think our exploration of space had a part in destruction of Ozone?

Question

Your sister,
Ginger

Answer 1

The "destruction of Ozone" is a myth. Ozone decays spontaneously with a half life of 21 hours, and is regenerated daily at almost all latitudes. There are some latitudes, however, where UV radiation either does not impinge , or has been already been filtered out by the rest of the atmosphere. At these latitudes, "holes" appear in the ozone layer.

While the exhaust from a launch into space appears tremendously huge to us as individuals, it is so minuscule on a global scale as to not be noticeable.

Answer 2

The exploration of space had a huge role in our perception of the destruction of the ozone layer, but as far as direct polution is concerned, it's contribution is insignificant.

1. Most space launches happen near the equator. The famous ozone holes are near the poles.
2. The threat to ozone would have been liquid flourine oxidizer. Flourine/Hydrogen is the most energetic chemical rocket propellant combination (oxyhydrogen is close second.) Flourine was abandoned because of its toxicity and the corrosive exhaust product, hydrogen flouride. There aren't any exhaust products I know of that are any more harmful to ozone than normal hydrocarbons.
3. Ozone depletion actually being an environmental concern is an enduring myth. See Helmut's answer. Fluctuations in solar weather are a greater concern, and mankind is not causing that.
4. Space launch activity is actually insignificant no matter how you measure it. NASA's budget is only 0.4% of the federal budget, which itself is a fraction of the US GDP. That in turn is only a fraction of the world's economic output. Space spending in the US (probably about 1.5% counting both DoD and NASA funding) is the most significant of any country in the world. Also, space launches generate a low amount of polution per dollar spent. Rockets operate at high power levels for minutes out of the year (although a Shuttle generates the power of several aircraft carriers, complete with all aircraft operating at full afterburner, or otherwise full throttle.) Powerplants, oil refineries, and aircraft carriers operate continuously (or as close to continuously as practical.)

Answer 3

Maybe... There are two major parts to exploring space. The first part is to rebuild and fuel a spacecraft and then launch it into outer space. The act of burning that fuel to launch the rocket might cause some destruction of Ozone, but mainly it produces tons of carbon dioxide that actually adds to the Green House Affect. As for the second part of traveling in the outer atmosphere of Earth and beyond, that should not cause any destruction to the Ozone layer.

Answer 4

Not significantly, when compared to other sources.
Consider that at the altitude which we define as the ozone layer, the molecules are spread very thin: unlike at sea level, the distance between particle is great.
In the past the world used a freon refrigerant nicknamed 'R12' in our air conditioners, our cars' A/C systems, in huge industrial chilling systems - in short, over the entire world, we manufacutred many thousands of tons of R12 every year. The stuff was so cheap, when a mechanic worked on your car or on an industrial refrigeration system, if the repaired section needed to be drained, the freon R12 was simply released into the atmosphere. Every year, we would dump many hundreds of tons into the atmosphere, and more would escape from around seals and through cracks in the cooling systems of the Earth.
When R12 travels into the ozone layer, it acts as a genuine catalyst, breaking down ozone into oxygen without any alteration of its form. The R12 molecule is not attracted to oxygen, so it just moves on.
This continues until the R12 molecule is destroyed, and the only force available to it in the ozone layer which can destroy it is cosmic rays - which are not too common. Thus every R12 molecule which reaches the ozone layer is assured a long and happy existence.
My college chemistry professor quoted experts, saying one pound of R12 is expected to destroy an average of 10,000 pounds of ozone. At this altitude, 10,000 pounds of ozone covers a significant volume of the layer, and tons of R12 are released every year.
When you consider we have been dumping R12 into the atmosphere since the 1950's at an alarming rate, it is no surprise the ozone layer is depleted.
It is against federal law now to import R12 into the US, with the fines that may begin $10,000 US per pound. We now use other "freons", which have been shown to be far less harmful. Unfortunately, the rest of the world continues to manufacture and use R12 for its efficiency and low source costs.
Against this backdrop, space travel represents a minimal input to the ozone ecosystem.
The humor is that we spew a great deal of ozone. Cities often declare "Ozone Alerts", because combustion and electrical motors (sparks on the brushes) are producing more ozone than can the natural ventillation of the city remove. The issue is that nobody has thought to isolate the atmospheric ozone, cool it, and fan blast it into the ozone layer.

Answer 5

Each time you burn soething, it is harmful for ozone layer. But, i suppose contribution of space industry is low compared to pollution by other industries