Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
Subject: Re: Space Launches (was Re: australia)
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 18:11:58 -0600
Marty wrote:
|
|I'm not really sure how much damage space launches themselves do to the
|enviroment, anyway... The only by product of the rocket is water vapour.

If the launch is successful there's no damage. If it's
carrying a satelite with radioactive material on board and
the launch fails...

At least that's one of the arguements that come up. I say
go for it. A little radiation never hurt anyone :)

-David

/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\ dbuehrer@****.org /^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\
"His thoughts tumbled in his head, making and breaking
alliances like underpants in a dryer without Cling Free."
~~~http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm~~~~
Message no. 2
From: Ferri Gianni Pagano van Amersfoort <ferri@********.NL>
Subject: Re: Space Launches (was Re: australia)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:19:52 GMT
At 06:11 PM 10/20/96 -0600, you wrote:
>Marty wrote:
>|
>|I'm not really sure how much damage space launches themselves do to the
>|enviroment, anyway... The only by product of the rocket is water vapour.
>
>If the launch is successful there's no damage. If it's
>carrying a satelite with radioactive material on board and
>the launch fails...
>
>At least that's one of the arguements that come up. I say
>go for it. A little radiation never hurt anyone :)
>
>-David
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
oh you gullible person you..:)>
water vapour????????????????????????????
rockets are NOT environmentally friendly, the only thing that keeps them
from causing any environmental disaster is the low quantity of launches,
check a physics book, solid fuels are rather poisonous.

Ferri
Message no. 3
From: Marty <s457033@*******.GU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Space Launches (was Re: australia)
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:15:42 +1000
> >|I'm not really sure how much damage space launches themselves do to the
> >|enviroment, anyway... The only by product of the rocket is water vapour.
> >
> >If the launch is successful there's no damage. If it's
> >carrying a satelite with radioactive material on board and
> >the launch fails...
> >
> >At least that's one of the arguements that come up. I say
> >go for it. A little radiation never hurt anyone :)
> >
> oh you gullible person you..:)>
> water vapour????????????????????????????
> rockets are NOT environmentally friendly, the only thing that keeps them
> from causing any environmental disaster is the low quantity of launches,
> check a physics book, solid fuels are rather poisonous.
>

Apologies; I was only talking about liquid fueled rockets..... In
particular LOX boosters. Solid fuel mixtures even *I* wouldn't want to
fool around with and I'm notoriously careless in the lab.

It'd be interesting to actually see the enviornmental impact assesment of
a space base.

Bleach
Message no. 4
From: Faux Pas <fauxpas@******.NET>
Subject: Re: Space Launches (was Re: australia)
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 01:01:09 -0500
At 06:11 PM 10/20/96 -0600, you wrote:
>At least that's one of the arguements that come up. I say
>go for it. A little radiation never hurt anyone :)

Exactly! It's the massive doses that'll do you wrong. :)

-Thomas Deeny
the Cartoonist at large is on the web at www2.cy-net.net/~fauxpas

"Larry Niven was dead wrong."
-one of a list of reasons why Lois Lane and Superman broke up (they're back
together).
Message no. 5
From: dhinkley@***.ORG
Subject: Re: Space Launches (was Re: australia)
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:01:37 +0000
> Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 18:11:58 -0600
> From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@****.ORG>
> Subject: Re: Space Launches (was Re: australia)

> Marty wrote:
> |
> |I'm not really sure how much damage space launches themselves do to the
> |enviroment, anyway... The only by product of the rocket is water vapour.
>
> If the launch is successful there's no damage. If it's
> carrying a satelite with radioactive material on board and
> the launch fails...
>
> At least that's one of the arguements that come up. I say
> go for it. A little radiation never hurt anyone :)
>
> -David

I recenitly saw a Television News segment on locating a new commerial
launch facility on Kodiack Island (off the coast of Alaska). While
no specifics were given [it was TV news after all :) ] there was a
large amount of consern from the enviormentalists. They were
most conserned with the Bears, Sea Lions, and Sea Birds and possible
effects, again no specifics. I bring this up as a possible source of
information on the subject, the key is finding quality print media
coverage. But now you know it is out there to look for.




David Hinkley
dhinkley@***.org
******************************************************
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve niether liberty or
safety.
Ben Franklin

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Space Launches (was Re: australia), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!