no government agency is currently vetting these companies when it comes to the safety of the human passengers aboard. An FAA official confirmed with Recode that while the agency is awarding licenses to companies to carry humans to space , they’re not actually confirming that these trips are safe. That’s jurisdiction Congress won’t give the agency until 2023.

There doesn’t seem to be an abundance of travelers’ insurance policies for space. “Passengers basically sign that they’re waiving all their rights,” Whitman Cobb said. “You’re acknowledging that risk and doing it yourself right now.”

So fair warning, if you decide to shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars for a joyride to space: You’d likely have to accept all responsibility if you get hurt.

Will you help keep Vox free for all?

At Vox, we believe that clarity is power, and that power shouldn’t only be available to those who can afford to pay. That’s why we keep our work free. Millions rely on Vox’s clear, high-quality journalism to understand the forces shaping today’s world. Support our mission and help keep Vox free for all by making a financial contribution to Vox today.

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via

space travel environmental impact

Next Up In Technology

Sign up for the newsletter today, explained.

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

Thanks for signing up!

Check your inbox for a welcome email.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please enter a valid email and try again.

Oregon Governor Tina Kotek speaks from behind a podium during a signing ceremony in Washington, February 23, 2024.

Psychedelics are about to become a casualty of Oregon’s opioid crisis

A pregnant woman’s belly is cradled in her arms as she sits in a hospital bed in Thailand.

US maternal deaths could be lower than we thought — but there are still far too many

space travel environmental impact

Should Black women stop going on Love Is Blind?

A man sitting on a couch, leaning forward, elbows on knees, in a very brightly colored room.

Love Is Blind gives “not here for the right reasons” a new meaning

A Black woman with long straight hair wearing a red long-sleeved dress sits at a courtroom table, with a video monitor behind her showing her testimony.

Fani Willis’s Trump prosecution can move forward — because her ex has resigned from the case

A drag performer smiles and poses during a performance.

The Supreme Court’s puzzling decision to allow the government to ban drag shows, explained

What's the environmental impact of space debris and how can we solve it?

Space industry should help solve climate change not worsen it.

Space industry should help solve climate change not worsen it. Image:  Pexels.

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Rajeev Suri

A hand holding a looking glass by a lake

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved .chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Listen to the article

  • The rise in the number of satellites being launched into space is unsustainable.
  • Satellites mega-constellations pose a risk to climate and the environment.
  • Tighter global regulation is needed to ensure space sustainability.

The space industry likes to see itself as an integral player in the battle against climate change. On a superficial level, this perception is justified. Space science and exploration have fostered a deeper understanding of our planet and satellite communications will allow for a more efficient use of the planet’s resources.

But the space sector is far from the pristine custodian that it claims to be. The industry is in the grip of an unprecedented investment spree. Collectively, we are sending more and more objects into space every year and, at the current rate of expansion, we risk decimating the value of space for future generations. Unless we act now, an environmental crisis will be created in space, which could hamper our efforts to tackle climate change here on earth.

Mega-constellations in space pose a threat to climate

The present pace of growth is unsustainable. Over the past six decades, about 11,000 satellites have been launched, of which 7,000 remain in space. But that number could swell to the hundreds of thousands by the end of this decade as private companies like Elon Musk’s Starlink and Amazon join China and other nation states in building mega-constellations in Low Earth Orbit (LEO).

Some of these new constellations will boast tens of thousands of satellites. Each one will have an expected life of between five and 10 years, creating vast amounts of space debris that will clutter their own orbit and endanger anything passing through it.

The environmental dangers of such space debris are myriad, including light pollution that would hinder future scientific discovery. Just as worrying are satellite re‑entries from the mega‑constellations, which could deposit hazardous levels of alumina into the upper atmosphere. The resulting solar radiation would have pernicious consequences for the environment. The planned mega-constellations could throttle competition and innovation too, if one country or company comes to dominate a particular orbit.

Have you read?

A new space-based invention will radically improve climate change forecasts - here’s how, will the battle for space happen on the ground, space junk: what it is and why cleaning it up matters.

However the smart use of space can enhance life on earth. Satellites are reducing emissions in the aviation industry by optimising flight paths and help container ships boost efficiency and profitability. Elsewhere, space technology helps us measure global carbon emissions more accurately, allows farmers to boost yields and feed the world’s growing population more sustainably. Satellites will be essential if we are to connect the roughly three billion people who have yet to use the internet. Whole industries, from mining to retail, simply would not be able to operate without satellite communications.

But the rules that govern this precious asset are no longer fit for purpose. The current regulatory regime lacks teeth; it relies on actors’ willingness to play fair and there are no meaningful penalties to deter rule breaking. Since joining Inmarsat as Chief Executive last year, I have lost count of the times I have heard space regulation described as a "wild west". The epithet is merited.

Many of the benefits of space-based communications are already possible using low-risk geostationary satellite constellations, positioned in high orbit, with more to come helped by the advent of LEO satellites. But we should all be worried about the scale, sustainability and safety issues created by the number of LEO mega-constellations now in development. The potential risks may outweigh the benefits.

Regulation is needed to address space sustainability

To avoid catastrophe, space industry leaders, regulators and governments should work towards a solution based on five principles, which Inmarsat outlined in a recent Space Sustainability Report .

First, we need a level playing field for operators globally. Second, a new regulatory framework must allow for robust enforcement, including penalties for companies that flout the rules. Third, we must increase investment in data and analytical tools to ensure a better understanding of the underlying science. Fourth, we need to detach sustainability from national security concerns; countries should be able to share information about the location of their satellites without revealing their purpose. Finally, regulations must be put in place rapidly and then improved over time as new technologies emerge at lightning speed.

We have no time to waste in finding solutions to these challenges. At the national level, regulators must take immediate action to ensure vibrant competition beyond a handful of LEO mega-constellations. Nations need to rethink how they grant market access and exclude irresponsible actors.

Climate change poses an urgent threat demanding decisive action. Communities around the world are already experiencing increased climate impacts, from droughts to floods to rising seas. The World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report continues to rank these environmental threats at the top of the list.

To limit global temperature rise to well below 2°C and as close as possible to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, it is essential that businesses, policy-makers, and civil society advance comprehensive near- and long-term climate actions in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change.

The World Economic Forum's Climate Initiative supports the scaling and acceleration of global climate action through public and private-sector collaboration. The Initiative works across several workstreams to develop and implement inclusive and ambitious solutions.

This includes the Alliance of CEO Climate Leaders, a global network of business leaders from various industries developing cost-effective solutions to transitioning to a low-carbon, climate-resilient economy. CEOs use their position and influence with policy-makers and corporate partners to accelerate the transition and realize the economic benefits of delivering a safer climate.

Contact us to get involved.

At the multilateral level, countries with the largest footprint in space must come together to agree some basic standards, such as limiting the number of satellites in a given orbital shell. The coalition of the willing Inmarsat has proposed would initially include the UK, Europe, US, Japan, Brazil, Australia and other like-minded countries.

At the global level, which is the most critical for a long-term sustainable solution, the ITU, the United Nations agency for information and communications, should be given the mandate and resources to address issues of space sustainability. The ITU is not perfect, but it has proven its worth ensuring the equitable and rational use of spectrum.

Through a lack of smart regulation and foresight, the planet’s resources have been mismanaged and we are all paying the price. The lesson of climate crisis is that prevention is better than the cure.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

The Agenda .chakra .wef-n7bacu{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-weight:400;} Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

Space Tourism Poses a Significant ‘Risk to the Climate’

Rockets launched by billionaires elon musk and richard branson emit black carbon in the stratosphere, where it is 500 times worse for the climate than it is on earth. billionaire jeff bezos’ rockets burn liquid hydrogen and oxygen and pose a lesser climate threat..

space travel environmental impact

Share this article

People watch as the SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket lifts off from launch pad 39A at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center on April 11, 2019 in Titusville, Florida. The rocket is carrying a communications satellite built by Lockheed Martin into orbit. Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

New Study Says World Must Cut Short-Lived Climate Pollutants as Well as Carbon Dioxide to Meet Paris Agreement Goals

Smoke billows from smokestacks and a coal fired generator at a steel factory on Nov. 19, 2015 in the industrial province of Hebei, China. Credit: Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

As SpaceX Grows, So Do Complaints From Environmentalists, Indigenous Groups and Brownsville Residents

SpaceX's first orbital Starship SN20 is stacked atop its massive Super Heavy Booster 4 at the company's Starbase facility near Boca Chica Village in South Texas on Feb. 10, 2022. Credit: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

Coal Mining Emits More Super-Polluting Methane Than Venting and Flaring From Gas and Oil Wells, a New Study Finds

An aerial view of a coal mine in Merthyr Tydfil, Wales on November 1, 2021. Credit: Matthew Horwood/Getty Images

The burgeoning space tourism industry could soon fuel significant global warming while also depleting the protective ozone layer that is crucial for sustaining life on Earth, a new study concludes.  The findings , published Saturday in Earth’s Future, raise additional concerns about the “billionaire space race” fueled by some of the world’s richest men.

A key focus of the study was emissions of black carbon, or soot, from the combustion of rocket fuel. Black carbon, which comes from burning fossil fuels or biomass, absorbs light from the sun and releases thermal energy, making it a powerful climate warming agent.  At lower altitudes black carbon quickly falls from the sky, remaining in the atmosphere for only a matter of days or weeks.

However, as rockets blast into space, they emit black carbon into the stratosphere where it remains, absorbing sunlight and radiating heat, for up to four years before falling back down to Earth. Black carbon emitted in the stratosphere is nearly 500 times worse for the climate than similar emission on or near the surface of the earth, the study found. Black carbon emissions from all space flights are currently relatively low but could quickly increase if projections for the growth of space tourism prove correct.

“A big ramp up in the number of space launches, which is hoped for by the space tourism industry, poses a risk to the climate by adding black carbon particles to the upper atmosphere and as a result, we should think very carefully about regulating this industry before it gets out of hand,” Robert Ryan, a researcher at University College London and the study’s lead author, said. “It would be a real shame for humanity to look back in 50 or 100 years when we’ve got thousands of rocket launches a year and think, ‘If only we’d done something.’”

We’re hiring!

Please take a look at the new openings in our newsroom.

To calculate the impact of spaceflights, Ryan and colleagues produced an inventory of all pollutants released from the 103 rockets launched worldwide in 2019, as well as data on the re-entry of reusable rockets and space junk descending back into Earth’s atmosphere.

The researchers then plugged the emissions data into atmospheric chemistry and heat transfer models to determine their impact on ozone depletion and climate change. They also included recent projections of anticipated flights by space tourism companies Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin and SpaceX to plot potential future emissions from the industry.

After just three years of more than once-a-day rocket launches, space tourism would account for 6 percent of warming due to black carbon emissions despite contributing just 0.02 percent of global black carbon emissions, the study concluded.  

The study also found that rockets deplete the Earth’s atmospheric ozone layer, which protects the planet from harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun. Rockets that burn solid, chlorine-based fuels harm ozone by releasing chlorine, which destroys ozone, directly into the stratosphere. Chlorine-containing chemicals, such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), were banned under the Montreal Protocol, an international agreement to protect atmospheric ozone that was adopted in 1987. Solid fuel rockets were not part of the ban.

Regardless of the fuel type used, all rockets contributed to additional ozone depletion through the emissions of nitrogen oxides upon re-entry into the stratosphere.     

A second study that also looked at the climate and ozone impacts of rocket launches and was published earlier this month, came to similar conclusions. The study , published in JGR Atmospheres, projected that increased emissions from space tourism would also disrupt global atmospheric circulation, slowing the transport of air from the tropics to the poles in the upper atmosphere.

This decrease in circulation would result in a slight reduction of atmospheric ozone concentrations in the northern hemisphere, said Christopher Maloney, the study’s lead author and a research scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

“Anytime you see anything that impacts ozone, it’s worthy of further investigation,” he said.

Stephen Andersen, research director for the Washington-based Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, said the recent studies further the climate and ozone concerns related to rocket launches that NASA scientists first raised nearly half a century ago.

“Over the last 45 years, they came to the same conclusion,” Andersen said of research done by NASA and others. “Current emissions are not a significant source, but they would be incredibly significant if the projections of space flights prove true.”

By one measure, public opinion turned against space tourism last year as some of the world’s most wealthy individuals blasted into space amid an ever-warming climate and the ongoing Covid pandemic.  

U.S. spaceflight company Virgin Galactic, which was founded by British billionaire Richard Branson and hopes to offer 400 flights per year from its “spaceport” in New Mexico, did not respond to a request for comment.

But, the company appears to be aware of the climate concerns posed by space tourism. In its most recent annual financial report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Virgin Galactic stated that the company “may be adversely affected by global climate change or by legal, regulatory or market responses to such change.”

This story is funded by readers like you.

Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.

Blue Origin, the space tourism company owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, envisions “millions of people living and working in space for the benefit of Earth.” 

Company executives did not respond to a request for comment. Blue Origin’s rockets burn liquid hydrogen and oxygen and emit water vapor and nitrogen oxides, but not black carbon. Emissions from hydrogen fuel rockets in the upper atmosphere pose less of a threat than other rocket types, but emissions of nitrogen oxides in the stratosphere and the emissions that go into producing liquid hydrogen on earth are still a concern, Ryan said.  

Elon Musk, the founder of SpaceX and the world’s richest person, tweeted in December that SpaceX plans to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and turn it into rocket fuel. Musk is also funding a $100 million prize for the development of carbon removal . While many seek to turn CO2 into fuel, such efforts remain unproven. Rockets that burn fuel derived from carbon dioxide would also likely result in emissions of black carbon and nitrogen oxides in the upper atmosphere.

Andersen said efforts to reduce emissions are helpful but international regulations are needed to curb climate and ozone threats posed by increased commercial space flights.

“They need to think before they act and they ought to consider all the options of minimizing the impact,” he said. “Then the final decision over whether it’s worthwhile to society to allow this enterprise should be made in some kind of a governance way.”

space travel environmental impact

Phil McKenna

Reporter, boston.

Phil McKenna is a Boston-based reporter for Inside Climate News. Before joining ICN in 2016, he was a freelance writer covering energy and the environment for publications including The New York Times, Smithsonian, Audubon and WIRED. Uprising, a story he wrote about gas leaks under U.S. cities, won the AAAS Kavli Science Journalism Award and the 2014 NASW Science in Society Award. Phil has a master’s degree in science writing from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and was an Environmental Journalism Fellow at Middlebury College.

  • [email protected]

Newsletters

We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every day or once a week, our original stories and digest of the web's top headlines deliver the full story, for free.

  • Inside Clean Energy
  • Today's Climate
  • Breaking News
  • I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy .

Smoke billows from smokestacks and a coal fired generator at a steel factory on Nov. 19, 2015 in the industrial province of Hebei, China. Credit: Kevin Frayer/Getty Images

By Phil McKenna

SpaceX's first orbital Starship SN20 is stacked atop its massive Super Heavy Booster 4 at the company's Starbase facility near Boca Chica Village in South Texas on Feb. 10, 2022. Credit: Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images

By Aman Azhar

An aerial view of a coal mine in Merthyr Tydfil, Wales on November 1, 2021. Credit: Matthew Horwood/Getty Images

Most Popular

The Maya Forest Corridor is a 2.5 mile-wide stretch of forest, wetlands and savanna that connects the jungles of southern Belize with forests in the north and in Guatemala and Mexico. Together, this Selva Maya is the largest tropical forest north of the Amazon. Credit: Kevin Quischan

Can Carbon Offsets Save a Fragile Band of Belize’s Tropical Rainforest?

By nicholas kusnetz.

A neighborhood remains flooded after Hurricane Ian on Sept. 29, 2022 in Orlando, Fla. Credit: Gerardo Mora/Getty Images

In Florida, Skyrocketing Insurance Rates Test Resolve of Homeowners in Risky Areas

By amy green.

The Delaware Riverkeeper, Maya van Rossum, was joined by several other activists in a coordinated effort to force Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro to hear their questions at a public meeting on Monday. Credit: Delaware Riverkeeper Network

Maya van Rossum, the Delaware Riverkeeper, Shouts Down Pennsylvania Gov. Shapiro Over a Proposed ‘Hydrogen Hub’

By kiley bense, q&a: what’s so special about a new ‘eye in the sky’ to track methane emissions.

Though its data collection is stealth, that data is public.

Interview by Aynsley O’Neill, Living on Earth

MIT’s Sloan School Launches Ambitious Climate Center to Aid Policymakers

New study shows planting trees may not be as good for the climate as previously believed.

MethaneSAT launched via SpaceX's Transporter-10 on March 4. Credit: SpaceX

Keep Environmental Journalism Alive

ICN provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Perspective
  • Published: 22 April 2022

The case for space environmentalism

  • Andy Lawrence 1 ,
  • Meredith L. Rawls   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1305-7308 2 ,
  • Moriba Jah 3 , 4 ,
  • Aaron Boley 5 ,
  • Federico Di Vruno   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7454-7883 6 ,
  • Simon Garrington 7 ,
  • Michael Kramer 8 , 9 ,
  • Samantha Lawler 10 ,
  • James Lowenthal 11 ,
  • Jonathan McDowell   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7093-295X 12 &
  • Mark McCaughrean 13  

Nature Astronomy volume  6 ,  pages 428–435 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

10k Accesses

34 Citations

826 Altmetric

Metrics details

  • Environmental impact
  • Space physics

The shell bound by the Karman line at a height of ~80–100 km above the Earth’s surface and geosynchronous orbit at ~36,000 km is defined as the orbital space surrounding the Earth. It is within this region, and especially in low Earth orbit, where environmental issues are becoming urgent because of the rapid growth of the anthropogenic space object population, including satellite ‘mega-constellations’. In this Perspective, we summarize the case for considering the orbital space around the Earth as an additional ecosystem, subject to the same care and concerns, and the same broad regulations as the oceans and the atmosphere, for example. We rely on the orbital space environment by looking through it, as well as by working within it. Hence, we should consider damage to professional astronomy, public stargazing, and the cultural importance of the sky, as well as the sustainability of commercial, civic, and military activity in space. Damage to the orbital space environment has problematic features in common with other types of environmental issue. First, the observed and predicted damage is incremental and complex, with many contributors. Second, whether or not space is formally and legally seen as a global commons, the growing commercial exploitation of what may seem to be a ‘free’ resource is in fact externalizing the true costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

111,21 € per year

only 9,27 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

space travel environmental impact

Data availability

The datasets and Jupyter notebooks used in the construction of Figs. 1, 2 and 6 are available via GitHub at https://github.com/andyxerxes/Space-environment-paper . The datasets used for Fig. 3 are available at https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/LHX5KM .

Lawrence, A. Brief of Professor A. Lawrence as Amicus Curiae, USCA Case #21-1123 Document No. 1910216 (US Court of Appeal, 2021); https://andyxlastro.me/losing-the-sky-resources/

Miraux, L. Environmental limits to the space sector’s growth. Sci. Total Environ. 806 , 150862 (2021).

Article   Google Scholar  

Lawrence, A. Losing The Sky (Photon Productions, 2020).

Long, G. The Impact of Large Constellations of Satellites Document No. JSR-20-2H (JASON Programme Office, Mitre Corporation, 2021); https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/jasonreportconstellations/

Rwanda files at ITU for nearly 330,000 satellites. SpaceWatch Africa (22 October 2021); https://spacewatch.global/2021/10/rwanda-files-at-itu-for-nearly-330000-satellites

Walker, C. et al. Impact of satellite constellations on optical astronomy and recommendations towards mitigations. Bull. Am. Astron. Soc. 52 , 0206 (2020).

Google Scholar  

Hall, J. et al. Executive Summary. In Report of the SATCON2 Workshop, 12–16 July 2021 (AAS, 2021); https://doi.org/10.3847/25c2cfeb.4554c01f

Rawls, M. L. et al. Observations Working Group Report. In Report of the SATCON2 Workshop, 12–16 July 2021 (AAS, 2021); https://baas.aas.org/pub/004iuwwu

Venkatesan, A. Community Engagement Working Group Report. In Report of the SATCON2 Workshop, 12–16 July 2021 (AAS, 2021); https://baas.aas.org/pub/enwrps6k

Walker, C. et al. Dark and Quiet Skies for Science and Society: Report and Recommendations (UN Office for Outer Space Affairs, 2021); https://noirlab.edu/public/products/techdocs/techdoc021/

Walker, C. & Benvenuti, P. (eds) Dark and Quiet Skies II for Science and Society (UN Office for Outer Space Affairs, 2022); https://noirlab.edu/public/products/techdocs/techdoc051

McDowell, J. General Catalog of Artificial Space Objects Release 1.2.3. (2020); https://planet4589.org/space/gcat

Space Debris by the Numbers (ESA, 2022); https://www.esa.int/Safety_Security/Space_Debris/Space_debris_by_the_numbers

Orbital Debris Mitigation Standard Practices (NASA Orbital Debris Program Office, 2019); https://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/library/usg_orbital_debris_mitigation_standard_practices_november_2019.pdf

Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (UN Office for Outer Space Afffairs, 1967); https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/outerspacetreaty.html

Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (UN Office for Outer Space Affairs, 1972); https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/liability-convention.html

Jah, M. Discovering the interconnection between Heaven and Earth. Aerospace America (May 2021); https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/departments/discovering-the-interconnection-between-heaven-and-earth/

Jah, M. Where to find fresh talent for the space tracking field. Aerospace America (July/August 2021); https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/departments/where-to-find-fresh-talent-for-the-space-tracking-field/

G7 Nations Commit to the Safe and Sustainable Use of Space (UK Space Agency, 2021); https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g7-nations-commit-to-the-safe-and-sustainable-use-of-space

Space Sustainability Rating (World Economic Forum, 2021); https://espace.epfl.ch/research/space-sustainability-rating

Mroz, P. et al. Impact of the Starlink satellites on the Zwicky Transient Facility Survey observations. Astrophys. J. Lett. 924 , L30 (2022).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Bassa, C. G., Hainaut, O. R. & Galadi-Enriquez, D. Analytical simulations of the effect of satellite constellations on optical and near-infrared observations. Astron. Astrophys. 657 , A75 (2021).

Tyson, J. A. et al. Mitigation of LEO satellite brightness and trail effects on the Rubin Observatory LSST. Astron. J. 160 , 226 (2020).

Feuge-Miller, B. et al. ASTRIANet Data for: Python Computational Inference from Structure (PyCIS). Texas Data Repository https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/GV0ASD (2021).

Kucharski, D. et al. Full attitude state reconstruction of tumbling space debris TOPEX/Poseidon via light-curve inversion with Quanta photogrammetry. Acta Astronaut. 187 , 115–122 (2021).

Mallama, A. The brightness of VisorSat design Starlink satellites. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.00374 (2021).

Michalowoski, M. J. et al. GN-z11 flash was a signal from a man-made satellite not a gamma-ray burst at redshift 11. Nat. Astron. 5 , 995–997 (2021).

Lawler, S. M., Boley, A. C. & Rein, H. Visibility predictions for near-future satellite megaconstellations: latitudes near 50 degrees will suffer the worst light pollution. Astron. J. 163 , 21 (2022).

SKAO needs corrective measures from satellite ‘mega-constellation’ operators to minimise impact on its telescopes. SKAO (7 October 2020); https://go.nature.com/381Fn3k

Selection of new IAU Centre for the Protection of the Dark and Quiet Sky from Satellite Constellation Interference. IAU (3 February 2022); https://iau.org/news/pressreleases/detail/iau2201

IAU Resolution B5 In Defence of the Night Sky and the Right to Starlight (IAU, 2009); https://www.iau.org/static/resolutions/IAU2009_English.pdf

Boley, A. B. & Byers, M. Satellite mega-constellations create risks in low Earth orbit, the atmosphere, and on Earth. Sci. Rep. 11 , 10642 (2021).

Brown, M. K., Lewis, H. G., Kavanagh, A. J. & Cnossen, I. Future decreases in thermospheric neutral density in low Earth orbit due to carbon dioxide emissions. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 26 , e34589 (2021).

ADS   Google Scholar  

Woodward, C. High-seas launch worries islanders. Christian Science Monitor (22 September 1999); https://www.csmonitor.com/1999/0922/p5s1.html

Weber, B. Inuit angered by Russian rocket splashdown in the Arctic. Globe and Mail (3 June 2016); https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/inuit-angered-by-russian-rocket-splashdown-in-the-arctic/article30273826/

Ailor, W. H. Large Constellation Disposal Hazards (Center for Space Policy and Strategy, The Aerospace Corporation, January 2020), https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/features/dodging-debris/

Dacke, M., Baird, E., el Jundi, B., Warrant, E. J. & Byrne, M. How dung beetles steer straight. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 66 , 243–256 (2021).

Mouritsen, H. & Larsen, O. N. Migrating songbirds tested in computer-controlled Emlen funnels use stellar cues for a time-independent compass. J. Exp. Biol. 204 , 3855–3865 (2001).

Emlen, S. T. Celestial rotation: its importance in the development of migratory orientation. Science 170 , 1198–1201 (1970).

Mauck, B., Gläser, N., Schlosser, W. & Dehnhardt, G. Harbour seals ( Phoca vitulina ) can steer by the stars. Anim. Cogn. 11 , 715–718 (2008).

Sjoberg, S. & Muheim, R. A new view on an old debate: type of cue-conflict manipulation and availability of stars can explain the discrepancies between cue-calibration experiments with migratory songbirds. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 10 , 29 (2016).

Rich, C. & Longcore, T. (eds) Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting (Island, 2006).

Lintott, C. & Lintott, P. Satellite megaclusters could fox night-time migrations. Nature 586 , 674 (2020).

Brown, T. M. Using light to tell the time of day: sensory coding in the mammalian circadian visual network. J. Exp. Biol. 219 , 1779–1792 (2016).

Phillips, T. The Starlink incident. Space Weather Archive (9 February 2022); https://spaceweatherarchive.com/2022/02/09/the-starlink-incident

Nair, V. Statistical families of the trackable Earth-orbiting anthropogenic space object population in their specific orbital angular momentum space version 2. Texas Data Repository https://doi.org/10.18738/T8/LHX5KM (2021).

IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines Revision 2 (Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee, 2020); https://go.nature.com/3jXqb9P

Report of the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space A/74/20, para 163, Annex II (UN COPUOS, 2019); https://go.nature.com/3xDqtuF

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to H. G. Lewis at the University of Southampton for providing a dataset of orbital elements of simulated debris from the recent C1408 ASAT event, as well as for general discussions on the topic of space environmentalism. Many other colleagues have contributed indirectly to this Perspective through comments on the open document during August 2021 in preparation for the Amicus Brief, and general discussions at astronomical meetings during 2020 and 2021 at which the issue of the impact of constellations was discussed.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute for Astronomy, School of Physics and Astronomy, Scottish Universities Physics Alliance (SUPA), University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Andy Lawrence

Department of Astronomy / DiRAC / Vera C. Rubin Observatory, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

Meredith L. Rawls

Aerospace Engineering & Engineering Mechanics, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

Privateer Space Inc., Maui, HI, USA

Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Aaron Boley

SKA Observatory, Jodrell Bank, Manchester, UK

Federico Di Vruno

Jodrell Bank Observatory, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Simon Garrington

Max-Planck-Institut für Radioastronomie, Bonn, Germany

Michael Kramer

Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Campion College and the Department of Physics, University of Regina, Regina, Canada

Samantha Lawler

Smith College, Northampton, MA, USA

James Lowenthal

Center for Astrophysics, Harvard and Smithsonian, Cambridge, MA, USA

Jonathan McDowell

European Space Agency, Noordwijk, The Netherlands

Mark McCaughrean

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The Perspective was conceived, initiated and led by A.L. The initial draft was written by A.L. in collaboration with M.L.R. and M.J., who also wrote major parts of the text. All other authors contributed significant text or key technical or scientific points.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andy Lawrence .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Lawrence, A., Rawls, M.L., Jah, M. et al. The case for space environmentalism. Nat Astron 6 , 428–435 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-022-01655-6

Download citation

Received : 01 March 2022

Accepted : 11 March 2022

Published : 22 April 2022

Issue Date : April 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-022-01655-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

The dark side of earth observation.

  • Karen Anderson
  • Robert J. W. Brewin
  • Kevin J. Gaston

Nature Sustainability (2024)

Toward sustainable space exploration: a roadmap for harnessing the power of microorganisms

  • Rosa Santomartino
  • Nils J. H. Averesch

Nature Communications (2023)

Aggregate effects of proliferating low-Earth-orbit objects and implications for astronomical data lost in the noise

  • John C. Barentine
  • Aparna Venkatesan
  • Salvador Bará

Nature Astronomy (2023)

The impact of satellite trails on Hubble Space Telescope observations

  • Sandor Kruk
  • Pablo García-Martín
  • Mark J. McCaughrean

The high optical brightness of the BlueWalker 3 satellite

  • Sangeetha Nandakumar
  • Siegfried Eggl

Nature (2023)

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

space travel environmental impact

What NASA Can Teach SpaceX About Environmentally Friendly Rocket Launches

N obody knows how many birds were killed when SpaceX’s Starship rocket —the largest, most powerful rocket ever built— took off and blew up during its inaugural launch on April 20. And the odds are nobody will ever know.

“Birds are small,” says Mike Parr, president of the American Bird Conservancy. “Anything that gets burnt up like that will basically vaporize, so we can’t really assess it.”

Nobody will know what other animals were killed either—the jaguarundi wildcat that makes the wilds around SpaceX’s launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, its home; the endangered Kemp’s Ridley sea turtle; the ocelots that are sacred to the local Carrizo-Comecrudo native American tribe. (The land itself is considered sacred by the Carrizo-Comecrudo as well.) The lack of any census on animal deaths is due mostly to the fact that, following the explosion, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service closed the beach and highway in Boca Chica for safety concerns, meaning that the carcasses of animals could have been eaten by predators before being tallied.

But closing the area was the prudent choice, given the force of the explosion. As the Fish and Wildlife Service explained in an email to the media, the footprint of the blast was vast. Much of the damage was done at the moment of launch, when the force of the rocket’s first-stage engines destroyed the launch pad.

“Impacts from the launch include numerous large concrete chunks, stainless steel sheets, metal and other objects hurled thousands of feet away along with a plume cloud of pulverized concrete that deposited material up to 6.5 miles northwest of the pad site,” the Fish and Wildlife Service wrote. Approximately 385 acres of debris was found on both SpaceX’s facility and in the surrounding Boca Chica State Park, and a 3.5-acre fire burned on park land south of the launch site.

And this is a flight SpaceX considers a success since the rocket did manage to clear the launch tower and fly for four minutes before consuming itself in a ball of fire. “Congrats @SpaceX team on an exciting test launch of Starship!” SpaceX boss and founder Elon Musk tweeted . “Learned a lot for next test launch in a few months.”

Such optimism notwithstanding, that next test flight is very much open to question. Environmental concerns will likely determine when Starship has another opportunity to fly. If SpaceX wants to get that chance, it would serve itself well by modeling practices that are already available: NASA’s long and impressive track record of including environmental modeling and safeguards into all of its launch assessments.

A piece of concrete blown off the launch pad litters the ground on April 22, 2023, after the SpaceX Starship lifted off on April 20 for a flight test from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas.

Ten days after the April SpaceX launch, five groups—the Center for Biological Diversity, the American Bird Conservancy, the Surfrider Foundation, Save RGV (short for Rio Grande Valley), and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas—filed suit against the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for its alleged failure to vet SpaceX’s environmental protocols adequately before clearing Starship to fly. The groups are demanding that a federal court in Washington, D.C. revoke the five-year license the agency granted SpaceX to conduct up to 20 launches, until the FAA conducts a full environmental impact study of the explosion and of the future risks SpaceX’s launch activities pose to the surrounding environment.

“We’re seeking to have it sent back to the agency for a full-blown, full-out analysis,” says Jared Margolis, senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “It’s not just the explosion. The heat and the light and the noise was way more than I think they had anticipated from this launch.” (“The FAA does not comment on ongoing litigation matters,” the agency said in an email to TIME.)

Notwithstanding, on May 18, SpaceX rolled another Starship out to the pad for engine tests preparatory to a launch that will come only after the current lawsuit is resolved. On May 22, SpaceX’s request to join the FAA as a co-defendant in the lawsuit was granted by a federal judge —a standard move by a company whose own permit to fly is in jeopardy by a lawsuit. Collaborating with the FAA will give SpaceX more influence over the defense strategy.

The SpaceX mess stands in sharp contrast to NASA, which has long shared its Kennedy Space Center home with the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge, a preserve that is home to more than 1,500 species of plants and animals. Sixty years and thousands of launches—including 135 of the space shuttle alone and 18 of the massive Saturn 5 rocket—produced nothing like the devastation wrought on the Boca Chica area by just one Starship launch. The reason lies partly in the engineering—the Starship launch pad was simply not built robustly enough to withstand the blast of the first stage’s 33 engines—and, according to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, partly bureaucratic: the lawsuit claims neither the FAA nor anyone else ever conducted the kind of full environmental impact study necessary to protect Boca Chica before the launch took place.

“This is one of the most biologically diverse areas in the country,” says Margolis. “So perhaps this isn’t the right place to be blowing up these rockets. But if they’re going to move forward, they certainly need to do a full analysis and make sure they’re imposing sufficient mitigation, which we don’t believe they’re doing.”

Learning from NASA

What SpaceX isn’t doing, NASA assuredly does—and it isn’t easy. The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) measures 140,000 square acres, but just 5,500 of them have been developed for space operations. The rest encompasses the Merritt Island preserve and the Canaveral National Seashore—both of which have remained untouched by generations of NASA launches. Environmental groups have recently criticized some proposals floated by the commercial space sector and NASA to build a spaceport on Kennedy Space Center land that would send rockets flying over the Merritt Island Preserve instead of straight out over the ocean—but those projects are nowhere near fruition and the environmental sector is mounting stiff opposition.

The safeguards responsible for NASA’s impressive environmental record begin whenever a new rocket—whether the venerable Saturn 5, the just-developed Space Launch System, or SpaceX’s Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy—is first under design and construction. “All new rockets which are proposed to launch from Kennedy require significant safety and environmental analysis prior to launch,” says Don Dankert, KSC’s Spaceport Integration Environmental Planning Lead. “Years of design, development, and testing—including ground tests, simulations, and flight tests—occur before a rocket is certified for launch operations.” The fact that the two SpaceX rockets underwent that kind of vetting suggests the company would know what a robust environmental assessment looks like.

Elon Musk Making Enemies Fast in Town Hosting Space-X Launches

Once a rocket is built, it has to overcome still more hurdles before it is cleared to fly. A complete environmental impact analysis is conducted in accordance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and, depending on the scale of the project and the size of the rocket, a formal environmental impact statement (EIS) must then be filed. NASA and the EPA do not work alone on the analysis. “Specifically,” says Dankert, “the FAA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and others may be invited to serve as cooperating agencies when assessing [potential] impacts.” Only after that environmental impact analysis is conducted does the FAA give the rocket the green light to fly.

Such standards are not limited to launches. Environmental oversight is conducted during construction of rockets, launch pads, buildings, and other infrastructure, as well as during routine maintenance, though in these cases, a full EIS is not typically required. Still, the work “must comply with NEPA and all applicable environmental laws and regulations,” Dankert says. When it comes to actual launches, environmental oversight goes well beyond the liftoff alone. “Kennedy conducted pre- and post-launch ecological monitoring for the 30 years of the shuttle program,” says Dankert. “And this monitoring continues with the Artemis [moon] program.” NASA also ensures that cultural resources are not affected by any launch or construction activities—avoiding the kind of complaints lodged by the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas in the lawsuit against the FAA.

What Went Wrong at Boca Chica

All of this stands in stark contrast with the way things unfolded at Boca Chica both leading up to and during the Starship launch. The first and perhaps biggest problem involved who was doing the environmental assessment and how it was conducted. The FAA is not required to receive a full EIS before approving a launch. Instead, under NEPA, a lesser analysis, known as a programmatic environmental assessment (PEA) can be filed, and it can be conducted by commercial entities—even ones associated with the rocket’s owner. Especially troubling, as the plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the FAA charge, is that this is what appears to be the case with the Starship launch, with independent contractors retained by SpaceX conducting the PEA, and the Federal Register publishing the positive results.

“This is the fox guarding the hen house,” says Mary Angela Branch, a board member with Save RGV.

The SpaceX Starship explodes after launch for a flight test from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, on April 20, 2023.

Just why the FAA imposed such lenient standards is not clear. Back in 2014, the agency itself conducted an environmental analysis and issued a full EIS when SpaceX was considering launching its smaller Falcon 9 rocket from the Boca Chica site. The license that resulted from that EIS authorized one Falcon 9 per month for a year and gave SpaceX permission to close the local beaches for 180 hours to accommodate the operations.

“The FAA did do an EIS for that permit and originally stated they were going to do one for the [Starship] permit,” says Margolis. For reasons that are not clear, however—but could be determined during the course of the lawsuit—SpaceX got a waiver from that requirement and an EIS was not filed for Starship. (SpaceX did not respond to a request for comment.)

Whatever the reason for the FAA foregoing a full environmental impact study, the result was good for SpaceX. The company’s independent analysts proposed, and the FAA accepted, what’s known as a Mitigated Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The FONSI portion of that label indicated that the FAA agreed that no meaningful harm would be done to the environment by the Starship launch; the “mitigated” qualifier referred to 75 steps SpaceX had to take in order to minimize the impact of the launch on the Boca Chica area. Among the mitigations were limiting launch site lighting to reduce the nighttime impact on wildlife; implementing measures to reduce noise from construction equipment; restoring any damage to surrounding terrain caused by construction or other operations; controlling spillage of hazardous chemicals like rocket fuel; cleaning up spills that do occur; and more.

The problem was, there are poor enforcement mechanisms in place for any of these mitigation requirements. According to the Federal Register , a mitigated FONSI will be issued on the condition that “the [relevant] agency or a project applicant commits to carry out the mitigation, and establishes a mechanism for ensuring the mitigation is carried out.” Nowhere does the Register specify how adherence to that commitment will be confirmed. In the case of Starship, that left the responsibility to comply with the mitigated FONSI dependent on SpaceX’s cooperation alone.

“All of the mitigation plans said, ‘SpaceX shall conduct biological surveys,’ ‘SpaceX shall work with cooperating agencies on anomalies,’ ‘SpaceX shall use the best possible lighting or minimize lighting,’” says Branch. Save RGV and the other four plaintiffs, she says, “never got any reports on what they were actually doing and you’d have to have a full-time watchdog to oversee them, which we didn’t have. But nonetheless the permit was issued.”

The result was the fire and the debris and the concrete-dust-covered mess the Fish and Wildlife Service described in its release. Whether more stringent requirements will be imposed when Starship next launches will be known only when the lawsuit against the FAA is settled—a process that has no fixed time frame, despite Musk’s claim that another launch was coming in “a few months.”

For now, the Starship rocket SpaceX rolled out to the pad on May 18 remains grounded—as is the entire Starship fleet on which SpaceX is betting its plans for journeys to the moon and Mars. Learning from the careful way NASA does its environmental business—and the way it’s done that business for more than six decades—may avoid another launch calamity in the future. And it may be the only way for SpaceX’s new mega-rocket to take back to the skies.

More Must-Reads From TIME

  • Why We're Spending So Much Money Now
  • The Fight to Free Evan Gershkovich
  • Meet the 2024 Women of the Year
  • John Kerry's Next Move
  • The Quiet Work Trees Do for the Planet
  • Breaker Sunny Choi Is Heading to Paris
  • Column: The Internet Made Romantic Betrayal Even More Devastating
  • Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Write to Jeffrey Kluger at [email protected]

The jaw-droppingly high, out-of-this-world carbon footprint of space tourism

Share this idea.

  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

space travel environmental impact

The commercial race to get tourists to space is heating up between Virgin Group founder Sir Richard Branson and former Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. On July 11, Branson ascended 80 km (49 miles) to reach the edge of space in his piloted Virgin Galactic VSS Unity spaceplane, while Bezos’ autonomous Blue Origin rocket launched today on July 20 , coinciding with the anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon landing. Although Bezos launched later than Branson, he set out to reach higher altitudes — about 120 km, or 74 miles .

The launch demonstrates a new type of offering to very wealthy tourists: The opportunity to truly reach outer space. Tour packages will provide passengers with a brief 10-minute frolic in zero gravity and glimpses of Earth from space. Not to be outdone, later in 2021, Elon Musk’s SpaceX will provide four to five days of orbital travel with its Crew Dragon capsule.

What are the environmental consequences of a space tourism industry likely to be? Bezos boasts that his Blue Origin rockets are greener than Branson’s VSS Unity. The Blue Engine 3 (BE-3)  launched Bezos, his brother and two guests into space using liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen propellants.

VSS Unity, on the other hand, used a hybrid propellant comprised of a solid carbon-based fuel, hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB), and nitrous oxide (or laughing gas), while the SpaceX Falcon series of reusable rockets will propel the Crew Dragon into orbit using liquid kerosene and liquid oxygen.

Burning these propellants provides the energy needed to launch rockets into space — but it simultaneously generates greenhouse gases and air pollutants. Large quantities of water vapor are also produced by burning the BE-3 propellant, while combustion of both the VSS Unity and Falcon fuels produces CO2, soot and some water vapor. The nitrogen-based oxidant used by VSS Unity also generates nitrogen oxides, compounds that contribute to air pollution closer to Earth. Roughly two-thirds of this propellant exhaust is released into the stratosphere (12 km-50 km) and mesosphere (50 km-85 km), where it can persist for at least two to three years.

The very high temperatures during launch and re-entry (which is when the protective heat shields of the returning crafts burn up) also convert stable nitrogen in the air into reactive nitrogen oxides. These gases and particles have many negative effects on the atmosphere. In the stratosphere, nitrogen oxides and chemicals formed from the breakdown of water vapor convert ozone into oxygen and deplete the ozone layer which guards life on Earth against harmful UV radiation.

Water vapor also produces stratospheric clouds that provide a surface for this reaction to occur at a faster pace than it otherwise would.

Space tourism and climate change

What’s more, CO2 exhaust emissions and soot trap heat in the atmosphere, contributing to global warming. Cooling of the atmosphere can also occur, as clouds formed from the emitted water vapor reflect incoming sunlight back to space. A depleted ozone layer would also absorb less incoming sunlight, and so heat the stratosphere less.

Figuring out the overall effect of rocket launches on the atmosphere will require detailed modeling, in order to account for these complex processes and the persistence of these pollutants in the upper atmosphere. Equally important is a clear understanding of how the space tourism industry will develop.

Virgin Galactic anticipates it will offer 400 spaceflights each year to the privileged few who can afford them. Blue Origin and SpaceX have yet to announce their plans. But globally, rocket launches wouldn’t need to increase by much from the current 100 or so performed each year to induce harmful effects that are competitive with other sources , like ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and CO2 from aircraft.

During launch, rockets can emit between 4 and 10 times more nitrogen oxides than Drax , the largest thermal power plant in the UK, over the same time period. CO2 emissions for the four or so tourists on a space flight will be between 50 and 100 times more than the one to three tonnes of emissions that are generated per passenger on a long-haul airplane flight.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .

What are the origins of spaceflight? It all started with science fiction. Watch the full Talk to learn more: 

About the author

Eloise Marais is an Associate Professor in Physical Geography at UCL. Marais leads a research group that addresses long-standing uncertainties about the chemical composition of the atmosphere and determines the influence of humans on the environment, air quality and climate.

  • carbon dioxide
  • carbon emissions
  • climate change
  • society and culture
  • space tourism

TED Talk of the Day

Al Gore: How to make radical climate action the new normal

How to make radical climate action the new normal

space travel environmental impact

6 ways to give that aren't about money

space travel environmental impact

A smart way to handle anxiety -- courtesy of soccer great Lionel Messi

space travel environmental impact

How do top athletes get into the zone? By getting uncomfortable

space travel environmental impact

6 things people do around the world to slow down

space travel environmental impact

Creating a contract -- yes, a contract! -- could help you get what you want from your relationship

space travel environmental impact

Could your life story use an update? Here’s how to do it 

space travel environmental impact

6 tips to help you be a better human now

space travel environmental impact

How to have better conversations on social media (really!)

space travel environmental impact

Let’s stop calling them “soft skills” -- and call them “real skills” instead

Set of astronaut women in spacesuit and helmet in different poses flat vector illustration. Clipart with girl cosmonaut characters. International female group in cosmos. Astronauts people

3 strategies for effective leadership, from a former astronaut

space travel environmental impact

The 7 types of people you need in your life to be resilient

space travel environmental impact

There’s a know-it-all at every job — here’s how to deal

30 futuristic spacecraft driving the new space age.

space travel environmental impact

These 8 cities around the world are putting their focus on biking and walking -- not cars

space travel environmental impact

Net-zero emissions is a great goal for companies to set -- but really hard to reach. Here's why

space travel environmental impact

Most US homes are energy vampires -- here's how we need to rethink housing from the ground up

Richard Branson clutching a model Virgin Galactic spaceplane.

Space tourism: rockets emit 100 times more CO₂ per passenger than flights – imagine a whole industry

space travel environmental impact

Associate Professor in Physical Geography, UCL

Disclosure statement

Eloise Marais receives funding from UKRI, the European Commission and DEFRA.

University College London provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

The commercial race to get tourists to space is heating up between Virgin Group founder Sir Richard Branson and former Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. On Sunday 11 July, Branson ascended 80 km to reach the edge of space in his piloted Virgin Galactic VSS Unity spaceplane. Bezos’ autonomous Blue Origin rocket is due to launch on July 20 , coinciding with the anniversary of the Apollo 11 Moon landing.

Though Bezos loses to Branson in time, he is set to reach higher altitudes ( about 120 km ). The launch will demonstrate his offering to very wealthy tourists: the opportunity to truly reach outer space. Both tour packages will provide passengers with a brief ten-minute frolic in zero gravity and glimpses of Earth from space. Not to be outdone, Elon Musk’s SpaceX will provide four to five days of orbital travel with its Crew Dragon capsule later in 2021.

What are the environmental consequences of a space tourism industry likely to be? Bezos boasts his Blue Origin rockets are greener than Branson’s VSS Unity. The Blue Engine 3 (BE-3) will launch Bezos, his brother and two guests into space using liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen propellants. VSS Unity used a hybrid propellant comprised of a solid carbon-based fuel, hydroxyl-terminated polybutadiene (HTPB), and a liquid oxidant, nitrous oxide (laughing gas). The SpaceX Falcon series of reusable rockets will propel the Crew Dragon into orbit using liquid kerosene and liquid oxygen.

Burning these propellants provides the energy needed to launch rockets into space while also generating greenhouse gases and air pollutants. Large quantities of water vapour are produced by burning the BE-3 propellant, while combustion of both the VSS Unity and Falcon fuels produces CO₂, soot and some water vapour. The nitrogen-based oxidant used by VSS Unity also generates nitrogen oxides, compounds that contribute to air pollution closer to Earth.

Roughly two-thirds of the propellant exhaust is released into the stratosphere (12 km-50 km) and mesosphere (50 km-85 km), where it can persist for at least two to three years. The very high temperatures during launch and re-entry (when the protective heat shields of the returning crafts burn up) also convert stable nitrogen in the air into reactive nitrogen oxides.

These gases and particles have many negative effects on the atmosphere. In the stratosphere, nitrogen oxides and chemicals formed from the breakdown of water vapour convert ozone into oxygen, depleting the ozone layer which guards life on Earth against harmful UV radiation. Water vapour also produces stratospheric clouds that provide a surface for this reaction to occur at a faster pace than it otherwise would.

Space tourism and climate change

Exhaust emissions of CO₂ and soot trap heat in the atmosphere, contributing to global warming. Cooling of the atmosphere can also occur, as clouds formed from the emitted water vapour reflect incoming sunlight back to space. A depleted ozone layer would also absorb less incoming sunlight, and so heat the stratosphere less.

Figuring out the overall effect of rocket launches on the atmosphere will require detailed modelling, in order to account for these complex processes and the persistence of these pollutants in the upper atmosphere. Equally important is a clear understanding of how the space tourism industry will develop.

Virgin Galactic anticipates it will offer 400 spaceflights each year to the privileged few who can afford them. Blue Origin and SpaceX have yet to announce their plans. But globally, rocket launches wouldn’t need to increase by much from the current 100 or so performed each year to induce harmful effects that are competitive with other sources , like ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), and CO₂ from aircraft.

A rocket blasting off from a coastal launch site.

During launch, rockets can emit between four and ten times more nitrogen oxides than Drax , the largest thermal power plant in the UK, over the same period. CO₂ emissions for the four or so tourists on a space flight will be between 50 and 100 times more than the one to three tonnes per passenger on a long-haul flight.

In order for international regulators to keep up with this nascent industry and control its pollution properly, scientists need a better understanding of the effect these billionaire astronauts will have on our planet’s atmosphere.

  • Climate change
  • Carbon dioxide (CO2)
  • Space tourism
  • Richard Branson
  • Virgin Galactic
  • Blue Origin

space travel environmental impact

Research Assistant (AIM Clinic)

space travel environmental impact

Visiting Professor - 2024-25 Australia-Korea Chair in Australian Studies at Seoul National University

space travel environmental impact

Dean, School of Computer, Data and Mathematical Sciences

space travel environmental impact

School of Social Sciences – Academic appointment opportunities

space travel environmental impact

Union Organiser (part-time 0.8)

NASA Logo

Suggested Searches

  • Climate Change
  • Expedition 64
  • Mars perseverance
  • SpaceX Crew-2
  • International Space Station
  • View All Topics A-Z

Humans in Space

Earth & climate, the solar system, the universe, aeronautics, learning resources, news & events.

SpaceX launched the third integrated flight test of its Super Heavy booster and Starship upper stage from the company’s Starbase orbital launch pad at 8:25 a.m. CT on March 14. This flight test is an important milestone toward providing NASA with a Starship HLS for its Artemis missions.

NASA Artemis Mission Progresses with SpaceX Starship Test Flight

A man sits in front of a computer screen in a large control room with huge screens in the background.

NASA Lights ‘Beacon’ on Moon With Autonomous Navigation System Test

NASA-Supported Team Discovers Aurora-Like Radio Bursts Above Sunspot

NASA-Supported Team Discovers Aurora-Like Radio Bursts Above Sunspot

  • Search All NASA Missions
  • A to Z List of Missions
  • Upcoming Launches and Landings
  • Spaceships and Rockets
  • Communicating with Missions
  • James Webb Space Telescope
  • Hubble Space Telescope
  • Why Go to Space
  • Astronauts Home
  • Commercial Space
  • Destinations
  • Living in Space
  • Explore Earth Science
  • Earth, Our Planet
  • Earth Science in Action
  • Earth Multimedia
  • Earth Science Researchers
  • Pluto & Dwarf Planets
  • Asteroids, Comets & Meteors
  • The Kuiper Belt
  • The Oort Cloud
  • Skywatching
  • The Search for Life in the Universe

Black Holes

  • The Big Bang
  • Dark Energy & Dark Matter
  • Earth Science
  • Planetary Science
  • Astrophysics & Space Science
  • The Sun & Heliophysics
  • Biological & Physical Sciences
  • Lunar Science
  • Citizen Science
  • Astromaterials
  • Aeronautics Research
  • Human Space Travel Research
  • Science in the Air
  • NASA Aircraft
  • Flight Innovation
  • Supersonic Flight
  • Air Traffic Solutions
  • Green Aviation Tech
  • Drones & You
  • Technology Transfer & Spinoffs
  • Space Travel Technology
  • Technology Living in Space
  • Manufacturing and Materials
  • Science Instruments
  • For Kids and Students
  • For Educators
  • For Colleges and Universities
  • For Professionals
  • Science for Everyone
  • Requests for Exhibits, Artifacts, or Speakers
  • STEM Engagement at NASA
  • NASA's Impacts
  • Centers and Facilities
  • Directorates
  • Organizations
  • People of NASA
  • Internships
  • Our History
  • Doing Business with NASA
  • Get Involved
  • Aeronáutica
  • Ciencias Terrestres
  • Sistema Solar
  • All NASA News
  • Video Series on NASA+
  • Newsletters
  • Social Media
  • Media Resources
  • Upcoming Launches & Landings
  • Virtual Events
  • Sounds and Ringtones
  • Interactives
  • STEM Multimedia

NASA Delivers Science Instrument to JAXA’s Martian Moons Mission

NASA Delivers Science Instrument to JAXA’s Martian Moons Mission

Hubble Views a Galaxy Under Pressure

Hubble Views a Galaxy Under Pressure

space travel environmental impact

NASA Helps Emerging Space Companies ‘Take the Heat’

space travel environmental impact

10 Ways Students Can Prepare to #BeAnAstronaut

Astronaut Candidate Jessica Wittner

NASA Astronaut: Jessica Wittner

Coastal Resilience Projects

Coastal Resilience Projects

SWOT satellite data for water surface height in part of Mendocino County, Northern California

SWOT Satellite Catches Coastal Flooding During California Storms

Etna Eruption

Can Volcanic Super Eruptions Lead to Major Cooling? Study Suggests No

Eclipse Photographers Will Help Study Sun During Its Disappearing Act

Eclipse Photographers Will Help Study Sun During Its Disappearing Act

Hubble Tracks Jupiter’s Stormy Weather

Hubble Tracks Jupiter’s Stormy Weather

Black Holes

Cheers! NASA’s Webb Finds Ethanol, Other Icy Ingredients for Worlds

NASA Volunteers Find Fifteen Rare “Active Asteroids”

NASA Volunteers Find Fifteen Rare “Active Asteroids”

Amendment 5: A.7 Biodiversity and Ecological Conservation Final Text and Due Dates

Amendment 5: A.7 Biodiversity and Ecological Conservation Final Text and Due Dates

space travel environmental impact

NASA Armstrong Updates 1960s Concept to Study Giant Planets

Illustration showing several future aircraft concepts flying over a mid-sized city with a handful of skyscrapers.

ARMD Solicitations

Dream with Us graphic, showing a female African American dreaming up aeronautics ideas.

2024 Dream with Us Design Challenge

The 2024 Power to Explore logo celebrates the total eclipse with an illustration of the Sun disappearing behind an atomic symbol.

NASA Announces Semifinalists of Power to Explore Challenge

space travel environmental impact

Tech Today: Suspended Solar Panels See the Light

Three small rovers that will explore the Moon together

NASA’s Network of Small Moon-Bound Rovers Is Ready to Roll

Cartoon graphic of the annual NASA Pi Day Challenge

NASA Pi Day Challenge Serves Up a Mathematical Marvel

Women’s History Month 2022

Women’s History Month: Celebrating Women Astronauts 2024

Headshot of Sarah Mann over a faded black and white aerial image of NASA Armstrong. There is text that reads “Women’s History Month – Sarah Mann, Public Affairs Specialist.”

Women’s History Month: Meet Sarah Mann

8 Must-Have NASA Resources for Science Teachers in 2024

8 Must-Have NASA Resources for Science Teachers in 2024

Astronaut Marcos Berrios

Astronauta de la NASA Marcos Berríos

image of an experiment facility installed in the exterior of the space station

Resultados científicos revolucionarios en la estación espacial de 2023

NASA astronauts (from left) Jasmin Moghbeli and Loral O'Hara, both Expedition 70 Flight Engineers, partner together removing and replacing components inside the Cold Atom Lab aboard the International Space Station. The space physics device enables observations of atoms chilled to temperatures near absolute zero allowing scientists to study fundamental behaviors and quantum characteristics not possible on Earth.

Logros de la NASA en la estación espacial en 2023

A researcher’s guide to: space environmental effects, space station research integration office.

Front cover for the ISS Researcher's Guide to Space Environmental Effects

September 2020 Edition

By Miria M. Finckenor Kim K. de Groh

Scientists and engineers have developed advanced materials for manned spacecraft and satellites for a range of sophisticated applications in space exploration, transportation, global positioning and communication. The materials used on the exterior of spacecraft are subjected to many environmental threats that can degrade many materials and components.

Determining how long-term exposure to space conditions impacts various materials and, thus, which materials are best suited for spacecraft construction can most effectively be accomplished through actual testing in space. The ISS provides an ideal platform for long-term space environment effects testing, particularly since experiments can be returned to Earth for postflight analyses.

This Researcher’s Guide explains the research priorities for space environmental effects on the International Space Station, describes specific aspects of the space environment for researchers to consider and details the various ISS external accommodations available. Lessons learned as well as funding opportunities are also provided.

» Kindle:  MOBI  [2.6 MB]

» All other eBook readers:  EPUB  [3.7 MB]

» PDF readers:  PDF  [1.6 MB]

Discover More Topics

Station Researcher’s Guide Series

space travel environmental impact

Opportunities and Information for Researchers

space travel environmental impact

Space Station Research Results

space travel environmental impact

Latest News from Space Station Research

space travel environmental impact

Advertisement

Supported by

The Future of Space Tourism Is Now. Well, Not Quite.

From zero-pressure balloon trips to astronaut boot camps, reservations for getting off the planet — or pretending to — are skyrocketing. The prices, however, are still out of this world.

  • Share full article

space travel environmental impact

By Debra Kamin

Ilida Alvarez has dreamed of traveling to space since she was a child. But Ms. Alvarez, a legal-mediation firm owner, is afraid of flying, and she isn’t a billionaire — two facts that she was sure, until just a few weeks ago, would keep her fantasy as out of reach as the stars. She was wrong.

Ms. Alvarez, 46, and her husband, Rafael Landestoy, recently booked a flight on a 10-person pressurized capsule that — attached to a massive helium-filled balloon — will gently float to 100,000 feet while passengers sip champagne and recline in ergonomic chairs. The reservation required a $500 deposit; the flight itself will cost $50,000 and last six to 12 hours.

“I feel like it was tailor-made for the chickens like me who don’t want to get on a rocket,” said Ms. Alvarez, whose flight, organized by a company called World View , is scheduled to depart from the Grand Canyon in 2024.

Less than a year after Jeff Bezos and Richard Branson kicked off a commercial space race by blasting into the upper atmosphere within weeks of each other last summer, the global space tourism market is skyrocketing, with dozens of companies now offering reservations for everything from zero-pressure balloon trips to astronaut boot camps and simulated zero-gravity flights. But don’t don your spacesuit just yet. While the financial services company UBS estimates the space travel market will be worth $3 billion by 2030, the Federal Aviation Administration has yet to approve most out-of-this-world trips, and construction has not started on the first space hotel. And while access and options — not to mention launchpads — are burgeoning, space tourism remains astronomically expensive for most.

First, what counts as space travel?

Sixty miles (about 100 kilometers) above our heads lies the Kármán line, the widely accepted aeronautical boundary of the earth’s atmosphere. It’s the boundary used by the Féderátion Aéronautique Internationale, which certifies and controls global astronautical records. But many organizations in the United States, including the F.A.A. and NASA, define everything above 50 miles to be space.

Much of the attention has been focused on a trio of billionaire-led rocket companies: Mr. Bezos’ Blue Origin , whose passengers have included William Shatner; Mr. Branson’s Virgin Galactic , where tickets for a suborbital spaceflight start at $450,000; and Elon Musk’s SpaceX , which in September launched an all-civilian spaceflight, with no trained astronauts on board. Mr. Branson’s inaugural Virgin Galactic flight in 2021 reached about 53 miles, while Blue Origin flies above the 62-mile mark. Both are eclipsed by SpaceX, whose rockets charge far deeper in to the cosmos, reaching more than 120 miles above Earth.

Balloons, like those operated by World View, don’t go nearly as high. But even at their maximum altitude of 18 or 19 miles, operators say they float high enough to show travelers the curvature of the planet, and give them a chance to experience the overview effect — an intense perspective shift that many astronauts say kicks in when you view Earth from above.

Now, how to get there …

Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, which are both licensed for passenger space travel by the F.A.A., are open for ticket sales. (Blue Origin remains mum on pricing.) Both companies currently have hundreds or even thousands of earthlings on their wait lists for a whirl to the edge of space. SpaceX charges tens of millions of dollars for its further-reaching flights and is building a new facility in Texas that is currently under F.A.A. review.

Craig Curran is a major space enthusiast — he’s held a reserved seat on a Virgin Galactic flight since 2011 — and the owner of Deprez Travel in Rochester, N.Y. The travel agency has a special space travel arm, Galactic Experiences by Deprez , through which Mr. Curran sells everything from rocket launch tickets to astronaut training.

Sales in the space tourism space, Mr. Curran acknowledges, “are reasonably difficult to make,” and mostly come from peer-to-peer networking. “You can imagine that people who spend $450,000 to go to space probably operate in circles that are not the same as yours and mine,” he said.

Some of Mr. Curran’s most popular offerings include flights where you can experience the same stomach-dropping feeling of zero gravity that astronauts feel in space, which he arranges for clients via chartered, specialized Boeing 727s that are flown in parabolic arcs to mimic being in space. Operators including Zero G also offer the service; the cost is around $8,200.

You can almost count the number of completed space tourist launches on one hand — Blue Origin has had four; SpaceX, two. Virgin Galactic, meanwhile, on Thursday announced the launch of its commercial passenger service, previously scheduled for late 2022, was delayed until early 2023. Many of those on waiting lists are biding their time before blastoff by signing up for training. Axiom Space, which contracts with SpaceX, currently offers NASA-partnered training at Houston’s Johnson Space Center. Virgin Galactic, which already offers a “customized Future Astronaut Readiness program” at its Spaceport America facility in New Mexico, is also partnering with NASA to build a training program for private astronauts.

Would-be space tourists should not expect the rigor that NASA astronauts face. Training for Virgin Galactic’s three-hour trips is included in the cost of a ticket and lasts a handful of days; it includes pilot briefings and being “fitted for your bespoke Under Armour spacesuit and boots,” according to its website.

Not ready for a rocket? Balloon rides offer a less hair-raising celestial experience.

“We go to space at 12 miles an hour, which means that it’s very smooth and very gentle. You’re not rocketing away from earth,” said Jane Poynter, a co-founder and co-chief executive of Space Perspective , which is readying its own touristic balloon spaceship, Spaceship Neptune. If all goes according to plan, voyages are scheduled to begin departing from Florida in 2024, at a cost of $125,000 per person. That’s a fraction of the price tag for Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, but still more than double the average annual salary of an American worker.

Neither Space Perspective nor World View has the required approval yet from the F.A.A. to operate flights.

Unique implications

Whether a capsule or a rocket is your transport, the travel insurance company battleface launched a civilian space insurance plan in late 2021, a direct response, said chief executive Sasha Gainullin, to an increase in space tourism interest and infrastructure. Benefits include accidental death and permanent disablement in space and are valid for spaceflights on operators like SpaceX, Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, as well as on stratospheric balloon rides. They’ve had many inquiries, Mr. Gainullin said, but no purchases just yet.

“Right now it’s such high-net-worth individuals who are traveling to space, so they probably don’t need insurance,” he said. “But for quote-unquote regular travelers, I think we’ll see some takeups soon.”

And as the industry grows, so perhaps will space travel’s impact on the environment. Not only do rocket launches have immense carbon footprints, even some stratospheric balloon flights have potentially significant implications: World View’s balloons are powered by thousands of cubic meters of helium, which is a limited resource . But Ted Parson, a professor of environmental law at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that space travel’s environmental impact is still dwarfed by civil aviation. And because space travel is ultra-niche, he believes it’s likely to stay that way.

“Despite extensive projections, space tourism is likely to remain a tiny fraction of commercial space exploration,” he said. “It reminds me of tourism on Mt. Everest. It’s the indulgence of very rich people seeking a transcendent, once-in-a-lifetime experience, and the local environmental burden is intense.”

Stay a while?

In the future, space enthusiasts insist, travelers won’t be traveling to space just for the ride. They’ll want to stay a while. Orbital Assembly Corporation, a manufacturing company whose goal is to colonize space, is currently building the world’s first space hotels — two ring-shaped properties that will orbit Earth, called Pioneer Station and Voyager Station. The company, quite optimistically, projects an opening date of 2025 for Pioneer Station, with a capacity of 28 guests. The design for the larger Voyager Station , which they say will open in 2027, promises villas and suites, as well as a gym, restaurant and bar. Both provide the ultimate luxury: simulated gravity. Axiom Space , a space infrastructure company, is currently building the world’s first private space station; plans include Philippe Starck-designed accommodations for travelers to spend the night.

Joshua Bush, chief executive of travel agency Avenue Two Travel , has sold a handful of seats on upcoming Virgin Galactic flights to customers. The market for space travel (and the sky-high prices that come with it), he believes, will evolve much like civilian air travel did.

“In the beginning of the 20th century, only very affluent people could afford to fly,” he said. “Just as we have Spirit and Southwest Airlines today, there will be some sort of equivalent of that in space travel, too. Hopefully within my lifetime.”

space travel environmental impact

52 Places for a Changed World

The 2022 list highlights places around the globe where travelers can be part of the solution.

Follow New York Times Travel on Instagram , Twitter and Facebook . And sign up for our weekly Travel Dispatch newsletter to receive expert tips on traveling smarter and inspiration for your next vacation. Dreaming up a future getaway or just armchair traveling? Check out our 52 Places for a Changed World for 2022.

  • International edition
  • Australia edition
  • Europe edition

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launches at Cape Canaveral in Florida.

How the billionaire space race could be one giant leap for pollution

One rocket launch produces up to 300 tons of carbon dioxide into the upper atmosphere where it can remain for years

Last week Virgin Galactic took Richard Branson past the edge of space, roughly 86 km up – part of a new space race with the Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos, who aims to make a similar journey on Tuesday.

Both very wealthy businessmen hope to vastly expand the number of people in space. “We’re here to make space more accessible to all,” said Branson , shortly after his flight. “Welcome to the dawn of a new space age.”

Already, people are buying tickets to space. Companies including SpaceX, Virgin Galactic and Space Adventures want to make space tourism more common.

The Japanese billionaire Yusaku Maezawa spent an undisclosed sum of money with SpaceX in 2018 for a possible future private trip around the moon and back. And this June, an anonymous space lover paid $28m to fly on Blue Origin’s New Shepard with Bezos – though later backed out due to a “scheduling conflict” .

But this launch of a new private space industry that is cultivating tourism and popular use could come with vast environmental costs, says Eloise Marais, an associate professor of physical geography at University College London. Marais studies the impact of fuels and industries on the atmosphere.

When rockets launch into space, they require a huge amount of propellants to make it out of the Earth’s atmosphere. For SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket, it is kerosene, and for Nasa it is liquid hydrogen in their new Space Launch System. Those fuels emit a variety of substances into the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide, water, chlorine and other chemicals.

The carbon emissions from rockets are small compared with the aircraft industry, she says. But they are increasing at nearly 5.6% a year, and Marais has been running a simulation for a decade, to figure out at what point will they compete with traditional sources we are familiar with.

The rocket motor on Richard Branson’s Unity 22 burns as it heads toward space.

“For one long-haul plane flight it’s one to three tons of carbon dioxide [per passenger],” says Marais. For one rocket launch 200-300 tonnes of carbon dioxide are split between 4 or so passengers, according to Marais. “So it doesn’t need to grow that much more to compete with other sources.”

Right now, the number of rocket flights is very small: in the whole of 2020, for instance, there were 114 attempted orbital launches in the world, according to Nasa. That compares with the airline industry’s more than 100,000 flights each day on average.

But emissions from rockets are emitted right into the upper atmosphere, which means they stay there for a long time: two to three years. Even water injected into the upper atmosphere – where it can form clouds – can have warming impacts, says Marais. “Even something as seemingly innocuous as water can have an impact.”

Closer to the ground, all fuels emit huge amounts of heat, which can add ozone to the troposphere, where it acts like a greenhouse gas and retains heat. In addition to carbon dioxide, fuels like kerosene and methane also produce soot. And in the upper atmosphere, the ozone layer can be destroyed by the combination of elements from burning fuels.

“While there are a number of environmental impacts resulting from the launch of space vehicles, the depletion of stratospheric ozone is the most studied and most immediately concerning,” wrote Jessica Dallas, a senior policy adviser at the New Zealand Space Agency, in an analysis of research on space launch emissions published last year.

Another report from 2019 penned by the Center for Space Policy and Strategy likened the space emissions problem to that of space debris, which the authors say creates an existential risk to the industry. “Today, launch vehicle emissions present a distinctive echo of the space debris problem. Rocket engine exhaust emitted into the stratosphere during ascent to orbit adversely impacts the global atmosphere,” they wrote.

“We just don’t know how large the space tourism industry could become,” says Marais.

A new market report estimates that the global suborbital transportation and space tourism market is estimated to reach $2.58bn in 2031, growing 17.15% each year of the next decade.

“The major driving factor for the market’s robustness will be focused efforts to enable space transportation, emerging startups in suborbital transportation, and increasing developments in low-cost launching sites,” the report says.

In the past, most space transportation has been focused on cargo supply missions to the International Space Station and satellite launch services, but currently, this focus has shifted to in-space transportation, planetary explorations, crewed missions, suborbital transportation and space tourism.

Several companies, including SpaceX, Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic, have been focusing on developing platforms such as rocket-powered suborbital vehicles that will enable the industry to carry out suborbital transportation and space tourism.

People have pointed out that the money these billionaires have poured into space technology could be invested in making life better on our planet, where wildfires, heatwaves and other climate disasters are becoming more frequent as the globe warms up in the climate crisis.

“Is anyone else alarmed that billionaires are having their own private space race while record-breaking heatwaves are sparking a ‘fire-breathing dragon of clouds’ and cooking sea creatures to death in their shells?” the former US Labor Secretary Robert Reich tweeted last week.

Marais says that there is always an element of excitement to new developments in space – but it’s still possible to be responsible while doing something exciting. She urges caution as the space tourism industry grows, and says there are currently no international rules around the kinds of fuels used and their impact on the environment. “We have no regulations currently around rocket emissions,” she says. “The time to act is now – while the billionaires are still buying their tickets.”

  • Greenhouse gas emissions
  • Virgin Galactic

More on this story

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX’s Starship destroyed on return to Earth at end of third test flight

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX delays second test flight of world’s largest rocket until weekend

space travel environmental impact

Elon Musk’s SpaceX Starship rocket blows up minutes after launch

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX Starship test flight cancelled minutes before blast-off

space travel environmental impact

Fury in Ukraine as Elon Musk’s SpaceX limits Starlink use for drones

space travel environmental impact

Australian satellites to be launched on SpaceX rocket in bid to close air traffic gaps

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX launches Swot satellite in Nasa-led global water survey mission – video

space travel environmental impact

Ex-engineer files age discrimination complaint against SpaceX

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX employees say they were fired for criticizing Elon Musk in open letter

Most viewed.

  • spectrospaceofficial
  • Dec 12, 2022

Beyond Earth: Exploring the Environmental Impact of Space Travel

Houston, We Have a Problem: Examining the Environmental Consequences of Space Travel

Space travel has been a topic of fascination for many decades. The thought of exploring beyond our planet and potentially finding new worlds has captured the imaginations of people all over the world. With the recent boom in private space exploration companies, space travel is becoming more accessible than ever before. However, as space travel becomes more popular, concerns are being raised about its environmental impact. In this article, we will explore the environmental impact of space travel, from air pollution caused by rocket launches to the impact of rocket debris and space junk.

space travel environmental impact

The environmental impact of space travel is significant, with both short and long-term effects. The most obvious impact is the pollution caused by rocket launches. Rockets burn a lot of fuel, which produces large amounts of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and other pollutants. These pollutants can have a negative impact on the air quality in the surrounding areas, as well as contribute to global climate change.

Another significant environmental impact of space travel is the creation of space debris. When rockets are launched, they leave behind debris that can remain in orbit for years. This debris can pose a threat to other spacecraft and can even fall back to Earth, potentially causing damage or harm.

Rocket launches can have a significant impact on air quality in the surrounding areas. The burning of rocket fuel produces large amounts of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and other pollutants. These pollutants can have a negative impact on the health of those in the surrounding areas.

For example, in 2014, a rocket launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California produced a cloud of black smoke that covered a large area of the state. The cloud was caused by a malfunction in the rocket's engine, which caused it to burn more fuel than intended. This incident raised concerns about the impact of rocket launches on air quality and the environment.

Space debris is a significant environmental problem caused by space travel. When rockets are launched, they leave behind debris that can remain in orbit for years. This debris can pose a threat to other spacecraft and can even fall back to Earth, potentially causing damage or harm.

In recent years, the amount of space debris has increased significantly. This is due to the growing number of satellites and other spacecraft in orbit, as well as the increasing amount of debris left behind by rocket launches. This debris can collide with other spacecraft, causing damage or even total loss.

Space exploration can also have an impact on climate change. The burning of rocket fuel releases large amounts of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and other pollutants into the atmosphere. These pollutants contribute to global climate change, which can have far-reaching effects on the environment and the health of the planet.

In addition to the direct impact of rocket launches on climate change, space exploration can also indirectly contribute to climate change. For example, the construction and maintenance of launch sites, spacecraft, and other infrastructure can require significant amounts of energy, which often comes from non-renewable sources.

Manned missions to space pose additional environmental challenges. For example, the International Space Station (ISS) requires a significant amount of energy to maintain its life support systems and to provide power to its various scientific instruments. This energy often comes from non-renewable sources, which can contribute to climate change.

In addition to the energy required to maintain the ISS, there is also the issue of waste management. Astronauts generate a significant amount of waste during their time in space, including food waste, human waste, and other materials. This waste must be carefully managed to prevent it from contaminating the environment or posing a threat to other spacecraft.

Efforts are being made to reduce the environmental impact of space travel. One example is the use of more efficient rocket engines. New rocket engines, such as the Raptor engine being developed by SpaceX, use methane as fuel instead of kerosene. Methane produces fewer pollutants than kerosene, which can help reduce the environmental impact of rocket launches.

Another effort to reduce the environmental impact of space travel is the development of reusable rockets. SpaceX has made significant progress in this area, with the successful landing and reuse of several of their Falcon 9 rockets. Reusable rockets can significantly reduce the amount of fuel and other resources needed for space travel, which can help reduce the environmental impact.

There are also efforts to address the problem of space debris. For example, the European Space Agency is developing technology to capture and remove space debris from orbit. This technology involves using a net to capture debris and then bringing it back to Earth for disposal.

As space exploration continues to evolve, it is important to consider its impact on the environment. The growing popularity of space tourism, for example, could lead to an increase in rocket launches and the creation of more space debris.

However, there are also opportunities to use space exploration to address environmental challenges on Earth. For example, satellites can be used to monitor and track climate change, as well as to gather data on environmental conditions such as air and water quality.

Space travel has captured the imaginations of people all over the world, but it is important to consider its impact on the environment. Rocket launches and the creation of space debris can have significant environmental impacts, and manned missions to space pose additional challenges.

Efforts are being made to reduce the environmental impact of space travel, including the development of more efficient rocket engines and reusable rockets. However, more needs to be done to address the problem of space debris and to ensure that space travel is sustainable in the long term.

As we continue to explore beyond our planet, we must do so in a way that is mindful of our impact on the environment. By working together, we can ensure that space travel is sustainable and that we are able to continue exploring the universe while protecting the health of our planet.

Recent Posts

Beyond Earth: The Fascinating Search for Intelligent Life in the Universe

Astrobiology: Exploring the Possibility of Life Beyond Earth

From Moonwalk to Lawsuits: Understanding the Complexities of Space Law

What is the Environmental Impact of Billionaires Flying to Space?

space travel environmental impact

Space travel has helped us to learn so much about our planet, solar system, and the galaxy – but now we have reached a new era of space exploration: space tourism.

Whilst many people around the globe work hard to cut back on flights in a bid to reduce emissions and fend off climate change, the likes of Richard Branson, Elon Musk and Jeffery Bezos launch commercial tourism rockets.

As the two billionaires battle their way to the top of this new industry, we can’t help but wonder how space travel will impact our planet, what the future of space tourism looks like, and who will benefit from this the most.

Rocket launching into space

What’s on this page?

  • 01 Why is space travel bad for the environment?
  • 02 The environmental impact of Branson’s Virgin Galactic
  • 03 The environmental impact of Bezos’s Blue Origin
  • 04 The future of space tourism

Why is space travel bad for the environment?

Before we jump into the space projects themselves, let’s get one thing straight: why is space travel so bad for the planet?

The primary reason behind space exploration’s hefty carbon footprint is the burning of rocket fuels. Rocket engines release harmful gases and soot particles (also known as black carbon) into the upper atmosphere, which contribute to ozone depletion.

Plus, the sheer amount of black carbon released with each rocket launch is huge compared to the likes of a modern jet engine. In 2018, for example, black-carbon-producing rockets (pretty much all engines that don’t run on hydrogen fuel) emitted roughly 225 tonnes of black carbon particles into the stratosphere – roughly the same amount as the global aviation industry’s annual black carbon emissions.

On top of all this, when it comes to emissions in the troposphere and stratosphere, the altitude really makes a difference. There are certain spots between the two atmospheric layers where condensation can form, which means greenhouse gases can have a much larger impact.

Thankfully, rocket launches are pretty rare, meaning their overall impact on our climate is much smaller than aviation’s – until now, that is. The global launch rate has already more than doubled in the past decade – and space tourism will only increase this.

Thankfully, space flights by both Virgin Galactic (Branson’s company) and Blue Origin (Bezos’s company) require less power than regular space launches, because they’re not travelling as far.

Is there a cleaner way to power rockets?

As a greener alternative, some rockets are propelled by liquid hydrogen fuel , which produces ‘clean’ water vapour exhaust. Although this is thought of as a better alternative, the production of hydrogen itself can cause significant carbon emissions.

The environmental impact of Branson’s Virgin Galactic

On the Virgin Galactic website, the company claims to have a keen focus on “environmental sustainability” – and yet, there is no sustainability report or outline of its environmental impact. So, we’ve decided to work it out for them.

In an attempt to dismiss the waves of climate criticism, Virgin Galactic told the BBC that its high-altitude aeroplane has the equivalent carbon footprint as a business-class return flight from London to New York. Or, in other words, roughly 1,237kg of CO2 . The company also claimed to be offsetting the emissions but didn’t explain how it plans on doing this.

The carbon equivalent of a flight from London to New York – that’s not so bad, right? Well, Virgin were quick to overlook the differences in journey lengths, which means the emissions are actually far higher, per passenger, on the Virgin Galactic trip.

A return flight from London to New York covers about 6,900 miles , whereas Virgin Galactic’s trip is only about 100 miles . So, if we divide 1,237kg of CO2 by these distances, that means the CO2 emissions for Virgin Galactic's trip is 12.37kg per person , whereas a commercial airline flight from London to New York is only 0.17kg of CO2.

The environmental impact of Bezos’s Blue Origin

Similar to Virgin Galactic, there is currently no data on Blue Origin’s emissions. Fortunately for Bezos, the public has been less inclined to interrogate him on emissions, since the company’s approach is more environmentally friendly than Virgin Galactic’s.

Bezos’s reusable New Shepard rocket uses a liquid hydrogen-fuelled engine to travel 62 miles above Earth. Unlike most other rocket fuels, hydrogen does not emit carbon – when you burn it, you literally just get water vapour.

While this is certainly a step in the right direction, it’s not completely good for the planet, since hydrogen production often causes carbon emissions.

Hydrogen doesn’t come in a raw form, so we have to produce it. This can be done in two main ways: obtaining it from natural gas or from electrolysis.

  • Natural gas method – Natural gas is added to steam at a temperature of 500 – 1,100°C. Under these conditions, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide are released. By adding additional steam at a reduced temperature, the amount of hydrogen produced increases, and the CO is converted to CO2. This produces roughly 7.05kg of CO2 per 1kg of hydrogen
  • Electrolysis method – Taking place at room temperature, electrolysis causes water molecules to be split into oxygen and hydrogen. To produce 1kg of hydrogen this way, about 9kg of water and 60kWh of electricity are consumed. By taking into account the amount of CO2 produced to create the electricity, the production of 1kg of hydrogen will yield 27.6kg of CO2

Unfortunately, there’s currently no information on how much fuel the New Shepard consumes per kilometre, so it’s difficult to work out its exact carbon footprint. But, as Blue Origin was keen to point out on Twitter, it seems to be a greener way of travelling through space compared to Virgin Galactic.

From the beginning, New Shepard was designed to fly above the Kármán line so none of our astronauts have an asterisk next to their name. For 96% of the world’s population, space begins 100 km up at the internationally recognized Kármán line. pic.twitter.com/QRoufBIrUJ — Blue Origin (@blueorigin) July 9, 2021

The future of space tourism

Currently, this opportunity is only available to the world’s richest, whilst the world’s poorest watch from the sidelines and suffer the brunt of climate change.

Despite Branson suggesting he’s “here to make space more accessible to all,” a ticket for a one-hour trip on Virgin Galactic's space plane costs $250,000 (£181,343) .

Whilst space tourism might not be accessible to everyone any time soon, it is predicted to boom over the next decade. In fact, the ever-growing market is expected to be worth at least £3 billion by 2030 .

Over this period of time, cleaner rocket fuels will be developed – with the introduction of hydrogen and methane already taking the industry by storm. There is, however, the concern that the more people jump onto this new craze, the more unnecessary emissions will be pumped into our atmosphere.

In a time where we’re fighting to save the planet, space tourism shouldn’t be on our to-do list.

As it stands, one flight with Virgin Galactic or Blue Orbit only releases a few kilogrammes of CO2 – though, we are in the early days of space tourism, and as interest begins to snowball, so will emissions.

Written by:

green mountain scenery with roads passing through it

The 11 Greenest Countries In The World 2023

scientist wearing rubber gloves and lab coat looking through microscope

What Are Forever Chemicals And How Can You Avoid Them?

the titular character from the disney film pocahontas

Disney’s 7 Best Eco Heroes and 7 Worst Climate Villains

a green golf course with a red flag in a hole, under a blue sky

Why we should ban golf to save the planet

Houses of Parliament and Big Ben in morning light, London

Labour Has Officially Shelved Its £28 Billion Green Investments Pledge

ski resort with melted snow exposing grass

European Ski Resorts Suffer From Lack Of Snow After Warmest January Ever Recorded

Close Up Of Smart Energy Meter In Kitchen Measuring Electricity And Gas Use With Woman Boiling Kettle

Failures To Insulate Homes And Deliver Clean Tech Have Led To Higher Household Bills, New Report Suggests

big ben and parliament viewed from Westminster bridge

UK Should Invest £26 Billion A Year In Green Economy, New Report Says

share this!

March 7, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

reputable news agency

Curiosity reigns at SpaceX Starship environmental impact meeting on Space Coast

by Richard Tribou, Orlando Sentinel

SpaceX

If SpaceX's Starship and Super Heavy ever finds a home on the Space Coast, what would be the most powerful orbital rocket to ever launch from here is going to have an environmental impact.

For a pair of potential sites within Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, the process to figure out exactly what that is has begun, including a set of in-person and virtual meetings for the public to comment on concerns about frequent launches of a rocket twice as powerful as the Saturn V rockets from the Apollo program.

The first of those public meetings brought out a few hundred curious residents to the Catherine Schweinsberg Rood Central Cocoa Library on the night of March 5th.

"The point of these meetings today and this week is to get as many members of the public—it can be any members of the public: residents, researchers, teachers, it really doesn't matter, everyone—to come here, in person or online or email their comments, concerns, questions, pretty much anything about this process," said Emre Kelly, media operations chief for Space Launch Delta 45, the Space Force group that oversees the launch sites.

The meetings are the first step in what is expected to be about a 15-month process to complete an Environment Impact Statement, headed up by the Department of the Air Force. The Space Force falls under the Air Force the same way the Marines fall under the Navy.

The goal of the EIC, which was announced in February, is to determine whether the Air Force will go into a lease agreement to take over the existing Space Launch Complex 37, create a new Space Launch Complex 50 or do nothing.

SLC 37 is currently home to United Launch Alliance's Delta IV Heavy launches, but the last of those rockets is slated to fly by this summer, after which ULA is expected to give up its lease on the launch site. A new SLC 50 would be on currently undeveloped land between SLC 40, where SpaceX launches Falcon 9 rockets, and SLC 37.

Instead of a set of speakers talking about the various aspects of the program's environmental impact , representatives from the Space Force, Federal Aviation Administration, NASA and the Coast Guard were stationed around placards describing the where, why and next steps in the environmental impact evaluation process.

Members of the public wandered in at a pretty steady stream during the three-hour event to ask questions about the plans.

"They have a lot of work to do," said John Boerlin who came with his two adult sons Tom and Greg, all from Merritt Island. "I expected probably more detail about the vehicle and that kind of stuff, but it's early."

"I'm feel good about it," Tom added, noting he sleeps through the more frequent sonic booms SpaceX's current rocket launches sometimes produce. "I think SpaceX has a good record. I think if anyone can build a big rocket like that successfully, right now, they're ahead of the game. So I don't see any problems."

The second meeting tonight, March 6, is from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Titusville Civic Center followed by Thursday, March 7, from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Radisson Resort at The Port in Cape Canaveral. A virtual meeting is also planned on March 12 that will be recorded and available through March 22, according to the website at spaceforcestarshipeis.com.

Anyone on site is able to leave written comments or get access to leave them online. Comment will be incorporated into the draft version of the EIS that is targeting release in December.

"Then there are more meetings again after that," Kelly said. "So obviously, it's incredibly important that anyone who has any thoughts about this officially comments, and they don't have to give their name or address or anything like that. Obviously, the important thing to note, it's public record once they do."

The final version of the EIC, which is the most intensive regulatory watchdog option under the National Environmental Policy Act, is targeting release in summer 2025 with the preferred launch site alternative. Only after that could SpaceX venture into any sort of new launch site agreement.

SpaceX for now uses its Starbase launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, for its Starship and Super Heavy launch attempts. The rocket can generate more than 17 million pounds of thrust on liftoff.

The first two in 2023 ended explosively, although the last in November did manage to technically make it to space. A third attempt is awaiting FAA approval to launch and could come later this month.

SpaceX had been building out a launch tower to support Starship launches from Kennedy Space Center's Launch Pad 39-A as well, but the company has stated that its launch plans dictate multiple launch sites to support hundreds and then thousands of Starship launches a year.

So while the KSC launch pad may eventually see Starship as well, that's up to NASA. This EIC is specifically tailored for Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.

"This is between Air Force/Space Force and SpaceX," Kelly said.

2024 Orlando Sentinel. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Explore further

Feedback to editors

space travel environmental impact

Dune: What the climate of Arrakis can tell us about the hunt for habitable exoplanets

3 hours ago

space travel environmental impact

Saturday Citations: The volcanoes of Mars; Starship launched; 'Try our new menu item,' say Australian researchers

6 hours ago

space travel environmental impact

Researchers take deep dive into how much water is stored in snow

9 hours ago

space travel environmental impact

Ultra-flat optics for broadband thermal imaging

Mar 15, 2024

space travel environmental impact

Shark-bitten orcas in the Northeastern Pacific could be a new population of killer whale

space travel environmental impact

Einasto Supercluster: The new heavyweight contender in the universe

space travel environmental impact

Protein fragments ID two new 'extremophile' microbes—and may help find alien life

space travel environmental impact

Bridging the gap: Computer scientists develop model to enhance water data from satellites

space travel environmental impact

Researchers develop a new strategy to enhance blue perovskite LED performance

space travel environmental impact

Brighter, cheaper blue light could revolutionize screen technology

Relevant physicsforums posts, a very puzzling rock or a pallasite / mesmosiderite or a nothing burger.

4 hours ago

Unlocking the Secrets of Prof. Verschure's Rosetta Stones

Mar 13, 2024

Earth's earliest forest discovered in SW England

Mar 8, 2024

La Cumbre volcano eruption, Fernandina, Galapagos Islands

Mar 4, 2024

Iceland warming up again - quakes swarming

Popocatepetl volcano eruption, mexico.

Feb 28, 2024

More from Earth Sciences

Related Stories

space travel environmental impact

New or retooled Cape Canaveral launch pads considered for SpaceX Starship

Feb 19, 2024

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX lines up satellite launch from Cape Canaveral

Feb 21, 2024

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX launches 11th Space Coast mission of 2024

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX sends up Space Coast's 66th launch of the year

Nov 28, 2023

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX back with 1st Space Coast launch of the year

Jan 3, 2024

space travel environmental impact

SpaceX lines up Canaveral launch, KSC launch Thursday

Nov 8, 2023

Recommended for you

space travel environmental impact

Meteorology research: Weak polar vortex makes weather more predictable

space travel environmental impact

Oil resources should stay underground to meet the commitments of the Paris Agreement, study finds

space travel environmental impact

Study finds lands used for grazing can worsen or help climate change

space travel environmental impact

Global climate databases work with incorrect data for the tropics, study shows

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

SpaceX expansion will claim more wetlands and scrub habitat at Kennedy Space Center

space travel environmental impact

Some wetlands and scrub habitat at NASA's Kennedy Space Center are slated to make way for continued SpaceX expansion.

SpaceX proposes to expand its Roberts Road Operations Area within Kennedy Space Center, upgrade the utilities, and widen Saturn Causeway to support vehicle transport to and from launch facilities.

NASA's environmental impact study of the proposed expansion said it will have long-term "moderate" environmental impacts . NASA has spelled those out in a 231-page report, required under federal law.

Located near SpaceX’s HangarX facility , the company's operations area is used for processing and storage of the company’s Falcon boosters and payloads.

The public has a month to weigh in on SpaceX's plan.

Here's what we know:

What's the plan?

Under the proposed plan, SpaceX would expand the Roberts Road Operations Area by 100 acres immediately north of the existing site.

Saturn Causeway would be widened by about eight feet from the Vehicle Assembly Building toPhillips Parkway. Drainage swales would be improved and a new electrical duct bank is proposed within the roadway footprint to support operations at Launch Complex 39A.

What else would the project include?

Additional office space and facilities are planned in support of vehicle and payload processing, fabrication, storage, manufacturing, and shipping and receiving.

Upgraded utilities at the site include new underground electrical feeder lines, fiber communication connectivity, water and sewer.

SpaceX would also make improvements to the intersection of Kennedy Parkway and Roberts Road, if needed, as the site develops "to maintain acceptable traffic conditions." Traffic gets snarled there because it's the intersection leading into Hangar X where the Falcon 9 boosters are taken for refurbishment, which most times blocks one if not both lanes on Kennedy Parkway.

How big a footprint is this?

The total footprint of facilities would not exceed 1.5 million square feet and facility height would not exceed about 400 feet. The size would be tall enough to accommodate future Starship vehicle development.

What are the environmental impacts?

The project would result in "short-term, moderate impacts to biological resources" on 100 to 115 acres of "relatively undisturbed habitat," the study says. "However, these habitats make up a small percentage of suitable habitat available at KSC and the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge. Mitigation measures would be implemented during construction to reduce potential impacts to species."

How would the project impact fire risk?

The site is managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and would be removed from the Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge oversight, so no longer be available for controlled burning operations.

But prescribed burning would continue to be conducted nearby, the study says, to maintain suitable habitat.

Will there be wetlands impacts?

Yes. The project would impact up to 68.2 acres of wetlands and surface waters. An alternate option would impact 102 acres of wetlands and surface waters: "However, these make up a small percentage of wetlands at KSC and thus would result in short-term, moderate, adverse impacts to surface waters," the study says.

Would there be any impacts to the Florida scrub jay?

Yes, but not significant, NASA's study says.

According to NASA's study, the project would result in the loss of 146 acres of "auxiliary" scrub jay habitat. Florida scrub jays are listed by state and federal government as a "threatened" species. That would be offset by creating other scrub habitat, the NASA study says.

How long do you have to comment and how to do so?

The public has a month to comment on an environmental study of the plan.

To comment, visit: https://public.ksc.nasa.gov/environmental/nepacomments/

Where can you get more information?

Contact Donald Dankert KSC Environmental Management Branch Mail Code: SI-E3 Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899, or by email: [email protected], or by phone: (321) 861-1196.

A direct link to the environmental impact study is here: https://netspublic.grc.nasa.gov/main/RR%20North%20Expansion_Draft%20SEA.pdf

space travel environmental impact

Curiosity reigns at SpaceX Starship environmental impact meeting on Space Coast

C OCOA — If SpaceX’s Starship and Super Heavy finds a home on the Space Coast, what would be the most powerful orbital rocket ever to launch is certain to have a significant environmental impact.

For a pair of potential sites within Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, the process to figure out exactly what that will be has begun, starting with a set of in-person and virtual meetings for the public to comment on concerns of frequent launches of a rocket twice as powerful as the Saturn V rockets from the Apollo program.

The first of those meetings brought out a few hundred curious residents to the Catherine Schweinsberg Rood Central Cocoa Library on Tuesday night.

“The point of these meetings today and this week, is to get as many members of the public — it can be any members of the public: residents, researchers, teachers, it really doesn’t matter, everyone — to come here, in person or online or emailed their comments, concerns, questions, pretty much anything about this process,” said Emre Kelly, media operations chief for Space Launch Delta 45, the Space Force group that oversees the launch sites.

The meetings are the first step in what is expected to be about a 15-month process to complete an Environment Impact Statement headed up by the Department of the Air Force. The Space Force falls under the Air Force in the same way that Marines fall under the Navy.

The goal of the EIC, which was announced in February, is to determine if the Air Force will go into a lease agreement to either take over the existing Space Launch Complex 37, create a new Space Launch Complex 50 or do nothing.

SLC 37 is currently home to United Launch Alliance’s Delta IV Heavy launches, but the last of those rockets is slated to fly by this summer, after which ULA is expected to give up its lease. A new SLC 50 would be built on undeveloped land between SLC 40, where SpaceX launches Falcon 9 rockets, and SLC 37.

Representatives from the Space Force, Federal Aviation Administration, NASA and the Coast Guard were stationed about with placards describing the where, why and next steps in the process.

Members of the public wandered in at a pretty steady stream during the three-hour event to ask questions about the plans.

“They have a lot of work to do,” said John Boerlin who came with his two adult sons Tom and Greg, all from Merritt Island. “I expected probably more detail about the vehicle and that kind of stuff, but it’s early.”

“I feel good about it,” Tom Boerlin added, noting he sleeps through the more frequent sonic booms SpaceX’s current rocket launches sometimes produce. “I think SpaceX has a good record. I think if anyone can build a big rocket like that successfully. Right now, they’re ahead of the game. So I don’t see any problems.”

The second meeting was scheduled for Wednesday (March 6) from from 4-7 p.m. at the Titusville Civic Center followed by Thursday, March 7 from 4-7 p.m. at the Radisson Resort at The Port in Cape Canaveral. A virtual meeting is also planned on March 12 that will be recorded and available through March 22, according to the website at spaceforcestarshipeis.com .

Anyone onsite can leave written comments or get access to leave them online. Comments will be incorporated into the draft version of the EIS that’s targeted for release in December.

“Then there are more meetings again after that,” Kelly said. “So obviously, it’s incredibly important that anyone who has any thoughts about this officially comments, and they don’t have to give their name or address or anything like that. Obviously, the important thing to note, it’s public record once they do.”

The final version of the EIC, the most intensive regulatory watchdog option under the National Environmental Policy Act, is expected to be released in summer 2025 with the preferred launch site alternative. Only after that could SpaceX venture into any sort of new launch site agreement.

FAA closes investigation into SpaceX Starship’s double-explosion 2nd flight

SpaceX for now uses its Starbase launch site in Boca Chica, Texas, for its Starship and Super Heavy launch attempts. The rocket can generate more than 17 million pounds of thrust on liftoff.

The first two in 2023 ended with explosions, although the last in November did manage to make it to space. A third attempt is awaiting FAA approval to launch and could come later this month.

SpaceX had been building out a launch tower to support Starship launches from Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Pad 39-A as well, but the company has stated that it wants multiple launch sites to support hundreds and then thousands of Starship launches a year.

So while the KSC launch pad may eventually see the Starship as well, but that’s up to NASA. This EIC is specifically tailored for Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.

“This is between Air Force/Space Force and SpaceX,” Kelly said.

©2024 Orlando Sentinel. Visit orlandosentinel.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Two proposed alternative sites that could be home for SpaceX Starship and Super Heavy rocket launches at Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.

How green is your next vacation? Here's how to tell

Travel consumes precious natural resources, pollutes the environment and punches a hole in the ozone layer. You probably already know that most vacations are not green. But does the travel industry know?

A 2023 study by Booking.com found that 74% of travelers believe people need to "act now" to make more sustainable choices to save the planet for future generations. That's up from 66% the year before. Yet hotels continue to act like scrapping single-use soaps and sourcing their restaurant food locally will reverse climate change. 

And airlines are making often outrageous claims that they're "sustainable" even as travelers feel the effects of climate change .

Check out   Elliott Confidential , the newsletter the travel industry doesn't want you to read. Each issue is filled with breaking news, deep insights, and exclusive strategies for becoming a better traveler. But don't tell anyone!

It's gone too far, experts say.

Learn more: Best travel insurance

"It can’t just be an impressive-sounding goal on a reusable water bottle," said Kathleen Hetrick, a sustainability engineer at the design firm Buro Happold and contributor to the book "The Regenerative Materials Movement." "There needs to be intention – and, of course, measurable action behind it."

That's a nice way of saying, "Enough is enough. No more greenwashing."

Pay less to fly: New strategies for finding cheap airfares now

Air travel may be about to get better. Here's what it means for your next flight.

What is greenwashing?

Greenwashing, or making exaggerated claims about your sustainability to attract visitors, is everywhere.

Last fall, Austrian Airlines lost a case brought against it by a consumer organization , which accused the carrier of advertising carbon-neutral flights that used 100% sustainable aviation fuel. A lower court found the advertisements to be misleading.

In December, the U.K.'s Advertising Standards Authority ruled that Air France, Lufthansa and Etihad had published ads that promised passengers would "fly more sustainably" and that they were "committed to protecting the environment." Regulators said the ads were false and misleading – and pointed out that air travel produces high levels of both carbon dioxide and non-CO 2 emissions.

Closer to home, one of the biggest greenwashing cases in recent years happened at the Hotel del Coronado in San Diego County, a resort that had won numerous environmental awards. Activists found that the resort was trapping and killing wildlife , including skunks and possums.

And here's the thing: It's really hard to tell if an airline or hotel is greenwashing. It's not as if there are environmental cops patrolling a resort. Your resort could make outrageously false claims about how it loves the environment, and you'd be none the wiser.

Or would you?

How can you tell if a travel business really cares about the environment?

Look, let's be honest – there's no such thing as a "green" vacation. You'll leave a carbon footprint, no matter what. But your trip can be green-ish. Here are a few questions to ask:

  • Is it a B Corp? B Corps are businesses that meet a strict set of standards by the nonprofit B Lab . They include requirements for governance, workers, customers, community and the environment. You can search the directory of these forward-looking companies online. You'll see some fairly well-known brands, like Intrepid Travel . But you won't find the names of any major airlines, car rental companies or hotel chains – at least, not yet.
  • Does the company have any other environmental certifications? Third-party certifications from Green Key, LEED and WELL can be signs that a travel company means business about the environment. Transportation companies may also offer verified offsets from organizations like Terrapass or the Gold Standard Foundation . These certifications aren't a guarantee the company is green, but it's a good start.
  • What's the company saying to everyone? If the company claims to be green, don't just take its word for it. Listen to what it says. If you see nothing but bikini models lounging around a pool on its Instagram channel or ads for online discounts on its site, perhaps it's a shade of fake green. "A company's social media strategy is generally a reflection of its current ethos and goals," explained Julia Carter, founder of Craft Travel . If you see posts about sustainability and conservation, it can be a positive sign.
  • How deep is its commitment to the environment? Look for reliable reports on sustainability from a travel company.  For example, The Travel Corporation publishes an annual impact report that charts its progress against 11 sustainability goals developed by the United Nations. Many cruise lines also publish detailed reports that allow you to check their commitment to the environment against several objective standards. For instance, Carnival Corporation shows which goals it has completed and which ones are still in the works.

Passengers want to get off the plane first. Here's how you can do it.

Me first! How passengers are cheating their way onto the plane faster

Looking for a green vacation? Be skeptical

Allow me to go off-script for a minute. Most of the environmental claims made by the travel industry are nonsense. The only green they care about is the color of your cash. I, on the other hand, care a lot about the environment. (That's why I recycled that line from a previous story.)

Seriously, though, as someone who is literally always traveling, I find there are two consistent truths: First, no matter what the travel industry claims, it's always profits over planet. In other words, if it's a choice between doing something that will help the environment versus earning money, the money wins. 

Second, travelers lie about what they want. They tell pollsters that they want to make a difference and that they care deeply about the environment. And then they turn around and book the cheapest hotel room they can find. (Is it LEED-certified? Who cares!). They choose the least expensive airline. (Does it use biofuels? It doesn't matter!). 

And that has created an environment where travelers pretend they want a green vacation – and the travel industry pretends to give it to them.

Meantime, if you're thinking of taking a green vacation, you might want to think again. Travel harms the environment no matter how you get there. If you want to be totally green, just stay home.

Elliott's tips on spotting a travel company that's greenwashing

It's difficult to exaggerate, but almost everything in the travel industry has a tinge of fake green to it. Here's how you can spot the biggest offenders and avoid them:

  • Look for sleight of hand : Some companies highlight eco-friendly initiatives that are unrelated to their main environmental impacts. For instance, an airline might promote a small recycling program but fail to address its massive carbon footprint. "It's irrelevant," said travel advisor Kristin Winkaffe of Winkaffe Global Travel .
  • Beware of a hyper-focus on one program : Greenwashing companies focus on a single initiative but miss the bigger picture, said Justin Smith, owner of The Evolved Traveler , an agency that focuses on sustainable travel. For example, a hotel that touts its commitment to abandon single-use plastics or utensils may be missing an opportunity to create a truly sustainable product by also supporting the local population. "Such practices indicate there is not a full or authentic commitment to sustainability," he said.
  • Watch for vagueness and buzzwords : Be skeptical. Any hotel that calls itself green – or, worse, an "ecolodge" – deserves extra scrutiny. But even so, many of the terms thrown around aren't just buzzy, they're also fuzzy.  "Vague, unverifiable claims can be a sign of trouble," said Shannon Guihan, who heads The Travel Corporation’s not-for-profit TreadRight Foundation , an environmental organization focused on supporting nature-based solutions to the climate crisis.

Christopher Elliott  is an author, consumer advocate, and journalist. He founded  Elliott Advocacy , a nonprofit organization that helps solve consumer problems. He publishes  Elliott Confidential , a travel newsletter, and the  Elliott Report , a news site about customer service. If you need help with a consumer problem, you can  reach him here  or email him at  [email protected] .

IMAGES

  1. Environmental Impact of Commercial Space Tourism

    space travel environmental impact

  2. Scientists worry about environmental effects of space tourism

    space travel environmental impact

  3. Meet the Teen Who's Cleaning Up Space Junk

    space travel environmental impact

  4. Space Debris: Space Environment Statistics

    space travel environmental impact

  5. The Benefits of Space Exploration

    space travel environmental impact

  6. Environmental impacts of a satellite mission

    space travel environmental impact

VIDEO

  1. Do Space Travel's Environmental Costs Matter? #lawrencekrauss #space #spacescience #physics #climate

  2. Space Travel 2 Snippet

  3. What are Some Sustainable Travel Practices for Minimizing Your Environmental Impact

  4. The Journey of IN-SPACe and Space Ecosystem

COMMENTS

  1. Climate change: How bad for the environment is space travel?

    Space travel can emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, such as water vapour, which is a major contributor to climate change. Learn how Nasa tested a powerful rocket, green hydrogen and bio-fuels can help reduce emissions and the impact of space exploration on the environment.

  2. Scientists worry about environmental effects of space tourism

    Scientists worry that growing numbers of rocket flights and the rise of space tourism could harm Earth's atmosphere and contribute to climate change. When billionaires Richard Branson and Jeff ...

  3. Projected increase in space travel may damage ozone layer

    The research team also simulated two larger emission scenarios of 30,000 and 100,000 tons of soot pollution per year to better understand the impacts of an extremely large increase in future space travel using hydrocarbon-fueled engines, and more clearly investigate the feedbacks that determine the atmosphere's response.

  4. How bad is private space travel for the environment and other key

    Space tourism is a reality for the superrich, but it also has environmental implications for everyone on Earth. Learn about the environmental impact of suborbital and orbital spaceflight, the scientific goals and challenges of these trips, and the social and ethical questions they raise.

  5. Is Space Travel Good for the Environment? No

    NASA's Artemis I Space Launch System (SLS) rocket launched at NASA's Kennedy Space Center on Nov. 16, 2022 in Cape Canaveral, Florida. Kevin Dietsch—Getty Images. S paceX has never been ...

  6. Environmental impact of space debris and how to solve it

    The rise in the number of satellites being launched into space is unsustainable. Satellites mega-constellations pose a risk to climate and the environment. Tighter global regulation is needed to ensure space sustainability. The space industry likes to see itself as an integral player in the battle against climate change.

  7. Space Tourism Poses a Significant 'Risk to the Climate'

    The burgeoning space tourism industry could soon fuel significant global warming while also depleting the protective ozone layer that is crucial for sustaining life on Earth, a new study concludes.

  8. Red risks for a journey to the red planet: The highest priority human

    This "space exposome" is a unifying framework that reflects the interaction of all the environmental impacts on the human body (Fig. 1b) and, when combined with individual genetics, will shape ...

  9. The case for space environmentalism

    Humans have carried out activities in outer space since 1957, and we have reached a point where these can have deleterious impacts both in space and on Earth's surface. There is therefore a ...

  10. The environmental and moral implications of human space travel

    This paper evaluated the environmental impacts, especially GHG emissions, from human space travel and compared them with impacts from the average global citizen. We found that all human space travel has impacts ranging from 550 to 1300 times the average global citizen's annual impact on a per-launch basis, and from 2000 to 4600 times the hourly ...

  11. What NASA Can Teach SpaceX About Protecting The Environment

    The Kennedy Space Center (KSC) measures 140,000 square acres, but just 5,500 of them have been developed for space operations. ... Only after that environmental impact analysis is conducted does ...

  12. The jaw-droppingly high, out-of-this-world carbon footprint of space

    Tour packages will provide passengers with a brief 10-minute frolic in zero gravity and glimpses of Earth from space. Not to be outdone, later in 2021, Elon Musk's SpaceX will provide four to five days of orbital travel with its Crew Dragon capsule. What are the environmental consequences of a space tourism industry likely to be?

  13. Space tourism: rockets emit 100 times more CO₂ per passenger than

    During launch, rockets can emit between four and ten times more nitrogen oxides than Drax, the largest thermal power plant in the UK, over the same period. CO₂ emissions for the four or so ...

  14. Environmental concerns grow as space tourism lifts off

    Environmental concerns grow as space tourism lifts off. Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo uses a type of synthetic rubber as fuel and burns it in nitrous oxide, a powerful greenhouse gas. After years ...

  15. A Researcher's Guide to: Space Environmental Effects

    This Researcher's Guide explains the research priorities for space environmental effects on the International Space Station, describes specific aspects of the space environment for researchers to consider and details the various ISS external accommodations available. Lessons learned as well as funding opportunities are also provided ...

  16. Space: New frontier for climate change & commodification, or

    Deeply entwined in the history of space travel is a budding sense of responsibility for our planet, laying the foundations and providing technologies to guide future environmental movements ...

  17. How Space Tourism Is Skyrocketing

    But Ted Parson, a professor of environmental law at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that space travel's environmental impact is still dwarfed by civil aviation. And because space ...

  18. How the billionaire space race could be one giant leap for pollution

    Last week Virgin Galactic took Richard Branson past the edge of space, roughly 86 km up - part of a new space race with the Amazon billionaire Jeff Bezos, who aims to make a similar journey on ...

  19. Is space travel a problem for the climate?

    Space launches are on the rise, but concerns are growing about their environmental impact.

  20. Sustainability in Space Travel: How Does Space Exploration Impact the

    While space launches can have adverse effects on the environment, NASA has spurred numerous initiatives for more research on sustainable space travel. Sustainability Initiatives NASA's innovation in science and engineering has been known to jump-start technologies used in private and commercial sectors, and the same is true of the sustainable ...

  21. Beyond Earth: Exploring the Environmental Impact of Space Travel

    The environmental impact of space travel is significant, with both short and long-term effects. The most obvious impact is the pollution caused by rocket launches. Rockets burn a lot of fuel, which produces large amounts of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and other pollutants. These pollutants can have a negative impact on the air quality in ...

  22. What's the Environmental Impact of Space Tourism? |The Eco Experts

    The primary reason behind space exploration's hefty carbon footprint is the burning of rocket fuels. Rocket engines release harmful gases and soot particles (also known as black carbon) into the upper atmosphere, which contribute to ozone depletion. Plus, the sheer amount of black carbon released with each rocket launch is huge compared to ...

  23. Curiosity reigns at SpaceX Starship environmental impact meeting on

    The second meeting tonight, March 6, is from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Titusville Civic Center followed by Thursday, March 7, from 4 to 7 p.m. at the Radisson Resort at The Port in Cape Canaveral. A ...

  24. NASA looks at environmental impact of SpaceX expansion at KSC

    Contact Donald Dankert KSC Environmental Management Branch Mail Code: SI-E3 Kennedy Space Center, FL 32899, or by email: [email protected], or by phone: (321) 861-1196. A direct link to ...

  25. Curiosity reigns at SpaceX Starship environmental impact meeting ...

    COCOA — If SpaceX's Starship and Super Heavy finds a home on the Space Coast, what would be the most powerful orbital rocket ever to launch is certain to have a significant environmental impact.

  26. How can you tell if a travel business cares about the environment?

    In other words, if it's a choice between doing something that will help the environment versus earning money, the money wins. Second, travelers lie about what they want. They tell pollsters that ...