• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Russia's toxic space debris

Juno

Juno

4,683
Posts
10
Years
    • Age 29
    • Seen Mar 22, 2024
    One of my professors and his son discovered about 2 years ago that Russia has been dropping their rocket stages into Arctic waters, and these stages are fueled by highly toxic chemicals; they finally published the finished article to Polar Record a few days ago and if you're interested in reading the full details of it, it's open to public: link
    Abstract said:
    Russia has dropped rocket stages fuelled with unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (UDMH) into the Barents Sea and the North Water Polynya?areas of considerable ecological importance?on ten occasions since 2002. The stages come from SS-19 intercontinental missiles that have been re-purposed for launching satellites. UDMH is a highly toxic chemical that has caused widespread health and environmental damage in Kazakhstan and Russia as a result of its extensive use there as a rocket fuel. Not all of the fuel on-board is consumed during a launch and the residual fuel tends to escape the incoming stages and form aerosol clouds that drift over large areas. This dropping of the rocket stages is of considerable concern to the Inuit of Canada and Greenland, who only learned about the practice in 2016. It is also a violation of several treaties as well as customary international law. At least two more launches of UDMH-fuelled rockets on the same trajectory are currently planned?even though alternative non-toxic rocket systems exist.
    Click to expand...

    The next rocket launch will be on October 13, and they are trying their hardest to spread the word and eventually stop the routine pollution of this area. While this may not directly impact any of us, I thought it would be interesting to share. Thoughts?
     
    string555

    string555

    Banned
    1,373
    Posts
    6
    Years
    • Considering that it says that one of the areas impacted by the UDMH rocket fuel usage was Russia itself, I find it odd that they would keep using it when they have alternatives. Russia might not get along with many countries, but they are usually very good (Ocheen karasho :P) about not doing damage to their homeland.
     
    Juno

    Juno

    4,683
    Posts
    10
    Years
    • Age 29
    • Seen Mar 22, 2024
    I think it's mainly because of the Rockots they use to launch satellites and whatnot these days, which are converted from the stockpile of UR-100N missiles left over from the 80s - they're cheap to launch but run on UDMH. It's also a very stable fuel and has a low freezing point, so they can be stored in the launch tubes for a long time.

    But yeah, that's a good point - the article says the Russian government denies their rocket fuel has caused any significant damage or health problems in Kazakhstan and Russia, so ?\_(?)_/?
     
    Tsutarja

    Tsutarja

    27,747
    Posts
    14
    Years
    • Russia is already under a lot of political scrutiny from the US, so this would be interesting to add onto their criticism and controversy if it becomes widely-known.

    Let's also not forget that the US is on speaking-terms with Russia in regards to space travel as well these days. Makes me wonder what could happen if the US government found out about this.
     
    Legobricks

    Legobricks

    7,741
    Posts
    17
    Years
    • Seen Sep 18, 2020
    Tsutarja said:
    Makes me wonder what could happen if the US government found out about this.
    Click to expand...
    Since this news is public, it's reasonable to think that they have already known for years. At this point competitors like the ULA could begin to leverage public scrutiny to twist the government's wrist into kicking up a fuss if they think it will get them more business.

    Thing is, though, the Rokot (with its history as an ICBM noted by the article possibly to make it sound worse?) is very reliable and cheap ? the two big things everyone really wants from a rocket. Each Rokot launch costs >$35 million (as of 2013), while a Delta II will cost >$50 million (as of 1975, so adjusting for inflation will show the Delta II to be much more expensive) for a lower increase in payload capacity than the increase in cost suggests. Like drivers in Brazil who pick fossil fuels over bioethanol due to getting more miles per gallon, customers for space launches will ultimately follow the bottom line, which is much more on their mind to begin with.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top